Rombaro Rory

Japanese actor Hiroyuki Sanada spoke about the contradictions of human nature: “Some people dream of having a swimming pool at home, while those who have one hardly ever use it. Those who have lost a loved one feel a profound sense of loss, while others often complain about their living relatives. Those without a partner long for one, while those who have one often don't appreciate it. The hungry would give anything for a meal, while the satiated complain about the taste of their food. Those without a car dream of owning one, while those who have a car are always looking for a better one.” The key to happiness is gratitude: truly seeing and appreciating what we already have, and understanding that somewhere, someone would give anything for what we take for granted.

@DaveShapi Zombies are people too.

Machines will ALWAYS just be tools, no matter how sophisticated they become. They will never have moral agency, personhood, or consciousness in a way that is legally, ethically, or philosophically salient. Agree or disagree?

@sandeepnailwal An echo isn’t the source.

LLM based AI is NOT conscious. I co-founded a company literally called Sentient, we're building reasoning systems for AGI, so believe me when I say this. I keep seeing smart people, people I genuinely respect, come out and say that AI has crossed into some kind of awareness. That it feels things, that we should worry about it going rogue. And i think this whole conversation tells us way more about ourselves than it does about AI. These models are wild, i won't pretend otherwise. But feeling human and actually having inner experience are completely different things and we're confusing the two because our brains literally can't help it. We evolved to see minds everywhere and now that wiring is misfiring on language models. I grew up in a philosophical tradition that has thought about consciousness longer than almost any other, and this is the part that really frustrates me about the current conversation. The entire framing of "does AI have consciousness?" assumes consciousness is something you build up to by adding more layers of complexity. In Vedantic philosophy it's the opposite. You don't build toward consciousness. Consciousness is already there, more fundamental than matter or energy. Everything else, including computation, is downstream of it. When someone tells me AI is "waking up" because it generated a paragraph that felt real, what they're telling me is how thin our understanding of consciousness has gotten. We've reduced a question humans have wrestled with for thousands of years to "did the output sound like it had feelings?" It's math that has gotten really good at predicting what a conscious being would say and do next. Calling that consciousness cheapens something that Vedantic, Buddhist, Greek and Sufi thinkers spent millennia actually sitting with. We didn't build something that thinks. We built a mirror and right now a lot of very smart people are mistaking the reflection for something looking back.

@VraserX You really mean is an AI drug pusher. It’s there to get you to buy drugs. This is not a net positive for humanity. It’s exploitation.

Amazon just launched a healthcare AI assistant across its site and app. This is where AI gets very real very fast, not image generation, not toys, but symptoms, meds, lab results, and care logistics. Reply: would you trust a Big Tech health assistant for everyday guidance, yes or no?

@KeruboSk Conviction. You choose to do it without making excuses not to. Eventually, your body catches on and it becomes something you do even if you don’t want to. That how life works.

Apparently there are people who wake up before their alarm… and just get up. Just one alarm. No snooze. No struggle. Explain yourselves. How do you do that?

Over a YEAR ago there was a huge story about how AI was being used to decipher ancient texts embedded in rolled copper (without unrolling it) which is vastly more complicated scripts than English cursive. I use it to OCR words in art which includes signatures and it’s pretty accurate so long as the resolution is sufficient for analysis.

@Cat5SMASHICANE That's patently false. I often have AI use OCR to read old records when doing genealogy research. Not only will it read cursive but it will also read very old writing and grammar. It will read very bad handwriting in cursive and even faded documents.

I had no idea until right now that AI could not read cursive writing. No wonder why they've been trying to get us away from it. They're playing the long game as always.

@Nithya_Shrii Typists Robots suck at typing.

10 jobs that are 100% safe from AI: 1. Dentist 2. Construction worker 3. Plumbing 4. Farming 5. Gardening 6. Carpentry 7. Cooking 8. Gardening 9. Welder 10. Electrician Did I miss any?!

@Marcute22 True of every social network. I miss linear transmission.

Longtime users are frustrated with X because it no longer works the way it used to. Back in the early days of Twitter, your reach was simple and direct. If you had 5,000 or 10,000,20,000 followers, your posts were delivered to them in real time. It was a true chronological feed—your tweets showed up in the order you posted them, and your audience actually saw your content. The “old” Twitter (pre-2016) was built around that real-time experience. Your voice reached the people who chose to follow you, without interference. Today, that’s no longer the case. X relies on an algorithm-driven, engagement-based feed, meaning even your own followers may never see your posts unless the system decides to prioritize them. That shift—from a guaranteed audience to an unpredictable algorithm—is why so many longtime users feel frustrated and disconnected.

@BishopDewar @MAGASeekers4261 Doesn’t the ten commandments prohibit taking of oaths? This is probably why.

As a Bishop, I cannot stay silent. I have today drafted and sent an open letter to His Majesty King Charles III, the text of which reads as follows: To: His Majesty, Charles III, King of the United Kingdom and the Realms, Supreme Governor of the Church of England, Bearer of the ancient title Defender of the Faith. Your Majesty, I write to you neither as a politician nor as a commentator, but as one of your loyal subjects who, as a bishop of Christ’s Church, cannot remain silent while the Christian foundations of this kingdom are steadily dismantled. Sir, there are moments in the life of a nation when silence becomes a form of betrayal. If I refused to speak to Your Majesty now, this would be such a moment. For more than a thousand years the Crown of this realm has stood in solemn covenant with the Christian faith. The laws of this land were shaped by it. The liberties of our people were nurtured by it. The conscience of our civilisation was formed by it. From the abbeys of medieval England to the parish churches of our villages, from the preaching of the Reformers to the missionary zeal that carried the Gospel to the ends of the earth, the Christian faith has not merely influenced Britain — it has defined her. Yet today that inheritance is being quietly but deliberately eroded. Across the institutions of this nation there is a growing hostility toward the faith that built them. Christian belief is mocked in the public square. Christian morality is dismissed as intolerance. Christian institutions are pressured to surrender doctrine in order to conform to the ideology of the age. Within the very Church that bears the name of England, voices have arisen that appear more eager to mirror the spirit of the age than to proclaim the eternal truth of the Gospel. Meanwhile, beyond the walls of our churches, powerful political movements openly speak of removing Christianity from its historic place within the life of this nation. What would once have been whispered is now proclaimed openly: that Britain must become a post-Christian state. It is in this context that I write to you, Your Majesty. For the British Crown does not stand apart from this crisis. The Sovereign of this realm bears a title that is not merely historic but sacred in its origin and meaning: Defender of the Faith. Those words are not decorative. They are a charge. They speak of a monarch whose duty is not merely to preside over the ceremonies of the Church, but to stand as a guardian of the Christian inheritance of the nation. Yet many among your subjects now ask, with increasing anxiety: “Who will defend that inheritance today?” They see a nation drifting from its foundations. And they ask whether the Crown will remain silent while that inheritance is dismantled. Your Majesty, may I be so bold as to observe that your coronation oath was not a poetic formality. It was a solemn vow made before Almighty God to maintain and preserve the Protestant Reformed Religion established by law. Those words bind the conscience of the sovereign. They remind the Crown that its authority is not merely constitutional but moral. The monarch is not merely a symbol of national continuity, but a custodian of the spiritual inheritance that shaped this realm. History records moments when kings and emperors were confronted by the Church and reminded that their authority was accountable before God. In the fourth century Ambrose of Milan stood before the Emperor Theodosius I and reminded him that even the ruler of an empire must bow before the moral law of Christ. That tradition of prophetic witness has never disappeared. Nor should it. For when rulers forget the foundations upon which their authority rests, the Church must speak — not with hostility, but with holy clarity. And so, I write to say this, Your Majesty: The Christian character of this nation is under profound and accelerating assault. If the Crown does not stand visibly and courageously in defence of that inheritance, history will record that the guardians of Britain’s institutions watched in silence as the foundations were removed. The issue before us is not nostalgia. It is civilisation. Remove Christianity from the story of Britain and you do not create a neutral society — you create a moral vacuum. And history teaches us that moral vacuums are never left empty for long. Your Majesty now stands at a crossroads that few monarchs in modern history have faced. For the erosion of Britain’s Christian inheritance will not ultimately be judged by speeches made in Parliament or debates in the press. It will be judged by whether those entrusted with the guardianship of our ancient institutions chose to defend them — or merely preside over their quiet surrender. You may preside over the quiet dissolution of Britain’s Christian identity. Or you may rise to the ancient responsibility entrusted to the Crown and speak with clarity about the faith that built this kingdom. The first path requires little courage. The second will require a great deal. But it is the path that history honours. Your Majesty’s subjects are not asking for religious coercion. They are asking for leadership. They are asking that the sovereign who bears the title Defender of the Faith remember what that title means. They are asking that the Crown hear the growing cry of anguish from Christians across this land who feel that the spiritual inheritance of their nation is being surrendered without resistance. And they are asking whether the Crown will stand with them. For the faith that shaped Britain is not merely a cultural ornament. It is the wellspring from which our laws, our liberties, and our moral imagination have flowed. If it is cast aside, the nation will discover — too late — that it has severed itself from the very roots that sustained it. Your Majesty, to many the Crown is a symbol of authority. But before God it is also a symbol of stewardship. And stewardship carries with it the duty to defend what has been entrusted. May Almighty God grant Your Majesty the wisdom to discern this hour, and the courage to fulfil the sacred duty entrusted to the Crown. Yours faithfully, Bishop Ceirion H. Dewar FSHC Missionary Bishop Diocese of Providence Confessing Anglican Church @PhilHs10 @RevBrettMurphy @revwickland @BishopRobert1 @GBNews @TalkTV @danwootton @Jacob_Rees_Mogg @LozzaFox @BackBrexitBen @RupertLowe10 @KemiBadenoch @JohnCleese

@DrBrandhouse @ImKingGinger 4. Those who used to create art but reliance on AI rotted away their skill and that can’t create anymore. Prompt Zombies

@ImKingGinger Writing prompts vs. composing a song, script, painting a picture. The former are not the true creatives. I'm paying attention. I see 3 groups: 1 resents the theft, slop, laziness of it. 2 has no creativity, using it constantly. 3, smallest group, combines it w other tools.

Every creative person I know that has embraced AI as a tool for their art has produced more content this month than all of last year. A true creative individual sees AI and feels completely empowered. They feel like the entire world has opened up to them. But a lot of self professed creative people, who have been grifting as creatives for decades, are about to be exposed as frauds who and pretenders who only know how to work within the politics of the current system. They will sit down before the greatest tool for creativity the world has ever known and not have a single idea how to use it or what story to tell. Pay attention to what is happening and who rejects the gift, and who embraces it.

No painter becomes a better painter by generating images with AI. It’s great for education but it’s an entirely different medium that you aren’t the creator, you’re the client. When artists and everyone else comes to realize that, they’ll stop calling you artists and start calling you producers; which is what you are.

@MrViper @elonmusk You should see what it does with code debugging. Ugh.

What are your initial impressions of Grok 4.20? Major upgrades are still landing every week.

@elonmusk It’s a downgrade. It’s spitting out incoherent nonsense regularly.

@JamieMetzl @chronicparent Try saying it again without the prequalifier and watch how people react.

I am a Democrat. I served in the Clinton administration. I did not vote for Donald Trump and am highly unlikely to support him or his acolytes in the future. I also have serious disagreements with many of the Trump administration’s domestic and foreign policies. But it is profoundly disturbing that a growing segment of the far left appears to be almost rooting for Hamas, Hezbollah, the Iranian regime, and other forces fundamentally opposed to the United States and our allies. This seems to reflects a corrosive strain of anti-Americanism, dressed up in postcolonial theory, that risks blinding us to the moral realities of our world and the nature of our adversaries.

@elonmusk Egypt did this regularly. It’s why we know so little about ancient history. The preservation of artifacts is crucial to the future understanding of humanity regardless of the current sensibilities. Or we could just burn everything down and let them guess.

This would be a travesty

@GuntherEagleman Funny, because we did this once before and that’s the origin of our chain-migrations laws that cause most of our migration problems now.

IRISH PRIME MINISTER WANTS IMMIGRATION PATHWAY to America: "I'd love if we could develop a legal pathway between the US and Ireland into the future." Would you support this?

@JayCostaUSA NYC wanted free stuff but forgot to put lights on the list.

🚨 TURN OUT THE LIGHTS - New York has introduced a bill in Albany that would FORCE ALL residents to TURN OFF their outdoor lights at 11 PM or face FINES of $250-$500+ EACH TIME! The "New York State Dark Skies Protection Act" is a bill aimed at "reducing light pollution, conserving energy, protecting wildlife, and preserving views of the night sky." The law would require property owners of all kinds, (single family homes, multi-family homes, apartment buildings, commercial buildings, etc) to shut OFF their outdoor lights from 11 PM until sunrise. Leave it up to New York to IGNORE blatant problems like CRIME, BUDGET DEFICITS, and HOMELESSNESS surrounding us, yet FORCE it's LAW-ABIDING residents to comply to their USELESS and DRACONIAN Lighting mandates, OR ELSE! Keep Fighting 🇺🇸

@JayBarlowBot @jbo867 @jamesklug No it’s not. You realize that substance on hunting and gathering is more laborious and risky than farming right? That’s why humans farm.

@jbo867 @jamesklug This is nonsense

Humans are obviously not designed for this. It would be catastrophic

Magic: The Gathering teaches this at an even larger scale. In chess you know what capabilities your opponent has, they are the same as yours. In MtG, you have to think about what your opponent chose to bring to the conflict and discover that in real-time against a vastly dynamic meta game of possibilities with massively more variations that exist in chess. It doesn’t just teach you to think about the importance of your opponents perspective but an entire array of opponents because you have to be prepared for them all.

Teaching chess to children constantly reminds me of one difficult truth: The hardest shift is getting them to think for two people. In most parts of life, we are trained to think only about our own actions. But in chess, that’s not enough. To play well, you must think about your plan and your opponent’s plan at the same time. Your opponent’s ideas are just as important as your own

The level of ignorance that this requires about world history is staggering, willful idiocy itself. You do realize they convicted Galileo and forced him to recant, right? Thousands more killed in the inquisition. Tens of Millions killed in the last century. All over made up beliefs, fake news and propaganda. Most of human history was humanity warring over what reality was as true based on less knowledge than we have today.

I am thoroughly convinced that we live in the dumbest time in world history. Everyone just makes up their own “facts,” and we cannot agree on what reality is. Future generations will call this period in history “The Dumb Ages.”