The Void's Collection

[Rook]

Re: The Void vs Clever Bot

Talk to evie next.

 

[Words]

Re: The Void vs Clever Bot

"What's the meaning of life?"

Why do people ask this question? I'm guessing they're not asking about things related to the origin of life and origin of evolution, so they must be thinking about their personal lives or human lives in general? So why do people frame it this way? As if there is "THE" meaning of life. This reminds me of characters who "seek their destiny." What is my destiny?

 

[The Void]

Re: The Void vs Clever Bot

"What's the meaning of life?"

Why do people ask this question? I'm guessing they're not asking about things related to the origin of life and origin of evolution, so they must be thinking about their personal lives or human lives in general? So why do people frame it this way? As if there is "THE" meaning of life. This reminds me of characters who "seek their destiny." What is my destiny?

I was asking just for fun, to be clear.

 

[The Void]

Re: The Void vs Clever Bot

In early September 2011, Existor's chatbot Cleverbot, recently took the Turing Test at the Techniche computer festival in Guwahati - and was judged to be 59% human! The humans were only judged to be 63% human, so Cleverbot has arguably passed the test.

00000000000000000000000

 

[Lot]

Re: The Void vs Clever Bot

Humans are only 63% human. WTF standard is that shit?

I think I'm almost on your philosophical side Void. Fatalism, is a just a hair away from the void. Have you read The biblical book, Ecclesiastes? I think you would like it.

 

[The Void]

Re: The Void vs Clever Bot

ye, read it.

 

[The Void]

type me plz

Type me, plz.

 

[The Void]

Re: type me plz

Type me, plz.

me, plz.


I typed what you wanted, are you happy now?

 

[The Void]

Re: type me plz

me, plz.


I typed what you wanted, are you happy now?

Yay! I am so happy now!
I recently found this which made me even more happy!

 

[The Void]

Re: type me plz

Yay! I am so happy now!
I recently found this which made me even more happy!

What a retard talking to himself.

 

[The Void]

Re: type me plz

I wouldnt be looking like a retard, if mods allowed alt accounts,
plz allow, alt accounts for my alt personas, plz plz plz, I cant just express my diverse nature, and personalities from one limited account.

 

[The Void]

Re: type me plz

I have fallen in love with a girl.
She is so great, she is so beautiful, so like me, so compatible, but she is just my imagination,
my alternate personality, it is so tragic that we can never meet each other, we can only remember each other through our vague memories, please allow alt accounts, so that I can connect with her, and other of my friends in a better way, through this forum, plz plz

 

[The Void]

Re: type me plz

I have fallen in love with a girl.
She is so great, she is so beautiful, so like me, so compatible, but she is just my imagination,
my alternate personality, it is so tragic that we can never meet each other, we can only remember each other through our vague memories, please allow alt accounts, so that I can connect with her, and other of my friends in a better way, through this forum, plz plz

What is the necessity of alternate accounts. Why not just use the same one account to express your different selves?
And seriously, what is the wrong with your English? I hate people like you. What is really your problem? You are psychotic. You need help, man. Go, find a psychiatrist.

 

[The Void]

Re: type me plz

What is the necessity of alternate accounts. Why not just use the same one account to express your different selves?
And seriously, what is the wrong with your English? I hate people like you. What is really your problem? You are psychotic. You need help, man. Go, find a psychiatrist.

Eye um da list dellooudead, und da mousht sen heuman een da hole orld!
Saikiatrist nid 2 cum see me, und lurn 1 aur 2 theengs frum mi.

 

[Jennywocky]

Re: type me plz

 

[The Void]

Re: type me plz

What is the necessity of alternate accounts. Why not just use the same one account to express your different selves?
And seriously, what is the wrong with your English? I hate people like you. What is really your problem? You are psychotic. You need help, man. Go, find a psychiatrist.

Using one account to express my alternate accounts, will cause confusions for everyone. It will be a loss for both sides. I will fail to manage my plethora of personas consistently, and the other members will get endlessly confused.
For the sake of the betterment of the both sides, The Void must be given permission
to have at least hundred alternate accounts. It may even make the forum much more active ( more of a pseudo-active though) and make it a highly famous forum,
attracting all sorts of members increasing in diversity and all that.

 

[Cavallier]

Bleh. I'm tired of the fluff. Stop fluffing you fluff monster. It's choking us all.

 

[Cherry Cola]

Yes shut the fuck up you existential hipster, stop writing a bunch of meta-ironic idiot shit.

 

[Hawkeye]

Hmm, he was keeping it contained within the thread though (for the most part).

 

[Cavallier]

No he wasn't. I've been merging his threads into this collection for days.

 

[Jennywocky]

 

[Hawkeye]

No he wasn't. I've been merging his threads into this collection for days.

Oh, my bad. Hahaha... No wonder you've had enough.

Carry on!

 

[scorpiomover]

Any culture back then relied on oral traditions. But even that matters little, because the men were the writers, not women. So they had to maintain their knowledge orally. I think actually, considering this, that this knowledge was probably among, if not the first practical knowledge right after we gained self-awareness as a species.

When a woman comes out of the animal mind and starts to realize her position and role in society, one of the things she will recognize is her own sexual preferences. She will like to be with that guy, not the other. The maternal instinct will resist having offspring with a man she doesn't like.

And so as she gathers and the men hunt, she will find herbs that need to be tested for edibility. And she will sample them and feel the effects in her body. If she is pregnant and the fruit is driven out, she will start to notice and yap yap yap, other women in the tribe will know it too. And they will have experimented with it and then used it to their advantage.

You could defend the position that this knowledge helped shaped our future, because no longer would the toughest, most brutal and dominant male be taking any woman against their will or not, necessarily, but it would not lead to a successful copulation, that is one out of which a child springs.

And so women would choose who they preferred and that means a higher chance for the 'nerd' of the group. Women with self-awareness will not automatically choose a partner that will defend their kids from other males, because I don't think in human societies other men killed the babies of others, such as bears do e.g. So the 'nerds' in the group over time has a higher percentage of successful copulations, increasing other traits such as intelligence over time.

Sounds like a Ti chain of reasoning. Have you checked it using Ne? If not, then it might be correct, or it might be another "castle in the sky", as us INTPs are so fond of making

Let's test it. If, as you say, women, who were around many thousands of years ago, had done as you suggested, then in far less than a thousand years, women would have selected "nerds" as their men of choice, and thousands of years ago, "nerds" would have become the dominant form of male homo sapiens.

However, it's quite evident that nerdish males have only become more preferential extremely lately, only in the last 20-30 years or so. So, hypothesis => prediction => testing of said prediction => falsification of said hypothesis, as according to the scientific method.

You have SOME valid points. Of course, over time, people would have noticed that when women ate certain foods, they were struggling to get pregnant, and many of those women who never ate those foods, had no problems getting pregnant.

But that would have been something that all the tribe would have been able to notice.

Even if one wishes to suggest that women might have taken more note of that than men (even though men needed offspring to support the family after they were gone, and so it was even more important to have offspring than for women, and so it was something that men took very seriously, unlike today, when Western offspring often are supported by the mother in such cases), it was still something that a doctor had to know. In ancient times, doctors were funded entirely by their own success. If they didn't make the woman pregnant, no more patients, no more money, and they had to turn to something else, like unskilled labour, to earn enough to eat. So doctors would have made sure to get that info, if it was available.

Women didn't want to hide that kind of info from doctors, because if they didn't, they'd get the wrong treatment and die, and women needed medical attention, just like today.

Anyway, your ruse would have worked against women, and so would only have been done by rather stupid women. If women didn't have the choice on who to marry, then the most they could do was to refuse to give their husband any kids, which, as I said, was very well known anyway. So they really only had an advantage, if the man would divorce her in favour of marrying someone else. But that would not have been an issue for societies in which men could have more than one wife, and if you think about it, going back before 1000 CE, that was pretty common. So again, would not have helped women. On the contrary, the wife who was co-erced into marriage, would have been forced to do so, because the man was sure he'd want her, and no-one else. Only attraction has that kind of allure, and pregnancy tended to ruin the looks in the past. So, for the man, it would have been a good thing, and something he'd have wanted. So, the only sorts of women who'd have tried to play this game, were the stupid ones, because it would have ensured they'd never have got free.

All such a ruse would have ensured, was that these women's genes never got passed on. So if such a ruse had existed, then the genes that might motivate such a ruse and be capable of it in women, were wiped out, thousands of years ago.

The thing that you're missing, is why there seem to be so many people online, who seem to absolutely sure that religion has nothing to offer and is only followed by genetic inferiors, when most of those online pundits have come from the same genetic stock as those that they criticise, and thus have almost exactly the same flaws, and in addition. seem to have made a far smaller contribution to society at large, than the people they criticise. I am of course referring to the millions of self-styled geniuses online who so far have not come up with anything even remotely close to an "Oh wow. The whole world has opened up to me in a way it never did before" moment, let alone a breakthrough in physics or anything else in science.

Why do so many online think they are so smart, when they don't have a basis on which to make that claim? And why is it always those who don't seem to have much to stand on, that seem to be so sure that science has all the answers and "religion" (a word that doesn't even make sense) has none?

Could it be because they are people who are easily persuaded of whatever flatters their intelligence, i.e. that they are intelligent, without decent proof, and that they are smart because they follow science and not "religion", when that also flatters their intelligence?

Why does it matter to me? Because gullible people are easy to convince to do horrible things.

 

[Variform]

Sounds like a Ti chain of reasoning. Have you checked it using Ne? If not, then it might be correct, or it might be another "castle in the sky", as us INTPs are so fond of making

How does one check it like that?

Let's test it. If, as you say, women, who were around many thousands of years ago, had done as you suggested, then in far less than a thousand years, women would have selected "nerds" as their men of choice, and thousands of years ago, "nerds" would have become the dominant form of male homo sapiens.

No, some women will have wanted the macho type because to some women that is more appealing. It is not black and white. It would I suppose be a slight shift over millennia, say from about 100.000 years ago until today. A matter o statistics.

However, it's quite evident that nerdish males have only become more preferential extremely lately, only in the last 20-30 years or so. So, hypothesis => prediction => testing of said prediction => falsification of said hypothesis, as according to the scientific method.

I don't think so. Based on what would you say that? Many of the great thinkers were happily married I am sure. I think women have a wide ranges of preferences in men, like men have in females. Besides, not all are alpha's. So many of us have to get by with what we can attract. I do not think that even though that may be the case, there is but one realm of seduction.

That is to say, there are tiers in society, where some females by their special attraction can score an alpha male (and vice versa) if they so desire, but that below that godly realm of jealousy inspiring agony in more average people, without special traits, there are still plenty of great choices of men and women.

So as preferences of women go, there are still a lot of 'nerdy' less alpha macho alpha-male style men to be had. And to be found very desirable by many ladies.

You have SOME valid points. Of course, over time, people would have noticed that when women ate certain foods, they were struggling to get pregnant, and many of those women who never ate those foods, had no problems getting pregnant.

But that would have been something that all the tribe would have been able to notice.

That depends. Women are different from men. I think it is likely to be noticed by women before men, because they are the one having to risk life to carry the child and survive birth. Could women keep such things secret?

Even if men in a social goup would dislike these herbs and make them 'ilegal' other herbs can be found. And maybe the men didn't mind at all. Because a man does won up to protect the kids, so to have sex without kids is quite a social advancement for many men! You could say it is the male variety of bra's, or maybe loin cloths :-) It is the male counterpart of feminism.

No longer would a man be held accountable for not protecting his kids, he can now seek out women without consequence.

Even if one wishes to suggest that women might have taken more note of that than men (even though men needed offspring to support the family after they were gone, and so it was even more important to have offspring than for women, and so it was something that men took very seriously, unlike today, when Western offspring often are supported by the mother in such cases), it was still something that a doctor had to know. In ancient times, doctors were funded entirely by their own success. If they didn't make the woman pregnant, no more patients, no more money, and they had to turn to something else, like unskilled labour, to earn enough to eat. So doctors would have made sure to get that info, if it was available.

It is a little but too specific what you are saying. Doctors, shaman rather, right? I am not so sure that men want kids to take care of the family. That would be a societal approach. It depends on what period we discuss. I am thinking 40.000 years ago and father back. I think shamans would have understood the significance, but in their role as teacher, healer and spiritual guide, they would also know more about the overall sociology of the group.

I think the information on herbs would be safe with him, if only because he understands that this particular male seems to produce rather weak kids, or so is his perception. And then so he can manipulate the survival of the group.

Women didn't want to hide that kind of info from doctors, because if they didn't, they'd get the wrong treatment and die, and women needed medical attention, just like today.

I think in modern society we are made afraid of child birth. Been on tv here the other day. Some want all women to go to the hospital. Many others want to retain the right to do it at home.

Anyway, your ruse would have worked against women, and so would only have been done by rather stupid women. If women didn't have the choice on who to marry, then the most they could do was to refuse to give their husband any kids, which, as I said, was very well known anyway. So they really only had an advantage, if the man would divorce her in favour of marrying someone else.

But this is another timeframe, you are shifting the poles of the goal.

But that would not have been an issue for societies in which men could have more than one wife, and if you think about it, going back before 1000 CE, that was pretty common.

How do you know? We don't know all that much about society 40k years ago.

These assumptions, how does that relate to Ti and Ne?

So again, would not have helped women. On the contrary, the wife who was co-erced into marriage, would have been forced to do so, because the man was sure he'd want her, and no-one else. Only attraction has that kind of allure, and pregnancy tended to ruin the looks in the past.

Wrong. Many men love the glow of pregnant women. Besides that, they find stone sculptures of huge breasted women, tens of thousands of years old. Goddesses perhaps, that show the Mother worship. Pregnant women were most likely revered and had a special status. And that remained the case until religion came on the scene, especially later on when christian values tarted to undermine society and the respect for femininity went out the window.

The thing that you're missing, is why there seem to be so many people online, ... The whole world has opened up to me in a way it never did before" moment, let alone a breakthrough in physics or anything else in science.

I don't see the connection.

Why do so many online think they are so smart, when they don't have a basis on which to make that claim? And why is it always those who don't seem to have much to stand on, that seem to be so sure that science has all the answers and "religion" (a word that doesn't even make sense) has none?

I have no bias towards anything. I think about models.

Could it be because they are people who are easily persuaded of whatever flatters their intelligence, i.e. that they are intelligent, without decent proof, and that they are smart because they follow science and not "religion", when that also flatters their intelligence?

Why does it matter to me? Because gullible people are easy to convince to do horrible things.

Yes, wanna be's. Many will sue science as an ego weapon.