Leo's Blog Discussion Mega-Thread

[Raze]

52 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Because the book needs to be much more potent and cohesive. It is not a random asortment of things I say.

Are you also focusing on making the book have literary merit and well written sentences / verbal wit? 

[Natasha Tori Maru]

It might be more accurate and less confusing to say 'it is arbitrary who decides the top great masters of each art movement', rather than state 'their skill is overrated'. Because it is the institutional power, group consensus, politics, historical accident, access and resultant group think that I see as the issue.

Many of these artist's have skill in the creative and directive realms - some receive accolades for innovating or applying their vision in a never before seen way. These, as well as tool use, control, materials, accuracy of rendition (proportion, anatomy)... then we can go on into perceptual sensitivity; colour relationships, spatial tension, rhythm (negative/positive space), emotional rendition, balance, harmony. Narrative flow. Stylistic rules. Skill begins to point toward an artist that can decide better. Direct. 

It might help to define what is meant by 'skill'. It is too nebulous a term to be used without defining what we mean, as combined with all of the above an element of subjectivity is present in what determines 'skill'.

Some of the greatest masters are not known for the technical ability. Some just for what they introduced as a concept IE Andy Warhol.

All of the above is sort of why I dislike art critics so much. 

You cannot just measure it with a ruler, see it conforms and slap 'great' on it.

Edited February 6 by Natasha Tori Maru

[Joseph Maynor]

What's sort of awful is the music that the masses like that is insanely popular for no good reason.  

 

[Human Mint]

On 30/1/2026 at 2:49 PM, LambdaDelta said:

What about children in Africa born into slavery, or some genetic disorder you have because a corrupt company has been polluting your city? Here comes separation again. Are Africa, DNA, oppressive ideologies, DuPont, air, and history not part of Mind? Therein lies the issue, a multi-thousand year history of misuses of mind, sowing divisions of all sorts. A proper use of an individual's mind will not automatically solve suffering, not even for them, much less the entire world, but what it can do is inspire love, connection, and beauty.
Tip: drop the distinction between 'directly' and 'indirectly'; God only works directly.  

It is not trivial, because what matters is the collective properly using their minds. It would be imposible for an individual to properly use his mind if their environment is polluted because some group didn't think through the consecuenses and being creative about solutions. Is all about making conections hidden at first glance. And the ego takes the first glance as ultimate reality and it reacts relative to that point, which is a mistake because truly there are hidden conections everywhere. So the ultimate skill to have is to effortless connect dots everywhere anytime. That's what knowing thyself means, at a deep level but also at a personality level. When you start understanding that giving space to your mind will lead naturally to you "waking up" more and reveal more then you find gold.  That's what the mind does naturally when it lands in caregiving hands.

[Human Mint]

On 30/1/2026 at 3:25 PM, LambdaDelta said:

Nothing I said implies you have to make perfect use of your mind all the time (that's actually impossible) nor that suffering is bad in any way. On the contrary, it's the best self-correcting mechanism there is. Whether you're sure about this point or not is up to you to contemplate, I could of course just be talking out of my ass. 

Well I disagree to an extent because I could have been a thousand times more intelligent and creative if it wasn't for toxic society behaviors which I have inherited. That is normalized addictions, making money out of producing addicted people. 

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Raze said:

Are you also focusing on making the book have literary merit and well written sentences / verbal wit? 

To some degree. But its more about the density and depth of the insights. My writing style is pretty causal and simple.

Some verbal wit, but I'm not trying to impress people with fancy language.

[Human Mint]

The CEO of Suno is one such example of a scammer. Explicitly only caring about the money and trying to convince people to drop music skill aquisition and trade it for quick AI songs which of course are dumb because to make a good promt you still need a skilled artist. It is not even fun not being able to create the music by your own. It is absolute and exclusively a scam.

Music made by AI was something that inevitably someone would have created. But it could've been directed by a mature person and not such an asshole. A mature person would promote such app as that only complements in specific occasions and train people to spot those ocassions. A mature person would not lead people into brainrot.

[Leo Gura]

4 minutes ago, Human Mint said:

It is absolute and exclusively a scam.

AI is not a scam, but it is overhyped.

Using AI to make music is not a scam, but it is problematic and limited in many ways.

A CEO's job is to run a profitable company. So he is doing his job. His job is not to make good music or good musicians.

[Joseph Maynor]

1 hour ago, Natasha Tori Maru said:

Some of the greatest masters are not known for the technical ability. Some just for what they introduced as a concept IE Andy Warhol.

All of the above is sort of why I dislike art critics so much. 

You cannot just measure it with a ruler, see it conforms and slap 'great' on it.

True.  But Andy Warhol has an original aesthetic like Elmore James does that makes their artworks great.  You don't need to be technically excellent at skill to create great art.  You can have an original aesthetic that is amazing.  This is why some overly-technical music sounds awful in a way because it's too many notes or some other balance is off.  

[Natasha Tori Maru]

1 hour ago, Joseph Maynor said:

You don't need to be technically excellent at skill to create great art.  You can have an original aesthetic that is amazing.  This is why some overly-technical music sounds awful in a way because it's too many notes or some other balance is off.  

Yes exactly - which is why I raised that 'skill' is a touch broad of a term, as it can reference more than just technical ability.

Original aesthetics are very close to what I think of as individuals with an artists vision or a directorial eye. 

[Human Mint]

10 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

AI is not a scam, but it is overhyped.

Using AI to make music is not a scam, but it is problematic and limited in many ways.

A CEO's job is to run a profitable company. So he is doing his job. His job is not to make good music or good musicians.

The idea of making the music you have in your head through the AI is a good thing. Probably a lot of creative individuals will love that and there are genuine good uses for it like in education.

But it is still a superficial phenomenon and this person is supposedly a musician, and you can see he is not very holistic. If he achieves his vision, then end of the story. But as a musician myself I see many problems with it. And I am not trying to be a purist.

[abc123]

It is bullshit in the sense of being overrated.

There are some nice classical pieces. Van Gogh's Starry Night is lovely, but it is not $100 million dollars lovely.

People have blown these artists like Van Gogh way out of proportion. Was he a decent artist? Sure. Was he some art God? No. That part is the bullshit. There are many artists alive today who are better than Van Gogh, Dali, Picasso, and so on. But none of them will ever be revered as art gods because they don't have the group-think behind them.

---

Even their skill is overrated. Of course they have skill, but there are so many skilled artists whose names you'll never hear.

It is not skill that made Picasso a household name. Was he skilled? Of course.

@Leo Gura 

Do you believe the same for music artists like Mozart, Beethoven, Hans Zimmer, The Beatles, Jimi Hendrix, Michael Jackson, Kendrick Lamar etc?

Edited February 6 by abc123

[Joseph Maynor]

On 2/5/2026 at 6:38 PM, Human Mint said:

The CEO of Suno is one such example of a scammer. Explicitly only caring about the money and trying to convince people to drop music skill aquisition and trade it for quick AI songs which of course are dumb because to make a good promt you still need a skilled artist. It is not even fun not being able to create the music by your own. It is absolute and exclusively a scam.

Music made by AI was something that inevitably someone would have created. But it could've been directed by a mature person and not such an asshole. A mature person would promote such app as that only complements in specific occasions and train people to spot those ocassions. A mature person would not lead people into brainrot.

This reminds me of vibe coding too.  We're becoming more like music producers and managers instead of formerly technicians and engineers.  But the downside is the delegation of trust and how that can limit a creator and the actual artwork produced.  AI is a tool but no more than that.  

Edited February 7 by Joseph Maynor

[Dazgwny]

There’s loads of those AI talks of Feynman. Came across them a few weeks back. Very interesting a lot can be learned through them. Good stuff

[Human Mint]

5 hours ago, Joseph Maynor said:

This reminds me of vibe coding too.  We're becoming more like producers and managers instead of formerly technicians and engineers.  But the downside is the delegation of trust and how that can limit a creator and the actual artwork produced.  AI is a tool but no more than that.  

The paradox would be if AI can teach you music faster and better than a school. That would be cool, you pay and become a sage musician. That's not impossible because there are limits of human teaching other humans. AI would not be more intelligent but more precise and to the point, incorporating all the best teaching methods and probably cheaper.

[Butters]

Everything related to self help is a bit of a scam because it puts whatever you desire into the future. 

[lostingenosmaze]

https://actualized.org/insights/why-light-speed-is-the-limit

Appreciate reuploading the Feynman blogpost, was wondering what ya'll was talking about back there.

[Nick_98]

Leo , since you mentioned AI in your last post. Here's some caricatures made by AI that should represent your work. What is your take on these? 
The blue one is made by Gemini. The other one is made by Chatgpt. 

Which one is your favorite ?

[Nick_98]

Ok here's what is funny.. I asked after that Chatgpt to create for me a funny caricature with the prompt "create a caricature that's really funny ", I didn't intentionally mean that they use the last prompts to generate a caricature related to you, However, it did so. It took you Leo and built a funny caricature about you. Here it is. 

Here's what is interesting 

At the beginning I didn't understand what's funny. I didn't notice that you where pointing a finger and didn't understand the meaning of the dollar bills/signs.

So i asked Chatgpt to clarify by giving the prompt " why did you add dollar bills on leo's caricature?"

Their Answer

"Fair question 🙂
I added the dollar bills as satirical symbolism, not as a factual claim.

In caricature art, artists exaggerate themes people associate with a public persona. For Leo Gura, common internet memes and critiques often mix:

Spiritual enlightenment

Self-actualization / consciousness

Teaching / monetized content (courses, donations, business)

The money imagery was meant as tongue-in-cheek contrast — the classic joke of “transcending the ego… while the ego still lives in the material world.” It’s a long-standing satire trope used for gurus, philosophers, and self-help figures in general.

That said:

It wasn’t meant as an accusation

It wasn’t meant to mock maliciously

Just exaggerated visual comedy layered on top of psychedelic + guru imagery" 
 

I still didn't understand and didn't notice the finger pointing in the picture so I added another prompt "I don't understand this explain for me like im 5 years old"

Their Answer

"

Got it 🙂 let’s make this super simple.

Think of a cartoon like a silly drawing, not a serious photo.

When people draw funny cartoons of famous teachers or “gurus”, they like to:

Mix big ideas (like “the universe” 🌀)

With normal human stuff (like food 🍕 or money 💵)

Why?
Because it’s funny when very serious things and everyday things are smashed together.

So the dollar bills were like a joke saying:

“Even someone who talks about big spiritual ideas still lives in the normal world.”

Not:

❌ “He is bad”

❌ “He only cares about money”

Just:

😄 “Haha, look at this silly contrast!”"

At that point I immediately realized the pointed finger and "GOT" the joke.  

 

[Eskilon]

Bro, that shit is cursed as fuck