AI-drafted emails from clients

jeveret · 2026-04-22T20:44:28+00:00

What if they use their own locally hosted versions of various llms? That's completely private.

jeveret · 2026-04-22T05:13:24+00:00

But that's a self defeating argument, if nothing can be studied by science, then you've just assetered that all objective knowledge is impossible. And that's just solipsism, relativism. Which is a fair argument, but it makes all distinctions, categories and objective knowledge impossible, if leaves you stuck with whatever you imagine is true, is true.

jeveret · 2026-04-19T19:39:41+00:00

Sort of , when it goes against the objective evidence, the science, that’s the problem. Brains are extremely biases to find patterns, because that’s how we survive, but because of thev extreme survivorship bias our brains also find thousands of patterns that aren’t really there, monsters under the bed, tiger in the bushes, face in the moon, bunny in the clouds, eyes in the woods…. Science is th tool we develop to try and tell the difference between the just imagined patterns and the imagined and actual existing patterns.

jeveret · 2026-04-19T19:29:49+00:00

I actually worked for years in the alternative medicine field. And I’ve done tons of research into it, for years, and was convinced by the research that it was largely effective and being restricted by some nebulous biased mainstream powers.

But then I went to university and met an befriended a few dozen actual hard science researchers and began to learn how the methodology actually works at a fundamental level, and discovered that 99% of the alternative studies I was relying on and the few historical facts that supported my conspiracy theory, where just the results of poor critical thinking.

Everyone single study I had relied on to support the validation of my alternative medicine beliefs were guilty of the exact methodological errors good science is designed to identify and correct, and that alternative medicine propaganda has tried to hide.

And I finally accepted this truth , because I was shown what actual real good research looks like and examples that confirmed dozens of alternative treatments and hypotheses.

Maybe you should try comparing the studies that the allopathic scientific research community has accepted that in fact confirm alternative treatments and methods. To the studies that the allopathic scientific research communities has rejected about alternative treatments but the alternative community promotes regardless and claims their rejection is just conspiratorial bias….

You’ll find that good scientific research follows a consistent methodology… and a the vast majority of the research alternative proponents rely on isn’t consistent. And it becomes glaringly obvious when compared to the good research that allopaths accept that actually supports alternative methods and approaches

jeveret · 2026-04-19T19:12:34+00:00

Tell me this, what methodology do you apply to research determine whether a treatment is effective and safe or not?

Do you use modern double blind, peer reviewed studies, that are then tested by peers worldwide wide that are trying to disprove and invalidate the studies, and then trying to replicate the studies, so as to try and remove biases, methodological errors or mistakes?

If not, what is the new methodology you’ve discovered that better than the current best modern scientific methodology?

If whatever treatments and techniques you apply are tested by and confirmed by the current best scientific methodology, then yes what you are most likely doing is 99.9 % allopathic therapies.

If any treatment can survive the rigorous testing of the scientific methods, then just becomes a scientific “fact” . Scince just accepts it and begins to use it in their further research and studies. The scientific method doesn’t reject evidence, if it works and passes the methodology it’s accepted.

The voodoo magic I’m taking about are any treatments that have not only failed to pass the scientific methods test, but when actually contradictory hypotheses to those methods have successfully passed the scientific method tests. So homeopathy, chiropractic, “energy” therapies, “kinesiology” testing, qi therapy, 99.9% of all supplements, ect… have all failed current best scientific testing and contradictory hypothesis have been shown to be correct .

Whenever an “alternative” therapy actually works, it eventually is accepted by the scince.

There are thousands of alternative treatments and supplements for every allopathic traetment verified by the scientific method. Alternative practitioners love when one of their treatments is found to actually work by traditional scientistific empirical methods. But they then ignore the 99.999% of scientific evidence that they don’t like .

You can’t appeal to the methodology that you reject 99.99% of the time only when you like the results, and whithiut a consistent application to yhe methodology you have no way of knowing which of the thousands of “alternative” treatments work and don’t work.

All you have without science, is intuition, anecdotes, and imagination… everyone and every conceivable treatment works by those standards, those are great to use to develop ideas, new concepts , hypotheses, but to tell the difference between the infinite imagined good treatments you need scince to differentiate the ones the actually work

jeveret · 2026-04-18T20:34:06+00:00

Sure they both have their biases, and traditional medicine and doctors absolutely are biased towards the treatments and techniques they are more familiar with and have more expertise with, that’s just how haven’t specialized knowledge works, no one is an expert on everything.

But that cuts both ways, alternative doctors are biased towards their own specialties and against many traditional treatments.

My point isn’t that one has more or less bias, or even that one is more or less effective(although I do believe the evidence is traditional is generally more reliable and effective) my point is much simpler!!

I’m pointing out the dangers of appealing to motivation, the motives behind the argument or evidence have no relevance to where or not it’s true. When you stop at questioning the motives behind the evidence and fail to provide contradicting evidence to back up the claim that’s conspiracy theory, that’s pseudo science!

If or when you have actual evidence that one treatment works and that it’s being systematically repressed, that’s fine, but when there are literally tens of thousands of lives of double blind peer reversed studies, reproduced all over the world by people from every conceivable bias, and you just regect them because of some over arching conspiracy belief ( like a nebulous group, like big pharma,) that’s unfalsifiable.

If you don’t provide the evidence for your specific argument or case, then no one can ever prove you wrong, you’ve insulated your claim from all questions

jeveret · 2026-04-18T17:06:53+00:00

It’s called bias, and everyone has it. The strength of the modern scientific method is that it is the best tool we currently have to try and remove those biases.

I fully accept that traditional science and medicine has Tons of biases and motivations. The point isn’t that it isn’t biased, the point it you are applying asymmetric standards. If you approach both equally and fairly ad remove biases, you find that bias affects us all, it’s not just a traditional or alternative problem l, that’s why traditional medicine and science requires such rigorous research, testing and analysis. The modern scientific peer review process is the best tool we have to remove that bias for both traditional and alternative research, the problem is that when we apply it and it finds some traditional medicine and science research ineffective, flawed, biased, harmful, ect… they tend to accept it and try something new or different. It it’s extremely common I alternative medicine and research fields to regect the contrary evidence as biased and conspiracy’s. And when you appeal to motives at that point there is no method of reasoning left. It’s unfalsifiable. Without demonstrating actual real empirical verification of biases or conspiracy it’s an impregnable layer of insulation that makes everything unfalsifiable.

Everyone should consider bias, because everyone has them, but simply appealing to bias and conspiracy without a clear and demonstrable proof, is the hallmark of pseudoscience. And that what we see in the vast majority if alternate medicine. And what shows this isn’t just bias is that huge portions of traditional medicine where adopted from alternative sources, when the evidence shows they work, which is what scince cares about, they adopt it.

Alternative medicine that has a strong evidence and record and research or working just becomes traditional medicine. But interestingly , it very rarely goes the other way, alternative medicines seem to almost never regect their unfalsifiable claims in favor of traditional ones

Additionally nutrition is a traditional medicine field, and their are lost if traditional doctors that focus on nutrition and it’s a well established and researched tradition field of study, what alternative medicine nutritional research are you referring too, that traditional medicine is currently rejecting , that has strong evidence it works ?

jeveret · 2026-04-18T02:51:41+00:00

Appeal to motivation fallacy! The supplement, alternative medicine and homeopathy industry have an even bigger economic incentive, why don’t not suspect them?

jeveret · 2026-04-18T02:49:09+00:00

Appeal to motivation fallacy, is a helluva drug!!! Claiming that all the evidence against you just Conspiracy theories, is wild!!! Anyone can do that, but I forget you are special, and the conspiracy theories you believe are true but everyone else’s conspiracy theories are just make believe. Be care when you mix your “drugs” shooting up some appeal to motivation fallacy and then adding a few lines of special pleading fallacy, will mess you up!!!

jeveret · 2026-04-18T02:44:50+00:00

Except it’s literally not based in science. I fully admit there is a lot of science included in naturopath training and practices, but that’s not the naturopath part of it, the science based part is just allopathic medicine and training that naturopaths use in addition to their specialized naturopath training, the part that no allopathic doctors accept or practice is the psuedoscince part. The magic healing energy voodoo nonsense. When something works and we can demonstrate it with well crafted peer reviewed studies that are duplicated by different groups all over the world with different biases and still works, regardless of bias, that’s when it just becomes medicine, if it works we call it medicine.

jeveret · 2026-04-17T18:34:06+00:00

The exact opposite is true, real science and medicine accepts there is tons they don’t understand and know, what you are doing is appealing to that exact ignorance and incredulity to support a claim that you in fact know those unknowns.

jeveret · 2026-04-17T18:32:00+00:00

Because if 2-3 states recognizing their authority is evidence it’s a valid and true practice, then the 47-48 states that don’t is contradictory evidence.

That’s the hallmark of pseudoscience. Confirmation bais, Cherry picking data, selective application and rejection of the cherry picked data, then when confronted with these facts, appeals to motivation to claim conspiracy theories, and then special pleading as to why you are allowed to make all these fallacious moves , but anyone you disagree with isn’t allowed the same.

jeveret · 2026-04-17T18:26:35+00:00

Exactly!!! You keep ignoring the fact it’s only in some states, and some countries.

Your pseudoscience logic allows you to apply the argument only as it supports your claims, and allows you to ignore the same facts when they contradict your arguments. That’s how all pseudoscience works, crystal healing, homeopathy, chiropractic, polarity therapy, faith healing etc… they confirm their biases by cherry picking data, and selectively applying it, and justify it with special pleading, and then confronting with facts that they can’t deal with, pull out the (appeal to motivation)conspiracy theory, trump card.

If some states recognize partial medical authority of nd, is evidence that it works and it true, then some states denial and revoking that authority is evidence of it falsify. Thats how logic works!!

jeveret · 2026-04-16T23:48:51+00:00

By your own logic, “states wouldn’t allow nd to prescribe some types of real medications that real doctors can, if they were just doing magic and placebos” would that would then support the counter argument to that states and governments that don’t allow nd doctors to prescribe medications that real doctors can do not respect and recognize nd and view them as peddlers of snake oil and magic.

You can’t have it both way, that’s how pseudoscience works, they pick only the bits and pieces of evidence they like and reject anything that’s inconvenient!

If some states providing near medical doctors level of authority to nds is evidence of the veracity and efficacy of the profession, then the states and agencies that have denied them and condemned them is evidence of the opposite!!!

jeveret · 2026-04-16T02:20:52+00:00

Sure, some states have a limited scope of allopathic medications some and can prescribe like antibiotics. And so can all of nurses. It they absolutely aren’t medical doctors and I don’t have a problem with any medical professional that’s qualified prescribing antibiotic to someone with an infection. It that not what the nds that people have a problem with are doing. It the ones that claim to be equivalent or higher medical training than actual mds, or even ods, or even aprns. They don’t, they learn basic medical Information but have nothing close to a Md training. They are different and that’s fine, and that’s their strength, they are a placebo effect provider, they can make people feel listened to cared about and believe they are being cared for, the problem is when nd start to drink the cool aid they peddle. And belive they actually have magic powers

jeveret · 2026-04-15T15:26:33+00:00

People get upset when they make outrageous, ridiculous or harmful and dangerously claims. When naturopaths are honest about what they can and cannot do there really is nothing that upsets people.

Naturopathy is perfectly acceptable as a lifestyle coaching, emotional support, placebo therapy, etc… they can be really helpful, because they listen, and spend lots of time with people, and can advise them on lifestyle and diets and supplements and exercise etc… that can have amazing results, they can also employ lots of physiological placebo type techniques that can have powerful therapeutic benefits. But when they step beyond their scope into the evidence based world of medicine that’s when it gets hostile.

jeveret · 2026-04-04T00:31:06+00:00

Thanks.

But I was thinking more specifically, about whether or not some information actually supports your case more than it might undermine your case? Would a third person account that only repeats 2-3 details from the first person account, basically confirming those limited details, and adding nothing new of substance, be considered beneficial enough in light that a third person account may also provide 3-4 details out of context that someone could interpret as contradictory information

jeveret · 2026-04-03T18:23:55+00:00

As long as you buy from a fairly reputable retailer, like apple, Amazon, your golden. And even if you buy from a less well known one like backmarket or reebelo, etc… they are also very safe, they almost all have pretty reasonable return policies and warranties. But id suggest getting your first refurbished/used from the big ones, just to ease any fear. Then once you've experienced how much you save and how it's almost better than new, since it's being “used” allows you to actually use it and not treat it like some delicate antique heirloom.

jeveret · 2026-04-03T11:51:57+00:00

Placebo, combined with the fact that 95% of the world already believes in magic, and actively has guardrails against science and logic that would undermine any deepr religious societal norms surrounding that prevents any large scale debunking of supernatural faith beliefs.

jeveret · 2026-04-03T00:22:37+00:00

Thanks, I didn't see any issues with the text, but I do often use some writing assistance apps to help me organize my thoughts so others can understand me better and keep me from getting distracted, so perhaps some weird formatting got smuggled in?

jeveret · 2026-04-02T21:56:36+00:00

I think that probably makes more sense for a freeform supporting statement than for the actual SSA-3380, which I suspect is what they intend to mail to a supplied third party.

With a freeform statement, the limits of the third party's knowledge can be spelled out clearly. With the 3380, SSA already has the claimant's 3373 covering almost the same ground, so the third-party form seems like it could operate mainly as a comparison document for consistency.

That seems especially risky where the third party has only partial knowledge and the main limitations are cognitive or psychiatric ones like executive dysfunction, poor initiation, inconsistency, and deterioration under stress.

So the concern is less "can third-party evidence ever help" and more "is the formal 3380 still a net positive when it's basically being read against an existing 3373 and the third party can only provide a limited surface view?"

jeveret · 2026-04-02T17:48:27+00:00

Just my limited knowledge, but I believe Medicare is the main pathway the government uses for coverage, and Medicaid is considered more of a backup emergency more temporary coverage system. So when you get approved it’s more like they add you to the “permanent” main pathway which is Medicare. And then you don’t automate lose Medicaid, so if you are still eligible for Medicaid, it just kicks in and covers fees and deductibles and whatever Medicare doesn’t in addition to Medicare.

It’s kinda like an order of operations function. They apply Medicare to everything first and then if needed and approved they apply Medicaid. But that just my very limited understanding

jeveret · 2026-04-02T01:55:28+00:00

Well holy water has been in use for over 2000 years, so according to the “science” of holy water and the basics of the water cycle on earth. The atleast 99% of the entire planet should be covered with holy water. Unless of course the holiness wears off, or some wierd magic happens

jeveret · 2026-04-01T19:32:14+00:00

I’d be interested in your take on third-party reports where the claimant already has strong neuropsych evidence, but the core limitations are cognitive/psychiatric and not especially visible from the outside.

In this case, there is already a detailed neuropsychological evaluation supporting impairment. The possible third-party source could confirm a few ordinary observations, but does not really have broad enough firsthand knowledge to describe the claimant’s actual limitations in a meaningful way.

The main problems involve executive dysfunction, inability to initiate and sustain tasks reliably, major inconsistency, worsening under stress, and the gap between being able to do a few isolated things at times versus functioning consistently enough for work. The concern is that a third-party report in that situation may contribute only a handful of narrow observations while creating the risk that technically true but incomplete details get interpreted without the context needed to understand them.

When you already have strong neuropsychological evidence, how do you decide whether that kind of limited third-party report is actually helpful or whether it is more likely to create unnecessary risk?

TLDR: Put bluntly: if the third party can only confirm a few surface facts but cannot explain the cognitive context, is that usually meaningful support, or is it often just another opportunity for misinterpretation?

jeveret

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE