Nopoint2

I still stand by my claim that the most common cause of death is chronic iron poisoning, and living past 100 was a regular occurence in the bronze age.

The best explanation again seems that all the modern nutrition is nonsense fed by some double agent to the allies in WW2, (iron, and the toxicity of heavy metals) based supposedly on some secret concentration camp experiments, and nobody is allowed to question it in order to "not let their sacrifice go in vain" or some such bullshit.

That's what I thought too, but the difference is big. You'd think you maybe lose some color lights, or very bright flowers, but no, colors outside sRGB are common.

There was nothing you could do about the TV, the screen couldn't show all the colors that you needed.

I never realized how limited sRGB is. I guess this is why people liked CRT TVs, and why you could never watch analog TV properly on a PC screen.

Let's add an example to illustrate the example:

Let's say that there is a correlation between the number of flights between London and New York, and the prices of sulfur. The correlation is near perfect.

When your neocortex is working, you ignore it. You can't create any plausible scenario how this could work (it doesn't exist within your latent space) so you don't learn anything from it, it doesn't even register in your brain as anything worthy of notice.

But everybody with the cerebellum only absolutely does learn it. And completely for real, not just as some fun factoid, but as a fact that they know the same way you know that airplanes have wings, and everybody knows it, only you don't.

Then, one day out of nowhere people start buying sulfur. Your questions are met with laughter and mockery "dude, everybody's buying sulfur, are you autistic?". And you don't know, because you haven't even learned the pseudo facts that everybody else bases their reasoning on.

This is only a made up example, but this is exactly how it works.

How about the delayed electrification in Britain? It seems that elswhere it began in the late 1870s, but there was no major electrification in Britain before the 20th century. I thought maybe it was also because of some patent obstruction?

I've been posting it repeatedly, but my posts are getting downvoted, and flagged (hidden).

It apears it only goes to back to the 19th century, and may be connected with the case of Phineas Gage, who miraculously survived massive brain damage.

Basically, it seems that we are ruled by a crazy cult.

What I claim is, that the cerebellum is a statistical machine, which is fundamentally limited by the fact that it gets overwhelmed by spurious correlations once it gets too powerful, and it begins to hallucinate.

Mammals evolved the neocoretex, a data reduction machine, which resolves this problem by reducing a large amount of inputs into a much smaller number of values that carry all the information. When the cerebellum acts only in this latent space, and is thus restricted by what can be represented within this latent space, it can be powerful, and avoid hallucination.

The more "counterintuitive" situations the creature has to deal with, the bigger neocortex/cerebellum ratio it needs to avoid hallucinating.

Thus when a person's neocortex gets damaged, they become what may seem like super smart, they make insane conclusions and appear to be able to understand anything, but none of it is actually real, and they are just insane.

What they seem to believe (which is not shared publicly, because it would get "misinterpreted, but allows to be acknowledged internally) is that as animals got too intelligent they failed to breed, but intelligence is still good for not dying. And the neocortex evolved to keep us dumb so that we could breed, and only lift its veil in times of dire need, so that we could use our intelligence to survive. And so, they concluded that they can create a supersmart race by destroying our neocortexes with various means, so that we can be smart all the time, not only in emergencies, and gigantic progress would result.

In reality, they made most people insane.

You need to understand that the power structure of the western society critically depends on the myth of the recent cognitive shift. Where people were little more than animals, until several thousand years ago, when modern thinking suddenly somehow emerged, and those chosen few worked tirelesly for the thousands of years to civilize everybody else.

You need to understand that the power structure of the western society critically depends on the myth of the recent cognitive shift. Where people were little more than animals, until several thousand years ago, when modern thinking suddenly somehow emerged, and those chosen few worked tirelesly for the thousands of years to civilize everybody else.

There is no such a thing as the Overton window. It's a made up term created by insane people who can't perceive reality, and don't understand that valid opinions are restricted by it. So they didn't understand why some ideas were accepted, while other opinions got rejected, and thought that it must be some kind of social consensus, that could be potentially changed.

I think that the incomprehensible part might be the levels of cooperation and trust to make it possible.

No, I'm not. Explain it. If iron is healthy, and heavy metals are, indeed toxic, why did we end up with a crowd of hare brained idiots, and not super geniuses who built a moon city?

reply to below:

It doesn't have to be space, that was just an example. It could be anything else.

What I'm saying is that the cerebellum is the statistical machine. But its power is limited by fundamental limits. You start getting correlations everywhere as the number of inputs grows. And you get paranoid. This is probably why even land birds don't get brains much larger than what they have, there is no point.

So you need data reduction (like the autoencoder, or similar) that reduces the data into fewer outputs that carry all the essential meaning, so that the correlation machine only operates in the latent space that only contains sensible things. (I suppose you could use it to make an actual AGI with resources that I don't have)

The thing is, if you disable the neocortex, the data reduction machine, you get people that seem smarter. They make conclusions that others can't and understand things that look like nonsense to everybody else. But all that extra stuff is delusions, hallucinations, and pure nonsese.

Yes, as far as I know iron and iron rich foods are traditionally known to be harmful in china, agriculture depended heavily on recycling, which keeps heavy metals in soil, and some foods that limit lead absorption (such as cheese) have been abandoned at some point in their history. But more or less, they are just lagging behind in the "cleanup" and "fignting anemia".

It seems involves some kind of metabolic disturbance, is there any explanation for this? https://academic.oup.com/metallomics/article/9/8/1106/601364...

This is misleading. A rise or fall in one kind disease doesn't mean anything out of context. Most people die of something so a fall in one disease may just as well mean that people die from something else instead. In this case, the drop in cancer seems to be the inverse of the rise in "neuropsychiatric conditions and drug use disorders". You can't die of cancer, when you are already dead from fentanyl overdose.

I'm sorry.

It isn't toxic, and that's an advantage that overrides any extra costs.

I don't fear people using AI for evil. The destruction comes from something far more benign. These coders won't really be able to code, and they won't teach anybody else to code. Skills will be lost. Once something breaks, nobody will be able to fix it.

It may get worse. Imagine the police using AI to interpret evidence against you, get judged by a court that uses AI to write your sentence, based on laws that were also written by AI. Nobody understands this, just listen to the AI.

The other aspect of this is the flood of inane and untrue content. It may go to such an extent that the outlook of the typical person may become incredibly local again, limited to their immediate surroundings and personal experiences, not by choice, but because there won't be any way to obtain any reliable information about the outside world, with no way to sift the real from the unreal.

Cars only fully replaced horses after WW2, so they were the first universally exposed generation, if anything.

Elizabeth Klett is good too.

He was the guy who started it all. He came up with this concept of "Judeo-Christian values", as the opposition to traditional values that he deemed fascist.

Of course it is learned, and fear is triggered by anything unfamiliar, that causes a high reconstruction error. Because it means you don't understand it, and it could be dangerous. We are just not used to encoding anything so deep below the eye level, and it freaks us out.

There is just no reason to believe that we are born with some insanely big library of knowledge, and it sounds completely impossible. How would it be stored, and how would we even evolve it?

It just isn't needed. Just like you can find let's say kangaroos in the latent space of an image generator, so we learn abstract concepts and principles of how things work as a bonus of learning to process the senses.

Maybe a way to AGI could be figuring out how to combine a video generator with a LLM or something similar in a way that allows it to understand things intuitively, instead of doing just lots and lots of some statistical bullsit.

I think that detective isn't the correct way to exploit copycat. A character which cooperates, but cheats at random, and keeps defecting if you retaliate, could push the balance towards cooperators. Grudgers, not forgivers, also win in high error scenarios for some reason, as long as enough rounds are played.

I admire your bravery, but, do you understand that you risk losing everything in much of the western world for posting such heretical thoughts?

I don't get the point. A simple CNN with stride =1 should be able to solve it perfectly and generalize it to any size.

I believe that this comes from the exact opposite of what the author does. People like this can discard the irrelevant details, and find what can be put together to create a clear picture.

The gibberish it produces shows that something quite different is being encoded.

It completely fails with Spanish. There is no reason why it would, if it used phonemes.

They think that the footnote explains the poor accuracy, but that is in fact how phonemes supposedly work.

I don't believe that phonemes are real. They are a product of centuries long literacy, and the stereotypically "foreign" accent results from people being taught to construct the words from phonemes.

Not all languages can be neatly split into a nice set of phonemes - Danish phonology in particular seems mostly imaginary, and the "insane grammar" of Old Irish appears to result from the fact that word/morpheme boundaries can occur within the "phonemes".

Why wouldn't they accumulate by natural processes exactly the same?

When you look at the ice cores, the "emissions" were higher just before the last glacial maximum.

The only reason why the metals weren't there 5000 years ago was that the soils had gotten recently stripped. The whole concept was invented by insane people.