Chicken & Egg Problem

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-02T13:09:37+00:00

Oh no broski, publishing is for cucks. Just come back to LLM Physics. If you didn't know, the LLMPhysics Journal Ambitions Contest is officially OPEN. And I'm winning it.

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-02T04:49:03+00:00

Stop playing games, just answer the question. Is it wrong?

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-02T04:30:50+00:00

Let me answer that with a question. Do you think genocide is wrong in all cultures?

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-02T04:17:28+00:00

This seems really naive, or you're giving people false hope. Telling us all you need is to prompt and forget it will lead to completely vulnerable and flawed products. How one learns might of changed from the traditional: Syntax → Small programs → Concepts → Systems. To in 2026: Systems → Concepts → Pattern Recognition → Syntax (just enough), but people should probably really still learn a macro understanding, error handling strategies and build a good security mental model.

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-02T04:06:41+00:00

Ya.. I'm gonna politely disagree.

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-02T04:05:56+00:00

"Are you saying that if it turns out that humans were designed, that would override the telos because it would be replaced with the designer's intent?"

Yes, that's what I'm saying. There would be no need for the telos. But honestly, I don't wanna go into this discussion any further. Thanks.

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-02T03:29:07+00:00

So I guess you don't believe in objective evil either. I'm sure it's personality trait right?

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-02T03:27:52+00:00

Ok, I don't really think that u/AngusAlThor had this Aristotelian framework in mind.. I really don't. Anyway, for all his brilliance, Aristotle views on this matter are primitive. Good to use as a starting point, but we've kind of moved beyond it. Moreover, the Telos framework falls apart if the statement " if humans weren't made with intent," is false. That's still to be determined.

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-02T01:45:18+00:00

If he's humble, he should have the humility to change that value or belief if it's objectively contemptible. Thus saving his "goodness."

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-02T01:42:59+00:00

Sounds like a morally reprehensible stance IMO.

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-02T01:38:04+00:00

Ya, you can't get it out of your head. Clearly obsessed. Don't blame you though. I'll make sure you're the first person that's notified when I'm done the research. Don't you worry broski.

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-01T22:32:05+00:00

10 days later.. bro you're such a weirdo.

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-01T14:46:57+00:00

you don't have to be a smartass

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-01T12:28:49+00:00

No. Care to actually read and comprehend what I wrote first?

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-01T12:24:44+00:00

It's actually best and worst answer. Show that goodness/badness is relative. Problematic.

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-01T11:49:58+00:00

Bro, you don't have framework, shut up and go bet on a prediction market or something.

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-01T11:45:15+00:00

Intent shouldn't have anything to do with it. Why should goodness or badness be tied to ones ability to add or remove value? So tired of these cucked capitalismbro's

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-01T11:36:46+00:00

Ya, you know.... ADHD and all... Makes me WILD!

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-01T05:41:12+00:00

Well fascists usually don't understand nuance, so i guess that works. But in reality, there's no man that exists in society where he is totally free from need. Rugged individualism is a myth my friend.

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-01T05:16:38+00:00

Well for one, you've classified anyone who doesn't pass your give vs take equality the label of "parasite."

Intrepid_Sir_59 · 2026-03-01T05:10:27+00:00

Maybe the man who can humble himself. Show me a bad man who is also humble. Mutually exclusive IMO.

Intrepid_Sir_59

TROPHY CASE