Comment: Astrology and science
Transcript: It's interesting, as I'm listening to Patricia's son on Rick Rubin's podcast, just hearing her go through all of the planets just reminds me of, like, of course the position of these planets affects you and when you're born. Like, for whatever reason, like, that actually makes a lot of sense to me from both an intuitive and scientific perspective. In the sense, like, I mean, there's literally different gravitational pulls on you. You wouldn't be able to recognize it at the level of your, you know, like, your consciousness. But it's there. Like, we know gravitational waves are a thing. So to think that that doesn't affect you is almost more crazy. And given that astrology in some way has been around for so many years in so many cultures, it's probably, like, there's probably at least something to it is all I'm saying. Like, it's probably not nothing. - Thank you, baby.
82.20% similar
Listening to Richard Rudd on Rick Rubin's podcast, the speaker reflects on Rudd's description of the Gene Keys project and its connection to the speaker's own experiences, particularly with their "burrito project" that might be aptly renamed "intentional computer". The concept of interconnectedness emphasized by Rudd appears similar to the speaker's journey of intention and the discovery of multiple interconnected paths. The ancient sages are mentioned as preferring silence to avoid misinterpretation of their teachings, highlighting the complexity of articulating such interconnectivity. Finally, the speaker is struck by the resonance of this interconnected feeling, despite its challenging, dynamic, and sometimes confusing nature, even playfully linking these reflections to the concept of microdosing.
This speaker expresses intrigue upon hearing about the concept of 64 keys, feeling a natural sense of correctness about the number's significance. They also find the mention of the number 3 and prime numbers resonant, hinting at an interest in numerical importance. The speaker reflects on the existence of a book on the subject, which validates their own thoughts and makes them feel less isolated in their perceptions. They are deeply fascinated by the idea that others share and have articulated similar views on understanding the world.
The user provided a review of the past weekend, discussing resonating with people about personal AI, privacy and security, and the idea of creating personal media artifacts. They found resonance with Chelsea, Colin, Hamad, Lauren, and Gene, particularly in the context of explaining the concept of personal AI using examples like food and sharing photos. The conversation also touched on the storytelling potential of combining voice notes, photos, and videos into a movie-like experience. Additionally, the importance of privacy and the multi-modality of personal media artifacts were highlighted, especially in the context of AR and VR. The user also emphasized their passion for privacy and bringing data into the conversation. The text is too long to be summarized.
Listening to James Purce on Rick Rubin's podcast, the speaker reflects on how Purce's lifestyle brand, inspired by the California lifestyle, resonates with their own life, especially in relation to technology. They consider embracing this aspect more wholeheartedly, mentioning setting up a high line on a Sunday morning in San Diego as an activity that brings them peace. There's an understanding that while this lifestyle may not be for everyone, it's important for the speaker to pursue what feels authentic and personally fulfilling. The speaker acknowledges feeling vulnerable in this pursuit but wants to lean into these inclinations, recognizing that even if not many, there might be others who share this sentiment.
In discussing Jan's argument on the podcast, I feel he's essentially resistant to the idea merely because he believes that Large Language Models (LLMs) can't venture out into the world and make perfectly right decisions, given they're not online systems learning in real-time. To me, this critique seems a bit narrow, akin to expecting a child to navigate the world flawlessly from the start. What seems to be missing, in my view, is not the continuous learning aspect per se, but rather the integration of feedback loops that enable learning and adaptation over time, much like how a child grows by interacting with their environment. I'm slightly confused by Jan's specific stance, as the distinction he’s making isn’t entirely clear to me. It's possible I'm not fully grasping the concept, or perhaps we're simply envisioning different models of how feedback mechanisms could or should work with LLMs.