Comments by "justgivemethetruth" (@justgivemethetruth) on "TED"
channel.
-
788
-
139
-
106
-
89
-
50
-
49
-
45
-
43
-
40
-
38
-
37
-
32
-
It's really doubtful that we can build AI, a general AI. Currently there is no such thing as self-awareness. The best chess playing computer in the world now or maybe forever has no idea what it is doing, what chess is, why it is playing it, and how to do anything other than play chess. It would not know how to talk about chess, or think about it. The AI thing, to me, is way overdone. The real threat to human survival is humans, because we do not seem to be intelligent enough to understand out own species or our own world. People reflecting their own dangerousness into a fictional machine, like projection, are ignoring each other and pretending AI is a threat.
28
-
28
-
22
-
21
-
19
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
Civics ... because there is no such thing now ... if there ever was. We say we are a country of laws not people, yet every year we move into this 1% and then 0.01% elitist society we have, everyone knows that is not true, and they know since no one is saying or doing anything about it, and not only that but every time anyone does try to mention it they get shut down with the most ridiculous stock replies, socialist, pansy, dreamer, loser, dependent, entitles, etc.
The people are not longer willing to fight for their rights. There are also no leaders that can inspire them because the media and those who speak for it will not allow anything to get off-script or off-plan.
15
-
15
-
15
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
+Ron maest
I don't think you can say that if you cannot qualify what it is to choose loneliness? What does it mean to choose anything? Do we have free will, or are there just not options available for people to chose, or are they even rejected when they do make an effort.
You react to this in a way that provokes your own interpretation of the world that you have come to some terms with, but by definition, that is something that you have found you can do ... by definition you do not know what you do not know ... the unknown unknowns as Donald Rumself would call them.
Can you say we have a choice when we face fear ... fear has a biological effect on people, not an intellectual effect? Some people can look at their fear, and if they are lucky enough, of the fear is not paralyzing enough, or if they can see something to try to change how they feel they may be able to make an effort to affect that.
You say the world is a fright-fest ... but we are all humans, we have dominated this planet, and we have nothing physically to fear, so how I interpret what you say is that these people are afraid of other people, they have been intimidated, bullied, frightened by other people ... so this is my problem with this kind of video ... it spins the people with lots of friends like a TV show, and when you look and dissect many of those friendships ... the should have different qualitied, like family, parents, children, associates, aquaintance ... and I think these friendships might more productively be classes as power, political power, so some people are disenfranchise by other people.
This fits more into the research they do with apes ... but we like to spin human research in some kind of positive more intellectual way. Say look at the cultural life span of native Americans or blacks in this country ... that is more telling I think than this study. I think this study misses the forests for the trees.
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
Actually, if you want some scientific data on this, look to the book "The Third Chimpanzee" by Jared Diamond. This book is a real gem because it is a broad scientific survey of human beings through history compared with other primates.
If you do real scientific analysis, yes, primitive people had a hard life, but in reality they had closer knit social relationships and surprisingly better nutrition, better health - except for accidents and disease and more leisure time. When you think about it most of the ideas we have had have been around since primitive times. They had time to think in groups, where our substitute for that is scientific forums and the web.
Our bodies are more tuned to being used and getting a lot of activity, and most of the illnesses we get today are not getting activity that clears our arteries and uses up the calories we eat. Most of our food is just,whereas nomadic people had the whole environment to pick from.
There are trade offs and few of us would want to go back to primitive times, but using the first hunter-gatherers as a model our lives would be better modelled by that, that what we do today.
The book talks about how when people first started farming we went from a varied balanced diet to a carb-based diet from corn, wheat, potatoes and often not fresh. The regular people did not get the special nutrition the rich rulers and priests got.
Gotta challenge those orthoxies!
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
1 out of seven corporations commits fraud ???? that seems like almost a joke. The biggest, richest, most powerful companies cheat on their taxes, cheapen their products, corrupt the political system giving themselves tax breaks and grants and getting the government to do their research for them while they get the patents. The whole system is one big syndicate that grinds right over common people like it did with Africans, Native Americans, Indians, Southeast Asians, and it is still doing today, but now it includes whites as well.
Equal Opportunity based on race is a joke, the true Equal Opportunity MUST BE BASED ON CLASS, meaning the tax system must be progressive, the health care system must be free, education must be a social and governmental priority, and we need a police and regulatory agencies that prosecute and actually fix systemic problems instead of constantly slapping wrists and allowing crime to pay.
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3:09 - the more we know about the brain, the more we think of it as a large music symphony
Fascinating subject, but simplistic and lame analogy. I've read book after book about the brain and neuroscience and I have never heard this metaphor used at all.
Instead of touting the "network" as the new way to visualize things, when you look at the PERL collaboration diagram it may not be that the network is the paradigm, but that this is mapping out data for which we have not yet found an order. A network is like the raw data, the substrate, and the order lives on that substrate. I just say this because I think the human brain cannot really integrate in an intuitive sense a network or data, we form little trees/hierarchy subtrees starting in whatever focus.
Like in other areas, especially internet arguments, we reduce things, all to often to linearities ... but even that is OK if we know the data and know where it is linear and the behavior of other variables around what we are looking at.
I'm just thinking, the network is the data, the tree is the way we visualize it.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
You are just talking about bugs in software, but intelligence, or general intelligence, involved goal setting, and learning, and re-defining goals, etc ... that is, we do not even know what it is, let alone how to define it or understand it let alone program it - and even less debug it. The complexities are so vast it is hard to imagine that we will ever be able to create anything but a clever encyclopedia. We can program it to make war for example, and maybe accidentally turn it against us, but it has no reason to live, it has no friends, it cannot conceive of any of this stuff, which we inherited from all the living life forms that evolved ahead of us, things built into our DNA from maybe as far back as millions of years that are so subtle that we cannot even see evidence of. The idea of AI being a threat is so silly compared to the idea that we are the threat and we have to figure out our own intelligence, or how to grow into it, because we are behaving like mindless robots ourselves.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
I figure, if you have something to say, please say it without fluffing it up by talking about a genie, particularly for the unnecessary Arab/Islamic references. God, what a waste of time the way he building this up is gratingly slow. Red tomatoes ... yawn. Now, way back in history to the flat Earth. Can't you make a point without wasting everyone in the audience's time by rehashing everything everyone already knows.
3:32 - Neuroscientist tell us that about 1/3 of the cortex is engaged with vision.
Even the camera reference to anyone younger than about 70 is out-dated and does not need to be rehashed. We all know what the eye looks like.
4:05 - 130 million photo receptors.
Then we go and talk about optical illiusions which is also something everyone pretty much that cares understands what they mean.
6:35 - in the normal case our perceptions are accurate
Yawn ... vision is only vision, but reconstructing the world as he calls it is perception with a lot more depth and uncertainty than just vision.
8 minutes for a cheap beer joke.
9 minutes for an animal intercourse joke.
How closely we see the world is dependent on looking back and seeing what turned out to be important and useful. Every organisms with "accurate" perceptions of reality has imperfect perception.
6:58 - Just start here for the question posed and the no answer, another slow way to go to the point.
And the theory of evolution is not the straw man he seems to want to make it out to be.
And evolution is not about children, it's about not want to die, ever, not wanting the light of consciousness to go out, and since you/I are the closest conscious objects and we find ways to value each other more or less and use each other more or less, but it is all about individuals too ... or otherwise what is sexual selection?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
+Themen Jamal
I am not sure I understand your question, or rather its point.
What part are you talking about ... loneliness?
I am not sure, but if that is what the numbers say,
then our society seems to be set up that way.
But is that really an answer?
Do they have a solution for it? If a given person is lonely,
what difference does it make that he knows that. What
difference does it make to all of us if we see someone who
is lonely, or the government ... does anyone care. Maybe
loneliness is a result or something else, for instance some
kind of bullying or oppression, see above. Who can avoid
loneliness? What can you do about it? There is a subtext
here that is useless and blaming of individuals.
How does this loneliness come about?
Or when people are told that society is one way, ie fame and
wealth and high achievement ... how conscious are they, and
when they develop habits of individuality ... how do they change
or find out it isn't working.
In other words, what is this guy telling us? I don't see any value
to it, as he says we all know this, but what can you do about it?
They say money and achievement don't get to happiness, but
they can certainly facilitate making friendships, having families,
avoiding conflict.
I think this guy is shirking away from the what are real political
ramifications of this study because the reality would be that
our society kills some people so that others can live better.
Do we really think that these people that are lonely choose that?
How do they get there, how can they change?
Agree or disagree with the study ... I don't know.
what is there to agree or disagree with?
Just sayin' ;-)
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
-- And as long as the conditions are in place, which they are, self conscious AI is bound to happen.
Hey Froggie, you might believe that, but that is faith, not science, not reason, and you have no reason of rationale to think that, it's just hopeful wishing. It's like saying that we will figure out how to do faster than light travel. It is something different than any other kind of motion, and also has the addition problem of relativity effects so that even if we figure out how to do it, it may not be useful to us.
When you study the problem with a skeptical mind and think about it there are a lot of problems to be solved just to define the problem and no reason to think we can do anything but perhaps single out small systems in the brain, such as the eye to copy and use in some design, not to determine how intelligence really works.
Also, there is even less reason to think that if we can reproduce of create human consciousness that it would progress any faster than people do. We tend to think that because computers are so much faster at computing than we are that they will be able to make inventions and discoveries faster too, but any intelligence will have limitations and discoveries are made by how fast things happen outside, the right discoveries or inventions, not how fast people think.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I like the reformat our thinking phrase ... the thing is that as we reformat our thinking to be more precise and clear, we change our behavior and motivations, and without a social structure we are all fighting ourselves in ways that are more perceptible and analyzable - if we have education. Meaning that if intelligence does not have some kind of "programming" it it to get along, respect, cooperate or tolerate other intelligences - all it will get it war and destruction ... and it seems to be that by definition - that is not intelligence. Or another thing is that one intelligence that dominates everything is also not intellgence, even though that might be what logic tells a cold dispassionate intelligence to do.
It is like after WWII, the finest minds got together and tried to reason as to what would be the best course of action for the US to take since at the time we were the only ones with nuclear weapons. The logical choice was to use the nuclear advantage to take over the rest of the world - but no one did that. No one also created rules for all countries and people to get along either though.
To get to intelligence, something has to experiences or understand all of the other paths, and have a certain attitude about which path to take ... dominance, destruction or cooperation. We as a species really do not understand this. How do you have a main loop of purpose for a an intelligent being that is not motivated by some goal, and then even at Terahtz speed, how do you explore all of the paths of behavioral choices, because you have to do something?
There is understanding, finding out, and then there is existing and wisdom ... maybe what we would call religion. There is some kind of purpose to religion that is analogous to an enclosing programming loop where a meta-understanding or even some kind of faith is necessary - I think,
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
To take control, we have to be able to look at paid links, and links associated with bad behavior and somehow filter them from the pages we look at.
The point of click bait is to trick people, and that is something that has been going on for centuries if not millennia.
There is even a good argument to be made for teaching people that such garbage exists and to find their own way to deal with it, but there are as yet few really useful applications for this, because most of the Internet is based on this in one way or another ... lying, fooling or appealing to purient interest or worst part of people's nature.
In just one generations a while American generations has been seduced into supporting and being hooked on, to the extent that they are sick, junk foods. The junk food companies made huge profits and then bought up other food-producers and turned the whole food industry into a poison industry, that now has enough money to buy the government and run it for them.
This is not about the individual and appealing to people as individuals is nice and always makes people feel stronger and prouder, but that is an illusion. The respect for citizens needs to be made explicit,and there needs to be real penalties for abuse of individuals within the relationships and institutions of society and nations.
1
-
11:37 - "and then on top of that the Chinese to this day believe that the US and the West do not accept the legitimacy of their political system because it's so radically different from those of us who come from liberal democracies. They believe that the US to this day is seeking to undermine their political system ...."
First, I think it must be said that the Chinese SAY they think this ... whether it is true or not we can never know what the Chinese think, and in order to justify actions such as military belligerence and expansion there must be some myth, some proposed reason and logic to it.
Yes ... the US is arrogant and expansionist and probably does seek to put China into the Western economic system ... but why? It is to conquer China or is it to get past these military threats of world war that the US was sucked into twice in the last century, and to China's benefit since they were swallowed up by Japan.
The real history of the world sort of puts a bit of suspicion on what the Chinese say. Same with Iran, Iran justifies its interference and hegemony in the Middle East and its antipathy towards the US and Israel because they say they are humiliated, or have been threatened, but really, who on a daily basis threatens the people of the Middle East more, the US or their own government and intolerant and repressive religion. I think it is the same with China. China has notions of being the old Chinese empire and regaining their stature in the world, and not only that, but the Chinese in China and elsewhere are really racist and insular. They work only with Chinese.
While the US and the West (albeit imperfectly) have changed their societies to be multi-cultural, there is no such idea in China. No, it is clear that most of the world thinks in old ways of empire and conquest. The US with its own problematic past at least is one country that can hope to become working and multicultural, but it cannot be as cultures fighting each other like gangs, and what is what China does in the world, and Chinese do in the countries they settle in. As people in the Phillipines or other countries what their experience with Chinese is. They are rude, arrogant and everything else they accuse everyone else of being. That is why all those arguments need to be ignored, and each system, including China must be evaluated for what it does right and wrong and a new evolvable meta-system needs to be worked at to be put in place that does not humiliate or elevate any country ... all of us have problems, and all of our people suffer to some extent from these problems.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This sounds nice, and it hits the right emotional notes.
I am not sure it is so easy to figure out what goes on between people, or that you can attribute spikes in profits to coffee breaks. I think people will do what they do, and it is better to have them all know each other and be comfortable, but what really happens between people is a mystery still. I can't remember who wrote about it, I think it was Dr. Atul Gawande talking about "social distance", particularly bad in socially stratified countries, which the US is starting to become, where workers are afraid to speak up when they think something is wrong. That may be just one problem that is solved here that increases productivity, but it may not indicate all the rest of the stuff mentioned. Also, there are people who are very socially skilled who can be super-chickens of another type in how they manipulate people. I am all for people getting along, and learning how to create a better culture but other than being slightly conscious of it I am not convinced this really gets at the issue. But it helps and it is interesting.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This guy is right, but he has just touched the tip of the tip of the iceberg. The resultant of any action 100 years back or more just affected a small group of whoever/whatever, but today the networks, the affects, the system are so big that worldwide systems are affected. Pollution, radiation, ideas, weapons, germs, everything is so close to everything else in time and space that the planet is unstable. Think of our computers, just like Twitter, but the systems in place that governments and private industry are hacking that can being down whole economies.
Human beings, we hairless apes do not know or have enough wisdom to manage a system such as this, and yet the forces push us to get more and more power, like capitalism in the game of Monopoly, we will soon have a few elite owners, and then it will be their fewer elite children who never had the privilege or experience of growing up in the world, just this synthetic mix of artificial lies we call models and ideas that we all accept without thinking, because there is nothing else to think about and the giant herd that we all run among will stampede right over us if we are not careful to do what everyone else does, and even then sometimes.
This is a scary time, and no one but the very small few is thinking about it or talking about it, and no one is listening. But there sure are a lot of shouting down by people who are risking everyone else's lives with the confidence only the vastly ignorant can summon.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well, ask a question, get pummeled on YT! ;-)
Yes, the "easy as IKEA" idea is good, and the mechanical engineering of that is really improving, but as I said, 2x4's, sheathing, concrete is pretty much ubiquitous, I don't think it is the house "technology" per se that is the difficulty - but the plan and system of living.
I see brand new McMansions being built with horrible ergonomics, it is the ergnonomics/system and the modification (which you did address) that are the problems.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
JUST elections, as the power elite has evolved them in the west - do not produce democracy, justice, human rights or environmental stewardship, they are just part of the marketing PR system, and from what this guy says, it's the same in China, just slightly different institutions.
All counties are taking a military government shape, in the west we cover it by pretending we are still a democracy, but that is hardly true. it sure doesn't make China good, just efficient at war when it is ready.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1