Ironically, if it plays out this way, it will be the biggest boon to actual AGI development there could be -- the intelligence via text tokenization will be a limiting factor otherwise, imo.
You're thinking of this [1]. Super duper cool idea, ahead of its time. Author seems to have transitioned to a ludicrous pricing model, but I suspect it's because the people who like it really _love_ it. I used to be among them, but then switched to org-mode .
It's all a matter of point of view I guess. Given that I replaced it with something costing zero dollars may explain my attitude. Also, the fact that it started out as basically free, and is now a recurrent expense over a hundred bucks a year.
That said, the author seems like a cool guy. Hope he's finding success.
Emacs org-mode -- it's less visually obvious that it's exactly equivalent from a structural / hierarchical point of view. But the editing experience is infinitely better, because Emacs.
I'm very curious, from the perspective that you have based on your experience at the retreat, what it means to you when you talk about "processing" these traumas?
Maybe a very concrete way to ask would be: what's the difference between someone who undergoes the ayahuasca experience and successfully "processes" a trauma, vs someone who does not? Is there such a thing?
I don't think it can be covered in a general way, everyone's traumas are unique. Sometimes it involves going into the memory, reexperiencing parts of it (which can be a very visceral experience under the effects) from an objective place, really feeling them and letting go, forgiving, etc. It's usually more complicated than that- there are a lot of "hooks" that are created (relationships, places, the emotions felt going in/after an event). The most common traumas (sexual) create some downright awful patterns especially if it happened as a child (e.g. a parent who is supposed to be protecting you and providing safety...but is also doing bad things to you. There's a lot to undo there). It's usually not something taken care of in a single ceremony or even a weekend of ceremonies especially without a skilled practitioner.
Is there a difference between this and doing it another way? Hard to say. If the process resonates with you I think it can be done a lot faster and more completely this way. Some people can make little to no progress in therapy for years, dancing around the issue and constantly hitting defense mechanisms (often the memories of these things are blocked out and very hard to access under normal circumstances). A strong ayahuasca experience will put it front and center so you have no other choice than to deal with it. It's not easy, not some magic pill, and takes courage and willingness to go into it head on and do the work. It's absolutely not for everyone. I really love this modality so probably a bit biased- like asking a heart surgeon to heal your broken leg might get you a couple stents installed ;) it's very versatile but not always the best option.
And we can imagine that, in a sci-fi world where some super-being could act on a scale that would allow it to perturb the world in a fashion amenable to causing hurricanes, the hurricane model could be substantially augmented, for the same reason motor babbling in an infant leads to fluid motion as a child.
What has been a revelation to me is how, even peering through this dark glass, titanic amounts of data allow quite useful world models to emerge, even if they're super limited -- a type of "bitter lesson" that suggests we're only at the beginning of what's possible.
I expect robotics + LLM to drive the next big breakthroughs, perhaps w/ virtual worlds [1] as an intermediate step.
If unanticipated issues are discovered, end users may not receive the updates in a timely fashion if, for example, the repo owner is the only committer and they're on vacation when the next Heartbleed 0day hits.
I am confident and trust the OpenSSL and LibreSSL projects each have multiple folks capable of merging and releasing critical updates.
Amazing as he is, Filippo is a single person who presumably has human needs. If he's a Terminator, though, swell, do let me know.
Ah. I was thinking the critique was about combining different crypto methods in serial; I've heard people say this is a bad idea but have never understood why.
It's interesting to imagine what a market solution would do to this.
On the one hand, the vibe is very much "show up and let's talk like friendly socialized people" and I bet that's a huge amount of the joy in it.
On the other hand, perhaps the people who _really_ want to talk to Matt should be able to? And while imperfect, paying for is an unshakeable signal that you _really_ want to.
(Note: I started this comment eight hours ago and apparently didn't submit it, so maybe someone has said the same thing in the meantime. I'm too annoyed with myself to check.)
Same. Somebody always posts a good discussion about why such things always devolve into hellscapes, and I always read them and say: oh yeah, I get it, that makes sense. And then as time passes I forget the logic and resume thinking that it would be a Really Good Idea.
