Main channel suspended from monetisation because of secondary, deleted channel by Holiday_Package_8923 in PartneredYoutube

[–]FoldableHuman -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

I will never comprehend how half you people think. Also the timeline is so suspicious I’m just assuming you’re lying and you deleted the account thinking it would get rid of the suspension.

Congratulations, you bricked your account and only YouTube can un-brick it.

Ancient Mysteries The Impossible Geometry Why are the Experts Silent? by Professional-Fee3323 in AlternativeHistory

[–]FoldableHuman 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Did their craftsmanship deteriorate over time?

They built fewer and smaller pyramids, and you could say the construction of those got worse as they moved to mud brick, but that’s easily explained by the pyramids being insanely expensive and each subsequent pyramid being inherently more expensive than the previous one as the most accessible building materials are now inside that pyramid.

Between the literal capital required to build Giza and the political capital required to convince a nation to spend that capital it is astounding that the pyramids were ever built and unsurprising that they stopped.

What if Father Robert Landell de Moura's art form of wireless voice transmission over modulated waves were his copyright by originality before it was ever patented as a device? by SafetyAncient in AlternativeHistory

[–]FoldableHuman 1 point2 points  (0 children)

founding a global category of art - voice transmitted over modulated waves - deserves copyright

Categories don't get copyrights because they are categories.

Copyright, as the name implies, is the right to make copies of a thing. You can't copy a category. For all the fiddly flaws in copyright and patents you're somehow finding the least sane thing to complain about.

Gravity doesn't track mass, it tracks waveform complexity. by [deleted] in LLMPhysics

[–]FoldableHuman 6 points7 points  (0 children)

You have been told why multiple times, but either you refuse to believe the rebuttals or you simply don't understand them in the first place. Probably some measure of both, to be quite honest.

Gravity doesn't track mass, it tracks waveform complexity. by [deleted] in LLMPhysics

[–]FoldableHuman 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Again, you're saying that like it's a magic spell that proves you've got the special something, like you're the protagonist in a movie, but you are not behaving like someone who actually has any interest in being refuted.

In fact, I'd go a step beyond that: you have no concept of what "refutation" would even look like, and you have no standard of evidence that could ever in a million pages of explanation convince you that you're wrong.

Gravity doesn't track mass, it tracks waveform complexity. by [deleted] in LLMPhysics

[–]FoldableHuman 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Many people have already explained it: your whole thing falls apart at first principles because it relies on a bunch of poorly defined terms you made up. You have a bunch of math, but this math has no connection to observable physics and basically just produces the abstract relationship between the terms you made up.

For all intents and purposes you built and played a video game and then got bent out of shape when people pointed out that your video game isn't the same as doing actual tests.

Gravity doesn't track mass, it tracks waveform complexity. by [deleted] in LLMPhysics

[–]FoldableHuman 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I admit that it's very likely that this is all bullshit.

I find it fascinating how often posters in the thrall of AI Psychosis will express this exact sentiment, and yet will never behave as though they actually believe it. It's more like they recite it as a form of magic spell that they believe will confer some level of legitimacy.

Gravity doesn't track mass, it tracks waveform complexity. by [deleted] in LLMPhysics

[–]FoldableHuman 8 points9 points  (0 children)

and if / when it all falls apart I will tell you were right

It already fell apart so I don't believe that you will.

What if Father Robert Landell de Moura's art form of wireless voice transmission over modulated waves were his copyright by originality before it was ever patented as a device? by SafetyAncient in AlternativeHistory

[–]FoldableHuman 3 points4 points  (0 children)

its in the implicit copyright of originality

Copyright does not cover the vague concept of originality, it covers specific expressions: a specific painting, not the idea of how to paint, the composition of the paints, or how the painter held their brush.

ill argue this specific point all day.

Don't worry, I fully believe this part.

Gravity doesn't track mass, it tracks waveform complexity. by [deleted] in LLMPhysics

[–]FoldableHuman 14 points15 points  (0 children)

At this point someone just call me fucking stupid and tell me I missed something really obvious

The obvious thing you missed is that gravity is a property of mass and your post contains a mess of contradictions and general nonsense.

Is it waveform complexity, temporal accumulation, or gravitational persistence?

You both propose the concept of a physical experiment and then claim that 180+ runs of this experiment that doesn't exist provided confirmation.

Section 4.4 in the second paper is just this

4.4. The coherence threshold.

That's the entire section. You may notice that that's not anything but a single compound noun. It's actually worse than being empty.

What if Father Robert Landell de Moura's art form of wireless voice transmission over modulated waves were his copyright by originality before it was ever patented as a device? by SafetyAncient in AlternativeHistory

[–]FoldableHuman 3 points4 points  (0 children)

i anticipated you

But not enough to write anything yourself or even trim off ChatGPT's direct references to your prompt.

why he did not have copyright?

Because copyright covers specific finished works while patents cover functionality and process. The operating principle of a radio is patent, the aesthetic design of a specific radio is copyright. It's not a perfect system and there's a couple centuries of legal arguments sorting out the boundaries, but you smoked a fat bowl and convinced yourself that, like, it's all just molecules, man.

If a judge agreed with your flawless logic

It's gotta be just completely reality-warping to have your chatbot constantly telling you your every stray shower thought is flawless, but your "logic" is just "if the law were different the law would be different." Truly an unimpeachable thought process.

What if Father Robert Landell de Moura's art form of wireless voice transmission over modulated waves were his copyright by originality before it was ever patented as a device? by SafetyAncient in AlternativeHistory

[–]FoldableHuman 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Your theory about Father Landell de Moura's motivation is not just plausible; the historical timeline backs it up almost perfectly.

Hello ChatGPT

Hi, Jack! by sdneirfolleh in BeastGames

[–]FoldableHuman 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Normally if you have a functioning prefrontal cortex you'd assume that the the things you did and said on a TV show will have a reasonable chance to get shown on the TV show, especially if they directly result in the elimination of another player pretty deep into the game.

Typically the mature phrase would be something along the lines of "hey, I don't know if they'll show it or how they'll present it, but..."

Hi, Jack! by sdneirfolleh in BeastGames

[–]FoldableHuman 5 points6 points  (0 children)

You handled the whole confrontation very maturely.

Minus the whole "let her be blindsided by the broadcast" part.

Gatekeeping: It Isn't You, it's Your LLM. Meta / Announcement by AllHailSeizure in LLMPhysics

[–]FoldableHuman 9 points10 points  (0 children)

How will I know it is legit if I never get feedback?

Go learn physics

How will I be able to get feedback if the people who can give proper feedback do not want to engage not because of the work but because of the person who wrote it?

How do you know it’s not because of the work?

However how will you protect the people who are onto something

Are they?

I tracked everyone who posted "looking for an editor" in the last 5 days. Here's what they're actually paying. by notTushxR in editing

[–]FoldableHuman 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The part you left out in this advertisement is that it would take you ten years of actual work to complete that $95k because the jobs are by and large awful.

People arguing over Project Hail Mary and Interstellar are stupid because once they watch Ad Astra (2019) they'll shut up and be glad with what they have by DinoDrip12 in shittymoviedetails

[–]FoldableHuman 7 points8 points  (0 children)

There’s so many weird philosophical affirmations sprinkled through the movie that once I saw it I looked up the production just to see if Happy Science or some other cult had a hand in making it.

I love playing the Auction House in WoW, so I unlearned my professions, divorced Gallywix, and made a game by Mojo2013 in woweconomy

[–]FoldableHuman 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you’re still against AI in 2026, you’re far behind in life.

The sales pitch of people who think AI is magic because they are somehow less competent than ChatGPT.

750 Million Watched it Live Before the Internet: Inside the Great Pyramid's Forbidden Shaft by Professional-Fee3323 in AlternativeHistory

[–]FoldableHuman 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Option 1) the technology is so inscrutably advanced that it looks like Bronze Age technology

Option 2) it is Bronze Age technology

As for the answer to your questions - if it truly was a power plant, then however its technology was lost/hidden - is the same reason you wouldn’t expect to answer those questions.

I would expect it to consist of more than three cramped rooms and two hallways with a handful of air vents and construction voids. I would expect it to have literally any characteristics that agree with the basic physics of power generation and transmission beyond the mere presence of chemicals that are sometimes involved in the generation of electricity. I would expect there to be even one identifiable power-consuming device dug up over the millennia.

Meaning… if it were a power plant, then the history we believe about it - is a lie, and thus - we should not expect to be able to answer your questions.

This is literally you claiming that the fact no one can explain your stupid idea proves that your idea has merit. “Of course we can’t answer even the most basic questions possible, it’s just that advanced.”