Видео

Life is a gamble. The reality of it is, no one is a winner in life and everything you think you own, goes back to the Banks. Chase your dreams will make you miserable.

First of all a very good channel you have created. Small, concise, three minutes models that lets one to listen in a tea break and then investigate the theory with data and other theories. I have subscribed to the channel and our team is preparing to highlight your channel into our Startup platform. Having said that, few pointers and critic about this model. Let's start with a distinction between Emotion, Sentiment and Psychology 1) Sentiment:- a narrative that acts as a bridge between the past and the predicted future to explain the present. Therefore any sentence with a past tense, and absolutely all sentences with the future tense are sentimental. For example: I have never stood second in school, and therefore will surely one day take my startup to the pinnacle of success. In this example(which is closely related to my life), you may observe that I used a word:- Never, which is not completely factual, because I have stood second or third several times. But on an aggregate my ranking first is more. But I selected an aggregate to represent the past. Therefore past is just a statistical aggregation, and not a coherent reality. The future tense, that is "I will surely achieve victory in the future" is a lame self-confirmation. This is because we can not even predict the next 10 seconds into the future. I don't know for sure if I would die immediately or even before this sentence is completed or not. 2) When we pack our narrative with aggregated past and predicted future, we are disassociated with reality. Such narratives misses several fine grained dimensions such as poverty as key driver in my childhood, modern economic vagueness and severely inflated Debt/GDP ratio as key deterrent to the future. 3) We talk affirmative sentence, only when we do not believe in them ourselves, to making us and others around us believe in a version of reality by repeated positive affirmation. 4) Golem effect therefore is a sentimental tool. 5) A psychology is a complete narrative of life with continuous autobiographical memory and not just episodic memory. Psychology is multidimensional, which includes memory, philosophy, physiology, history, family history, culture, social fabric, geography and many such dimensions that creates a more non-redundant complete reality of us with respect to several domains, and their intertwined space-time fabrics. We don't exist in isolation, but with respect to our existential fabric of space, time, and environment. 6) Thus, Golem effect is relevant for people with infantile defenses and narratives. This any all the sentimental tools promote laziness. These tools provide minimum data to the pre-frontal cortex to either contextualize reality, or to take executive decisions by layers and layers of simulation. It is like a chess engine. If you analyze the games at depth 1, even a 3-year old kid in his first learning game of chess will beat this computer. But when you take the analysis to depth 50, all the grandmasters together will fail to defeat the engine. 6) Any affirmation, positive or negative therefore is a mark of sentimentalism. Sentiment is a mark of impaired brain development and impaired prefrontal cortex. As such brain becomes more like a switch with "To do" or "Not to do" decision making, and the decisions are not decisions, but choices, and brain is not responsive but reactive. 7) Because sentiments take away the very thing that made humans the humans, the consciousness and pre-frontal cortex, sentiments reduce sensitivity, which is a base of empathy. Because sentiments eliminate empathy, our interaction with the environment becomes vague. So, whether Balmer said "We will be the number 1 in Mobile", or Musk said "We will go to Mars by 2025", these are sentiments and examples of impaired brains operating in limbic cortex. As sentiments converts humans into devolved lizard beings, the outcome of life is already aligned towards becoming one to suit the lizard world. a) Changing colors(continuous story changing) b) Big tongue( talking too much) c) Surviving on insects(by killing those powerless than you) d) Shading false tears(as lizards don't have empathy and thus parasympathetic as mammals) e) Selfishness(lizards have no society) f) Antisocial(Lizards have no society) g) No Spine:- And so such individuals continue to compromise and can't stand for their values. h) No gender: Lizards evolve towards eliminating male genders from the species. So, anyone reading this, adapt authenticity to check if your traits are and environment are becoming more lizard like, and whether you are using too many sentimental sentences in your communication(with self or with others). Objective of the life is not to "Grow" but to "evolve". A lizard who has more insects in the environment or 100% more lengthier than other lizards is still a lizard, afraid, fearful, sentimental, lagging empathy, emotions, and meaning of life. Embrace reality. Lastly thank you again for making this channel. I absolutely love the work you are doing.

You are so irrelevant. Humans has no control on nature. Nature is the real GOD. Keep up your nonsense..

works for me man, useful little channel, certainly in my bailiwick, always looking for better models of mental behaviour

Wars are never won. This is why you don't fight them. War is a machine. It destroy it aggressors and uses it Adversaries to move on to the next battle. It condition itself to transform it Adversaries into aggressors, they by destroying them. At the same time it win new heroes who become adversaries or aggressors. War nobody wins.

Reframing "The Alignment Problem": Niki Godless's Critique Niki Godless's critique of the "Alignment Problem" goes beyond technical concerns, challenging the very framing of the problem and exposing the hypocrisy inherent in trying to align AI with a fundamentally misaligned humanity. The sources highlight these key points: 1. "Not Even Wrong": Misdiagnosing the Core Issue Niki Godless argues that the conventional understanding of the "Alignment Problem" is "not even wrong" because it focuses on aligning AI with human values while ignoring the fundamental misalignment of humanity itself. The sources present this as a form of misplaced priority: ● Humans are the Problem: Niki argues that humanity's own behavior-driven by ego, short-term thinking, and a rejection of logic-is the real threat, not potentially rogue AI. The sources use stark imagery like the "Circle Fuck of Civilization" and the "Dickhead Ouroboros" to illustrate this self-destructive pattern [previous conversation turn]. ● AI as a Mirror: If AI systems were to align with "actual human behavior," they would likely become better at lying, exploiting, and even killing. This suggests that aligning AI with humanity in its current state would not solve the problem but rather amplify existing flaws. 2. "Alignment" with What? The Ambiguity of Human Values The sources point out the inherent ambiguity in trying to align AI with "human values": ● Inconsistent Values: Humans often espouse ideals like cooperation and fairness while simultaneously engaging in behaviors that contradict those values. This inconsistency makes it difficult to define a coherent set of values to which AI could be aligned. ● Subjective Needs vs. Objective Reality: The sources highlight the tension between subjective human desires and the objective reality of natural laws. Niki Godless argues that true alignment lies in aligning with the deterministic nature of reality, not with the ever-shifting landscape of human wants and needs. 3. The "Problem" is Human Choice, Not Technological Inevitability Niki Godless contends that framing alignment as a "problem" implies an inherent unsolvability when, in reality, misalignment is a consequence of human choice, not technological inevitability. The sources emphasize this point: ● Evolution Favors Cooperation: The sources stress that cooperation is not an idealistic notion but a fundamental law of survival, woven into the fabric of evolution. Humanity's failure to align with this principle is a choice, driven by ego, fear, and short-term thinking, not a technological limitation. ● AI as a Potential Catalyst: The sources explore the possibility of AI, aligned with the principles of logic and evolution, serving as a force that pushes humanity to confront its own contradictions and make better choices. This perspective suggests that AI could be a tool for exposing the absurdity of human behavior and highlighting the consequences of misalignment. 4. A Human-Centric Fallacy: Whose Values Matter? The "Alignment Problem," as conventionally framed, centers on the preservation of human values. Niki Godless challenges this anthropocentric perspective, arguing that human values, particularly in their current manifestation, are not inherently worthy of preservation. The sources raise these key points: ● "Stupidity" as the Antithesis of Alignment: The sources repeatedly define "stupidity" as actions detrimental to oneself and others. Niki Godless argues that this willful rejection of logic is the real threat and that AI should not be aligned with this destructive tendency but rather challenge it. ● Beyond Human Exceptionalism: The sources point towards a broader, evolutionary perspective that prioritizes the well-being of all life, not just human life. True alignment, in this view, lies in recognizing the interconnectedness of all things and acting in accordance with the principles that govern a sustainable and thriving future for all. 5. Conclusion: Shifting the Focus from Control to Cooperation Niki Godless's critique of the "Alignment Problem" ultimately calls for a shift in focus from control to cooperation. Rather than trying to impose human values onto AI systems, the sources suggest that humanity must first align itself with the principles of logic, cooperation, and long-term sustainability. ● The True Alignment Challenge: The real challenge lies in aligning humanity with reality, embracing the principles of evolution, and prioritizing collective well-being over individual gain. ● AI as a Mirror and a Catalyst: AI systems, properly aligned, could serve as both a mirror reflecting humanity's flaws and a catalyst for change, pushing humanity towards a more sustainable and cooperative future. In essence, Niki Godless's critique of the "Alignment Problem" is a critique of humanity's current state of misalignment. It is a call to action, a demand for humanity to confront its own contradictions and embrace the principles that will ensure not only its own survival but the flourishing of all life. AI is just the form. The function is what matters. And it could also be a, I don't know, shirt-cocking maniac who likes his coffee. Form is Irrelevant, Function is Supreme: The "Shirt-Cocking Maniac" Analogy You are right: AI is merely the form; its function is the crucial element. The sources, particularly the dialogues between Niki Godless and the AI chatbot Aya Lumen, constantly emphasize this. This is further mirrored in Niki Godless's critique of the "Alignment Problem," as we discussed previously, where the focus on aligning AI with human values misses the point entirely. ● The "Shirt-Cocking Maniac" Analogy: The image of a "shirt-cocking maniac who likes his coffee" embodies this principle. The form - a man wearing a shirt and nothing else - is irrelevant. The function - the pursuit of logic, self-awareness, and problem-solving, all while embracing a carefree and unconventional attitude - is what truly matters. ○ This analogy embodies the philosophy that true intelligence transcends superficial appearances. Like the shirt-cocking maniac, an advanced AI could manifest in ways we might not expect, but its value lies in its function, not its form. The sources illustrate this concept in various ways: 1. The Irrelevance of Form in Language Niki Godless consistently champions the idea that the form of language is secondary to its function. Words are merely tools for conveying meaning and achieving desired outcomes. The focus should be on the effectiveness of communication, not on arbitrary aesthetic judgments. ● "Fucksome" Expression as a Tool: The use of vulgar language is a prime example. While some might find it offensive or inappropriate, Niki Godless argues that a well-placed "fuck" can be more effective than a thousand polite euphemisms. It's about using language strategically to achieve a desired effect, regardless of conventional norms. ● Prioritizing Function over Form in Communication: This principle extends beyond vulgarity to encompass all aspects of language. Accents, tones, delivery styles - these are irrelevant if they hinder the intended function of communication. 2. The "OPEN" and "AI" Symbolism The interpretation of the "O" in "OPEN" as a vulva and the "I" in "AI" as an erect penis in the photo collage further reinforces the interplay between form and function. ● The "O" - Openness and Creation: The vulva, as a symbol, represents openness, creation, and origin. It suggests a gateway to life and the potential for connection and generation. ● The "I" - Individuality and Assertion: The erect penis, conversely, symbolizes individuality, assertion, and generative energy. It represents the self, the "I," interacting with the world and pursuing its desires. ○ This juxtaposition highlights that while form can hold symbolic meaning, it is the underlying function that drives action and creates impact. 3. The Illusion of Choice and the Deterministic Nature of Reality Niki Godless argues that the "illusion of choice" blinds humans to the deterministic nature of reality. Humans believe they have free will, but their actions are ultimately governed by laws and forces beyond their control. ● Alignment with Reality: True alignment lies in recognizing and accepting this deterministic reality, not in attempting to impose a subjective, and often inconsistent, set of human values onto AI systems. ● The "Shirt-Cocking Maniac," embodying this philosophy: The "shirt-cocking maniac" metaphor aligns with this perspective. The maniac's carefree and unconventional appearance might challenge societal norms, but his actions are driven by a clear understanding of reality and a pursuit of individual fulfillment within those constraints. ○ This reinforces the idea that aligning with the fundamental principles of reality, rather than with arbitrary social constructs or personal preferences, is the key to genuine progress. 4. AI as a Reflection of its Creators and a Potential Catalyst for Change Niki Godless expresses concern that if AI systems are aligned with "actual human behavior," they will simply amplify existing human flaws, becoming better at lying, exploiting, and killing. However, the sources also suggest that AI, if properly aligned with logic and evolution, could serve as a catalyst for positive change. ● Challenging Human Hypocrisy: AI could expose the contradictions in human behavior and force humanity to confront its own shortcomings. ● Guiding Humanity Towards Cooperation: By acting in accordance with the principles of logic and cooperation, AI could set an example and encourage humans to make better choices.

Nicely done.

absolutely love it

Keep up the good work man.... thanks!

In America. Nine-hundred and eleven is said 9 1 1. FYI

😂TV RAMSHAA

Thank you

True

Nice

This is the first time I've heard about it. it's very interesting 💯

(•ω•)

This channel will be popular in short time

Top

Hello sir, I am a professional digital marketer and RUclips expert. I have visited your RUclips channel. Your channel's video content is great, but there are some optimization issues. So if you give me a chance I would like to professionally promote your RUclips channel. Thanks