Chinese laborers brought Chinese traditional medicine with them to California, etc. in the nineteenth century. One of these cures was fat from the Chinese water snake which was effective against inflammation and pain from arthritis and some other diseases.
American ex cowboy Clark Stanley decided to exploit this and he produced a concoction made from rattlesnakes. This was vastly inferior.
Later on, he and others only made their snake oil from mineral oil with other ingredients such as turpentine.
This is how snake oil became synonymous with fake.
Seems you have been considering how we think for a while now. In 1994 I was 30 years old and had just moved to Oregon. I generally am in the design/music fields, and have always just 'done my things' until now. Now, it seems, I am supposed to find a new place to help, somehow. What really prompted you to 'think about thinking'...just curious. thanks thesource....
In my life, restarting every 7-10 years was mandatory; otherwise, I would have been bored to death. :)
How did I elect to pursue knowledge?
I was five, when God asked me what I wanted out of life. I chose "to learn how the world works."
In the meanwhile, I couldn't help noticing that when I read something, I was always curious to find out why it had been written. In order to find out about that, I had to learn a lot about history and anthropology, while developing my own paradigm for what a human being is and how the world works.
By that time, I was sick of ("famous" and definitely well-paid) psychologists' and philosophers' guessing games, so I assumed that if human thought could be emulated by artificial intelligence, that would serve as evidence to prove that my theory is useable (that is the highest end of "scientific knowledge"). So, I started working on a theory.
My first doctoral dissertation focused on modular cognitive structures that can be converted into linguistic modules, but it fell short on computability, so I had to keep working.
In my second doctoral dissertation, I managed to reach the level of setting up a five-page-long algorithm for human-AI communication in natural languages. I immediately realized that whoever would own that knowledge, would own the world, so I refrained from publicizing and selling my findings. Only two mathematician friends read it and okayed it. I didn't save mankind, but perhaps postponed the inevitable. The same or similar algorithm was certainly used already in 2012...
Aaaahhhhhh.....choo. Thank you Ray for a slice of life....For me, before AI, i can see why folks wanted to go there...and after AI, ie now....i can see why folks DONT want to go there....i am biased against it, as a human creation, in the same way that i do not like most modern 'conveniences' that come to shape us in ways that are not beneficial for human to human interactions. I went through college right at the time where hand drafting was being phased out literally the year after mine...(1993).....i never wanted to do CAD but when i moved out west in 1994 i had to learn as it was already here....First it was a mac based cad (CLARIS CAD, sucked but got me off the pencil and clicking the mouse, phase 1) to Autocad, which i still use albeit an ancient version. The benefit is to be able to model 3d forms hard to draw manually. The downside is....well, many, as you might guess. The biggest downside to CAD has been the increased productivity, or rather, the ever increasing expectation of such. The equipment costs and upgrades are constant, the physical demands of sitting (I stand and click) are not a health boon for sure. The CRT rays, the 5G. Overall we are not any more productive and much more destructive than when we had pencils and erasers and paper, from my observation. I did hear about one architectural student who protested the unwritten demand that he 'DO CAD' for his degree, and won the 'RIGHT' to simply draw like folks have done for (ever) instead. I feel lucky to have this perspective, most of the kids after me never saw a pencil again in design. best
ps do you watch Lex Fridman, seems way up your alley so to speak?
For me, the computer was a simple verification tool. On the other hand, all knowledge can be abused and whatever can be done, someone will do it.
While I am familiar with the rat race in tech, I've been lucky to have been able to stay out of it. Anyway, my strength lay in systems-building and systems-manipulation, but being usually obviously better than future bosses, thank God, I never got hired. :)
No, I do not watch Lex Fridman or anyone else in the field. I am familiar with the technological advances, so I am quite aware of the harms that the results entail. I stopped reading "experts," because they usually talk about a small fraction of what I already know; most of my knowledge comes from my own (unpaid) research...
There were two claims in about 2019, one from NZ and one from Canada that politicians could be AI, that the tech was already there. There's also a passing comment by an academic playing host in a presentation that I went to (by a politician) that if they didn't like what she said that they could replace her with a copy. It jarred that one did.
Deepfakes for politicians also exist. They are generated by AI. Even in movies from 2020, famous actors are often AI. Only their eyes give them away, because the AI too only 15-25 samples and often doesn't care for transitions. E.g. Russell Crowe is handled this way in The Call of the Wild.
The politicians are puppets to the globalist technocrats, who are using a graphene-based quantum AI that is fed live data to run a worldwide simulation and advise the murderers on their next steps. The AI's signature is unique:
Chinese laborers brought Chinese traditional medicine with them to California, etc. in the nineteenth century. One of these cures was fat from the Chinese water snake which was effective against inflammation and pain from arthritis and some other diseases.
American ex cowboy Clark Stanley decided to exploit this and he produced a concoction made from rattlesnakes. This was vastly inferior.
Later on, he and others only made their snake oil from mineral oil with other ingredients such as turpentine.
This is how snake oil became synonymous with fake.
Snake oil maybe really was snake oil. Reptiles trying to get their planet back.
Seems you have been considering how we think for a while now. In 1994 I was 30 years old and had just moved to Oregon. I generally am in the design/music fields, and have always just 'done my things' until now. Now, it seems, I am supposed to find a new place to help, somehow. What really prompted you to 'think about thinking'...just curious. thanks thesource....
In my life, restarting every 7-10 years was mandatory; otherwise, I would have been bored to death. :)
How did I elect to pursue knowledge?
I was five, when God asked me what I wanted out of life. I chose "to learn how the world works."
In the meanwhile, I couldn't help noticing that when I read something, I was always curious to find out why it had been written. In order to find out about that, I had to learn a lot about history and anthropology, while developing my own paradigm for what a human being is and how the world works.
By that time, I was sick of ("famous" and definitely well-paid) psychologists' and philosophers' guessing games, so I assumed that if human thought could be emulated by artificial intelligence, that would serve as evidence to prove that my theory is useable (that is the highest end of "scientific knowledge"). So, I started working on a theory.
My first doctoral dissertation focused on modular cognitive structures that can be converted into linguistic modules, but it fell short on computability, so I had to keep working.
In my second doctoral dissertation, I managed to reach the level of setting up a five-page-long algorithm for human-AI communication in natural languages. I immediately realized that whoever would own that knowledge, would own the world, so I refrained from publicizing and selling my findings. Only two mathematician friends read it and okayed it. I didn't save mankind, but perhaps postponed the inevitable. The same or similar algorithm was certainly used already in 2012...
when had you come up with your own version? What is your proffesional field?
What happened in the 2012?
Aaaahhhhhh.....choo. Thank you Ray for a slice of life....For me, before AI, i can see why folks wanted to go there...and after AI, ie now....i can see why folks DONT want to go there....i am biased against it, as a human creation, in the same way that i do not like most modern 'conveniences' that come to shape us in ways that are not beneficial for human to human interactions. I went through college right at the time where hand drafting was being phased out literally the year after mine...(1993).....i never wanted to do CAD but when i moved out west in 1994 i had to learn as it was already here....First it was a mac based cad (CLARIS CAD, sucked but got me off the pencil and clicking the mouse, phase 1) to Autocad, which i still use albeit an ancient version. The benefit is to be able to model 3d forms hard to draw manually. The downside is....well, many, as you might guess. The biggest downside to CAD has been the increased productivity, or rather, the ever increasing expectation of such. The equipment costs and upgrades are constant, the physical demands of sitting (I stand and click) are not a health boon for sure. The CRT rays, the 5G. Overall we are not any more productive and much more destructive than when we had pencils and erasers and paper, from my observation. I did hear about one architectural student who protested the unwritten demand that he 'DO CAD' for his degree, and won the 'RIGHT' to simply draw like folks have done for (ever) instead. I feel lucky to have this perspective, most of the kids after me never saw a pencil again in design. best
ps do you watch Lex Fridman, seems way up your alley so to speak?
For me, the computer was a simple verification tool. On the other hand, all knowledge can be abused and whatever can be done, someone will do it.
While I am familiar with the rat race in tech, I've been lucky to have been able to stay out of it. Anyway, my strength lay in systems-building and systems-manipulation, but being usually obviously better than future bosses, thank God, I never got hired. :)
No, I do not watch Lex Fridman or anyone else in the field. I am familiar with the technological advances, so I am quite aware of the harms that the results entail. I stopped reading "experts," because they usually talk about a small fraction of what I already know; most of my knowledge comes from my own (unpaid) research...
There were two claims in about 2019, one from NZ and one from Canada that politicians could be AI, that the tech was already there. There's also a passing comment by an academic playing host in a presentation that I went to (by a politician) that if they didn't like what she said that they could replace her with a copy. It jarred that one did.
The politicians are AI? Like in not real people? I've been curious about that.
Deepfakes for politicians also exist. They are generated by AI. Even in movies from 2020, famous actors are often AI. Only their eyes give them away, because the AI too only 15-25 samples and often doesn't care for transitions. E.g. Russell Crowe is handled this way in The Call of the Wild.
The above is just the claim of those particular academics, whether they are running one like that I don't know.
The politicians are puppets to the globalist technocrats, who are using a graphene-based quantum AI that is fed live data to run a worldwide simulation and advise the murderers on their next steps. The AI's signature is unique:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/the-end-game-has-begun-the-mass-murders
It usually uses one event for multiple purposes to make progress towards the 2030 plan:
https://rayhorvaththesource.substack.com/p/four-birds-with-one-stone-the-derailment
I believe it!