Carl-Richard

What do you mean "start"?

Consider that you would consider a doomsday cult a cult even if they weren't taking any of your money or using "mind control" techniques (which is what exactly?) or the members are "completely free" to leave.

Instead of taking criticism from a retarded bot seriously, take it from the humans in question: I think if you seriously believe Leo when he says he is the #1 authority on epistemology and consciousness, you might be idolizing him a bit too much. "But I'm just open to the possibility". Sure, I'm too (there are many things that are technically possible), but do you believe it to actually be the case by any reasonable probability?

A computer is a rock: silicon and metal.

Think about walking through a crowded PvP zone with high defense/HP vs a relatively vacant PvP zone with low defense/HP. What feels the scariest?

I will throw a rock- I mean a doorstop at you right now through the screen and you will catch it with your left arm, yes? Let's go. My screen is black. Sorry, I've been watching "not allowed to laugh in the cabin", a horrible Norwegian game show that destroys your sense of what is funny.

@Natasha Tori Maru I can't watch AI videos. And is the claim "5-MeO -> death" now? I thought it was "weird beliefs -> death". The video must be using ChatGPT-4o or something, it seems low intellect and hallucinatory.

What happens when you scale a rock?

When you're in the statistical worldview, - you are acutely aware that many things can influence one thing, and their relationship is statistical (quantitative). Some things can have a strong influence, other things less of a strong influence, and some things only a weak influence (e.g. the butterfly effect). In reality, there is a huge web of influences, where each influence is a particular node or string on the web, and each node is weighted with a certain strength of influence or statistical value. For example, ADHD can be influenced by beliefs, experiences, genetics, etc. Even if you think one of these things have a stronger influence, it doesn't mean it can only be reduced to that thing, and talking as if it can be reduced to that thing can lead to problems with accurately talking about and perceiving reality. Words like "partially", "mostly", "some of", "many", are often used. - you often say things are "probably so", "most likely", "less likely", "probably not". It does not preclude you from making firm and exclusive analytical statements (e.g. "given x and y, z is true or false, coherent or inconsistent"). But you are very acutely aware when something is statistical and probabilistic so you don't overstep or overgeneralize or oversimplify. - you realize a thing can be many things at the same time. There is often not just one way to do things, or one thing you can do at any one time. "Should I meditate every day or should I do retreats where I meditate more deeply?" Why not both? "That's the placebo effect". Why can't it be a real effect and placebo at the same time? "Trans is social contagion". Why can't some of it be real trans and some of it be social contagion (both within and across individuals)? "Yes — both" is very often realized to be the answer. The statistical worldview is a way to conceptualize nuance and holism, as opposed to black-and-white thinking and naive reductionism. It's also related to the modern scientific framework of putting numbers and quantities to these relationships. Modern science, especially human-oriented science (e.g. medicine, psychology), primes this kind of statistical thinking where everything is viewed through statistical associations (mediation, moderation, correlation) and ways of quantifying them (effect sizes, correlation coefficients, measures of statistical significance). If you do enough scientific thinking, in the right fields of science, you will eventually end up viewing a large chunk of the world this way.

Even a blueberry-banana smoothie makes me feel wonky (but eating the banana and blueberries in their normal form seems OK). When you break down the fibers, it's like knocking off the 4-HO-group of psilocin and it becomes DMT. I need that steady release or the physiology gets out of whack.

I've found if I deviate too much from a certain ratio of carbs, protein and fats (and fibers and anti-inflammatories), my mind becomes foggier and slower. The same with eating too often or too much. The goal when eating I've found is to pack a lot of energy into your body (of course "the right type" of energy and the right amount), cut off the initial glucose response by walking or working out, and then ride the steady blood glucose without eating anything else until you're hungry again. Eating an in-between meal or just a fruit at the wrong time messes with that cycle, it kick-starts digestion again, blood glucose rises again, and if you don't lower it adequately, you end up with symptoms of restlessness, inflammation, brain fog (and of course you become desensitized to insulin so you want to eat more and after less time).

I think the reason I reacted so strongly (to "why not simply listen to this institution that landed on a highly generalized consensus for various reasons and with various caveats instead of learning about things yourself?") is that I felt it was an invalidation of all other methods of epistemology (which at least for me I don't think is true and was probably not intended either, although maybe partially), and even if I were right in all my observations, I don't think he would ultimately care, unless it was supremely pragmatic to do so.

"I just follow the dietary recommendations from the national institute of public health; they have 1000s of scientists that have done more research and better research than I could ever do".

It's so strong. When I started ordering supplements from abroad, my mother (doctor) was like super skeptical meanwhile she is buying Nycoplus (the main generic brand our pharmacies sell) which do not have any non-state or independent third-party certifications, do not provide publically available contaminant reports and are generally subpar (e.g. use non-chelated minerals, the shitty non-phosphatized B vitamins). At least she doesn't go full stepdad "I read two sentences on government website about dietary advice and that is all I need for living healthily" (which depending on your standards, fair enough).

I knew I thought that 🤭

There is something I've coined the "Scandi delusion" that probably most people who live in Scandinavia (including myself in the past) are under, that everything in Scandinavian countries is so safe, no worries, institutions are rock-solid and provide all the best all the time, they have created a perfect safety net that us as privileged citizens can exist under. It is a delusion, as demonstrated above. It's also related to a feeling that Scandinavian countries are somehow exempt from military threats and that a military invading is like "illegal" or impossible or against the laws of the universe. Meanwhile, we're next-door neighbors to Russia (literally bordering it) and some of the most militarily strategic NATO countries with respect to Russia. Nazi Germany invaded Denmark and Norway only a few decades ago.

Based on what? Here are some funny statistics from this article (https://tidsskriftet.no/2020/06/debatt/kan-miljogifter-true-oss-som-art): According to "Nordisk ministerråd", exposure to PFAS is responsible for 750-1250 deaths a year in the Nordic countries. Furthermore, they estimate these countries use 21-35 billion Danish krones per year to counteract the negative health effects and excess mortality caused by PFAS. A multi-center study of three regions in Norway found that 100% of blood donors had PFAS blood levels above suggested cut-off values.

You think Scandi water ain't contaminated? :>

AI is helping me re-code this human slopware (software slop) I'm using to finally get image reconstruction of my brain data. Sloppidy doppidy. EDIT: Bro: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slopsquatting That's so fucking funny, and smart, (like my man).

13 is quite specific. That's like the transition phase between primary and secondary lower school in my country. Tits, ass and makeup mainly occurred after that transition as far as I can remember. But that transition is fast.

What a seriously insightful and thought-inspiring perspective! It is true that we must recognize our strengths as well as our weaknesses. That shows strength of character, not condescension. It's not about being superior—it's about showing one's superiority through a show of humility.

You couldn't tell a 90-year-old smoker with COPD dying from lung cancer from a 2-month-old baby.

The only thing that is worse than AI prose is cringe condescension using Leo language models (LLMs).

@Basman 0:27 The way that Reddit user described trying 5.2 and interacting with it is actually fucking my mind so hard, it's like giving me feelings of gore. It comes off like they may very well think it's a real person that lives inside the computer that they're talking to. I sometimes forget there are people out there that have virtually zero idea how computers work, how AIs work, how really anything slightly technical works, that they are almost destined to fall into these kinds of traps. I used to hang out with some girls in and around high school (they went to a different school) and especially one of them, they were sweet and all, but I really got the sense that there are simply different IQ levels (she couldn't keep track of our discussions in English in my friend group where some came from an international school; she said she doesn't really speak English).

Lol, when I had the thought above, I thought about of course PsychedSubstance (I think) and also Quentin Experiment (and also Dakota Of Earth). But I was also a bit puzzled why I had the thought as it didn't quite make sense that I would put these last two under "trauma dumping" (although Quentin Experiment did talk about taking his break and becoming a dad and it was very personal, but still, it didn't quite fit to me as "trauma dumping"). That said, I haven't watched much Dakota Of Earth either, you could probably find something there, but anyways, I couldn't find the connection. Anyways, the fact that my thought didn't seem quite logical (it basically only applied to PsychedSubstance alone, which wouldn't really warrant a generalization like that), in hindsight might have been a sign that it was something external I was picking up on and not some intuitive insight born out of seeing connections within my own mind (as they tend to be experienced as significant because they are quite logical or profound in how they connect different things). I think you @Natasha Tori Maru have commented on this that when you suspect an externally sourced thought, (I believe you said) there is a lack of logic behind them (?), or at least there is something off, like a disjunction, like a sort of randomness in how it occurs. If simply the latter, that would be consistent with what you @Oppositionless are describing with how you had never talked about him before that (and it's consistent with the three original dreams I wrote about in the thread; they seemingly popped out of nowhere, seemed highly deviant compared to the usual dreams).