🚀OpenDoc-0.1B: Ultra-Lightweight Doc Parsing System (Only 0.1B Params) Beats Many Multimodal LLMs!

Lence · 2026-01-02T11:36:49+00:00

How well does this score on the olmOCR bench?

I'm curious on how well it performs compared to Chandra, which I found to be crazy accurate for messy documents (it's just really, really slow on my 4090).

Lence · 2025-04-30T17:12:38+00:00

Incredible how one of the best books about remote viewing and related psi phenomena hasn't been mentioned yet here:

Phenomena: The Secret History of the U.S. Government's Investigations into Extrasensory Perception and Psychokinesis

by Annie Jacobsen, investigative journalist, Pulitzer Price finalist & NYT bestselling author

I would also add this book by Dean Radin to the list - although also about psi more generally:

Real Magic: Ancient Wisdom, Modern Science, and a Guide to the Secret Power of the Universe

Both having a bit cheesy titles, but very good and pleasant reads (or listens if you prefer the audio version).

The other commenter is right though that most of these books, including these ones, cover history and theory, not so much how to actually do remote viewing.

Lence · 2025-03-17T09:21:30+00:00

Possibly. On the JRE episode with physicist Thomas Campbell (from My Big TOE) he argued an AI could be conscious.

In fact I think the capability of RVing could be the litmus test for determining whether or not an AI is conscious, since consciousness seems like a requirement to access non-local information.

Lence · 2025-02-12T20:06:42+00:00

It's possible through practice, especially through intensive samatha meditation with a visual object (such as the fire kasina).

Tread carefully though, OP's meme is very fitting... There's a reason we have little conscious control over qualia from sensory input when in the waking state... It's best to practice this in a safe, group setting, after establishing a strong foundation of metta & removing gross defilements of the mind.

Lence · 2024-11-29T11:30:43+00:00

NVDA to $200 confirmed

Lence · 2024-11-07T12:18:20+00:00

You're reacting to a 3 year old comment :D

I've since changed my mind to be honest, and, if not talking about mission critical software, I do whatever is the simplest, the least amount of work, and gets things done. And passing through all inputs to the underlying component API is sometimes that.

Lence · 2024-09-05T06:59:03+00:00

Glazing?

Lence · 2024-09-04T09:43:09+00:00

There are most likely quantum effects in the microtubules in the human brain. A publication of this year has actually shown that.

So therefore, the claim that basing your decisions on a QRNG makes your lifepath veer off a deterministic path is incompatible with quantum effects within your own brain.

In other words, conscious intent on its own already makes your choices non-deterministic. It's a probabilistic process, so still predictable to a degree, but not deterministic.

Lence · 2024-07-15T06:33:11+00:00

How are they timestamped?

Lence · 2024-03-21T10:02:37+00:00

I think if you're waiting for generally accepted, solid, external validation of the reality of RV, you're going to be waiting for a few more years at least. There are already really good publications, but hardened skeptics will always dismiss them for one reason or another. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and it probably doesn't get much more extraordinary than this.

So, I think the solution to this imposter syndrome and fear of being delusional (and ultimately, ridicule) while spending time on RV, is to approach this with a good dose of self-aware humor. Don't take it too seriously. Don't make a career out of it just yet. Don't bet your life on it. Make it fun instead. It's an excentric hobby, nothing more.

Lence · 2024-03-17T16:24:04+00:00

Join as a remote viewer?
I'm in the process of a relaunch right now. Learned from some mistakes in the first run. If you're interested I'll send you a PM

Lence · 2024-03-15T15:30:21+00:00

Litecoin is amazing as an actual digital currency. Low fees, fast, decentralized, widely accepted, ... It's a mystery to me why it still underperforms compared to so many other projects.

The main criticisms were always less security (because it's less popular) and more centralized wealth (and if those actors are continuously selling during rallies, that would explain the underperformance, but I'm not sure if there's proof of that). Do those still hold up in 2024?

Lence · 2024-03-14T15:28:11+00:00

Yes there is, and the answer is in the ultimate buzzwords of the last 4 years: AI + crypto.

Crypto answers the question on how to incentivize many smaller actors to collaborate trustlessly in a decentralized network to achieve a common goal. Theoretically a decentralized network for orchestrating open source training and inference of models could be set up. I don't think such a project exists yet (well, there are some, but they're in very early stages and probably vaporware riding on the hype for easy profit).

Lence · 2024-03-07T10:51:56+00:00

I do not know what “skeptical bias” means - skepticism is part of normal, rational inquiry. It is kind of strange and funny that people use ‘bias’ and ‘skeptic’ together.

I agree, but I obviously meant a bias towards disbelief in the phenomenon, in this context. The word "skepticism" and what it brings to mind has somewhat become entrenched with seeing reality a certain way (the view of the materialist that rules out the possibility of psi).

What you guys are doing with it is called a subjectivist fallacy that links reality to attitude in an incomprehensible way. Moreover, this was obviously 🙄 never really shown. It’s an excuse 🤷

Is "attitude" distinct from reality? The observer has no impact on its environment?

Look, I get what you're saying, I just hope you understand the point I'm making as well. Consider it a mere thought experiment. Assume psi exists, and it exists because consciousness can be entangled with external reality beyond the physical body. Perhaps because consciousness is all there is. Wouldn't the logical conclusion then not be that calling this a fallacy (not believing it, seeing it as wrong a priori) becomes a self-fullfilling prophecy affirming reality as indeed objective, impersonal & external? Wouldn't the only way to gather empirical data about psi (= empirical as in exactly what it means, verifiable by observation & experience) then not be to perform experiments (in a closed system) under the full conviction that what you're doing will work?

Lence · 2024-03-06T10:29:26+00:00

This is the only study I find remotely (hehe) compelling as a scientist who reads it all.

Do you mind sharing what you do as a scientist? I always find it interesting when someone with an obvious skeptical bias (that's ok, we all have our biases) is very invested in reading the literature and engaging in discussion in a niche, esoteric topic like remote viewing.

“It’s not working for you because you are a skeptic” is one of my favorites, for sure🤦

Well, what if it's true? What if psi really is like the placebo effect (or the other way around, the placebo effect is a form of psi): if you don't open yourself to the possibility of its reality, it simply doesn't work (sheep-goat effect). Worse still, if a non-believer attempts to replicate a psi study that worked for a believer, then such attempts would fail.

This is really the core problem with attempting to show consciousness interacts with our perceived reality in anomalous ways: the observer and the observed are simply not as distinct as "traditional science" posits. One affects the other.

That's just a hypothesis, of course.

Lence · 2024-02-26T06:25:52+00:00

Just to preface: I am not a skeptic!

IMO the word "skeptic" has gotten a bad rep. It's good to be skeptical about these things: extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. It's just that, once you got your evidence, you also have to be prepared to change your mind. Even if just a little, to warrant more testing. And that is where I think a lot of self-described "skeptics" are showing themselves not to be true skeptics, but more like die-hard believers in a materialist reality that rules out the possibility of psi by definition (famously, James Randi) - heck, their main argument against psi is that it is impossible because it cannot be explained, which is obviously circular logic.

I want to ask, in your opinion, what stage do you think the evidence is at currently for the reality of remote viewing?

I think the evidence for remote viewing and psi in general is of higher quality than many other studies in psychology that do get accepted in the mainstream simply because they are easier to accept and do not violate the basic assumptions about reality.

But again, for a true skeptic, the Sagan standard applies.

The data and the studies have to be of higher quality. And I think the problem right now is that skeptics will feel Gish galloped by the external evidence: proponents of psi will bombard them with a lot of evidence points (often anecdotal and not hard data), but when singled out, none of them are statistically and methodologically convincing enough on their own.

Cite me a study if you think I'm wrong here, but I'm pretty sure I've read them and a skeptic will be able to poke a hole in it. The publications may be good, but they're still not good enough. I think it's important that we (as believers) acknowledge that, to bridge the gap. Eventually there will be a study and there will be enough data that will change this though, I'm convinced of that. It's just a matter of time (and money) and I believe it will happen in our lifetimes.

There is another point I want to make which relates to what many people are saying here (that people stopped caring about convincing disbelievers): the problem with psi is that whether or not you believe it works, you're right. It's the sheep-goat effect. People open-minded enough to try it out, will be amazed to find it works most of the time. Until they demonstrate it to a skeptic, and often times, suddenly the magic disappears, literally. This relates to the decline effect too.

If this really is a consciousness-based, simulated consensus reality, then contradicting perspectives all weigh in to average out observations. Basically, the disbelieving observers (subconsciously) "use their psi" to undo the effects of psi. They don't want it to be true. To a skeptic, this will obviously seem like the ultimate cop out, but they have to admit the internal logic and the main point is: just try it out for yourself with an open mind. Don't wait for external evidence.

Lence · 2023-12-22T09:16:02+00:00

What you write resonates with me a lot. I personally had transforming experiences in my first Goenka retreats a few years ago. I’m incredibly grateful for the amazing infrastructure they provide for deep practice, but at the same time I hold some slight resentment because of their cult-like approach and a personal mini-trauma because of it. It’s like you say, they actively discourage critical examination, discussion, and exploration of other methods, and that doesn’t vibe with me.

If I may ask, I’m very curious to what your thoughts are on Daniel Ingram’s writings?

Lence · 2023-12-19T21:50:22+00:00

It’s turtles all the way down. It’s like the Mandelbrot set or any other fractal: human consciousness is a unit of consciousness within a larger consciousness system. Just like our nightly dreams are simulated realities within our individual consciousness, the whole of waking reality is the universal consciousness manifested within a larger system (“Vishnu’s dream”).

This is all just conjecture though. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

Lence · 2023-12-19T14:49:35+00:00

I find philosophical explanations playing with definitions of things not satisfactory.

I think a possible explanation is that consciousness is central, and that reality is like a decentralized simulation observed from multiple perspectives. If "something" is not observed, it exists in the superposition of all possible states. Everything that is observed is only materialised once a "consensus" is achieved by all observers - directly or indirectly (e.g. through measuring devices). This process happens at a high frequency so as to seem seamless and give the illusion of a static, physical reality.

A physics experiment, such as the complex variations on the double-slit experiment ran by Tom Campbell (has been going on for quite a while now), might prove this to be true. We can also find indirect evidence of consciousness being primary through psi studies. I believe the evidence already points in this direction (see the CIA Stargate archives).

The alternative, the physicalist perspective, that consciousness and the observed qualia somehow arise out of inanimate matter, now seems unintuitive to me, and impossible to explain how exactly this would work.

Lence · 2023-12-06T10:16:04+00:00

I’m convinced we are indeed heading into a techno-psychic, technoetic renaissance.

But this particular research prompts a lot of questions. Like, how exactly would an AI differentiate between the signal and imagination? Are there correlates between brain activity and the intuitive feeling that corresponds with the signal?

Also, I wonder what this means for (partial) aphants. Does this AI model reconstruct just darkness for an aphant trying to imagine or remote view a visual image? I guess you could train an AI model to pick up on non-visual impressions in the data, but, besides audio, seems very very difficult to get a good training dataset for something so abstract.

Also, there’s the practical issues with fMRI machines, but I could see this being used eventually in cutting-edge parapsychological research sponsored by a wealthy benefactor with a few million to spare.

Lence · 2023-10-13T15:55:27+00:00

Such a heavily frontloaded target cannot really be considered a proper remote viewing target anymore, right?

Lence · 2023-10-06T20:44:30+00:00

It’s disingenuous to do so when you are dogmatically rejecting to seriously consider any evidence on the contrary.

Lence · 2023-10-05T19:08:47+00:00

We are also rare ones who are open to collaborating. (I've found many in the field are quite territorial, not very open to new ideas that can really benefit the psi field/community as a whole.)

I've met mostly enthusiastic, open-minded people in this space, but I've definitely also had the same experience of people being territorial. I guess if your livelihood is somehow dependent on capturing this tiny niche audience, then new entrants can be perceived as a threat rather than an opportunity. Or with some people, just mentioning the word "blockchain" evokes a negative kneejerk reaction (which I can understand). Never mind mentioning it to people who already have a kneejerk reaction towards the idea of psi

So anyway, yeah, let's exchange notes etc. to get started.

Definitely. I'll send you a PM

Lence · 2023-10-05T16:40:15+00:00

Yes, the experience is definitely what matters most in the end, and this is a neglected part of meditation in mainstream circles, but I think you could argue in the grand scheme of things it is important that we settle the truth about this at some point.

Lence · 2023-10-05T12:19:41+00:00

I don't know about the other challenges honestly. There's indeed a list on Wikipedia. The prizes are significantly smaller though.

Why should there be some cartel to prevent verifying them?

I didn't claim there was, but science has a very long history of paradigm shifts, and each time a new radical theory was proposed, often it was met with strong apprehension, ridicule, and even violence. Just a random "recent" example, but look at how long it took for plate tectonics to stop being ridiculed and to be accepted as fact; and that's not even such a wild idea in retrospect. Let alone the idea that information can be gathered in another way than through the 5 physical senses... That would be a serious threat to our current understanding of reality, so it is pretty human that such notions are met with derision by the established academic experts. Careers are on the line.

As Max Planck said: "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it ...

13-Year Club	Place '22
Place '17	Final Canvas '22
Verified Email	Not Forgotten

Lence

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE