OpenAi chatgpt

[Normal Human]

I had a person ask it some very simple inductive questions and it failed miserably. It can't even recognize basic geometric progressions such as 1, 4, 27, 256, 46656, 823543, and so on. In other words, it cannot "think" out of the box and discover/solve "known unknowns". It can only manipulate information it has already been fed in various ways that seem "novel" but aren't really creating any new knowledge. That's why it only works with language - a finite system that can be manipulated with statistical rules/transitions.

From "Mind and Tissue":

"The cortex is the mediator between inside and out. For an abstract person, like Descartes or Sartre or the average American scientist/salesman, all of reality is like a skin between the world and the self, leaving a vacuum for self and for world, except as there is arbitrary interaction in this abstract reality-skin. These are "cortical" people in the sense that their interacting self has very little to do with their body's highly determinate needs; they are the people that Pavlov called "intellectuals," dominated by the "second signalling system," language. According to Pavlov, they aren't quite at home in the world." (Emphasis mine)
These "cortical people" have been expressions of a derangement of the human condition stretching back in time. "Crests" in the waves of the ocean of this derangement manifest as exemplars of a philosophy of abstraction/explanation/deduction at the expense of energy/perception/feeling. People such as Kant and Descartes laid the foundation of this philosophy, followed by overly-abstract physicists and biologists, and on into the construction of "AI", programming, the "virtual world", and beyond. I have always seen these "verbal expression" as products of the underlying bio-energetic status of the organism-as-a-whole, as well as being catalysts of a vicious cycle that perpetuates the underlying bio-energetic status itself in others.

I keep pointing out to people that true artificial general intelligence (AGI) akin to the one humans have is impossible, but it looks like most normies don't care and would trust this thing with their lives if promised easier/richer existence by letting it run their lives.

Artificial intelligence is impossible

Because the law of independence conservation states that no combination of randomness and determinism can create mutual information, then likewise no Turing machine nor artificial intelligence can…

mindmatters.ai

Could One Single Machine Invent Everything?

Computers can never originate, they only regurgitate. Humans, on the other hand, can come up with original ideas, i.e. they write the programs in the first place. So, my proof shows that the human…

mindmatters.ai

From "Mind and Tissue", next paragraph:

"The type of person who grasps the world clearly and strongly, that Pavlov called the "artistic" type, dominated by the "first signalling system," perception, isn't necessarily over-concrete, as Pavlov seemed to imply. The person who uses his body in an integrated way, investing his imagination in important aspects of the real world, can deal with all of the complex and general aspects of society and history, but does it with a sense of purpose, rather than with the Sartrean sense of arbitrary choice. (Sartre's description of the "nausea" associated with this perception gives us a clear sense of the absence of orientation, physically resembling sea-sickness, in the extremely detached form of perception.)
The body and the "older" parts of the brain give precise shape to one's life, and the cortex helps to expand the possibilities that are open to that life." (emphasis mine).

The "artistic type" has always stood in contrast to the "intellectual type" as regards organismic functioning as well as social opposition in so far as its social goals are rarely in sync with the social goals of the intellectual type. Prime examples of the artistic type would be individuals such as William Blake, Goethe (who was a a contemporary of Kant and was vehemently opposed to Kant's philosophical ideas (for a great exposition of the intellectual differences in these two individuals see "Goethe, Kant, and Hegel: Discovering the Mind Volume 1" by the eminent philosophy Walter Kaufmann, wherein he makes the argument that, despite Kant's domination of philosophy at-large, Goethe was in fact the much more effective philosopher in the sense of understanding and offering constructive ideas regarding the human-being, and, as a second aside, Goethe actually carried out a very large body of scientific work himself on the nature of plant and animal morphology, light and color, see "Goethe's Way of Science" for an interesting exposition of this)...Wilhelm Reich, and of course Ray Peat.

Thus, the creators of this so-called "AI" have taken this dichotomy to (perhaps) it's furthest inevitable conclusion. ChatGPT has no organic body with its infinite bio-energetic processes constantly releasing energy and sensation, no perceptual apparatus with which to perceive surroundings on either a "conscious" or "subconscious" level, no guiding feelings of either pain or pleasure with which to help orient itself...only language, input, and man-made mathematical algorithms through which it "learns" how to "talk to other".

Obviously, as this intellectual philosophy proliferates and our modern technological environment is shaped in its image and the "digital culture" dominates, the power of chatGPT-type things only increases as the the normal human, who is already so cut-off from the First Signalling System falls further and further under the spell of the Second-Signalling System, i.e. the language system, which in today's culture also means "the propaganda system".

Now, what it CAN (and will) do is basically make the Internet completely unusable and turn it into a massive propaganda land, where the official party line is trumpeted from every direction. Yeah, I know this is already kind of happening but this thing will multiply it by a thousand. In a few years, all mainstream news will be written by this thing and likely all online discourse will turn into a futile and maddening back-and-forth as most of the agents we interact with online will be this thing. One can easily add a few billions new "users" on the Internet by using only a few servers and the endless logorrhea these agents spew will drown out any remaining human discourse as it would be virtually impossible to verify that the other side is a human and not a bot. Unfortunately, most plebs will probably be convinced that this is what intelligence looks like and will allow themselves to be replaced by these bots, which will both make humans even more economically "useless" while also ensuring an eventual economic collapse as the over-reliance on such agents in a "knowledge economy" will lead to many other economic events similar to 2008 with all the unfathomable financial derivatives banks created. Imagine how much more complex derivatives this thing can/will create, that no human can possibly understand/untangle. No wonder the elite is pushing for a predominantly knowledge (read: financial/abstract) economy. In such an economy whoever has access to the fastest and most sophisticated bot wins all the time, and people with access to slower/dumber bots (or none at all) lose 100% of the time (as you said). An industrial economy is the antithesis to AI and will never be allowed again in the West, barring an all out nuclear war, which of course will also mean no industrial economy for the West, and possibly for the rest of the world.
I am starting to think that the sun is "alive" in some sense and periodically forces the Earth and its conceited humanoid inhabitants go through "Great Reset" periods. Not like those of Mr. Schwab, no. I mean coronal mass ejections that wipe out anything on Earth that has achieved sufficiently high levels of technological complexity that eventually turns against life (i.e. the Unabomber Manifesto covers the latter pretty well).

So...have you heard about the Dead Internet Theory?

Dead Internet Theory: Most of the Internet is Fake
"TLDR: Large proportions of the supposedly human-produced content on the internet are actually generated by artificial intelligence networks in conjunction with paid secret media influencers in order to manufacture consumers for an increasing range of newly-normalised cultural products."
And this from a Digs.com article:
"Case in point, a recent report by security company Barracuda Networks states that only 36% of all internet traffic is human – the rest comes from bots."

It appears the "digital culture" Ray Peat mentioned as a prime goal to be demolished was 1) a long time in the making, and 2) more pervasively manipulated than a lot of us probably thought at the time. Who knows where it will fully go, I just hope enough bio-energetic health and awareness can be restored in the average person that there is enough of us who escape the net.

 

[aadrock]

From "Mind and Tissue":

"The cortex is the mediator between inside and out. For an abstract person, like Descartes or Sartre or the average American scientist/salesman, all of reality is like a skin between the world and the self, leaving a vacuum for self and for world, except as there is arbitrary interaction in this abstract reality-skin. These are "cortical" people in the sense that their interacting self has very little to do with their body's highly determinate needs; they are the people that Pavlov called "intellectuals," dominated by the "second signalling system," language. According to Pavlov, they aren't quite at home in the world." (Emphasis mine)
These "cortical people" have been expressions of a derangement of the human condition stretching back in time. "Crests" in the waves of the ocean of this derangement manifest as exemplars of a philosophy of abstraction/explanation/deduction at the expense of energy/perception/feeling. People such as Kant and Descartes laid the foundation of this philosophy, followed by overly-abstract physicists and biologists, and on into the construction of "AI", programming, the "virtual world", and beyond. I have always seen these "verbal expression" as products of the underlying bio-energetic status of the organism-as-a-whole, as well as being catalysts of a vicious cycle that perpetuates the underlying bio-energetic status itself in others.


From "Mind and Tissue", next paragraph:

"The type of person who grasps the world clearly and strongly, that Pavlov called the "artistic" type, dominated by the "first signalling system," perception, isn't necessarily over-concrete, as Pavlov seemed to imply. The person who uses his body in an integrated way, investing his imagination in important aspects of the real world, can deal with all of the complex and general aspects of society and history, but does it with a sense of purpose, rather than with the Sartrean sense of arbitrary choice. (Sartre's description of the "nausea" associated with this perception gives us a clear sense of the absence of orientation, physically resembling sea-sickness, in the extremely detached form of perception.)
The body and the "older" parts of the brain give precise shape to one's life, and the cortex helps to expand the possibilities that are open to that life." (emphasis mine).

The "artistic type" has always stood in contrast to the "intellectual type" as regards organismic functioning as well as social opposition in so far as its social goals are rarely in sync with the social goals of the intellectual type. Prime examples of the artistic type would be individuals such as William Blake, Goethe (who was a a contemporary of Kant and was vehemently opposed to Kant's philosophical ideas (for a great exposition of the intellectual differences in these two individuals see "Goethe, Kant, and Hegel: Discovering the Mind Volume 1" by the eminent philosophy Walter Kaufmann, wherein he makes the argument that, despite Kant's domination of philosophy at-large, Goethe was in fact the much more effective philosopher in the sense of understanding and offering constructive ideas regarding the human-being, and, as a second aside, Goethe actually carried out a very large body of scientific work himself on the nature of plant and animal morphology, light and color, see "Goethe's Way of Science" for an interesting exposition of this)...Wilhelm Reich, and of course Ray Peat.

Thus, the creators of this so-called "AI" have taken this dichotomy to (perhaps) it's furthest inevitable conclusion. ChatGPT has no organic body with its infinite bio-energetic processes constantly releasing energy and sensation, no perceptual apparatus with which to perceive surroundings on either a "conscious" or "subconscious" level, no guiding feelings of either pain or pleasure with which to help orient itself...only language, input, and man-made mathematical algorithms through which it "learns" how to "talk to other".

Obviously, as this intellectual philosophy proliferates and our modern technological environment is shaped in its image and the "digital culture" dominates, the power of chatGPT-type things only increases as the the normal human, who is already so cut-off from the First Signalling System falls further and further under the spell of the Second-Signalling System, i.e. the language system, which in today's culture also means "the propaganda system".



So...have you heard about the Dead Internet Theory?

Dead Internet Theory: Most of the Internet is Fake
"TLDR: Large proportions of the supposedly human-produced content on the internet are actually generated by artificial intelligence networks in conjunction with paid secret media influencers in order to manufacture consumers for an increasing range of newly-normalised cultural products."
And this from a Digs.com article:
"Case in point, a recent report by security company Barracuda Networks states that only 36% of all internet traffic is human – the rest comes from bots."

It appears the "digital culture" Ray Peat mentioned as a prime goal to be demolished was 1) a long time in the making, and 2) more pervasively manipulated than a lot of us probably thought at the time. Who knows where it will fully go, I just hope enough bio-energetic health and awareness can be restored in the average person that there is enough of us who escape the net.

Wow

 

[Drareg]

I had a person ask it some very simple inductive questions and it failed miserably. It can't even recognize basic geometric progressions such as 1, 4, 27, 256, 46656, 823543, and so on. In other words, it cannot "think" out of the box and discover/solve "known unknowns". It can only manipulate information it has already been fed in various ways that seem "novel" but aren't really creating any new knowledge. That's why it only works with language - a finite system that can be manipulated with statistical rules/transitions. I keep pointing out to people that true artificial general intelligence (AGI) akin to the one humans have is impossible, but it looks like most normies don't care and would trust this thing with their lives if promised easier/richer existence by letting it run their lives.

Artificial intelligence is impossible

Because the law of independence conservation states that no combination of randomness and determinism can create mutual information, then likewise no Turing machine nor artificial intelligence can…

mindmatters.ai

Could One Single Machine Invent Everything?

Computers can never originate, they only regurgitate. Humans, on the other hand, can come up with original ideas, i.e. they write the programs in the first place. So, my proof shows that the human…

mindmatters.ai

Now, what it CAN (and will) do is basically make the Internet completely unusable and turn it into a massive propaganda land, where the official party line is trumpeted from every direction. Yeah, I know this is already kind of happening but this thing will multiply it by a thousand. In a few years, all mainstream news will be written by this thing and likely all online discourse will turn into a futile and maddening back-and-forth as most of the agents we interact with online will be this thing. One can easily add a few billions new "users" on the Internet by using only a few servers and the endless logorrhea these agents spew will drown out any remaining human discourse as it would be virtually impossible to verify that the other side is a human and not a bot. Unfortunately, most plebs will probably be convinced that this is what intelligence looks like and will allow themselves to be replaced by these bots, which will both make humans even more economically "useless" while also ensuring an eventual economic collapse as the over-reliance on such agents in a "knowledge economy" will lead to many other economic events similar to 2008 with all the unfathomable financial derivatives banks created. Imagine how much more complex derivatives this thing can/will create, that no human can possibly understand/untangle. No wonder the elite is pushing for a predominantly knowledge (read: financial/abstract) economy. In such an economy whoever has access to the fastest and most sophisticated bot wins all the time, and people with access to slower/dumber bots (or none at all) lose 100% of the time (as you said). An industrial economy is the antithesis to AI and will never be allowed again in the West, barring an all out nuclear war, which of course will also mean no industrial economy for the West, and possibly for the rest of the world.
I am starting to think that the sun is "alive" in some sense and periodically forces the Earth and its conceited humanoid inhabitants go through "Great Reset" periods. Not like those of Mr. Schwab, no. I mean coronal mass ejections that wipe out anything on Earth that has achieved sufficiently high levels of technological complexity that eventually turns against life (i.e. the Unabomber Manifesto covers the latter pretty well).

Thats interesting to think about, if the suns ejections can wipe us out, if we generate enough electrons the suns plasma could be drawn out more towards us, the magnetic effect, we are ramping up the use of electromagnetism on a profound scale, we are basically becoming a sink or tinder box for energy looking to expand outside?

 

[Drareg]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVqbXbcagGE

 

[Drareg]

And in vacuum.
Its interesting to note the rise of the theory the sun is becoming more active and this is causing climate change, is it possible we are attracting the plasma more because of an excess of electrons we are creating, it would be interesting to check historically to see if these solar events correlate with the use of electricity.
Mainstream doesn't believe in the electric universe theory so are likely blind to the idea we are making ourselves a giant static generator asking to be electrocuted, what an ironic fate of we wipe ourselves out with a giant bolt of lightning, death by electrocution for our dysfunctional behaviour and ignorance.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WTPL-pm92eo

 

[LadyRae]

@Normal Human not normal, but extraordinary

 

[Badger]

Someone did an AI art query to turn each country into a villain Results are quite remarkable.

 

[Badger]

Someone did an AI query to turn each country into a villain Results are quite remarkable.
View attachment 46634View attachment 46635View attachment 46636View attachment 46637

What do you think an AI query portraying Klaus Schwab as a villain would look like? My guess: pretty close to what he normally looks like.

 

[Nokoni]

quite remarkable

Wow. Outstanding (although USA not as impressive as the other three). And yeah, Schwab in his space robes is already comically evil, lol.

 

[haidut]

So...have you heard about the Dead Internet Theory?

Yep, and I think this is a big reason why Musk stalled his buying of Twitter. In fact, he openly stated several times that he believes the majority of Twitter's several hundred million "users" are actually bots, which should greatly decrease Twitter's own valuations in regards to acquisition. I think Musk was right, and in all likelihood no more than 10%-15% of Twitter's users are human. However, being a con-artist himself and probably under the advice (orders?) of his handlers, Musk chose to go through with the deal as to avoid exposing the massive scam most social media is, which would decimate the (already contracted) advertising revenue and general PR credibility, on which Musk's entire business "empire" heavily depends.

 

[Nfinkelstein]

Great thread.

 

[TranceWax]

So, basically the "AI" bot is essentially a very capable language manipulator, which these days passes for intelligence...but is, tragically, nothing of the sort. The stuff it spits out on Peat is basically what you can read on Wikipedia in regards to most "alternative" medical topics - i.e. a patronizing and manipulative way of saying Peat was "wrong" according to the scientific community and that's what should be considered the indisputable truth. If you have time, I would ask it something along the lines of "Can you please provide examples of claims by Ray Peat that are unsupported by mainstream scientific evidence?" And when (if) it answers, then you can say "Can you provide evidence contrary to Peat's claims, or maybe you can site some studies in support by saying "well, how about study X or Y that Peat cites on this topic? Isn't that also scientific evidence?" You can get some study titles from Peat's website on topics like estrogen, progesterone, thyroid, testosterone, etc that the bot claims are controversial.
I was reading a related thread on ChatGPT on HackerNews and virtually all people who interacted with the bot discovered the same thing - basically as soon as you challenge the bot with actual concrete evidence it falls apart and start repeating ad-nausaeum the line "X goes against the scientific consensus" while refusing to provide concrete evidence to back this statement up. In other words, the same behavior as what we got from Fauci and his ilk - "this is the truth because we say so, and this cannot be question and does not need to be backed up by evidence". Which is not surprising at all considering the bot was trained on text from those people and many of the bot's maintainers/trainers probably share those same views/biases and provided biased training sample.
So, yeah, mankind finally created a fully automated model of psychopathic behavior. I have a feeling this will not end well at all...especially if this technology is widely adopted in everyday life, as most people won't even challenge the B.S. that this thing spits out.

I wish I seen this thread before my last posts as I just made a thread about AI (not chat GBT) asking it about transitional cell carcinoma and the pathways it uses. Looks like one user can already see through it and I think you're right, it seems like it just scans google and more or less re-writes what it has seen without actually fully understanding the context of it all. Some of the questions I asked seemed to make it contradict itself and even with some of the studies you have mentioned about cancer etc it always went back to talking about the more mainstream and more widely accepted medical views.

 

[Drareg]

I'm starting to suspect chatgpt3 is cover for human neuronal cells on a chip.
It's really interesting to think about the implications of this, this is the likely goal of trans-humanists and everything else is a decoy.

I mean you could link your experiences up to your own stem cell cultured brain on a chip, it could help you solve problems around your experiences, an extra brain, 2 is better than one as they say.
You have to feed the cells in culture and continue to feed them so they survive, I bet the solution they use isn't "peaty".

Frontiers | Brain-on-a-Chip: Dream or Reality?

www.frontiersin.org

One of the dreams of neuroengineers is building a human brain. More realistically, building an accurate model of the brain with thousands of neurons synaptically connected to be used for a large variety of experiments where populations activity plays a fundamental role. If in the pioneering era of the neurosciences, it was sufficient performing experiments with isolated neurons to understand the single-channel kinetics and the genesis of the action potential, or with couples of neurons to understand synaptic mechanisms, phenomena like cognition and behavior, and the onset of neurological diseases need realistic and reliable models of the human brain. “To really understand how our own brain works and ‘what makes us human', it is essential to study the human brain at the fine-grain level of cells and the connections that they make with other cells, the synapses,” argued Idan Segev in 2018 (Eyal et al., 2018). If the computational approach by means of the development of complex mathematical models is a possibility (Markram, 2006), the recent advances in stem cell knowledge and in neurotechnologies paved the way to (partially) recreate the human brain in vitro and to record its electrophysiological activity. After more than 10 years from its first appearance, the term brain-on-a-chip can now be appropriately used (Wheeler, 2008). Nowadays, we are able to replicate many human neuronal types and peculiar brain regions in the form of engineered neuronal cultures, like neurospheroids or brain organoids, directly from embryonic and human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSC), and to couple them to a technological counterpart (i.e., chip).

Thus, how far can we go with “new generation” brain-on-a-chip models to unravel the many hidden mechanisms of the brain? Which experiments will benefit from this model? Are we able to “clone” our brain (or a brain region) to use it as a backup in case of severe impairments? Starting from the recent advances in the field of neuroengineering and neurotechnologies, we will discuss what should be done, which questions can be answered by using brain-on-a-chip models, and what will continue being a dream and what could become reality in the next decades.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CX9QIj_EamI


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXWL17vwVik

 

[Badger]

One could use ChatGPG for learning,

I asked ChatGPT this question:
What is a metabolite?

Answer:
A metabolite is a molecule that is produced during metabolism, which is the process by which our body breaks down nutrients and other substances to release energy or build and repair tissues. Metabolites can be small molecules such as amino acids, carbohydrates, and lipids, or they can be larger molecules such as proteins and nucleic acids. They can be produced by cells or by microorganisms, and they can have various biological functions such as signaling molecules, energy sources, or building blocks for larger molecules.

I then asked this question:
Please give a definition of the term metabolite using analogies a high school kid in a biology class could understand.

Answer:
Think of your body as a factory that takes in raw materials like food and turns them into useful products, just like a factory turns raw materials into finished goods. Just as a factory produces waste as a byproduct of its manufacturing process, your body produces waste products during metabolism. These waste products are called metabolites, and they can be thought of as the "leftovers" of the metabolic process. In some cases, these metabolites can be harmful to your body if they accumulate in high concentrations, but in other cases, they can be useful for various biological functions.

Wow! I think that's cool!

 

[Badger]

One could use ChatGPG for learning,

I asked ChatGPT this question:
What is a metabolite?

Answer:
A metabolite is a molecule that is produced during metabolism, which is the process by which our body breaks down nutrients and other substances to release energy or build and repair tissues. Metabolites can be small molecules such as amino acids, carbohydrates, and lipids, or they can be larger molecules such as proteins and nucleic acids. They can be produced by cells or by microorganisms, and they can have various biological functions such as signaling molecules, energy sources, or building blocks for larger molecules.

I then asked this question:
Please give a definition of the term metabolite using analogies a high school kid in a biology class could understand.

Answer:
Think of your body as a factory that takes in raw materials like food and turns them into useful products, just like a factory turns raw materials into finished goods. Just as a factory produces waste as a byproduct of its manufacturing process, your body produces waste products during metabolism. These waste products are called metabolites, and they can be thought of as the "leftovers" of the metabolic process. In some cases, these metabolites can be harmful to your body if they accumulate in high concentrations, but in other cases, they can be useful for various biological functions.

Wow! I think that's cool!

Another very useful potential with ChatAI: finding best of breed research based on citations.

I asked it:
"Please list the three most cited studies about rapamycin. The articles found should include full bibliographic information for each article, such as authors, title, name of journal or book it came from."

The reply:
"Here are the three most cited studies about rapamycin, including full bibliographic information for each article:

1. Harrison, D. E., Strong, R., Sharp, Z. D., Nelson, J. F., Astle, C. M., Flurkey, K., ... & Miller, R. A. (2009). Rapamycin fed late in life extends lifespan in genetically heterogeneous mice. Nature, 460(7253), 392-395.
2. Lamming, D. W., Ye, L., Katajisto, P., Goncalves, M. D., Saitoh, M., Stevens, D. M., ... & Sabatini, D. M. (2012). Rapamycin-induced insulin resistance is mediated by mTORC2 loss and uncoupled from longevity. Science, 335(6076), 1638-1643.
3. Kurmasheva, R. T., Dudkin, L., Billups, C., Debelenko, L. V., Morton, C. L., Houghton, P. J., & Smith, M. A. (2010). The insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor-targeting antibody, CP-751,871, suppresses tumor-derived VEGF and synergizes with rapamycin in models of childhood sarcoma. Cancer Research, 70(20), 8175-8184."

 

[BRMarshall]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCJrmAIa1gs

 

[cs3000]

This could be useful for summarising research for finding health stuff. Badger similar thing i just tried.
pretty cool for this type of usage if it sources from studies accurately
you can ask it to collect specific information like "only include those which show a more than 15 minute increase in slow wave sleep" etc.

Something interesting i just found using it -

i asked it to source me research about something specific. and it made up a quote and pubmed ID that doesn't exist

"it was not my intention to provide false or inaccurate information intentionally" lol

 

[Badger]

This could be useful for summarising research for finding health stuff. Badger similar thing i just tried.
pretty cool for this type of usage if it sources from studies accurately
you can ask it to collect specific information like "only include those which show a more than 15 minute increase in slow wave sleep" etc.

Something interesting i just found using it -

i asked it to source me research about something specific. and it made up a quote and pubmed ID that doesn't exist

"it was not my intention to provide false or inaccurate information intentionally" lol

Yikes about the made up citation. Did you ask it why it created a fictitious citation?

 

[ThinPicking]

I'm starting to suspect chatgpt3 is cover for human neuronal cells on a chip.
It's really interesting to think about the implications of this, this is the likely goal of trans-humanists and everything else is a decoy.

I mean you could link your experiences up to your own stem cell cultured brain on a chip, it could help you solve problems around your experiences, an extra brain, 2 is better than one as they say.
You have to feed the cells in culture and continue to feed them so they survive, I bet the solution they use isn't "peaty".

Frontiers | Brain-on-a-Chip: Dream or Reality?

www.frontiersin.org

One of the dreams of neuroengineers is building a human brain. More realistically, building an accurate model of the brain with thousands of neurons synaptically connected to be used for a large variety of experiments where populations activity plays a fundamental role. If in the pioneering era of the neurosciences, it was sufficient performing experiments with isolated neurons to understand the single-channel kinetics and the genesis of the action potential, or with couples of neurons to understand synaptic mechanisms, phenomena like cognition and behavior, and the onset of neurological diseases need realistic and reliable models of the human brain. “To really understand how our own brain works and ‘what makes us human', it is essential to study the human brain at the fine-grain level of cells and the connections that they make with other cells, the synapses,” argued Idan Segev in 2018 (Eyal et al., 2018). If the computational approach by means of the development of complex mathematical models is a possibility (Markram, 2006), the recent advances in stem cell knowledge and in neurotechnologies paved the way to (partially) recreate the human brain in vitro and to record its electrophysiological activity. After more than 10 years from its first appearance, the term brain-on-a-chip can now be appropriately used (Wheeler, 2008). Nowadays, we are able to replicate many human neuronal types and peculiar brain regions in the form of engineered neuronal cultures, like neurospheroids or brain organoids, directly from embryonic and human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSC), and to couple them to a technological counterpart (i.e., chip).

Thus, how far can we go with “new generation” brain-on-a-chip models to unravel the many hidden mechanisms of the brain? Which experiments will benefit from this model? Are we able to “clone” our brain (or a brain region) to use it as a backup in case of severe impairments? Starting from the recent advances in the field of neuroengineering and neurotechnologies, we will discuss what should be done, which questions can be answered by using brain-on-a-chip models, and what will continue being a dream and what could become reality in the next decades.

Honestly Mr Drareg, what they're doing here isn't hocus pocus.

ChatGPT Hardware a Look at 8x NVIDIA A100 Powering the Tool

If you have heard about the OpenAI ChatGPT AI inference running on the NVIDIA A100 and what to know what a NVIDIA A100 is, this is for you

www.servethehome.com

It's the digital equivalent of mechanically throwing ***t at a wall and seeing what sticks. They're just reducing the power envelope and increasing the frequency of the ***t throwing and adhesion detection machinery. They're not making the wall or the ***t any more conducive and human verification or correction will always be required. Although I'm rubbishing this. These Nvidia A100's and other crude machinery still peak my nerd. It's cool engineering.

People like Harari would probably love for us to believe we're 30 seconds to midnight on a useful brain computer interface. Something that can do I/O with precision for control or compute. Personally I don't think we're anywhere near it, and no one even knows if it's possible. Even in vitro, in the worlds most advanced petri dish. Then again. I don't work in "biotech".

 

[ThinPicking]

This could be useful for summarising research for finding health stuff. Badger similar thing i just tried.
pretty cool for this type of usage if it sources from studies accurately
you can ask it to collect specific information like "only include those which show a more than 15 minute increase in slow wave sleep" etc.

Something interesting i just found using it -

i asked it to source me research about something specific. and it made up a quote and pubmed ID that doesn't exist

"it was not my intention to provide false or inaccurate information intentionally" lol

Lying seems to be its most reliable feature.

I spent some time the other day trying to get it to tell me how to horizontally flip an h264 video losslessly without any reencoding. Having established by conventional cognition that it's impossible. You can only manually apply a transformation filter at the point the file's played back.

It repeatedly lied to me and repeatedly apologised for doing so when I called it out.