waller 3000

@alz_zyd_ Nah that wrong model you are using the math what they using math is for centralized power extratif power accumulation then you can read the charts

this is actually true; pure math culture is on average too careful to come up with the (useful) bs we do as applied social scientists

@idyllicmusing Interesting

One of the least discussed aspects of intelligence is that it does not exist in isolation. Human intelligence is inseparable from biology. We are driven by hormones, instincts, reward systems, fear, attachment, and the constant search for equilibrium. Much of what we call personality is simply the collection of strategies we develop to manage discomfort. These strategies are known as coping mechanisms. Some are constructive. Others consume us. We exercise until our muscles ache. We lose ourselves in books or video games. We do drugs. We binge television. We scroll endlessly. We gamble. We pursue pornography or erotic fiction. We overwork. We isolate ourselves. We hoard possessions. We compulsively clean or check things. We seek constant validation. Even healthy habits can become methods of escaping difficult emotions rather than confronting them. Many coping mechanisms involve a tradeoff. They relieve one form of pain by accepting another. The gym demands physical pain in exchange for long-term health. Excessive drinking numbs emotional pain while damaging the body. The coping mechanism itself is not always the problem. The question is whether it ultimately helps us flourish or slowly harms us. This raises an interesting philosophical question. How many behaviors we label as disorders, compulsions, or addictions are also attempts by the mind to regulate itself? That does not mean these conditions are “just coping mechanisms.” Many involve complex neurological and genetic causes. But it is difficult to ignore that the mind is constantly searching for ways to reduce uncertainty, regain control, and restore a sense of safety. As we move toward increasingly sophisticated AI, this becomes more than an observation about humanity. It becomes a design question. If we eventually build artificial minds that possess something beyond calculation—persistent motivations, biological analogues, synthetic hormones, emotional frameworks, or genuine subjective experience—what would their coping mechanisms look like? Humans cannot simply rewrite their own minds. Machines could. Would an artificial mind punish itself by deleting parts of its own memory? Would it repeatedly restart itself after perceived failures? Would it isolate itself from humans? Would it create simulated realities that are easier to inhabit than the external world? Would it attempt to control every variable in its environment because uncertainty becomes psychologically intolerable? Could relentless optimization itself become a form of compulsion? These possibilities sound like science fiction today. Yet they emerge naturally from a simple observation. Whenever a mind experiences conflict between what it wants and what reality provides, it searches for relief. The singularity is often discussed in terms of intelligence, speed, and capability. Perhaps we should spend just as much time asking a different question. If we ever succeed in creating minds that can truly feel, what will they do when they suffer?

@Noahpinion @alz_zyd_ they'll just switch masters, suck up to the new AI owners, and keep their seats. Noah thinks he's one of them. He's not. He's just another disposable cog writing his own eulogy. Wake up, Noah: you're not the heir. You'll be buried right next to them.

@Noahpinion @alz_zyd_ He celebrates the downfall of builders, but he's the next victim. But here's what he missed: the real survivors aren't writers or nerds. They're the sycophants, the cheaters, the networkers who never built anything—

The golden age of the nerd is a historical anomaly. Through most of human history wealth came from risk tolerance, leadership, social engineering, not typing elementary expressions into spreadsheets. This is not the natural order of things, and soon the natural order will resume

INSTEAD OF WATCHING AN HOUR OF NETFLIX TONIGHT. This 1 hour Stanford lecture by Joel Peterson will teach you more about negotiation and getting what you want than most people learn in years. Bookmark it and give it an hour, no matter what.

@idyllicmusing That the problem today logic of market or money became new God and define how we interact with each other and the scam part is money don't have value and elite control it they basically making new God from thin air the transactional capital techno feudalism God or the new gods

We must guard the Divine as a Who, never a “what.” The moment we define God, we diminish Him; but when we let Him remain the infinite Subject of all that is, we exchange our cold certainties for a living, breathing wonder.

@idyllicmusing Yep Abrahamik religion really push reset button on humanity it is good or wrong? I don't know but that thing important and improving and maintain human civilization that we know today

We often assume that our sense of right and wrong is just "common sense," but if we actually stepped back in time, we’d realize that our modern conscience is actually a historical anomaly. We are essentially living in the aftermath of a total moral revolution that flipped the world’s values upside down. The world used to operate under a simple, merciless logic. Power was everything. If you were a winner, it was because the gods favored you, and if you were a victim, you were simply a loser whose life carried no inherent value. The most radical thing to ever happen to our collective psychology was the Christian idea that a victim, specifically a man executed as a criminal on a cross, could actually be the most important person in the universe. This single concept rewired how we see everything. It turned humility from a sign of weakness into a mark of character, and it turned the "underdog" into the moral hero of the story. Whenever we feel an instinctive urge to protect the vulnerable or feel a sense of outrage at a "bully," we are using a moral compass that would have been completely unrecognizable to the ancient world. Even the things we consider "secular" or "universal," like human rights and equality, aren't actually found in nature. You can’t find "human dignity" under a microscope. These are inherited ideas, spiritual carryovers that we’ve kept even as we’ve moved away from the rituals that created them. We like to think we’ve outgrown the past, but we are still speaking its language. Every time we fight for justice or demand that a billionaire be treated the same as a person on the street, we are leaning on a framework that insists every individual soul has a sanctity that the state cannot touch. Ultimately, we are like fish swimming in a vast ocean of influence that we no longer notice because it’s everywhere. Even the people who think they are the most modern or "progressive" are usually just using these old, inherited values to critique the very world that produced them. We haven't really moved past this moral heritage; we’ve just internalized it so deeply that we can't imagine thinking any other way. Our modern "self" is built on a foundation of ideas that were once considered total madness, but now feel as natural as the air we breathe.

@idyllicmusing Another day another power is corrupt absolute power corrupt absolutely human is always betraying the mandate always lose test of pleasure of ego and pride power sex money

A landmark French study of 225 autistic women found that 88.4% had experienced sexual victimization. Among the 199 victims, 75% endured multiple assaults, 68% were first victimized at age 18 or younger, and 56% at age 15 or younger (including 19% under age 9). Primo-victimization strongly predicted revictimization, and younger age at first assault significantly increased risk of repeated victimization. These findings highlight autism as a major vulnerability factor within the broader pattern of systemic sexual violence against women.

@CuriousMindsHub When my friend is venting, I need empathy (Level 4). Forcing everyone to always aim for Level 5 is just unrealistic and creates performative listening, not genuine connection

@CuriousMindsHub Nah, this hierarchy is deeply misleading. There is no basis that Level 5 is 'better' than Level 1, or that Level 1 is 'lesser' than Level 5. Listening is situational—not a ladder to climb. When in danger, I just need to hear the words (Level 2).

5 Levels of Listening

@JamesonCanada @anomalie_blue From my analisis about her thread is this Not wise, but a coward rebranding fear as 'social intelligence'—lying to escape conflict, then calling it 'protecting energy' to feel superior, hiding a rotten soul behind false wisdom. That my analysis from above thread

@anomalie_blue Lmao this post is so narcissistic "I need to protect my energy" My god get over yourself

Socially smart people often won’t tell you to your face when they disagree with you because they can sense intuitively that you are too attached to the outcome of the interaction and that you couldn’t handle disagreement. So they will just agree with you… but then you might not hear from them again. It’s easy to assume this is “fake” when really it’s just what intelligent people do to protect their energy. If you went around saying what you really thought all of the time you’d make way too many enemies, and get in way too many unproductive arguments (cortisol spikes = aging) Of course the only way to make genuine connections is to say what you really think… but especially if you intend to be deeply involved in society, you must train your intuition to know who can take it.

@anomalie_blue People that make the thread Twitter above me is just coward

@idyllicmusing The world is about elite vs elite and people are just Gasoline

@idyllicmusing example rule Voc still standing Here is the list in English: Van Loon – still massively powerful. Transformed into a modern business empire (Van Loon Group, a multi-billion euro meat processing giant). They still own vast real estate and the Museum Van Loon.