is Leo Gura the most epistemically intelligent person alive? As he keeps saying!

[Aaron p]

On 28/04/2025 at 1:14 PM, integral said:

All action no psychology

you would think a greedy corporate fool would still understand the value of their own property, and they would try to maximize profits by making really good content, but no!

Corporate donkeys, could’ve made 10 more movies in this franchise and created a highly profitable sequence of movies but instead they cash grabbed.

You climbed the corporate ladder by taking action whenever you seen an opportunity and capitalizing on every opportunity as quickly and ruthlessly as possible, so that’s all they know

@integral homes, these donkeys need to stop.  for a minute there it looked like they were going to try and make a matrix video game (which I suspect they might also fuck up super badly). 

They need to put the pin back in the grenade they're holding before they ruin the entire trilogy (the holy grail of films). 

Bro...when I seen it, the cringe was eclipsed only by the disappointment. These characters look and act completely unnaturally 

And this guy is weird and annoying:

...honestly it just feels like the entire show completely undermines the entire original trilogy, the machines are back, neo is back, trinity is back... Morpheus is now some random, loose character who is cringey af and wears multicoloured clothes.

Is it too much to ask for a green tinted film with latex, machine guns and a coherent plot continuation? (:-/)

AHH well lol. We can just delete it from our minds ❤️ long live the matrix *trilogy*

[integral]

@Aaron p don't worry I plan to remake the sequels with AI the moment the technology is ready lol
Well call it "The Matrix Absolute Consciousness". 

[Aaron p]

@integral "The Matrix: Recorrections."

 

 

(Are you being serious? That would be next level)

Edited May 29 by Aaron p

[SOUL]

You asked 'artificial intelligence' about 'actual intelligence'? What did you expect it to say? Pfft...

 

/cultery

[krazzer]

@xeontor

To answer your question: nobody really knows. First, you'd need to define a very specific metric. Then, you'd have to measure it across every person on the planet, assuming you're not including aliens.

Sounds like a pretty pointless thing to research… but hey, it still beats doomscrolling.

[Aaron p]

On 30/05/2025 at 9:34 AM, krazzer said:

 

… but hey, it still beats doomscrolling.

@krazzer being on the forum is kinda addictive too and can become a problem but yeah it's better than being addicted the doom scrolling on tiktok. 

(Also I think most people would have a hard time finding someone more epistemically skilled that Mr Gura, he's pretty epistemically skilled). 

Edited May 31 by Aaron p

[Ry4n]

Yes.

[Xonas Pitfall]

Obviously, these kinds of strong claims are hard to give a definitive yes or no to.

But in terms of publicly available "commercial" material, he’s definitely one of the best. His delivery of spirituality and truth is so much more direct, with far less fluff, obscurity, or unnecessary circling around the point. We can never know if *the most*, but certainly one of the best out there. Or, at least that I've found by far! 

[Lucasxp64]

What Leo Gura does is closer to an art form than to rigorous stuff. He's selective in what he becomes very rigorous about and fuzzier in what he doesn't think demands that much care. But I think his priorities for the core questions of life are pretty spot-on. With rigid schools of thought, they have just as much selectiveness, and their selectiveness is different.

I don't think we need formal definitions for what I just said. Even those LLMs are like that, they emphasize the patterns in their training data and their outputs are biased by the way they were trained plus your inputs.

From a cybernetic perspective, we are talking about different kinds of entities. Leo Gura entity, "Scientific Community" (or whatever it is) entity, and that LLM + your mind inputting specific data into into.

Then there is my mind over here doing arbitrage over all of this information based on my own biases.

Scientific papers will all the goddamn time say "remarkable new discovery" and it's barely consequential to the core matters of being.

This is what buddha used to do, he basically would be selective, his core concern was the problem of suffering. And he would try to avoid topics such as the nature of reality, or getting into debates with people, or trying to teach people that he deemed simply too lost to be taught and would try to undermine him with rhetoric.

Leo Gura refusing to engage with certain people is just in line with that, he simply focusing on not developing certain kinds of rethorics to be having debates.

Edited June 3 by Lucasxp64