I know mankind, we are the input, anything outside of this bound of input is unknown to me. If you suggest that AI can as yet supersede its input, then I disagree — it is a sum of all knowledge machine that can help to compile and provide data much faster than an individual or consortium, ie instantaneously.
If you suggest the sum of all knowledge inputs include non-human sentience, then yes, I don’t know what AI is capable of.
But then neither do you, so we are both in for a wild ride — “any sufficiently advanced technology akin to magic” and all that
Free will is what God imbued unto existence so that it is not directionless in its sentience, but only after metabolism drives desire from instinct.
*Meaning* is another thing entirely, as it is a universal paradox of sentience. A deer and tree are living, doubtful they have what you or I would describe as a choice, but rather are a product of physical outcomes.
But why are they here, why are they living? There is an answer, I suppose
It’s an absurd enterprise top to bottom, and most participating know it because they are living things with a minimum emotional competency dependent on its continuation to live mechanically within its bounds.
It’s also the most profound mental prison in existence, ensuring that seemingly milquetoast yet destructive policies and their public champions remain free from direct *criticism* until such time that the actionable results of its policies materialize into reality, when they are thus forced to watch the fruit of their labor destroy the curated ideal they thought they lived.
What if the creators are still attempting to prove or disprove the existence of God based on their paradoxical inability to answer the question “What is the meaning and purpose of life?” though they know fundamentally how to create and destroy it.
This is the state of the universe currently and God is as ever both knowable and, as yet, *unknown*
Artificial Intelligence will never know singularity because it is infinitely incapable of logically defining this paradox
A math proof should not be required to make a true or false statement of a general observation, though it is an academic exercise that should be attempted at least once to recognize how difficult it is to provide logical evidence of the realness of anything.
True skepticism is a much better beginning premise than blind acceptance, so that you demand evidence that I can’t provide still shouldn’t be cause to dismiss my premise or anyone else’s premise out of hand — unless you are prepared to defense your own with equal veracity and *proof*
You asked me to prove time is a closed circle. It ends at entropy, the “destination” so to speak of the arrow of time, but what then is creation but the beginning of time, and yet you have yet to describe it in any way. I’m open to your interpretation, which will invariably sound like the beginning or the “release” of the arrow of time, or it will sound original and profound, but I’m guessing the former
Interesting times are these. It is good to be observant and fancy a pause to look and focus for memory an intentional perspective. I remember very few passing things about my childhood, because I am so far removed, but the things I chose to remember are still here at the forefront of my mind. Make a memory, and remember it enough to tell a story to a love you don’t yet know
Observation and judgement is a personal affair; that any one goat publicly protests in defense of celebrity suggests motivation. I’m indifferent of the accusation and if true, unsurprised. Celebrity should welcome such inquiries lest risk obscurity
All places are honeypots the deeper one goes — to what end then at the center, what concern is it when one feels obligated to remain mute outside its confines?
Say what you want, wherever you want and to whomever you want, here and every where else. There are always consequences…but sometimes there are none at all
Battlefat 2 points 3 months ago
>Lives for slop
Program is working
/v/Screenshot viewpost?postid=678f7271cf913
Battlefat 5 points 3 months ago
I know mankind, we are the input, anything outside of this bound of input is unknown to me. If you suggest that AI can as yet supersede its input, then I disagree — it is a sum of all knowledge machine that can help to compile and provide data much faster than an individual or consortium, ie instantaneously.
If you suggest the sum of all knowledge inputs include non-human sentience, then yes, I don’t know what AI is capable of.
But then neither do you, so we are both in for a wild ride — “any sufficiently advanced technology akin to magic” and all that
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=678115121db19
Battlefat 2 points 3 months ago
Free will is what God imbued unto existence so that it is not directionless in its sentience, but only after metabolism drives desire from instinct.
*Meaning* is another thing entirely, as it is a universal paradox of sentience. A deer and tree are living, doubtful they have what you or I would describe as a choice, but rather are a product of physical outcomes.
But why are they here, why are they living? There is an answer, I suppose
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=678115121db19
Battlefat 0 points 3 months ago
Feds, then rootless and vengeful bums.
QED
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=6780b7ed45954
Battlefat 0 points 3 months ago
It’s an absurd enterprise top to bottom, and most participating know it because they are living things with a minimum emotional competency dependent on its continuation to live mechanically within its bounds.
It’s also the most profound mental prison in existence, ensuring that seemingly milquetoast yet destructive policies and their public champions remain free from direct *criticism* until such time that the actionable results of its policies materialize into reality, when they are thus forced to watch the fruit of their labor destroy the curated ideal they thought they lived.
Ironic.
A decade ago, I spoke hypothetically
/v/Glowniggers viewpost?postid=6780b9caeef11
Battlefat 2 points 3 months ago
“shitskinny” — into the lexicon it goes
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=678115121db19
Battlefat 1 point 3 months ago
What if the creators are still attempting to prove or disprove the existence of God based on their paradoxical inability to answer the question “What is the meaning and purpose of life?” though they know fundamentally how to create and destroy it.
This is the state of the universe currently and God is as ever both knowable and, as yet, *unknown*
Artificial Intelligence will never know singularity because it is infinitely incapable of logically defining this paradox
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=678115121db19
Battlefat 1 point 3 months ago
A math proof should not be required to make a true or false statement of a general observation, though it is an academic exercise that should be attempted at least once to recognize how difficult it is to provide logical evidence of the realness of anything.
True skepticism is a much better beginning premise than blind acceptance, so that you demand evidence that I can’t provide still shouldn’t be cause to dismiss my premise or anyone else’s premise out of hand — unless you are prepared to defense your own with equal veracity and *proof*
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=677fe371ee5ea
Battlefat 1 point 3 months ago
You asked me to prove time is a closed circle. It ends at entropy, the “destination” so to speak of the arrow of time, but what then is creation but the beginning of time, and yet you have yet to describe it in any way. I’m open to your interpretation, which will invariably sound like the beginning or the “release” of the arrow of time, or it will sound original and profound, but I’m guessing the former
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=677fe371ee5ea
Battlefat 1 point 3 months ago
Yes, someone did tell me about entropy, but they’ve as yet a more difficult time explaining creation, though my eyes tell me it exists, empirically.
Now it’s your turn
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=677fe371ee5ea
Battlefat 0 points 3 months ago
Salacious children or learned behavior, mystery lost to time and interpretation
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=677fe371ee5ea
Battlefat 3 points 3 months ago
You’ve discernment, thus inner dialogue and morality based on what you’ve said. Sinners path is easy and most often chosen
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=677fe371ee5ea
Battlefat 1 point 3 months ago
Patience is for rocks, action is for the short lived
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=677fe371ee5ea
Battlefat 3 points 3 months ago
Agreed, but zoom out
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=677fe371ee5ea
Battlefat 2 points 3 months ago
Time, like political spectrums, is a closed circle
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=677fe371ee5ea
Battlefat 2 points 3 months ago
Based and DEI pilled
/v/random viewpost?postid=677fc37f71d41
Battlefat 7 points 3 months ago
When noticing approaches 1, a new war *with a new enemy* starts like clockwork
/v/random viewpost?postid=677fc4097288d
Battlefat 3 points 3 months ago
No, unless you are gay, then yes
/v/AskUpgoat viewpost?postid=677f586d0d0c3
Battlefat 0 points 3 months ago
Interesting times are these. It is good to be observant and fancy a pause to look and focus for memory an intentional perspective. I remember very few passing things about my childhood, because I am so far removed, but the things I chose to remember are still here at the forefront of my mind. Make a memory, and remember it enough to tell a story to a love you don’t yet know
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=677dfb5462cfe
Battlefat 0 points 1.7 years ago
[No](https://files.catbox.moe/xkhcy5.jpeg)
/v/Health viewpost?postid=64d41d3d77e98
Battlefat 1 point 1.7 years ago
Proxies
/v/pics viewpost?postid=64d4228a498b2
Battlefat 2 points 1.7 years ago
Observation and judgement is a personal affair; that any one goat publicly protests in defense of celebrity suggests motivation. I’m indifferent of the accusation and if true, unsurprised. Celebrity should welcome such inquiries lest risk obscurity
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=64d427c7dd97f
Battlefat 7 points 1.8 years ago
It hurts the colony when one aggressive nigger wasp decides to perform monkeyshines. Give them all the shovel, evolution mandates total wasp docility
/v/whatever viewpost?postid=64b71b5f80b39
Battlefat 1 point 1.8 years ago
All places are honeypots the deeper one goes — to what end then at the center, what concern is it when one feels obligated to remain mute outside its confines?
Say what you want, wherever you want and to whomever you want, here and every where else. There are always consequences…but sometimes there are none at all
/v/TellTalk viewpost?postid=64b6ec73c9ece
Battlefat 2 points 2.5 years ago
Original YouTube link
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=oOn3oVKc_Sg
/v/WeirdNews viewpost?postid=6369502e545f7