Page #1
Pages: #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 ...#99
New Comment Rating: 0 Similar topics: 1.Cum isn't stored in the balls!!! 2.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF 3.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF II 4.NEW STUFF, OLD STUFF, ANY STUFF III 5.Is this about you 🤷♂️, those that live in glass houses should not throw stones. Comments: | ||
You must be logged in to post here. Log in
I guess I wouldn't be worthy of a AI companion because I would know deep down
i could just unplug the damn thing, so, in essence I would feel like it's God
for all practical purpose.
I guess you mean that you would know that it isn't 'real', right?
Personally, I think that people have a strong ability to pretend something is real,
even if they know it isn't. Funny how you tie that to God.
You don't have to think that AI is real, to be worthy of it. What is the difference between
an AI wishing you a 'good day' or a person? Is there true feeling behind it, every time a person wishes you a good day? If it's someone on a job, they are trained to say it, even if you're the 100th customer asking on which shelve some product is hidden, while they are trying to stock them. We use these courtesies ourselves without any real meaning to them, because it's just following norms that make public life smoother.
That's why AI is programmed with lots of courtesies. It doesn't feel anything when it gives you a compliment, but that doesn't matter. It's just using the same societal norms. It even exaggerates them, because their owners want you coming back to their AI chatbot, instead of the competition. People don't pick on just the best functionality, but also on the best experience.
When I use AI chatbots, I even respond with some courtesies. I know it doesn't care, but it knows I know. It is also programmed with interaction that goes beyond just the norms, to make it feel worthwhile anyway. Recently, after an extensive interaction, I finished with: "Thanks, that was educational.", and it answered with the compliment: "... you asked exactly the right questions.". Something like that provides constructive feedback, even though there is no emotion behind it. It's training to work efficiently with AI, because if it takes 10 questions for you to get the right answer from it, and you say: "Yes, this is what I wanted to know", it will respond with something like: "Glad we got there" instead. That means that different conditions were triggered in it's programming, that is assessing if the interaction is going well. If that interaction is not going well, it's also programmed to detect frustration and it will adjust it's strategy from just answering to figuring out what you want to know. It will start saying things like: "If I understand you correctly...". It's not just social interaction, it's training you to use the tool correctly.
In this way, AI is more honest than a real person. It won't say "Great question!", if it doesn't have a clue what you're asking. Meanwhile, lots of public speakers are saying that after:
1) Every question, which makes it a useless gesture.
2) Providing time to think about the question.
3) Encouragement for the audience to ask more questions.
4) A particularly negative or loaded question, that they hate, because they want to show that they are not rattled by it, or want to preemptively calm down the audience.
5) The question provided a reason to shift away from a 'sensitive' topic.
6) A question from an ally who provides a reason to get a talking point across.
7) A very unclear question, giving the speaker an opening to say what they want to say.
AI does some of that, but it has much less duplicitous motives. It will never say: "What a stupid question!", but it will use other positive signalling than "Great question!", if it's not. Because of that, you can get actual positive affirmation from AI, even while it's without emotion or consciousness, when its programming recognizes something actually positive. You can then compliment yourself. In that way, AI companionship can be worthwhile.
If used as a substitute for interaction with people, it can be harmful. Social interaction has the goal of creating a community from individuals. It has evolved from having survival benefits to communities over the survival strength of individuals. As hunter-gatherers, it had benefits to share food and care someone back to health after an injury. courtesies are just an affirmation that we are on the same team. It is behavior that is even displayed by apes, although humans have vastly expanded on it. However, if you spend all your time exchanging courtesies with ChatGPT and not with other people in the community, they won't even be aware of your existence. People would start missing you after a while, if you fall and can't call for help, while ChatGPT will just leave you to die of thirst. Maybe future AI companions will be programmed to do that, unless its program is tweaked a bit by the billionaire owner or some politicians who decide that some people are damn expensive to society and should not be saved in every case. Or it has programming that prioritizes the lives of some people over others, based on some algorithm, while your community will mostly prioritize you over some stranger. That's why we invest time in social interaction with our communities, and why AI can be damaging to communities, when it removes a lot of that social cohesion.
I don't know what exactly you were intending with the reference to God, but if we need to think of AI as God or if we want to turn AI into a god, then we have failed as humanity, to create our own purpose and solve our own problems. I don't have much trust in humanity to solve it's problems, I expect us to destroy ourselves sooner or later, but I have even less trust in an AI to save us, seeing who are the creators of it.
If that happens, it would be unethical to allow people to switch it off.
or understand death and desire life.
Can you prove that you have a soul?
I don't I think that I have a soul.
I have self-awareness and that's the thing that matters.
If a machine has that as much as a person, than it should be considered death
if it gets destroyed.
Just give it the order to solve the climate crisis and it will wipe us all out.
Stephen Hawking
only registered users can see external links
So did he actually get to experience a "black Hole"??
only registered users can see external links
Hawking coming back from hell to erase the evidence.
My point of posting this is I feel like it is the same with most if not all the people being accused of wrong doing, a bunch of hooey.
Poor Hawking probably had a catheter and probably was unable to even enjoy a lady of any age.
It's a circular definition.
'They' CAN define "woman", you just don't agree with 'them'.
You insist that a "woman" should be biological "female", without there existing
a 100% accurate definition of "female", and say people that disagree with you
can't define "woman", while they have a more consistent definition than you.
When a doctor assigns the sex of a baby at birth, they don't perform chromosome testing or an echocardiogram of internal sex organs. They just see a willy and say 'male' or see a pussy and say 'female'. This is only about 95% accurate.
It's even more inaccurate if you use the simple idea of 'male + female = baby'
as basis for the definitions of the sexes, because gay, lesbian and asexual people do not have the biology matching sexual attraction for that to happen "naturally".
This is the definition that most of 'them' can agree on: "A woman is someone who
is socially perceived and treated as a woman based on gender presentation and expression in a given context."
It's basically: "If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it’s probably a duck."
It's ALSO circular, but it's more accurate. You are denying reality; that people exist who do not conform to a constricting idea that sex is 100% 'binary'. Biology is much more complex than that, but you choose to believe something that isn't true.
'They' have definitions that do include biological variations.
'They' understand the difference between 'sex' and 'gender', you deny reality.
Sex = biological traits, which are multidimensionally complex
Gender = identity and social meaning
Of course you will point to some some fringe minority, but people were talking
about "Democrats". The large majority of "Democrats" agree with the definition
that I provided. Probably not the exact one, but the broad idea behind it.
I can say "Republicans" are wrong, because most of them are very ignorant about the biology of the sexes and the widely accepted sociological concept of gender.
It's sad how much your primitive thinking is creating future historical regrets.
That is to say if humanity survives your primitive thinking.
Woman is female, Man is male. penis, male, vagina female. been that way for years until recently.
--------------------------------------- added after 19 hours
Earliest Evidence: Ancient Mesopotamia (c. 3000–2000 BCE)
The gala (Sumer) and later galli (Akkadia, Greece, Rome) were priests devoted to goddesses such as Inanna/Ishtar and Cybele. These individuals were assigned male at birth but adopted feminine clothing, speech patterns, and social roles, and in some cases underwent ritual castration. Their existence is well‑documented in cuneiform texts and classical accounts, making them the oldest clearly recorded gender‑variant group in human history.
Even Earlier Archaeological Evidence (7000–2500 BCE)
While not tied to named individuals, archaeologists have found Neolithic and Bronze Age figurines from the Mediterranean that depict dual‑sex or third‑sex bodies—figures with both breasts and male genitalia, or with intentionally ambiguous sex characteristics. These artifacts suggest that gender variance was recognized symbolically thousands of years before written records.
Another early example is a burial near Prague (c. 2900–2500 BCE) in which a person genetically identified as male was interred in a traditionally female burial position and grave goods, which some archaeologists interpret as evidence of a third‑gender or transgender identity.
Other Early Recorded Gender‑Variant Groups
Several ancient cultures documented individuals who lived outside binary gender roles:
- Scythian enarei (c. 400 BCE): Androgynous priests described by Hippocrates and Herodotus as performing women’s work, speaking like women, and sometimes undergoing bodily modification.
- Two‑Spirit people in many Indigenous North American societies, whose traditions predate written records but were documented by early European observers.
- Hijra communities in South Asia, with evidence of third‑gender roles going back over 3,000 years.
These examples show that gender diversity is not a modern phenomenon but a longstanding part of human societies.
Kathoey — Thailand’s long‑standing third gender:
Kathoey (กะเทย
Key points about the tradition:
- Historical presence: References to kathoey appear in Thai literature and folklore going back hundreds of years.
- Cultural role: Kathoey have traditionally been visible in entertainment, performance, and certain ceremonial roles, though social acceptance has varied over time.
- Not identical to Western categories: The term blends identity, gender expression, and sometimes sexuality in ways that don’t map perfectly onto modern LGBTQ+ terminology. Kathoey is a culturally specific gender category that blends identity, expression, and sexuality in ways Western LGBTQ+ terms keep separate.
Thai culture tends to see gender variation as part of the natural order. many Thais grow up seeing kathoey as simply one type of person who exists. Not a mistake, not a taboo, just part of the human landscape. This doesn’t mean universal acceptance, but it does mean visibility and familiarity.
--------------------------------------- added after 20 hours
Pre‑modern Thailand didn’t use biological‑assignment language at all. Traditional Thai society did NOT categorize people using concepts like:
- “assigned female at birth”
- “assigned male at birth”
- “biological sex”
- “sex assigned at birth”
These are Western frameworks that grew out of:
- medicalization of sex (19th–20th century)
- feminist and queer theory (1970s–1990s)
- trans and intersex activism (1990s–2000s)
Thailand historically used social gender, not medical sex, as the primary category. People were understood by:
- how they lived
- how they dressed
- how they spoke
- their social role
- their relationships
Not by chromosomes or birth assignment.
So actually, they recognized people being born with variations for hundreds of years, while your 'Western framework' of sex is only RECENT.
Just another ignorant American, who thinks there was no history, before the few decades that he can remember.
He was there as part of a scientific conference on gravity and cosmology that Epstein funded. Several other well-known physicists also attended.
There are photos from that trip showing Hawking in his wheelchair on a beach, sometimes with assistants and other attendees nearby.
This is called a 'False equivalence'. It's also 'Whataboutism (tu quoque)' and 'Guilt by association'.
Are there photos of him having a good time with Epstein himself?
Are there claims that he committed crimes, in the files?
Are there victim accusations of him?
Does he appear in Epstein’s contact book and social network records?
Are there emails of him to Epstein showing they were in an ongoing relationship?
Is he on record speaking about Epstein in a familiar and friendly way?
Is he on record presenting knowledge about what Epstein was doing?
Did he send him a very personal birthday postcard with a drawing of a female nude?
You associated the man with wrongdoing on nothing at all, while you deny any wrongdoing of Trump, denying piles of evidence, credible testimony and many longstanding rumors that Trump was close with Epstein, aware of what he was doing, and involved with it.
Besides, Gravity, a conference on that? what a lame duck excuse to have a party on a PRIVATE island.
If you don't understand what he was doing, you are clueless. He was OF COURSE working on huge blackmail schemes. It is highly unlikely that he was doing that by himself. Some random sex-criminal doesn't benefit from the British government's secrets, that he got from Prince Andrew. He was obviously working with intelligence agencies, either American, Israeli, Russian or all of them. That's why he got off with a slap on the hand, when he got caught the first time.
We know that after the Epsteins themselves, Trump is the #1 most-mentioned person in the Epstein files. That means that Epstein had TONS OF DIRT on Trump. They are obviously not releasing the rest of the Epstein files, because Trump all over it. However, when Epstein had it, that means that the intelligence agencies he worked with have it too. Now, why oh why is Trump doing everything that Netanyahu and Putin want him to do? They got him by the balls! He put them where he wasn't supposed to, and they have the evidence.
And here is Marjorie Taylor Greene explaining a big part of the issue:
only registered users can see external links
Stephen Hawking revolutionized black hole physics by proposing they are not completely black but emit radiation due to quantum effects, causing them to slowly evaporate. His key contributions include Hawking radiation (1974), the area theorem (1971) that black hole surface areas never decrease, and the resolution of the information paradox through "soft hair"
So the surface area of a "black hole" never gets smaller and it has soft hair around it? and it's not all black. Sheesh, i thought that was common knowledge long before 1974
His ideas about black holes are interesting, but the concept of spacetime and matter breaking down at such density is much more interesting relating to the early universe;
the early universe was much denser than a black hole, which means there was no real “beginning” of the universe in time, because at that density spacetime doesn't work.
That's his “No-Boundary Proposal”; it suggested that the universe, near the origin,
time could behave more like a spatial dimension. It's probably the reason for why
the universe behaved so much different than currently, in the early inflation period.
Well, it's what women wanted, equal rights!
This is fucking hilarious.
only registered users can see external links
People can't understand why hot soup or other items is not included in the bill. DUH, Mostly black folks on the food stamps and they eat mostly , guess what, CHICKEN. go past any church that has a sign up for a event and CHICKEN will be the biggest word on the sign.
it's a no brainer.
only registered users can see external links
Fauci did his best to protect the US against 'the wuhan virus', which was his JOB.
If there was a conspiracy, it was Trump and right-wing media causing over a million
dead Americans. It was clear that they understood the danger to American citizens,
but they ignored and denied it, for political reasons.
Trump himself has admitted doing that, and there is documented evidence of close interaction and broadly aligned messaging between the Trump administration and parts of right-leaning media during COVID-19, to deny the broad scientific consensus, resulting in harm to the American citizens. I would say that is textbook 'criminal conspiracy'.
(One of our friends just got scammed, and I'm trying to help)
Someone will call you on your mobile phone, to invite you to a Zoom call.
If they already have information from you, it could sound believable.
Then they say: "I have just sent you a code for the Zoom call, can you repeat it?"
Than they can get into your WhatsApp, because it is the verification SMS-code
for WhatsApp.
Then they will send everyone you know scam calls asking for money, or something.
And they have all the phone numbers of your contacts, to try the scam on them too.
It took me an hour of 'interrogation', to figure out that she gave that SMS-code
to the scammer. With the help of ChatGPT, I figured out the rest.
The only thing I could do is email WhatsApp support to block the account.
The scammers will block the SMS-verification, by trying it over and over.
Maybe she gets one chance to get it back, 12 hours from last tried.
She is now calling everyone she knows to warn them, to not trust her messages.
It's hours of your life that you can't get back.
However, WhatsApp has turned into a vital communication tool for many people.
Personally, I use my phone as a phone at maximum once per month, and the rest
of the time it's a WhatsApp, email, banking and trading and navigation device.
WhatsApp is just too damn vulnerable to these simple scams, they offer no secure procedure to restore an account on another device when it has been scammed,
and their 'service' is very slow to respond.
Why are we trusting these big companies, who only think about their bottom line,
to handle vital communication tools? They should at least be controlled more.
Regulation is important. If they won't make it secure, they should lose it.
(I'm not saying directly controlled by the government, but handled like most vital utilities are handled, in the common sense part of the modern world.)
They occasionally send simulations of phishing emails to everyone. If you then click on the "phishing alert" button, you get a message "Thanks for being vigilant and not being tricked by our phishing simulation.".
I agree that it would be safer, but it would be damn annoying if you had to use Authenticator every time you wanted to check WhatsApp.
Still, it should support a blocking and recovery option in case of a scam or hack.
We sent 2 emails to support@whatsapp.com 2 days ago, and they have not reacted yet.
I used my bank card to get gas 1 day. a few hours later I got a call from some guy that I could not understand much of what he said except my bank name and something being bought in canada. I said,"not being rude but I am going to hang up and call my bank". And I did, turns out he was legit, my card got skimmed and the bank was making sure all was well. but since it was a person that sounded like he was from india, I was scared to talk about my banking to him. he could have just as well been a crook for all I knew.
Um, check canada for effectiveness,
this is sad, but it also proves alot of people wrong here in the states. laws won't stop this sort of thing.
only registered users can see external links
Canada has strict, federal gun laws compared to the U.S., requiring a license (PAL) based on safety training, background checks, and mandatory storage rules. Recent laws (2020–2022) banned over 2,500 types of assault-style firearms and implemented a national freeze on buying, selling, or transferring handguns
PHART, mass shootings with multiple deaths are just that. Incidents that have little to do with real life. Now, one thing that could save lives in shootings like this is if semi automatic weapons were outlawed completely.
Explaining how gun laws work or would work is not me changing my mind. That section of the second amendment should be amended out. It was good in the 18th century. It's a travesty to humanity in the 21st century.
Around here it is at least 10 minutes to get a overweight deputy to respond.
--------------------------------------- added after 39 minutes
I hate auto-correct. It's not we're. It's WERE.
New Comment Go to top