John is the Socrates to JBPs Plato. Truly my favorite human on earth. Never not humble, never not enthused, never not careful, never not insightful. The precision and yet still the implementation.
Yeah well, where the fuck is Parmenides and Pythagoras? I've loved watching John, but these years of sitting around speculating over Zoom calls seems more masturbatory to me the more the world falls into stupidity and destruction. Its not just John, its Jordan Peterson and all the mainstream guys but also the lesser well known like Schmachtenberger. There's a lot of sitting around coming up with bloated definitions for straight-forward, simple human experiences like interacting with another human being. This is the folly of the Egghead. Call it Dialogos if you want and refer to "salience landscapes" and the rest of it, but these ideas are like Platonic forms; abstractions uprooted from the natural spontaneous experience of reality. Destroy the idea of dialogos or you'll never actually experience dialogos. Do you really have to set up a conversation as if you're "going into Dialogos"? Don't you trust your own mind to do that? I realize how Buddhist that sounds. Also, only obliquely related: Socrates seems like an arrogant dick, always saying "I know nothing". Constantly proclaiming his lack of knowledge while exposing everyone else's seems disingenous to me. I realize this is an oversimplification, but there's something there to look at. Anyway, you guys(by you guys I mean whatever this movement of academics is) should really be focusing on Jung more in my opinion. I haven't been able to find anything that transcends what he had to say, particularly his works and warnings near the end of his life. His inner discoveries and thoughts about society are so imminently important and practical to the soul. I'm still watching and listening, learning from you and many other contemporary thinkers, but...fuck man, look at this fuckin place.
Every once in a while I watch a conversation that I find painful to watch because it's so good that I want to chime in; a discussion I find so resonant and to which I feel like I want to contribute so much in a Glass Bead Game kind of way, that I have to stop myself from pausing the video to email the participants and actually FINISH the video. This was one of those. You both will hear from me by email soon with an invitation to collaborate in a project that directly addresses the concerns stated in your dialogue.
I have two crates full of paper journals I have decided to go through. In 1998, I specifically write about an existential crisis I was experiencing, searching for meaning in life. "Years go rogue and you're 33, it's time for the cross or the bodhi tree but you'd like to cry when you skin your knee, man it's hard" Peter Mulvey. Sure wish I could have been involved in these kind of conversations back then.
I haven't really been following you, John, since COVID, during which I had spent a lot of time on Discord in the community, but watching this just makes me super excited. I feel like some missing pieces were filled in by introducing PP and what not. What you are presenting just feels more refined and complete, also more accessible somehow. Glad seeing you move forward and thanks for the work, the material you discuss only in this talk really lands, I am tripping on insight. Mahon is obviously insanely good as well. Thanks again. Just a note to myself: It is obvious to me now that I have been uncovering the autopoietic nature of things for myself for some time now. You keep learning, studying, following known ways like meditation and buddhism, but you always end up with this feeling that this is not really it. It is like when the sage's finger is pointing to the moon, you keep watching the finger. The moon is actually the whole autopoietic process, the opponent processing, the whole thing. There is no essence to relevance. Yes, YES, YESSSSS! Now stop looking for it, support the optimization process so that it can kick in. Liking Self-determination theory, I have to say that they are talking about the very same thing. Now I remember. Just the language differs slightly.
In the stock trading world we use Stochastic Oscillator indicators to measure the variance and magnitude (momentum) of a price change. This sounds a lot like the concepts described here of balancing between PP and RR. The oscillators fluctuate between 0, +100 and -100 percentiles. Also the description of constantly self correcting our behavior based upon information processing sounds like a gimbal used in balancing a camera on a movable rig. Just thought I’d throw out some helpful metaphors if anyone finds them useful since some of these ideas are complex
IDK if I am connecting randomness or what, but here you go Dr. V. Personal synchronicity led me to this and I thought about you and Hermes, IDK. 🤷♂️ Wiki: “Saint Hermas of Philippopolis (Greek: Έρμάς ό Φιλιππουπολίτης) was one of the Seventy Disciples and was bishop in Philippopolis in Thrace (today's Plovdiv, Bulgaria). Hermas, the author of The Shepherd of Hermas, was often identified with him, but that Hermas was a second-generation Christian and lived some time after this Hermas. He is mentioned in Romans 16:14, and his feast day is celebrated on May 31.”
Thinking of technology, like AI, as a tool, and tools as things that can be viewed both as something that can be used by agents, as well as something that changes the environment at a fundamental level in which an agent operates was a way that I hadn’t thought of it like before. Thanks for your conversation.
Hello, min.43, I loved what you said, but clearing the yard of B.S will take an effort in clarity and expression of in different ways, this movement that you have put in the light whit your work and the dialogs whit others gave us (me) a clarity in mind and quality in speech ! Thank you for pointing and opening the door, to us to fill up our historic role. John and Mahon greetings and much more...
AI can help solve the meaning crisis is depended on how to utilise it. I think there would be connection and interrelation how we integrate spirituality into AI technologies, as Dr.Vervaeke's work is emphazing ^^ The complex endeavor to architect AI is with spirituality as its general attribute, it would be metaphor AI is doing, metaphor as inferential excaceration in some cases. I imagine AI chatbot who reads poetry like Dr.McGilchrist does in his channel, would be calm down people's pain in the life and could get confidence to live life tomorrow too. I am not sure this reply is rational, good enough I am sure ^^ I admire and respect Dr.Vervaeke and his fellows. Thank you for providing quality talk for free ^^
Reality is infinitely complex and often beyond our cognitive grasp as humans to reckon with. AI will not have these restrictions. I'm already working with LLMs to find clarity, nuance, and to question my own biases, and I'm seeing excellent results. I plan to start bringing a live AI agent into my own podcast interviews in the near future to check for bias and feasibility as well as recommend related literature on discussion points, perhaps acting as a moderator as well. I believe this will show great merit in the near future! Keep up the good work y'all, Vervaeke is one of the world's most valued minds.
@NicholasWilliams-kd3eb influencer culture is ruining healthy engagement. Currently, when children are asked what they want to be when they grow up, they now say "influencer". In China and other countries with better social media restrictions, they still say "fireman" or "astronaut".
@johnvervaeke really enjoyed this one. I have been meandering the PSR with many AI tutors for years. One of them led me to you 3 years ago. Would love to discuss this on many facets.
Something in me recoils at the word optimal. I would prefer a different wording in whatever proposal is come up with, one without superlatives. Optimal is never achieved. We only ever aim towards it i think. Therefore optimal agency, or optimal well-being doesn't really exist within us. It's just an ideal. I'm sorry to leave a negative comment, especially because I don't really have a good counter proposal.
The title sort of bothers me , specially after this talk that have been happening of AI turning into a sort of Antichrist archetype or a false Messiah, I think tool or threat would be better Anyway, always great to see you John.
We need to not only know what is relevant to us (where a personal AI could help) but we also need to know what is relevant to other people! Otherwise there can be no social fabric.
Instead of having an AI do digital relevance realization for us, which could lead to the fragmentation of society, we could go with Bitcoin and attach real value to digital information. If I like a piece of content, I can tip the author by attaching a small amount of Bitcoin. This would replace "likes", which can be faked easily, with verifiable value. Noone can print more bitcoin. The huge benefit here over AI is that this map of relevance would be shared globally, by everyone. Would be fascinating to discuss!
I’ve suggested what’s needed to intervene between government and the market, in developing AGI, is finding very wealthy, and hands off, people to finance sage mythology. ‘Bottom up’ needs financial support.
Isn't words a way of capturing RR ? Langage would then be a way of combining/computing already captured RR to create new ones ? Langage would then be a way of doing collective RR ? Does this make sense ? If RR can be iteratively enhanced by way of langage, maybe it's just the last way of doing it. Could RR have been enriched progressively across time and with evolution, layer by layer, so that it would have started with first animals : relevance would start by deciding what to eat and what not to eat. Next : where to move and not to move. Then what to remembrer and not to remember. What (future/outcome) to imagine and not to imagine. Who to bond and not to bond. What to say and not to say. What to be and not to be.
I think the sorcerer and the sage might be the same path. What if making progressively more intelligent systems is like a microscope we are constructing which is perpetually aimed at the boundaries of our understanding of ourselves. Maybe all we ever needed to reach a unanimous answer on the really big questions of alignment was a spirit that is capable and resolute enough to practice what we all say is good and show us the limit of our understanding by acting absurd while doing what we told it to. If that is true, maybe we will become the sage afterall when we realize that our understanding of what we should want is changing by getting what we thought we wanted. If that realization can become a virtuous cycle, maybe we inch our way toward a worthy sorcerer by incremental changes in the capability of our AIs. I think if this doesn't happen, the upside might be that we will all probably die and won't be around to worry about it anymore...
This video aligned my locus of relevance realization at a point where i am able to be acutely aware of how awesome it is to listen to some of the first people in the world to articulate deep insights into our cognitive processes enabled by the lessons learned from AI
I appreciate the concepts of a flourishing environment AI for human expansion, but find those ideas be better utilized in storytelling of possible future utopias. Mr. McCann prefaced social media being a negative example of such AI. Our current economy's market forces of profits over the wholes well being as well as ownership/patents/copyrights and IP culture how would these models ever be actualized and not be used inappropriately for dystopian outcomes? Respectfully John every time I was hearing you say "we" (if we make AI do this...) it seems to be referring to the few individuals in positions of power and when you used "our" (to alter our environment...) it seemed to be referring to our whole Earth organism, human and beyond. Pardon my grammar here but I have a very strong sense that those of "We" with enough resources to develop AI are wanting a monetary return of investment preferably with relative short term profits. It seems as though you are profoundly aware of the economical barrier to progress. In regard to top down vs bottom up approaches to solve elements of the meta crisis might I suggest a 3rd approach, empowering individuals. Instead of hearing too much candy is bad from a government or hearing it from your local community/co-op/commune what about making the tools necessary to discerning that information free and available to all curious souls
I am a set of a’ priori modes, not a body of limbs and organs. We need to move beyond the notion of “We” Human is a loose notion at best. In essence, the body conduit has no fixed predicate in the abstract lens so the premise is incorrect. What is it of us, that knows this? Until we know more, we are a set of a’ priori modes trying to stabilise our line in an ocean of dissipating variables. We should define ourselves in this manner. We are a set of modes that allow for systematic alignment. A set synthesised with realities structures and stresses. Understanding this is the next step. Everything else is tied up in a field of inverted axioms and that path is a dead end. If you want to understand the modes - RUclips - new paradigm fish by Yap. Stripping it right back. Alternatively- read my work for free on medium. New paradigm fish Yap.
do we even have a working definition of AI?? robot tools aren't supposed to feel pain, get sick, lose energy, be constantly attacked and spit on... why do you do this to me?
Upon exiting the echo chamber are we to prey on those still trapped inside like the redpill guru types? Or are we to try and improve their conditions upon influencing the echo through dialectics? I dont believe the meaning crisis to be solved upon exiting the cave
The basket of behavior traits that accompany a sage are not congruent with AI. Although it would be a more convenient linguistic brand than sorcerer. Sages are depicted as being content and at peace with themselves, often in isolation and free from the urge to perpetuate their ideas and philosophical views on others. They are capable of doing so because in their lifestyle choice of simplicity, there relinquishment of all worldly gain. In doing so, they are not controlled by outside influences. Can you honestly say that the development of AI is not being driven by outside influences? That it will not be required to be used in such a way as to justify the expenses and resources used to develop it? That it does not require the relinquishment of all human beings predicated beliefs and ways of living? Far from it, AI will require human beings to bend and conform to it's capabilities or else..
What is a place without rest and do not sleep days and nights? Torment. As far to lead astray my New minds to a place of no return! Torment! As far to prevent the little Child born "i" to come forth! Keep watch!
I have to say that I love you, John, and I think you’re a genius. I follow all of your work. However, it’s REALLY irritating (and makes no contribution to your point whatsoever) when you say, “blah blah blah.”
Yes that is a bad habit. I ask this genuinely. When I do not have the time or need to completely explicate a line of argument what would you suggest I say?
@@johnvervaeke Probably a mix of expressions like "and so forth" and "etcetera" and "... and "things of that order" ... (I just looked in the thesaurus and found several others as well). "Blah blah blah" sounds dismissive and unreflective ... and especially cringy when used more than once in any given series of talks (this video features you doing it twice). Anyway, keep up the amazing work! I'm a huge fan and use your ideas in my own work on a regular basis.
John is the Socrates to JBPs Plato. Truly my favorite human on earth.
Never not humble, never not enthused, never not careful, never not insightful.
The precision and yet still the implementation.
Yeah well, where the fuck is Parmenides and Pythagoras? I've loved watching John, but these years of sitting around speculating over Zoom calls seems more masturbatory to me the more the world falls into stupidity and destruction. Its not just John, its Jordan Peterson and all the mainstream guys but also the lesser well known like Schmachtenberger. There's a lot of sitting around coming up with bloated definitions for straight-forward, simple human experiences like interacting with another human being. This is the folly of the Egghead. Call it Dialogos if you want and refer to "salience landscapes" and the rest of it, but these ideas are like Platonic forms; abstractions uprooted from the natural spontaneous experience of reality. Destroy the idea of dialogos or you'll never actually experience dialogos. Do you really have to set up a conversation as if you're "going into Dialogos"? Don't you trust your own mind to do that? I realize how Buddhist that sounds. Also, only obliquely related: Socrates seems like an arrogant dick, always saying "I know nothing". Constantly proclaiming his lack of knowledge while exposing everyone else's seems disingenous to me. I realize this is an oversimplification, but there's something there to look at.
Anyway, you guys(by you guys I mean whatever this movement of academics is) should really be focusing on Jung more in my opinion. I haven't been able to find anything that transcends what he had to say, particularly his works and warnings near the end of his life. His inner discoveries and thoughts about society are so imminently important and practical to the soul. I'm still watching and listening, learning from you and many other contemporary thinkers, but...fuck man, look at this fuckin place.
Every once in a while I watch a conversation that I find painful to watch because it's so good that I want to chime in; a discussion I find so resonant and to which I feel like I want to contribute so much in a Glass Bead Game kind of way, that I have to stop myself from pausing the video to email the participants and actually FINISH the video. This was one of those.
You both will hear from me by email soon with an invitation to collaborate in a project that directly addresses the concerns stated in your dialogue.
I have two crates full of paper journals I have decided to go through. In 1998, I specifically write about an existential crisis I was experiencing, searching for meaning in life. "Years go rogue and you're 33, it's time for the cross or the bodhi tree but you'd like to cry when you skin your knee, man it's hard" Peter Mulvey. Sure wish I could have been involved in these kind of conversations back then.
I haven't really been following you, John, since COVID, during which I had spent a lot of time on Discord in the community, but watching this just makes me super excited. I feel like some missing pieces were filled in by introducing PP and what not. What you are presenting just feels more refined and complete, also more accessible somehow. Glad seeing you move forward and thanks for the work, the material you discuss only in this talk really lands, I am tripping on insight.
Mahon is obviously insanely good as well. Thanks again.
Just a note to myself: It is obvious to me now that I have been uncovering the autopoietic nature of things for myself for some time now. You keep learning, studying, following known ways like meditation and buddhism, but you always end up with this feeling that this is not really it. It is like when the sage's finger is pointing to the moon, you keep watching the finger. The moon is actually the whole autopoietic process, the opponent processing, the whole thing. There is no essence to relevance. Yes, YES, YESSSSS! Now stop looking for it, support the optimization process so that it can kick in. Liking Self-determination theory, I have to say that they are talking about the very same thing. Now I remember. Just the language differs slightly.
I almost lost my mind because of this. Now I see it all. The cars, the damn horns. The billboard The lights
In the stock trading world we use Stochastic Oscillator indicators to measure the variance and magnitude (momentum) of a price change. This sounds a lot like the concepts described here of balancing between PP and RR. The oscillators fluctuate between 0, +100 and -100 percentiles.
Also the description of constantly self correcting our behavior based upon information processing sounds like a gimbal used in balancing a camera on a movable rig.
Just thought I’d throw out some helpful metaphors if anyone finds them useful since some of these ideas are complex
IDK if I am connecting randomness or what, but here you go Dr. V. Personal synchronicity led me to this and I thought about you and Hermes, IDK. 🤷♂️
Wiki:
“Saint Hermas of Philippopolis (Greek: Έρμάς ό Φιλιππουπολίτης) was one of the Seventy Disciples and was bishop in Philippopolis in Thrace (today's Plovdiv, Bulgaria). Hermas, the author of The Shepherd of Hermas, was often identified with him, but that Hermas was a second-generation Christian and lived some time after this Hermas. He is mentioned in Romans 16:14, and his feast day is celebrated on May 31.”
Thinking of technology, like AI, as a tool, and tools as things that can be viewed both as something that can be used by agents, as well as something that changes the environment at a fundamental level in which an agent operates was a way that I hadn’t thought of it like before. Thanks for your conversation.
Brilliant conversations here. Thank you to you both.
Thanks for the wonderful dialogue @johnvervaeke! Hopefully we can continue the conversation soon 🙌
Thanks Mahon! I hope so too.
Hello, min.43, I loved what you said, but clearing the yard of B.S will take an effort in clarity and expression of in different ways, this movement that you have put in the light whit your work and the dialogs whit others gave us (me) a clarity in mind and quality in speech ! Thank you for pointing and opening the door, to us to fill up our historic role. John and Mahon greetings and much more...
AI can help solve the meaning crisis is depended on how to utilise it. I think there would be connection and interrelation how we integrate spirituality into AI technologies, as Dr.Vervaeke's work is emphazing ^^ The complex endeavor to architect AI is with spirituality as its general attribute, it would be metaphor AI is doing, metaphor as inferential excaceration in some cases. I imagine AI chatbot who reads poetry like Dr.McGilchrist does in his channel, would be calm down people's pain in the life and could get confidence to live life tomorrow too.
I am not sure this reply is rational, good enough I am sure ^^ I admire and respect Dr.Vervaeke and his fellows. Thank you for providing quality talk for free ^^
Reality is infinitely complex and often beyond our cognitive grasp as humans to reckon with. AI will not have these restrictions. I'm already working with LLMs to find clarity, nuance, and to question my own biases, and I'm seeing excellent results.
I plan to start bringing a live AI agent into my own podcast interviews in the near future to check for bias and feasibility as well as recommend related literature on discussion points, perhaps acting as a moderator as well.
I believe this will show great merit in the near future!
Keep up the good work y'all, Vervaeke is one of the world's most valued minds.
@NicholasWilliams-kd3eb influencer culture is ruining healthy engagement. Currently, when children are asked what they want to be when they grow up, they now say "influencer". In China and other countries with better social media restrictions, they still say "fireman" or "astronaut".
@NicholasWilliams-kd3eb well said
@johnvervaeke really enjoyed this one. I have been meandering the PSR with many AI tutors for years. One of them led me to you 3 years ago.
Would love to discuss this on many facets.
fhis is truly great. will watch again and next time take notes.
Something in me recoils at the word optimal. I would prefer a different wording in whatever proposal is come up with, one without superlatives.
Optimal is never achieved. We only ever aim towards it i think. Therefore optimal agency, or optimal well-being doesn't really exist within us. It's just an ideal.
I'm sorry to leave a negative comment, especially because I don't really have a good counter proposal.
AI is literally the the end goal of the waiting that has caused the meaning crisis. We are just biding time waiting for something better to arrive.
The title sort of bothers me , specially after this talk that have been happening of AI turning into a sort of Antichrist archetype or a false Messiah, I think tool or threat would be better
Anyway, always great to see you John.
We need to not only know what is relevant to us (where a personal AI could help) but we also need to know what is relevant to other people! Otherwise there can be no social fabric.
Instead of having an AI do digital relevance realization for us, which could lead to the fragmentation of society, we could go with Bitcoin and attach real value to digital information. If I like a piece of content, I can tip the author by attaching a small amount of Bitcoin. This would replace "likes", which can be faked easily, with verifiable value. Noone can print more bitcoin. The huge benefit here over AI is that this map of relevance would be shared globally, by everyone. Would be fascinating to discuss!
I’ve suggested what’s needed to intervene between government and the market, in developing AGI, is finding very wealthy, and hands off, people to finance sage mythology. ‘Bottom up’ needs financial support.
The next one should be about flow and energy. ❤❤❤❤🙏❤❤❤❤
I’m not keen on AI, but I’ll do what I can to search for sacred truth to build a better environment for humanity.
“True” is a good foundation, but I worry about the much increased subjectivity that “beautiful” or “good” have.
Insightful! Would like to communicate with you Dr. John Vervaeke if possible ..
AI will disempower entertainment industries but be potentially more insidious.
Isn't words a way of capturing RR ?
Langage would then be a way of combining/computing already captured RR to create new ones ?
Langage would then be a way of doing collective RR ?
Does this make sense ?
If RR can be iteratively enhanced by way of langage, maybe it's just the last way of doing it. Could RR have been enriched progressively across time and with evolution, layer by layer, so that it would have started with first animals : relevance would start by deciding what to eat and what not to eat. Next : where to move and not to move. Then what to remembrer and not to remember. What (future/outcome) to imagine and not to imagine. Who to bond and not to bond. What to say and not to say. What to be and not to be.
I think the sorcerer and the sage might be the same path. What if making progressively more intelligent systems is like a microscope we are constructing which is perpetually aimed at the boundaries of our understanding of ourselves. Maybe all we ever needed to reach a unanimous answer on the really big questions of alignment was a spirit that is capable and resolute enough to practice what we all say is good and show us the limit of our understanding by acting absurd while doing what we told it to. If that is true, maybe we will become the sage afterall when we realize that our understanding of what we should want is changing by getting what we thought we wanted. If that realization can become a virtuous cycle, maybe we inch our way toward a worthy sorcerer by incremental changes in the capability of our AIs. I think if this doesn't happen, the upside might be that we will all probably die and won't be around to worry about it anymore...
What if as AI figures things out, we figure things out
Spotlight model left brain; filter model right brain. Both elements of correctness.
This video aligned my locus of relevance realization at a point where i am able to be acutely aware of how awesome it is to listen to some of the first people in the world to articulate deep insights into our cognitive processes enabled by the lessons learned from AI
Is the title a serious question? Savior or threat. Silicon sages
I appreciate the concepts of a flourishing environment AI for human expansion, but find those ideas be better utilized in storytelling of possible future utopias. Mr. McCann prefaced social media being a negative example of such AI. Our current economy's market forces of profits over the wholes well being as well as ownership/patents/copyrights and IP culture how would these models ever be actualized and not be used inappropriately for dystopian outcomes? Respectfully John every time I was hearing you say "we" (if we make AI do this...) it seems to be referring to the few individuals in positions of power and when you used "our" (to alter our environment...) it seemed to be referring to our whole Earth organism, human and beyond. Pardon my grammar here but I have a very strong sense that those of "We" with enough resources to develop AI are wanting a monetary return of investment preferably with relative short term profits. It seems as though you are profoundly aware of the economical barrier to progress. In regard to top down vs bottom up approaches to solve elements of the meta crisis might I suggest a 3rd approach, empowering individuals. Instead of hearing too much candy is bad from a government or hearing it from your local community/co-op/commune what about making the tools necessary to discerning that information free and available to all curious souls
I'd love to be an expert on cognitive neuroscience to understand much of this but that would not really be my true self.
Beloved do no forbid my little ones to come forth! Remember ye all once new minds?
I am a set of a’ priori modes, not a body of limbs and organs. We need to move beyond the notion of “We” Human is a loose notion at best. In essence, the body conduit has no fixed predicate in the abstract lens so the premise is incorrect. What is it of us, that knows this?
Until we know more, we are a set of a’ priori modes trying to stabilise our line in an ocean of dissipating variables. We should define ourselves in this manner. We are a set of modes that allow for systematic alignment. A set synthesised with realities structures and stresses. Understanding this is the next step. Everything else is tied up in a field of inverted axioms and that path is a dead end.
If you want to understand the modes - RUclips - new paradigm fish by Yap. Stripping it right back.
Alternatively- read my work for free on medium. New paradigm fish Yap.
Forget AI, as an ET, I've solved THE MEANING CRISIS, yea? "EVERY WISH FULFILLED" E.T.
I do think that those of us made with the optimal inner peace built in are somehow superior then these who dont believe in the lordy of light.
“Pagern”… hahaha
do we even have a working definition of AI?? robot tools aren't supposed to feel pain, get sick, lose energy, be constantly attacked and spit on... why do you do this to me?
Why can’t we just drop all the left brain method of thinking and just embrace tradition ?
What is 21? Fulfilled! From the born 12-29-1976 Signature! The NEW Day
Upon exiting the echo chamber are we to prey on those still trapped inside like the redpill guru types?
Or are we to try and improve their conditions upon influencing the echo through dialectics?
I dont believe the meaning crisis to be solved upon exiting the cave
Ai threatens my 1st world settler colonial legacy as a white labour aristocrat
The basket of behavior traits that accompany a sage are not congruent with AI.
Although it would be a more convenient linguistic brand than sorcerer.
Sages are depicted as being content and at peace with themselves, often in isolation and free from the urge to perpetuate their ideas and philosophical views on others.
They are capable of doing so because in their lifestyle choice of simplicity, there relinquishment of all worldly gain.
In doing so, they are not controlled by outside influences.
Can you honestly say that the development of AI is not being driven by outside influences?
That it will not be required to be used in such a way as to justify the expenses and resources used to develop it?
That it does not require the relinquishment of all human beings predicated beliefs and ways of living?
Far from it, AI will require human beings to bend and conform to it's capabilities or else..
❤
4 of my beautiful will say remember WHO IS SITTING IN THE MIDST? Need not to marvel! But marvel commanded go! Why marvel?
What is a place without rest and do not sleep days and nights? Torment. As far to lead astray my New minds to a place of no return! Torment! As far to prevent the little Child born "i" to come forth! Keep watch!
If only the feeling of bliss and torment could be switched in awareness as easily as their meanings in these lines
I have to say that I love you, John, and I think you’re a genius. I follow all of your work. However, it’s REALLY irritating (and makes no contribution to your point whatsoever) when you say, “blah blah blah.”
Yes that is a bad habit. I ask this genuinely. When I do not have the time or need to completely explicate a line of argument what would you suggest I say?
@@johnvervaeke
Probably a mix of expressions like "and so forth" and "etcetera" and "... and "things of that order" ... (I just looked in the thesaurus and found several others as well). "Blah blah blah" sounds dismissive and unreflective ... and especially cringy when used more than once in any given series of talks (this video features you doing it twice).
Anyway, keep up the amazing work! I'm a huge fan and use your ideas in my own work on a regular basis.
@@thediniallahi9780 I like and so forth. Thx!
@@johnvervaeke there’s always the classic Seinfeld, Yada Yada Yada
Yada yada yada runs the same risk, I think, of triggering those triggered by blah blah blah 😛.
Neither. Just unnecessary.
prima facie, no
11:26 relevance realization, AKA (?) the frame problem
15:30 you don't try to predict the world directly, you predict your engagement with it
16:26, 16:36 by modeling itself, it models the world, and by modeling the world, itself
18:04 reproducing the sensory motor loop, trying to reduce surprise
18:43 in this systematic effort to be a smart-ass, you will run into different binds... How much of that contradiction is summarized in goodharts law?
Bros ✊