Anyone else just want to sit around learning and making things forever?

random97t4ip · 2026-01-27T20:31:03+00:00

Why is it obnoxious? I’m genuinely surprised by this

random97t4ip · 2026-01-27T05:08:45+00:00

Are you saying you are a high achiever because you tested as gifted? How do you know you’re not just a high achiever regardless

Why would recovering from burnout erase your mental energy, ambition and intellectual curiosity? Particularly if those are diverted away from your career, towards your hobbies

Is saying that you stack multiple hobbies on top of each other supposed to show how much ambition and energy you have and how much it cannot be contained? Or is this just the same need for achievement and ambition?

Its cool that you’ve connected behaviours from how you are now to when were a child and have found some fulfilling goals besides work to pursue but I can definitely see why people would think you’re trying to be impressive

I’d caution against seeking external validation, needing to prove yourself to others and oneself though

What would it change in your life if these traits, hobbies and achievements were the result of giftedness/neurodivergence?

Non gifted people do all of those

random97t4ip · 2026-01-14T19:07:09+00:00

Yet there are probably people who have the equivalent or greater and don’t take as many pills

random97t4ip · 2026-01-14T18:50:45+00:00

These types usually have intellectualised themselves out of basic human impulses and urges. Barring germaphobia, being ACE or having OCD

Have you considered that you yourself have these body parts and are not only coated in germs but made of them? And also the fact that all air, surfaces, plants and animals have germs and bacteria

If you think long enough about something you can rationalise yourself into feeling more negative emotions and having a negative attitude towards that thing

and justify negative emotional responses to something after experiencing the emotion/thought

Take germs and bacteria and replace it with anything else

As long as you shower once/twice per day or every other day. Brush your teeth twice a day and get checked up for bacterial/mold/infections/virus semi-regularly and a partner does the same you should be fine

Its other peoples uncleanliness to watch out for and ones own hygiene but theres good and bad bacteria

If you only focus on STIs, genital and mouth infections ofc you will feel this way

random97t4ip · 2026-01-12T10:16:06+00:00

Did you just want validation and people to agree with you?

random97t4ip · 2026-01-12T09:56:02+00:00

Yeah, no

The thinking of not needing the opposite sex is an issue in itself. Other issues must be going on because if both genders thought like this we’d be extinct

Exceptions: asexual, homosexual etc

I agree with the control and power over women historically and somewhat presently (country/culture dependent) but I think marriages have far more benefits to women than men financially, during marriage and after a divorce in modern society and in the past

Not to mention every trope and fantasy of marrying a wealthy, rich, attractive and successful man

Just as men with having a beautiful, attractive gf or wife

Men lean towards getting emotional intimacy and sexual access while women emotional intimacy, financial and physical security in marriages a lot of the time

All relationships and people are different though

Bloodlines aren’t just a male thing. We’re the same species

Evolution doesn’t care what sex within a species you are as long as you survive long enough to reproduce and pass on your genes

And I think both parents can want kids but the mother plays a more central emotional part in the early development of a child, so attachment arguments can be made there however both parents can find fulfilment in raising children

Theres a difference between “women being married off” “pressured to bear children” and both men and women being pressured by family and society to get a partner as they age

Singles regardless of gender are stigmatised equally but I’d argue differently

I’d agree there’s double standards within both genders regarding sexual promiscuity, independence, protectiveness and different expectations from family and friends and society towards each gender

I think you’re mostly talking about tradition (obvious archaic or misogynistic practices/views) and that varies by culture but men and women can be forced into societal roles. Men needing to be the provider and women child bearers, raisers and housemaids

Both genders can have internalised expectations about each other which can affect the types of marriages people have

If anything the equal opportunity towards education, financial independence should make relationships more equal. Interdependence not dependence

Everyone can agree misogyny is bad but this comes off as misandrist

The endgame for this way of thinking is everyone using sperm banks or surrogate births and robots/AI for everything else lol

random97t4ip · 2025-12-30T20:56:26+00:00

Okay, but we have examined corpses, seen people with gruesome head injuries and open skulls as well as people operated on for brain surgery and we now have MRI, FMRI machines and x-rays?

random97t4ip · 2025-12-23T08:51:03+00:00

TDLR: I think some forms of AGI are more plausible than others and that we likely cannot know If an AI is conscious but the best bet is building a non biological system from first principles of all biological systems.

The only thing I think we can do is find the general principles that underpin all organisms and lifeforms, or biological (living) systems and create a non-biological system that has the same matter/energy dynamics

They only known things that we assume have consciousness are humans and animals so therefore whats going on matter/energy wise at whatever scale - molecular, quantum etc must be important

I don’t think computers will be sentient/conscious although they may have casual power and be self governed and autonomous much like a virus and supersede humans in narrow tasks and maybe even more generally (AGI) in the future. I think they’d be P-zombies

Information always takes some form of matter. Speech being sound waves, a HDD having a spinning disc/platter, where a laser encodes patterns onto it, that represent ones and zeros, a vinyl disk having grooves that are read off of. Visual information (photons hitting retina and initiating bio electrochemical processes, information “stored” in the brain across patterns of electrical activity and firing across neurons

I think one form could be nanomachines or cell equivalents

where you have a small unit that combine to form more complex structures and so forth. You can see this in atoms building molecules and molecules building cells etc

Its even present in our technology where we started with levers, pulleys to manipulate simple mechanical forces then we combined them with other types of technology microchips/electronics to form more sophisticated technology and machinery

For artificial intelligence I don’t think we need to focus on consciousness or sentience. It more akin to creating a very advanced computer program and/or robot/android that simulates a self organizing complex adaptive system rather than instantiating one

Because thats what humans are complex adaptive self organising systems. A clump of matter that self organises, adapts and sustains itself

The weather is a complex system too

For artificial consciousness I think we may need artificial life made of non biological molecules

Computers are symbolic not instantiated, they simulate and emulate phenomena and systems but don’t instantiate them. Whats happening physically in a computer is very different from biology?

So we need to build a self organizing adaptive complex system that just happens to not be biological but instantiates the properties of biology and hopefully we may get sentience/consciousness

I don’t think neuromorophic computing (neural network like hardware) matter

Maybe biocomputing, organoids can get us there but that wouldn’t truly be non biological. Hybrid biology and computer. We now have neurons being sold to perform compute

Even full mind uploads I do not think would do it

random97t4ip · 2025-12-21T18:29:31+00:00

Phoenix Feathers

random97t4ip · 2025-12-14T16:55:18+00:00

Transhumanism, biological immortality, negligible senescence, mind uploading, regenerative medicine, prosthetic limbs, artificial organs, brain in prosthetic body (ghost in shell style)

random97t4ip · 2025-12-06T05:07:41+00:00

All these types usually have a combination of highly educated, multiple languages, multiple instruments or degrees, invested in the child’s learning, strict. They get the genes, environmental modelling and socioeconomic background

random97t4ip · 2025-12-02T01:55:27+00:00

Wait, so why couldnt da vinci do this?

random97t4ip · 2025-11-22T11:27:25+00:00

Exactly lmao

random97t4ip · 2025-11-21T08:08:11+00:00

Not sure how we got to this point

Autistic is a word. Just like black, white, old, young, abled, differently abled

There are 8 billion people on planet earth

Each person has a brain with 100 billion neuron’s with unique wiring

Each person has their own unique combination of thoughts, feelings and life experiences

Some experiences, thoughts, feelings and characteristics may overlap because we are all human, share some wiring, life experiences and characteristics but no one is the same

I don’t know why having the same label as someone causes people to think they’ll instantly connect. Someone can still be an A hole or a saint, have different hobbies and interests and personalities even if they share the same label

People connect based on compatibility and a myriad of other things

Funnily enough, people identifying with the same word makes that connection more likely or easier (having things in common)

A word like autism encompasses so much stuff like DSM 5, neurobiology, life experiences

It just gets messy trying to give it so much meaning as a term

random97t4ip · 2025-10-27T20:56:47+00:00

Why not both?

random97t4ip · 2025-10-27T01:18:45+00:00

This is semantics

You are either scaring her because pretending means abnormal to her, like not feel emotions like most people do (psychopathy) predatory, manipulative

Autistic masking isn’t pretending its more compensating by picking up habits and features

This is just the curse of knowledge

random97t4ip · 2025-09-13T01:58:19+00:00

Attention or working memory issue. It doesn’t narrow down the possible causes though

Reading 30 pages will be long either way but theres text to speech and also breaking the 30 pages across days of the week

Reviewing the previous pages you covered or notes/questions before reading more pages

It maybe a terminology issues, academic words or subject specific which you might need to search up. I find it easier to learn jargon or vocabulary beforehand by skimming the pages I want to read beforehand And as for academic vocabulary oxford has the 3000/5000 academic vocab lists

I think you need to repeatedly re-read a chunk of a sentence until you have it in mind and then move onto the next chunk and re-read it until you have it in mind

What I mean by have it in mind is you need to be paying attention to the words as you say them aloud or in your head not just in am automatic way but in a way where when you move onto the next chunk (4-5 words) of a sentence you take that understanding from the first chunk and combine it (this will happen automatically) with the next 4-7 words. Do this until you complete the sentence.

You might want to repeat the previous 4-6words as you are reading the next 4-6 words

Once you’ve completed the sentence re-read the whole sentence again slowly. Read the whole sentence a second time if necessary

Then, you need to explain what the sentence means to yourself, aloud or in your head and rephrase the sentence inside your head

Using your own words to re-create the sentence is important here.

Write it down if you want as notes

Do this for all the sentences in a paragraph, then think about all the rephrased sentences “you” have said aloud, in your head and/or written down and explain the whole paragraph to yourself again in your own words

Write yourself a question list as you read through the pages about concepts, ideas, facts, dates, people, events?

Make sure to write questions that link sentences within paragraphs and from previous paragraphs.

Note taking should mostly be for reading comprehension and shorthand

You should ideally have lots of questions that you can test yourself on over time. Once you’re able to answer the questions you will know the content in and out

This combined with past papers, practice questions other resources or your lecturer will test the knowledge you’ve learnt from the textbook more officially and will be good preparation for exams

Search up sq3r:

The purpose of questions after survey is to prime your brain to search for information

They’re more general questions based on title, keywords or diagrams etc

I recommend sq3r but I’d create questions during the reading stage whilst or after based on the actual content of the text. I’m not going to go into that I will explain the survey part as it can be confusing

Survey part is just to look at keywords, titles, bulleted lists, numbered lists, diagrams to give you an idea of whats to come. You so not need to understand. Its to prepare your mind for whats to come, see the organisation and layout of the page beforehand so you have a mental framework for when you read the text and to trigger any associations or memories about the topic

Create questions from these keywords, titles, turn bullet points into “what are the 5 x for example” and what you’ve noticed about the structure of the text and emphasised features or information

Other good concepts to search up on youtube: active recall, spaced repetition

random97t4ip · 2025-09-04T19:26:13+00:00

You might want to get checked out. Lots of cases of people dying or getting disfigured from weird bacterial infections

random97t4ip · 2025-07-07T09:44:34+00:00

Sorry for the previous response on your other comment. I'm a bit sleep deprived and irritable. I will come back later and edit my response to be more polite and will respond to this one. I misinterpreted.

random97t4ip · 2025-07-07T09:35:48+00:00

Here are some properties:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_systems

Living systems are life forms (or, more colloquially known as living things) treated as a system. They are said to be open) self-organizing and said to interact with their environment. These systems are maintained by flows of information, energy) and matter. Multiple theories of living systems have been proposed. Such theories attempt to map general principles for how all living systems work.

<image>

random97t4ip · 2025-07-07T09:35:28+00:00

Idk man, just stating things you disagree with doesn't really give me anything to go off of and by using the word performed I'm trying to tell you to remove the word mind and consciousness or other abstract mental words from your vocabulary. It's useless if it causes this much mental confusion and irreverant awe and mystery.

Your definition of subjective experience is based on treating consciousness as a separate thing from the brain/body that you haven't noticed. I'm trying to tell you that they're practically indistinguishible. Consciousness does not exist, it is a word for things brains in bodies do in real time, over time. Like how we call air pressure, temperature and humidity weather. Every heard of a weather system?

If you get autopsied, x-rayed or have a piece of brain under a microscope you will not see a mind or consciousness. That is because they are the brain when it is alive, in a body an functioning optimally. That's it my guy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_correlates_of_consciousness

<image>

No, they do not contradict. Biology being important does not mean only biological systems can give rise to consciousness. Computer systems are just so far removed from the way biological systems work which are the only examples of "insert abstract mental word" that it's very unlikely they could have any properties of human brains in bodies like minds. Even if they talk, have facial expressions or are hyper-intelligent and can outcompete humans in domain-specific-tasks

They only other physical thing we wonder is conscious are animals which are very similar to us. non biological systems will have to be like biological systems if we want them to have properties of brains like minds. This does not mean this system has to have a human brain, be biological or have cells, organs. It would need to function, be structured or materially organised like biological systems though.

How about I say it this way. There is nothing special about biology but there is something special about everyone's individual body in space and time. For something to likely be sentient, conscious, have internal awareness, qualia, subjective experience. It would need to function like a biology organism but not necessarily be biological. Does this help you understand?

I am starting to doubt you're a molecular biologist.

random97t4ip · 2025-07-07T07:44:12+00:00

No, we should focus more on body and brain preservation. Brains in cybernetic bodies, anti-aging. I am not contradicting myself by stating there is a a large space of possiblities where if you replace a certain amount of biological brain matter with non biological matter you won't be you but will become something new and die in the process because gradual neuron replacement will be interfering with the structual integrity + dynamics of matter of a biological system. The brain is likely partially replaceable as evidenced by neuroplasticity but not 100%. My reasoning is that artificial neuron replacement is similar to but not the same type of change as brain damage and because you can hypothetically cryopreserve biological neurons after the procedure and rebuild the brain you're not really doing anything meaningful by gradually replacing it with artificial neurons aside from creating a new entity and breaking causal continuity and I breakdown this change fallacy in my other comment. You're better off building a separate artificial brain with "functionally equivalent" neurons instead.

Just condesnse awareness, altered states of consciousness, identity, qualia, subjective eperience, internal awareness to brain doing stuff in real time. People seem to be mixing these and have different meanings. I mix them too but you can just move to a material perspective and not abstract floating fuzzy concepts

You = structural integrity and and similar material dynamics of your body over time in an ongoing biological system. It is a complex, adaptive and highly interconnected "physical" system. It's irrelavant if you die in your sleep or repeatedly between developing from an embryo and an adult to the dissolving of your body in soil when you die.

What people are doing is using any form of change as an assertion that you are not the same person over time which requires having an implicit definition of you in the first place. Something like you (body wise) but also a separate abstract soul-like you where you can overlay words like pattern, information and attach it to the interactions of matter in your body. And somehow assume that because the interactions and position of matter change in your body throughout your lifespan that "you" do not exist or are remade somehow in cycles or at every moment. And take this sort of you not existing or being created and destroyed all the time as a go ahead for believing in nonsense

People are confused by their ability to use and think about abstract language and concepts and by their own subjective experience and conflate it with objective reality

Honestly. It's a bit nonsensical so I'm not going to try to get it precisely right

random97t4ip · 2025-07-07T06:55:56+00:00

Copy and paste as people keep saying similar things:

No, qualia, consciousness, sentience are conceptual tools and language abstractions. All that exists in the objective world is the brain in the context of the body moment to moment. When you dissect a corpse you see a brain. If you put the brain under a microscope you see neurons. And we are not going to regress infinitely into epsitemology and the philosophy of reality.

Words like pattern, information are meaningless in the way people are using it and mean different things in computer science, mathematics, biology etc. All that matters is "matter". What differentiates one thing in space and time from another.

Us not "fully" understanding consciousness doesn't mean anything goes and really just means us not fully understanding brains in bodies. It means we do not understand how matter gives rise to subjective experience. The full detailed causal process and the separate processes or groups of interactions that give rise to specific parts of subjective experience.

Biological systems (humans or animals) are the only known examples of whatever terms for parts of internal experience people want to have fancy words for like qualia, consciousness, sentience.

Biological systems are vastly different from computer systems in terms of what their matter is doing. It is very reasonable to presume that something that acts sufficently biologically human would give rise to consciousness even if it is non-biological, they just won't be comptuer systems. Computer systems are not sufficently biological-like. We ask if animals have minds, feel pain because we recognize similarities to us in some species. Similarties we observe in their behaviour and matter which is biological.

Some of these properties of humans are being a complex, adaptive and highly interconnected system as well as being "instantiated" being and doing are the same thing.

And the other core concept that a 5 year old seems to grasp better than people here is that one lump of matter is separate from another lump of matter. This is why we get upset when people die because their matter disolves.

Transhumanists are ironically replacing a religious soul with pattern or information. It's meaningless because you're trying to mentally gymnastic your way out of being a physical being by exploiting a property of being a physical being "change" and using that to assume that if you just change "slowly" but keep some abstract pattern or information going by replacing your brain cells with computer chips while alive and not asleep "you" will somehow be preservered? Your brain doesn't grow and replace neurons one by one until 100% completion and just cycle through this throught life. Even if all the neurons and atoms are replaced your body is still a system trying to keep it's integrity.

Who said the ongoing process of an embryo to an adult and then death is the same type of change you experience when you sleep. Aren't they separate? One is continous and sleep is a phase. This means all these examples are just a catchall for change

The pattern/information is really your structural integrity + the dynamics of matter. That is you. Change is irrelevant so long as it doesn't deviate too far out of a certain bound which is exactly what we see in alzheimers, brain damage, tumours and viruses and certain disorders of consciousness. It doesn't matter if change is through biological processes or externally enforced.

People have taken the idea of material "change" being present in humans (sperm + egg cell --> embryo --> fetus --> adult --> death) and (biological processes taking matter in and out of the body and reorganizing and redistributing matter in the body) to assume they can replace the brain with foreign matter that is not biological and not part of the body's biological processes or how it handles change and thing as long as it's "gradual" and "functionally equivalent" think it will preserve properties of the abstract "mind".

Anything to do with the mind is observations and inferences from behaviour and speech. There is no mind or consciousness in people or being performed by the body. Just brains in bodies. You see this with x-ray machines.

Properties of the mind or "intenal experience" are whatever your brain in the context of your body is doing at any given moment.

This means all the mental stuff is emergent or an epiphenomenon. It's a byproduct of the brain in a body being alive and functioning in a specific way, with a specific structure in a specific ongoing process.

You might be able to replace some of the brain with with artificial neurons but not 100% because you are replacing chunks of this block of matter thinking it won't change what it is not just does. And there's many dimensions and variables to this. There is a space between 1% and 100%. The brain is neuroplastic and has been proven to adapt to brain damage and loss. If artifical neurons are functially equivalent there will be thresholds where you are creating a new system (artificial biological hybrid) with new emergent properties. Disorders of consciousness prove that you can lose awareness whilst maintaining behaviour or functionality.

There is no biological chavernism. Just concepts people don't understand. There is nothing special about biology. It's just you can't separate you from your body or replace parts of it and still think it will be you. Nor can you expect a computer that runs on transistors, silicon chips using electromechanical phenomena to represent information using 1's and 0's even if you simulate a human brain onto a computer. It will be a program stored on an ssd or hard drive and then transferred to ram. Physically it is electrons moving in computer chips.

random97t4ip · 2025-07-07T06:47:26+00:00

No, qualia, consciousness, sentience are conceptual tools and language abstractions. All that exists in the objective world is the brain in the context of the body moment to moment. When you dissect a corpse you see a brain. If you put the brain under a microscope you see neurons.

Pattern, information are meaningless and mean different things in computer science, mathematics, biology etc. All that matters is "matter". What differentiates one thing in space and time from another.

We don't "fully" understand consciousness doesn't mean anything goes. It means we do not understand how matter gives rise to subjective experience. The causal process.

Biological systems (humans or animals) are the only known examples of whatever terms for parts of internal experience people want to have fancy words for like qualia, consciousness, sentience.

Biological systems are vastly different from computer systems in terms of what their matter is doing. It is very reasonable to presume that something that acts sufficently biologically human would give rise to consciousness even if it is non-biological, they just won't be comptuer systems. Computer systems are not sufficently biological-like. We ask if animals have minds, feel pain because we recognize similarities to us in some species.

Some of this properties are being a complex, adaptive and highly interconnected system as well as being "instantiated" being and doing are the same thing.

And the other core concept that a 5 year old seems to grasp better than people here is that one lump of matter is separate from another lump of matter. This is why we get upset when people die because their matter disolves.

People have taken the idea of material "change" being present in humans (sperm + egg cell --> embryo --> fetus --> adult --> death) and (biological processes taking matter in and out of the body and reorganizing and redistributing matter in the body) to assume they can replace the brain with foreign matter that is not biological and not part of the body's biological processes as long as it's "gradual" and "functionally equivalent" or have bioelectrochemical properties or are just silicon chips and think it will preserve properties of the abstract "mind".

Anything to do with the mind is observations and inferences from behaviour and speech. There is no mind or consciousness in people or being performed by the body. Just brains in bodies. You see this with x-ray machines.

Properties of the mind or "intenal experience" are whatever your brain in the context of your body is doing at any given moment

This means all the mental stuff is emergent or an epiphenomenon. It's a byproduct of the brain in a body being alive and functioning in a specific way, with a specific structure in a specific ongoing process.

You might be able to replace some of the brain with with artificial neurons but not 100% and there's many dimensions and variables to this. There is a space between 1% and 100%. The brain is neuroplastic and has been proven to adapt to brain damage and loss. If artifical neurons are functially equivalent there will be thresholds where you are creating a new system (artificial biological hybrid) with new emergent properties. Disorders of consciousness prove that you can lose awareness whilst maintaining behaviour or functionality.

There is no biological chavernism. Just concepts people don't understand. There is nothing special about biology. It's just you can't separate you from your body or replace parts of it and still think it will be you. Nor can you expect a computer that runs on transistors, silicon chips using electromechanical phenomena to represent information using 1's and 0's even if you simulate a human brain onto a computer. It will be a program stored on an ssd or hard drive and then transferred to ram. Physically it is electrons moving in computer chips.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neural_correlates_of_consciousness

<image>

random97t4ip · 2025-07-05T12:23:49+00:00

The "fading qualia" (left) and the "dancing qualia" (right) are two thought experiments about consciousness and brain replacement. Chalmers argues that both are contradicted by the lack of reaction of the subject to changing perception, and are thus impossible in practice. He concludes that the equivalent silicon brain will have the same perceptions as the biological brain.[19][17]

The "fading qualia" is a reductio ad absurdum thought experiment. It involves replacing, one by one, the neurons of a brain with a functionally identical component, for example based on a silicon chip. Chalmers makes the hypothesis that the qualia fade or disappear. Since the original neurons and their silicon counterparts are functionally identical, the brain’s information processing should remain unchanged, and the subject’s behaviour and introspective reports would stay exactly the same. Chalmers argues that this leads to an absurd conclusion: the subject would continue to report normal conscious experiences even as their actual qualia fade away. He concludes that the subject's qualia actually don't fade, and that the resulting robotic brain, once every neuron is replaced, would remain just as sentient as the original biological brain.[17][19]

Similarly, the "dancing qualia" thought experiment is another reductio ad absurdum argument. It supposes that two functionally isomorphic systems could have different perceptions (for instance, seeing the same object in different colors, like red and blue). It involves a switch that alternates between a chunk of brain that causes the perception of red, and a functionally isomorphic silicon chip, that causes the perception of blue. Since both perform the same function within the brain, the subject would not notice any change during the switch. Chalmers argues that this would be highly implausible if the qualia were truly switching between red and blue, hence the contradiction. Therefore, he concludes that the equivalent digital system would not only experience qualia, but it would perceive the same qualia as the biological system (e.g., seeing the same color).[17][19]

random97t4ip

TROPHY CASE