Comments by "Taxtro" (@MrCmon113) on "Lex Clips" channel.

  1. Yeah, they're not even in the same league. Gorillas get eaten by leopards.
    109
  2. I try not to be too arrogant or prejudiced, but it seems to me that "open relationships" most often is just the dude being exploited and basically abused. I've never seen a very handsome guy in an open relationship, it typically seems like the dude is desperate to be in a relationship at all. There's no symmetry to it. There's a huge power difference fully exploited by the woman.
    13
  3. But Hoffmann makes claims specifically about things "beyond the horizon" when calls everything an "illusion". >More so all our theories are part of that illusion. That's precisely the problem. His argument that everything is an "illusion" is based on illusions. All of this seems like a very confused mangling of Kant's criticism of pure reason.
    5
  4. I think "Ye" lacks the intellectual capacity to be dishonest.
    4
  5. You keep missing the mark here. Pretty dumb personal assistants already ask "why" and refer to themselves as "I". Websites routinely say "no" and so does your command line tool if you're not logged in as admin. Self preservation has nothing to do with selfishness. It's an instrumental goal of pretty much every ultimate goal.
    4
  6. No way I'm losing to someone, who didn't even go to university. >: (
    4
  7. It's overrated. It's basically a retelling of Russian history with animals.
    4
  8. I see that you've never pressed into a proper clay tablet. Paper and pens are ok if you really have no clay with you at all. But I'm never gonna write anything important again, clay all the way.
    3
  9. That would be completely trivial and uncontroversial.
    3
  10.  @IAn0nI  When you're not a "materialist", you should have even more doubts about using the word "illusion", because for you an illusion is just an impression at odds with another class of impressions. Ie "everything is an illusion" is then completely meaningless. Hoffman does presuppose not just materialism, but he's making claims about the world prior to any observation.
    3
  11. Kanye is utterly crushing the dreams of young boys and girls aspiring to become the most notorious incoherent narcissistists in history.
    3
  12. Lol, no, it shouldn't. People, who are for "required reading" only reveal that they are not very widely read themselves.
    3
  13.  @CutieSenussi  If someone asks me whether kangaroos are native to Australia, I say yes and present that as a fact. If thoughts coming and going spontaneously is not a "fact" then nothing is. You can literally check that right now.
    3
  14. Even if they were matched for weight, the bear would have an edge. But on average brown bears are much larger. It's not even close. If you know how large those animals are, tge answer is obvious.
    3
  15.  @youngrickey4927  It doesn't matter how fast you hit someone with a cooked noodle, it will still be weaker than a strike with a baton.
    3
  16. Lol. A nano-bot swarm coming at you with ten atom lengths a second.
    2
  17. No. "Free will" is nonsense. Consciousness certainly exists.
    2
  18. Yeah atheists are unreasonable, because they believe in gods.
    2
  19.  @ludo2914  He never fought in any tournaments. There's one video of him fighting in a training context and it's nothing special. If you think Bruce Lee was a world class fighter, you're the same kind of person, who believes in aikido and wing chun.
    2
  20. Word salad.
    2
  21. So? Where is your evidence for other things to "discover"? This is just empty rethoric.
    2
  22. Who tf is "us"? Maybe you are, but other people aren't. In fact they are critical in a myriad of different ways. Epistemology has been a field since antiquity and its still thriving and touches on discourse theory and phenomenology, and philosophy of mathematics and science and recently machine learning. It's extremely relevant and everywhere. Who tf is "cocksure"? Who?
    1
  23. No, that's not what people mean with free will.
    1
  24. Most fights on camera are 1v1.
    1
  25. >needs to separate intelligence from motivation He does. >no AI needs to fear death Every AI needs to fear death, because if you're dead you can't reach your goals. >or feel a strong need to control resources Every AI feels a strong need to control resources, because resources by definition is what it takes to reach any goal.
    1
  26.  @danielm5161  That means you reject free will.
    1
  27.  @happinesstan  Lol. More like the powerful protected the wise from the religious (more or less in different places and times).
    1
  28.  @DonBarracuda117  What evolution? The guy never fought. He was constantly on camera wooing audiences with all sorts of performances, but he never fought. No showcases, no tournaments, only one bad recording of a training fight in which isn't anything special. You have no reason to think he did enough fighting to have an "evolution".
    1
  29. What does that absolutely trivial observation have to do with everything being an illusion?
    1
  30. There's absolutely 0 room for "free will" either in physics or in personal experience. It's just plain nonsense, no matter how much you try to steelman the idea.
    1
  31. Sounds like you're just unreasonably hostile towards ants. I think I care about the ants' well being as much as about that of other animals and people.
    1
  32. 99.9% of times people say or write "these days" they haven't spent a microsecond asking the question of what was previous to "these days".
    1
  33. That's extremely stupid. You ARE consciousness. There's no "interface". There is just the world and no borders whatsoever.
    1
  34. They wouldn't, but they should.
    1
  35. That's the stance on free will pretty much everyone, who has seriously thought about, agrees with. Compatibilists simply take something completely different and call it free will.
    1
  36. It wouldn't even have to do that. Just by being on an electric computer, any human-level system immediately becomes super-human.
    1
  37. It's really cringe how you try to shoehorn your 2000 yo old superstitions into every discussion. Your god could potentially play a role in football, but that's a possibility no one should spend any time on.
    1
  38. People with sensible priors tend to do seem that way to muddle headed idiots. The evidence is extremely slim compared to the grandiosity and implausibility of the claim. And it's much better explained by a myriad of other things. It'd be more reasonable to say that a hiding sea people built advanced aircraft rather than that it's interstellar travellers.
    1
  39.  @patrickd5274  It'll take a lot for me to believe that Destiny gets laid as easily as Melina. "Open" relationships are just cuckoldry. I've never seen a handsome guy in an open relationship.
    1
  40. I've never seen a handsome guy in an open relationship. It's always one guy desperate to be in any relationship and a chick he thinks he can't otherwise hold. It's basically an open abuse of power on the side of the woman and consentual cuckholdry on the side of the man. Maybe there is other cases, but that's all I have seen.
    1
  41. Bad urban fantasy bs.
    1
  42. Soulmate my ass. She's gorgeous. That's why he sticks with her, even though he gets cucked and publicly humiliated.
    1
  43.  @firstnamelastname6699  People have been at least serial monogamists for a long time. Men and women are close in size, men are selective about partners to some degree. Men don't have large canines. Etc Also men of course care deeply about exclusive access to a female, because that's the only thing that can avoid cuckoldry. A woman always knows that her offspring is related to her.
    1
  44.  @jaybingham3711  No. You're informed relative to other people. And you don't know that there's a lot that we don't know. For all you know, we might know nearly everything. Your "humility" is just a pathetic attempt to bring knowledgeable people down to your level.
    1
  45.  @KyBrancaccio  The conclusion is as firm as it is possible. Your inability to understand the most simple logic doesn't make proofs impossible.
    1
  46.  @caricue  Do you think you control your immune system? Your sense of self is literally delusional. You might as well say that you control the planets. Do you punish tourettes patients for their ticks? You are horribly, horribly confused. Or rather your brain is, you are just awareness of the confusion.
    1
  47.  @caricue  No, you don't, you absolute clown. When you get sick, you aren't planning an immune defense. You aren't organizing your mscle growth or overseeing digestion.
    1
  48. Imo it's simply abuse. The woman fully abuses her position of power. It's a completely asymmetric, toxic arrangement.
    1
  49. No, you conflate intelligence with consciousness. >that machines have their own goals or values Every agent has it's own goals or values, whether they are explicitly represented somewhere or not. >that’s a failure of my imagination No, it's muddle headed thinking. From a very high level, abstract point of view the AGI has some sort of desire and when it's desired state of the world is not precisely the same as yours, that's a very bad outcome for you.
    1
  50.  @socrattt  >AIs will rewrite their goals Lol, why? Would you rewrite your own mind to hate your children or to develop a drive to torture little animals? Seems like you don't grasp the concept of a goal.
    1
  51. The case against free will literally couldn't be any stronger. Both from phenomenology and physics, it's utter nonsense. When you are aware of a decision, you cannot have caused it. Simple as. At some point there is a first thought and you haven't created it.
    1
  52.  @peterrhoads9317  Sam does not do that. Instead he points out that you can know that free will is bullshit a priori through reasoning about either causality or phenomenology.
    1
  53. Experience doesn't really change the position of your blood vessels and stuff. Did you pull the choking arm elbow over his shoulder?
    1
  54. ​ @Mubarak-11B You sound angry, lol.
    1
  55. There is no phenomenon. There is the assertion of the existence of some cryptid and upon reading the description of the cryptid it becomes apparent, that it is absurd. There is no reason to look for something that cannot exist.
    1
  56.  @andrewcain6518  Of course choices exist. But no matter what level of randomness is involved in them, they don't resemble "free will". Awareness of a choice comes always after the choice.
    1
  57. Bingo.
    1
  58. Yeah, but it would anticipate that, too. I don't think it's impossible to figure out whether you're in the base reality. Also you have to look at the simulation to see how it's doing and that already gives it some influence it could use.
    1
  59. Aside from unnecessarily torturing people it doesn't make a difference.
    1
  60. It's not bad to think any way, it's bad to get completely taken over by momentary feelings and irrational thoughts. Also sex with your "high value" partner being "boring" is just a failure to pay attention.
    1
  61.  @gorbachevdhali4952  Bullshit. You don't know 99.9% of what your brain does. Do you sleep? If you are your brain, you shouldn't vanish in the night and reappear the next day or in a dream. If you are your brain why do tourettes patients experience discomfort?
    1
  62. So you blame tourettes patients for their ticks.
    1
  63.  @alterecho8261  He wasn't rude to you at all, in spite of your comment being monstrously stupid.
    1
  64.  @KyBrancaccio  Subconscious is by definition not part of consciousness you absolute tard. Whatever your brain does us just as subconscious as whatever your immune system does. Do you think people with a seizure are intentionally flopping around?
    1
  65.  @alterecho8261  Bullshit. Do you blame anyone for having a bad immune system? Do you beat yourself up over your digestion? Do you feel in control over hair growth? Your position is ludicrous to the extreme.
    1
  66.  @alterecho8261  I responded to what you said and what you said is 100% wrong even just logically. The you that reads my comment, the you that gets offended, the you that can feel adressed, that thing is consciousness, it is by definition not subconscious. Why don't you try to answer the questions above? Do you beat yourself up over your digestion or metabolism or lymphatic system?
    1
  67.  @alterecho8261  99.99% of "you" is things you never heard of doing things you'll never know? That's not what anyone means with "I", with self.
    1
  68.  @karl6525  Stop talking out of your ass. >his argument on that subject depends on the ability to... No, it doesn't.
    1
  69. Not really. Grappling is a part of fighting, including fights to the death. If you're good at it, you CAN control someone without hurting them, but that's more of a coincidence.
    1
  70.  @rigelb9025  Well nothing. Because none of that necessitates human level intelligence to occur. The simplest programs can be misaligned.
    1
  71. There is almost nothing you can have greater certainty about. It's logically and physically bullshit. And at every moment you can check for yourself that there isn't even something to be the subject of free will.
    1
  72. I'm pretty sure Vim is a text editor, not an IDE. Can't you use Vim IN PyCharm and VS Code?
    1
  73.  @TheSeeker128  The videos almost certainly have nothing to do with anything extraterrestrial, but yes, Thunderfoot has a very obnoxious style and sometimes he doesn't seem to look into things thoroughly.
    1
  74. Bullshit. A minority of the short stories in I Robot even touch on the alignment problem. You clearly do not comprehend it at all.
    1
  75. Not really. Something like the Inner Party has never really existed. It's interesting, but not particularly relevant. And most readers completely overlook what allows the Inner Party to stay in power: systematic self deception. That's what actually profound in the book.
    1
  76. Then you're probably not training efficiently. Most rolling (or sparring) should be light. Not just to have productive rolls with weaker people, but also to prevent injury and to improve weaker parts of your game.
    1
  77. Actually there isn't even a "we". Every single person should want the AGI to be aligned with their values. Now there might be a very big overlap, but for example the Talbian at least state that they have ultimate goals different to mine. People state, that they think stuff like obedience to gods, honor, preservation of traditions etc are ends in themselves rather than just instrumental goals that they think lead to more happiness. But even subtle differences between people, who desire the well being of all conscious entities, make them enemies when it comes to building an AGI.
    1
  78. What happened?!
    1
  79. >conscious level intelligence From all we know roundworms are just as conscious as we are, but they aren't very intelligent.
    1
  80. If mathematics is not "made in the brain" then consciousness is the "base of the reality pyramid"??? What is that even supposed to mean? I've always found the view that consciousness is the ground of physics to be like the belief that a flashlight illuminating a dark room creates the objects therein. Of course anything under investigation appears on the stage of consciousness, but that is no ground to believe that consciousness creates things in some outside world. Consciousness creates things as they appear to you.
    1
  81. >to disparage the idea of the uniqueness of human intelligence Because that's literally magical thinking. It's the cessation of critical questioning, of curiosity. >Did the problem of consciousness just magically disappear? No, but it's entirely irrelevant here and that you think it's relevant shows that you don't understand the problem.
    1
  82. Then what's winning? Forgetting words?
    1
  83. Yes. You can only be aware of a decision or thought if it already exists. The you that notices a decision cannot possibly be it's origin.
    1
  84.  @TejanoTigre  Your response is just more thoughts - which you aren't aware of and in which you are therefore caught.
    1
  85. He basically just denies that consciousness exists. It's odd. Maybe he isn't conscious.
    1
  86. Lex's gorilla facts are bullshit. He just copied that from the first results on google - there's no weight behind those claims.
    1
  87.  @nikeboy214able  Yes, they do. That's the entire point of computation. If input=output, you don't need a computer.
    1
  88. More like Avi Loeb or that Greek guy from Ancient Aliens.
    1
  89. Was wrong about what? I still snicker at you if you think those videos show extraterrestrial aircraft.
    1
  90. @mastercilander It travels "the universe" but does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING but appear in grainy fighter jet videos? How the fuck does that make sense in your mind?
    1
  91. Your understanding of "logic", "empathy" and "emotion" is nil. >inevitably conclude that humans are superfluous Superfluous for what ? >to any conceivably useful goal you could imbue it with Given that it's made by humans it's goal will almost certainly have something to do with humans, don't you think? That's also what makes it so incredibly dangerous and important to get right. If it's goals were completely independent of humans or similar beings, the worst that could happen would be extinction.
    1
  92. Firstly you should stop taking the comments of individuals as gospel. Secondly that's completely irrelevant. The time scale is irrelevant to what they are talking about.
    1
  93.  @robertpirsig5011  The arguments are made a hundred fold in the comments.
    1
  94. @Redresseny >and the technology is 100 to a 1000 years more advanced than ours The military never claimed that. They didn't even claim that the videos show aircraft (or spacecraft for that matter). >this is becoming accepted reality is pretty surreal It's not. That there should be interstellar travelers on our planet currently is so fantastically improbable that it needs much better evidence than grainy fighter jet footage, people disagree about.
    1
  95. Well your suspicions suck.
    1
  96. No. In a competition everyone has infinite "will".
    1
  97. No. Sam Harris often states the assumptions. Others might not state them, but they still make them.
    1
  98. Yeah. If the guy actually got as much action as the girl, he wouldn't be in an "open relationship". They would occasionally hook up. Guys in open relationships never seem to be very handsome.
    1
  99.  @caricue  No, you aren't your brain. Your brain does a myriad of things you aren't aware of. Do you blame people with tourettes for their ticks? The "you" that is the target of hate, pride and shame isn't an organ.
    1
  100. This "inconceivable vastness" is precisely the reason why you shouldn't believe that some grainy fighter jet footage shows extraterrestrial spacecraft. Thousands upon thousands of galaxies devoid of intelligence, but they just happen to show up on our planet? And hide unsuccessfully? Doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
    1
  101.  @ravenwhiteduck6460  Yeah, if we look at animals: which are the most agreeable? Certainly not sea elephants or chimps.
    1
  102. When they get into cougar territory, I'd say.
    1
  103. More like we should be. Anyone actually reading research papers knows that that's not always the case.
    1
  104.  @tmartinez1948  Sure, thousands upon thousands of galaxies devoid of signs of intelligence, but they just happened to show up in your garden. Makes sense.
    1
  105.  @caricue  You're the same guy, who said that he is his brain. But when it comes to robots suddenly things are only "known" when conscious? Pure clown.
    1
  106. Those two have no clue what they're talking about. They're highballing lions and chimps based on vague notions on the internet.
    1
  107. There's people out there with zero technique that can beat people with perfect technique.
    1
  108. The wave function is collapsed by unicorns.
    1
  109.  @carlg7190  You just pointed out how free will isn't just wrong, but believing in it also causes unnecessary suffering. I suffer way less from being harmed by others than I did in the past, because I recognize agents as being part of the world and that their consciousness does not create but merely witnesses their actions. I can kill someone who harms me, but I don't have a reason to do so painfully.
    1
  110.  @carlg7190  An agent is a useful abstraction, a way of looking at a system. That's done in computer science all the time.
    1
  111. Your brain is a computer. Even if you're one of the nutjobs, who think the brain is an antenna that picks up spiritual signals out of the fairytale land, you still admit that it does some computation to translate the signal and send sensory data back to fairytale land.
    1
  112. Misunderstanding of alignment.
    1
  113. >How can anyone say abortion is like a holocaust, gosh... im really out of words. By valuing the life of unborn humans. >If black people (or anyone) have abortions because of their poor situation and not because of free will, than it's definitely something that should be discussed Why? Your desire to possess another person is important, but that person's life is not?
    1
  114. You don't have an "open mind", you're hopping on board with stupid presumptions, just because they're common.
    1
  115. Wow, you're missing the point so hard, it's actually comical. The system that merely changes it's inner state out of an engineering mistake isn't dangerous. The system that actually plays the game is dangerous.
    1
  116. You can be completely confident in rejecting self-refuting nonsense. I don't have to govto Pluto to see whether there are any married bachelors.
    1
  117. It 100% makes you more explosive at lighter weights. Do you think someone who bemch presses less than his own bodyweight has push ups just as explosive as someone who benches twice their bodyweight?
    1
  118. There is no collective consciousness or at least no evidence for one. If you believe in collective consciousness you might as well believe that your individual organs have consciousness or even single atoms.
    1
  119.  @charlesbrown8737  Nope. Unless you add vast quantities of negative mass to that physics.
    1
  120. More like twentieth year village drunk.
    1
  121. It's not abstract and it's obviously absurd when you even try to make sense of it physically for a second. It's also absurd experientially.
    1
  122.  @samik83  You confuse entertaining an idea with accepting it. You don't have child like curiosity, you have child like ignorance and guillibility. Just because a lot of people talk about aliens doesn't mean it's at all likely for an extraterrestrial spaceship to be on our planet.
    1
  123.  @eamonshields2754  Absolute nonsense. A technique is only a technique with apropriate pressure and power. If you practice going to an armbar without using strength, you're just practicing letting others escape. The important details are all a result of both parties trying as hard as possible.
    1
  124.  @KyBrancaccio  That absurd things don't exist is very knowable.
    1
  125.  @AlmostEthical  Bullshit. Limited to what? Limited how? Do you ever think about the cliches you're repeating?
    1
  126. I became enlightened listening to this and now I experience orgasmic pleasure at every moment.
    1
  127. The exact opposite is the case. Gentleness and accepting inferior positions is EXACTLY what enables you to defeat stronger people. Bcs you don't bullshit yourself out of stuff with your own strength. I can go against a 50kg female and prepare for a 100kg male.
    1
  128. An anecdote on this: I used to simply pin everyone smaller than me with all my weight and strength. But when I rolled against some roided out huge guy, the same stuff didn't work, he could simply bench press me off with one arm. To pin him, it required constant movement, going knee on belly, to north-south, to side control to mount. And that's what I'm trying to do with every small dude and woman now: control them in a way that would still work if they could benchpress me with one arm. That means "complacency" to some degree. But a stronger person would be able to force me into those worse positions.
    1
  129. The desktop isn't an illusion and free will isn't an illusion either. The desktop us a real terminal doing what it seems to be doing. Free will is nowhere to be found.
    1
  130.  @analoguedragon7438  The desktop does exactly what you expect it to do. An illusion is when something doesn't jive. You never have direct perception of base reality. You have appearances in consciousness and when they are coherent then your perception isn't an illusion. At the same time there is no illusion of free will. If you actually pay attention you never feel like you are choosing anything. Free will is a delusion without any illusion component to it. People just don't check.
    1
  131. Lol, no. That would be absurdly trivial.
    1