> If made legal, then how do we navigate the normalization of a substance which can quite literally ruin a life? It prohibited, how do you manage the safety concerns and crime we know will stem from the ceaseless demand for drugs which are unregulated? How do we manage education in either case?

I believe you underestimate peoples ability to ruin their own lives, regardless of what laws and regulations are put into place to try to help them.

Many people kill themselves with food, legal drugs to name a few.

We’ll be in a much better place if more people become knowledgeable in the workings of their own minds, bodies and emotions so that seeking self-destruction is less common.

I agree. I didn’t want to suggest specifics in my comment, but I think our mistake all along has been top down solutions.

People drink and eat and smoke because they’re hurting and seeking distraction and numbness. There are some anomalies where people fall into addiction more easily, but stronger family and community safety nets seem like a far better insurance against the potential outcomes of this than virtually anything else.

Pretty much every heavy cannabis user, alcoholic, or other addict I’ve met has had deep family issues. It starts early. Regulations and education might make a dent in outcomes, but the only way we’ll have happy people who don’t want to ruin themselves is to make it so they aren’t crushed under the misery and fear of taking on the world in the first place.

If physical reality is quantized, which many believe to be true, then the state of all all reality can be described symbolically. Therefore, a large enough language model could conceivably model physical reality. At some point, we could construct a LLM powerful enough to manipulate the lowest level quanta of reality given a description of the manipulation in another language. The tricky part is resolving ambiguity, as the only truly unambiguous description is the direct description of the changes at the sub-atomic level.

What is the language of the human mind? Of consciousness itself? If a LLM can learn that, perhaps we will build a technology that takes an intention and is immediately able to manifest the corresponding changes to reality to satisfy the intention or desire? When we get there, perhaps it will be time to look inward and do some of that spiritual inner work we keep putting off?

What’s exciting to me about LLMs is they seem to be one step closer to this vision, with all the peril and all the possibility that comes with it.

> If physical reality is quantized, […] then the state of all all reality can be described symbolically.

First, quantized in the physics sense [0] doesn’t mean discrete states. And discrete doesn’t necessarily mean finite.

But even if you mean “finite”, I believe that you are underestimating how staggeringly large “finite” can be.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantization_(physics)

Thanks for the link!

You’re right, when I say quantized I do mean finite, countable, represents me symbolically. I realize how staggering large finite can be.

We are in the midst of exponential growth in our ability to manipulate reality. The mastery of physical reality feels achievable to me now. I could be wrong, but I could also be right. It’s a fun time to be alive.

I think video will be a step in the direction of LLMs making sense of physical space

You're conflating two different things -- the law, and the concepts of right and wrong.

But the majority of the things people think of as "rights" do, in fact, come from the law. "The law" is just us collectively deciding what the rules we live by are.

There is a small set of fundamental human rights, but that's a bit of a different thing and I think it's very hard to argue that driving a vehicle on public roads is one of them.

I reject that anyone else can tell me what rules to live by. I only respect other peoples requests if they claim and show that my actions are causing harm. Otherwise, the “collective” is just a bunch of people I never met ganging up and telling me how to live my life at the point of a gun. And they don’t even have the courage to hold the gun themselves in most cases but go crying to father government to punish people they don’t agree with.

I define “rights” as what I may do morally, not a code, act, statue or “collective” decision. Words can have multiple meanings. What you are calling rights, I am calling arbitrary rules made by other people against my will.

Edit to reply to below: I am that I am. I don’t take titles like anarchist, but sure, that’s a decent title if you insist.

Anarchy isn’t a system. It’s just a word. It means no rulers. I don’t think that we should abolish the government (nor could we, it doesn’t exist), I just wish people would grow up morally, so we (conscious beings) didn’t feel the need to play ruler and ruled. I wish to see a world where each being understands morality and what is right and wrong “to the bones” or “from the soul”, so the idea of abstracting away and externalizing our morality and violence was no longer the accepted normal.

So you're an anarchist. That's fine. But, at least right now, that's not the system we have.

Rights don’t come from the constitution. They just are. If someone is not causing harm, then there is no harm being done. Doing (or threatening) violence against people you may think will cause harm using “the government” seems to be more and more popular every day.

Edit since I can’t reply further down: “Reproductive rights” as you call them are also something that doesn’t come from laws or the constitution, whether the constitution protects it or not. Regardless of one’s moral standing, it is never up to other people to decide what is right or wrong for me. That is for me to decide. My rights end when I cause harm to another being, as as defined by the other being who claims to be harmed. No government or papers are needed.

Well, I wrote rights protected by the Constitution. Reproductive rights aren't protected by the Constitution, and look what happened there.

"Doing and threatening violence" seems to encapsulate the American fetish for pickup trucks nicely.

Haha you’re not wrong. That gave me a good laugh. I do wish fewer people would operate such large machines in cities.

I am always surprised to read articles that appear to be written by people so disconnected from their own consciousness and value of their own life.

If I value my own life, it follows that I will value yours. Without this fundamental pillar, all that is built without it is unstable and rotten. This is not to be understood rationally. It’s either something you know, or you don’t. If you don’t, what I am saying will sound like religion or superstition.

I’ll also add that your rights end when they conflict with my rights. Finding a way to live with this conflict appears to be the primary “lesson” we are learning together as conscious beings.

It’s sad. I don’t even know why I am writing this.

I’m surprised how much fear most people seem to have about their fellow conscious being. It’s like now that LLMs exist, people feel we are only one bad actor away from death and destruction, and rather than look inward at our own capability of violence and develop our morality, we wish to use violence preemptively to stop others out of our own fear. It’s wild.

Edit: I’m not surprised of the presence of fear, as much as how out and open it is.

Yes

I’ll add that the reserve requirement is currently zero.

https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/reservereq.htm

It might be worth adding that regulatory capital requirements are not zero: https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/large-bank-capit...

I do too!

I’ve started writing extensive documentation for internal projects at work, with the intention that someone could pick them up, understand the context, use the code and improve it without needing to talk to me.

Are the responses, and audio and video all generated with “AI”?