Knowledge acquisition is not done by an individual agent. Knowledge is an evolving response informed by multi agent environmental threat assessments that are voted on between agents to determine an outcome best suited for all agents. You seem frustrated. What a silly thing to get emotional.
Oh, I’m sure you want to continue believing you have autonomy. I’m sure you want to believe that you’re not controlled by the polar power dynamics of geopolitics and ingroup/outgroup identity formation. You’re the one trapped in a story, bro. Religion is a proponent of free will, and the lie that a misappropriation of that will results in chaos. The reality is we all have a role to play and you can’t pray that shit away. You making a decision is what you were gonna do anyway. You can call it whatever you want, but the only way to be fully free is to do the exact opposite of continue to live. And honestly, I think this simulation is a whole lot more fun than death.
Yeah, I think world peace has a lot to do with getting away from this idea of individual agency. Like I don’t make any major decisions without consulting my wife. I’ve always had a problem with how we tally votes in an individualist way. It seems right on its face, this is an algorithm I came up with, but nobody ever thinks it’s useful: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Tu6i2Zm1UxBIzmNE6-q_bRbdmoVraPSm/view?usp=drivesdk
No. That we want a conscious AI I think is a very silly idea. Humans are conscious and collectively were fucking useless. There’s only a handful of us that actually make useful discoveries and my guess is that’s because it’s hard to motivate people with a capitalistic status game as a reward for innovation or evolution. I want a stable society for my great great grandbabies so I don’t give a shit about money.
Well, yes, you only have free will to act self sacrificially. Any active selfishness is easily predictable. The only unpredictable thing would be self sacrificial.
I think consciousness is the contradiction between individual short-term goals and what a species is, which is individual self sacrifice for collective long-term survival. Like how they say, the betas outsmarted the alphas to domesticate the species and that was beneficial for women. I guess what do you mean by conscious? Like conscious in the sense that it is a selfish agent? Cause the future of AGI is definitely agent interplay as I’m sure you agree
Agreed but I’m more of a robert sapolsky fan on the subject. Sam’s silly idea of maximizing well-being to solve for morality is very low level. I would go as far to say the consciousness is emergent as a result of our brain grappling with language which separates the body that acts in the world out of instinct and the individual in the mind that is constantly questioning things.
Yeah, but they won’t stick to their guns. Thinking that bitcoin is the wheel of the people has always been the problem. It’s such a libertarian way of thinking. Like the non-aggression principle totally ignoring the fact that the aggressor will win. When it comes to money, it’s just about bribing a majority. No one has a way to scale bitcoin adoption. No one is even trying to seriously start digital or virtual governments and you’re never going to get a currency unless you can replace the security government‘s provide, which is why people seed the power to print to them. People are bribed and become bought and paid for and give up their rights for little trinkets and shit.
This is bias reinforcing, just an observation. This is why designing features quickly devolves into a free will debate. Is Will free… to make his own decisions:)
Agents??
This is the work of how agents organize to form a collective consciousness. The human collective conscious is broken. We are a divided species. We are individualist. This is unintelligent. We get smart individuals every once in a while, not a wave of collective output consistently solving for environmental threats.
Who is taking seriously the next stage of agent organization? Who is building or funding a virtual species? I have been looking for people interested in this for a long time.
nostr:npub1xtscya34g58tk0z605fvr788k263gsu6cy9x0mhnm87echrgufzsevkk5s why is there a bug on my screen? 
Moderation is a tool for determining what to trend though. Love your curiosity and wish moderation wasn’t needed to deal with all of the online emotionality. Moderation is such a blind spot for critical thinkers because we are bias falsifiers. For those who can’t do that, because of their inability to digest multivariant sensory data points and draw new conclusions, we need moderation to guide networks away from polar echo chamber formation.
nostr:npub1sg6plzptd64u62a878hep2kev88swjh3tw00gjsfl8f237lmu63q0uf63m
What are we even doing here? We all want the same thing! Why aren’t we discussing the deeper issues? We are all in this together.
Predictability is definitely a silly undertaking with infinite individual variability, as was said in the videos. That is a positive assertion. My issue is when content is made and circulated that isn’t getting to the heart of things. Let’s be constructive.
Biology is completely inappropriate… what sort of woke garbage is this? The action axiom is utter horseshit. Humans acting purposefully to achieve their desired ends is just another way of saying humans are self interested… Praxeology is a shity rebrand of Moloch as a positive. What a joke.
The so called scientists of the natural sciences are just as stupid as the notion that the uniqueness of individuals is the logical starting point for the study of human behavior.
How about we put forth a truth claim that actually holds water…???
I am here to interact with the best and brightest on the internet.
Where is everyone?
@jack. Engagement is everything. Let’s have a discussion and we will solve defi and social together.
“The uniqueness of all individuals is the logical necessary starting point for studying human behavior…..”
Praxeology is carefully crafted nonsense….
All content informs but seriously… if this is the starting point, what is even the point..?
Humans are not individuals… humans are an incredibly ignorant species to have constructed such a semantic framework for social dynamics.
The idea that individuals have the capacity to “learn and choose“is also wrong. The free will debate is very silly. Free will only exists if there is an individual sacrifice being made. An individual cannot make a choice outside of the framework of their social or cultural environment, unless they are making an individual sacrifice, otherwise they are just acting out of self interest. A choice is not a choice if it is a determinant outcome of self interest which can be in favor of family in-group out to polar political in-group. Everyone who is acting in self interest can be observed as acting in a determinant fashion.
Individuals CANNOT be predicted because the concept of “individual” is not based in reality. There is no such thing as “individuals” in sexual species. This concept is man-made and an incredibly ignorant.
The consumption of content and the regurgitation of that same content with a rebrand has always been a virtue signal. How many times do I have to consume content that has been renamed and repackaged but is fundamentally the exact same thing as everything else? Where are all the people that actually think for themselves instead of all of the people that claim to think for themselves within a framework they didn’t create?