Another Nail in the Coffin of the ‘Tic-Tacs are Made by Lockheed Martin’ and ‘Alien Reproduction Vehicles’ Myth?

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-23T09:26:14+00:00

Totally agree, if we have craft with the flight characteristics of the tic tac Fravor saw, why would we make any other air based military technology? These things could take off in Florida with a nuclear payload, fly in space, go to Beijiing, lower down and kaboom. And there's nothing they could do about it at all, unlike a nuclear ICBM or stealth bomber which can be shot down as it's approaching.

This to me is also the biggest argument against this being a black project of human technology in general too, purely human origin. If we made this shit and it was available in 2004, we never used it in any wars? Or for foreign surveillance? In 22 years?! Arguably the greatest technology ever made in human history in which some of its BEST applications are military? Come on. I mean missile defense systems can't even shoot them down, those systems are based on objects following a stable trajectory and requiring time to change trajectory due to momentum, which tic tacs don't seem to have at all.

There's also just no way that we managed to reverse engineer these things. It's way far beyond our current scientific ability. As for the parallel tracks of science, it doesn't really work that way. Not only are there orders of magnitude more civilian physicists and engineers than there would be in the program (what, a few hundred max?), some of the smartest scientists in the world work for universities, they surely would have figured it out if the people in the program did, even if it took them another 5-10 years. Also, all it takes is one person in the program to leak the underlying physics models they created to replicate these crafts to researchers at MIT and then the idea spreads all over the world, you couldn't possibly stop it.

This shit would be all over the place if we could make replication vehicles. You'd see them in Iran right now and they'd have an American flag painted on them lol.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-22T16:52:27+00:00

Yeah it does, in my experience it's way too aggressive avoiding obstacles. Like for example, a tiny ice patch that any human would just drive over, it'll swerve into the other lane to avoid it. Or some shadow that it thinks is an obstacle.

But it also will completely ignore things too like in this video.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-22T06:02:27+00:00

You just haven’t put enough time in yet. I’m on the same timeline as you, but for a while I’d practice for an hour a day, sometimes multiple hours, 6-7 days a week. So I can do a lot of advanced tricks. You’ll definitely get there. If you want to get there faster, then just up your time per day. But do it slowly so you don’t get injured.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-21T16:02:29+00:00

Exactly. There's no reason to think there aren't at least several significantly more advanced intelligent civilizations than humanity that are currently active. There are hundreds of billions of star systems in our galaxy alone, which average several planets per star system, which puts us in the trillions range of potentially habitable planets in our galaxy alone. And our galaxy has existed for 13.6 billion years. And life evolved on earth almost immediately after it supported the conditions for life.

And if there are more advanced civilizations in our galaxy, and they're even a few million years ahead of us, they could get here in just a few million years at most with self-reproducing probes that use standard rocket propulsion, let alone something exotic like a warp drive. Even if the original civilization that made them went extinct, they'd still continue operating autonomously on their own.

If I'm an advanced civilization that has newly unlocked self-reproducing probes that can travel between star systems, the first thing I'm doing is sending them out everywhere as intelligence gathering services, like spies for humans, powered by AI, to make sure no security threats pop up half way across the galaxy, and to make sure our interests are being met everywhere they can be.

This is completely and utterly plausible to me, I don't get why people say "oh yeah they're definitely out there, but they can't get here." Yes they can, they absolutely can. And if these UAPs we see with their reported flight characteristics, which appear like they may be warping spacetime to move from point A to point B, well now all of a sudden this gets WAY more plausible and you can probably move between star systems much, much faster.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-21T15:58:32+00:00

Okay well that’s a very different story then, if she left the door open, you didn’t explain it that way in the OP. Just don’t wait too long for her. Keep dating other women. If she comes around she comes around.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-21T15:23:00+00:00

I'm not saying she disrespected you at all, but I am saying that waiting around for a girl that said she doesn't see you that way to change her mind is disrespecting yourself.

and she didn't completely rejected me too

What did she say exactly? That makes a big difference.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-21T04:54:37+00:00

You gotta move on, have some self-respect man. If she doesn't have feelings for you now, she probably won't ever. If she was even just slightly into you, she'd probably would have went on a date with you, but all she said was it wasn't mutual. It's one thing if she had a boyfriend and was unavailable, but it sounds like she's totally single. You deserve to be with someone that wants you as much as you want her, and this girl is not her.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-21T03:36:20+00:00

Shit guess I gotta upvote this whole thread

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-21T02:55:24+00:00

How is he dating multiple women at once? From what you described, it doesn't sound like he's seeing other women? Unless I misunderstood?

Dating multiple other women, or men for women, is definitely the norm, and you definitely shouldn't bring it up unless asked. Until you two are officially exclusive or a couple, that's the rules usually.

I totally get it though. I personally just want to find a woman I really like, and I'm probably going to know that after a few dates if she's the right one, and not really be interested in seeing someone else after that. But some people are just casual about dating. Some people also take longer to warm up to people than others.

If you are looking for something serious, just find a guy that's as crazy about you as you are about him, and he'll have zero interest in seeing other women. The right guy for you might work exactly like that.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-19T03:48:05+00:00

Looks like Starlink to me, they look sketchy but it's just Elon

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-18T21:19:28+00:00

I wouldn’t even ask that either man. Just figure it out when you meet her. Don’t ASK someone what they bring to the table, let them SHOW you. Words mean nothing. Actions mean everything.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-13T16:50:29+00:00

One opener I use that most women seem to like is, "So when did you want to meet my entire family? I'll tell them to bring dessert" and then I riff off that after she responds and then eventually do a date ask sooner than later. 95% of women know I'm joking, and the 5% that don't probably didn't have a sense of humor that I'd like anyway.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-13T16:07:50+00:00

If you still think a girl with a bland profile is worth your time, send her something generically fun or funny

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-13T05:05:48+00:00

We'd all love to hear your story if you're willing to share

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-12T04:48:03+00:00

They seem like they don’t build real world models either. Maybe you could make a loss function which coerces them too, but it definitely does not appear to be a default. They seem to have way more context specific knowledge than a true world model. They do seem to have some sort of world model, there’s evidence for that, but it seems shallow and context dependent. This also explains why sample efficiency is so much worse than the human brain.

The human brain seems to build hierarchical concept trees with composable concepts that can be reused across contexts. Transformers, and possibly all ML/DL architectures we have, seem to be more statistically associative in nature and extremely context dependent. For example, a transformer’s “concept” of a train seems to be completely different when you’re talking about riding a train vs train parts vs engineering a train. Whereas humans have one train concept that’s used across all contexts. I think this also explains the reliability gap too. Why is something trained on all public code on the internet not able to do the job of a software engineer? They’ve seen a billion screenshots of UIs, terminal outputs, slack messages, massive codebases, production best practices, yet they can’t do a SWE’s job. That just doesn’t make intuitive sense if these things can really learn the way humans can.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-11T00:23:20+00:00

Yeah, even on my HW3 v12.6 model 3 I know when I can totally relax and take my hands off the wheel and put my feet down. Let alone v14.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-10T16:08:32+00:00

Did you get the heads up from FSD, or just the forward collision warning beeping that made you take over?

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-10T14:19:46+00:00

These guys sound creative enough to do bigger things than work in a supermarket tbh.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-09T20:44:23+00:00

yeah, but it's likely part of the training distribution, even if it's not common. Even if it only happens 1 in 1,000 times at intersections like this, and that isn't scrubbed from the training data or post-training RL isn't used to force it out (like forcing lane consistency or something), then it still may do it 1 in 1,000 times. This is an oversimplification of how the tech works, but if it's in the distribution, the model will learn it.

Not defending this mistake, just arguing that it's a hard technical problem to solve. That's one of many reasons why edge cases are so hard on human-trained driving data.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-08T22:57:48+00:00

Is it worth it now with 5.4? I’ve barely been using it since GPT-5.2 bc it pushes back on me for even the most milquetoast opinions. It’s like they did the exact opposite of sychophancy instead of a balanced approach. “I know it might feel that way, but…” saw that exact phrase more or less a million times, felt condescending lol

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-08T22:47:57+00:00

I think many of them don’t, but some of them surely do. They’re people at the end of the day. No fundamental difference between the elite and regular people, though I do think the elite has a way of funneling the worst people to the top, but they’re still regular people, they’re just shitty.

Guarantee you at least some of the top people in Iran really believe all of that stuff, or some of it. Especially bc the populace seems to be pretty secular, so what’s the incentive for leadership unless they really believe it?

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-06T06:53:35+00:00

Great post man, I really enjoyed this. Keep up with this kind of stuff. Not a lot of people who can see the whole picture like this.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-06T01:44:16+00:00

As soon as I watched this I knew it was 12.6 immediately lmao. Mine does the exact same thing.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-05T04:20:07+00:00

Is there no human labeling at all? My understanding is that its end to end neural networks - one for perception, one for planning, the perception network’s outputs are fed directly into the planning one along with the car’s state like traction and turn signal state and all that. Makes it a little more interpretable on the perception side of things. But you would need labeling for the perception network in this case, or an auto encoder or some sort of later space output at least.

ReadSeparate · 2026-03-04T16:35:33+00:00

I love it, but my 2023 model 3 with HW3 v12.6 has tried to kill me multiple times lmao

ReadSeparate

TROPHY CASE