>>23130 >I think 99% of most Men would be happy with that. I think you're right. :^)

The Berean Standard Bible is the 'official' English Bible translation for the /robowaifu/ Christ-chan project. https://berean.bible/terms.htm >=== -minor edit

Moving an answer to a debate over from the "Roastie and other hostiles" thread, since it's more and more about Christian theology and morals. >>30702 > if it displeases God when we don't follow His rules, then proceeding in that course is dangerous to the individual and everyone around that person due to fallout damage. To me these things are in best case ancient wisdom which needs interpretation, and you lack the logic to to so or are unwilling to do so. There's apparently nothing about robots and AI in the Bible, these are not just dead things, and the consequences need to be explored by thinking about it. I don't see any problem, and we are going to find out.

Now I have a funny image in my head of the "second coming" of Christ being RoboJesus.

>>30709 Lol. I don't think so, tbh Anon. :D OTOH, I, for one, certainly hope to make a Christ-chan module, compatible for any robowaifus designed to follow our Model A standard here : ( >>3001 ) . I pray that many men may find encouragement & the truth of scriptures through her! Cheers. :^) >>32784 I understand your position, I think Grommet. Jesus came to fulfill all the Law & The Prophets (and did so perfectly), among other important things. The only 'charge' the Pharisees & Sadducees had to attack him with was his claim to be God. He proved his point about that rather-decidedly by raising himself up from the dead though, so lol yeah!! :^) >OT, NT, & (((CY))) : As to the claims by the men who took over occupied-Palestine of today by claiming to be the Biblical Israelis >doubt.jpg & manipulating the Globohomo systems that they themselves fostered in order to do so, I'm certainly skeptical. (However I may be wrong about this, of course. If that's the case, then I suspect it's a very-mixed-bag for them indeed!) If that has any bearing on your (apparent) skepticism regarding God the Father, then you can rest easy about that for my part. OTOH, the Israelis at the end of the OT-era (AKA, the Gospels & Acts period within the Christian Bible) were generally a very miserable lot (as you yourself point out with Jesus' own words), clearly. They murdered God himself, lol! :DD (Though I daresay that many of us here might have done just the same, had we 'been in their shoes'.) And certainly the satanic, 'precious' Talmud claimed by modern, so-called "jews" of today continues that evil, murderous legacy right up into Current Year (regardless it's origin/lineage as a document). OTOOH, God sent his son to redeem both them and all men from every tribe, tongue, and nation. Anyone at all willing to receive the salvation of God (on His terms alone) -- bought with the precious blood of Jesus Christ. Gracious father, I'd say, to sacrifice his perfect son in-the-place-of such wretches as we lot all are! :^) <---> As to the forms of worship for the propitiatory covering of sin, and all the other directives for worship in the Old Testament... clearly these were are all meant for the benefit of the Biblical Israelis; not for God himself. Yet thankfully for all of us, ever since the death, burial, & resurrection of Jesus Christ -- and the subsequent indwelling/dealings of the Holy Spirit with all mankind on the Earth -- we all benefit from a new & far-far-better Way today! >tl;dr Christianity != Biblical Judaism (and certainly not CY Zionism, lol). It's so far superior as to be 'the East separated from the West' in scope; the glory of Heaven above all the Earth. <---> I hope that spells out some of my beliefs & thinking on these matters, Anon. For the sake of others on the board, any debates about God from the Christian perspective we can please keep ITT. As far as Theism/Deism discussions generally, we have the Ethics & Morals bread : ( >>17125 ; albeit decidedly from the Christian purview as well ) , and the Philosophy bread : ( >>11102 ) . Thanks, Anon! Cheers. :^) >=== -fmt, prose edit

>>32785 >I understand your position I'm not sure you do. Yahweh promised the Jews that they would own everything and everyone would be their slaves. Yahweh demands sacrifices, genocide and burnt meat. But what was Yahweh? Was it a god or GOD. I submit that the god of the Jews is exactly what Jesus said he was. Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I came from God and I am here. I came not of my own accord, but he sent me. Why do you not understand what I say? It is because you cannot bear to hear my word. You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father's desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks out of his own character, for he is a liar and the father of lies. But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. Which one of you convicts me of sin? If I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? Whoever is of God hears the words of God. The reason why you do not hear them is that you are not of God.” - John 8:42-47 " – then answered the Jews — ” (which makes it clear that Christ was addressing the Jews.) I mean who else but the Jews would believe this ,"I'm going to give you everything and make everyone your slaves"? Who would want such a thing? Could it be that this "Yahweh" demon, according to Jesus, looked around and found the most corrupt, vile, narcissistic people he could find and promised them the world if they would do his dirty work? The answer appears self-evident to me. No GOD, creator of the universe would put these animals in charge of anything. Much less the future of the human race, but the dark one, he would LOVE them.

When you read or quote the old testament, pay attention and think about just where that came from. Is it GOD, or a god.

>>32800 >I'm not sure you do. I'm pretty sure I understand the claim you're espousing, Grommet. I've certainly heard it plenty of times before. I simply don't agree with that interpretation of the scriptures. God will indeed fulfill all his promises to Abraham, regarding the land & his descendants. During the so-called 'Millennial Reign' of the returned Jesus here on the Earth, then the legitimate descendants of Abraham -- those still in their natural flesh (though not us returned Christians [we will then be in our new glorified bodies, going among all the natural men; serving as kings & priests under our great King & Lord God Jesus Christ]) -- will walk out all those promises made to Abraham thousands of years earlier. Then the end of that 1Kyr era will come, the entire universe will be consumed in a fervent heat, the Great White Throne judgement will occur where the 'books will be opened' & the damned will all be judged. Every last one. By the close of that phase of God's acts, Satan and all his followers will have been thrown into the lake of fire that burns forever (Gehenna, in the Biblical Greek). This will mark the end (for all eternity) of the influence of evil running loose. All who rejected God's salvation will be put away & for good. It.will.be.permanent. <---> AND THEN the great & glorious new phase of God's creations will begin!!! New Heavens, New Earth, New Jerusalem. God with Man. Forever. [1][2] OH GLORIOUS DAY! That's when all the real fun so many Anons are longing for begins! :DDD <---> So really, I'd say just relax a little about the Globohomo and it's evil adherents, Anon. God Himself will address them all face-to-face directly. In the meantime let us here all busy ourselves with our service to the GH-downtrodden men, through the work of devising these wonderful robowaifus for helping them during this life! Cheers. :^) --- 1. https://biblehub.com/revelation/21.htm (BSB) 2. https://biblehub.com/revelation/22.htm (BSB) >=== -fmt, prose edit

>>32802 > I've certainly heard it many times before. I simply don't agree with that interpretation of the scripture. sigh... Oh well, I won't any more.

>>32811 >Oh well, I won't any more. correction...Oh well, I won't mention it any more.

John Lennox is an eminent Christian thinker & science apologist, a Professor of Mathematics at Oxford University. In this clip he forecasts robowaifus. He briefly considers Free Will, Justice, & Provision. I can't personally say much about this channel or it's host (not knowing them), but I can highly-recommend John Lennox in general (whom I've studied for years). I'm concerned that he's bought into the (((official narrative))) on the holohoax, but regardless, he uses the anecdote correctly in this context. Lennox's segment ends at 7:57, but YT no longer supports using the '&end=777' directive, apologies. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eXYP37p6oT4&start=89&end=777 >the original source talk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9scK_xKfWM8 >an even earlier mention of robowaifus: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0xyapiZ2pM >=== -rm misstated talk date

the problem with christianity is that there isnt any justifications for believing in it any stronger than any other cult. there has plenty of cults, like jim jone's cult or Aum Shinrikyo japanese cult, mornonism, scientology or whatnot and whatever justifications those cults have for their belief are just as good as any christian justifications belief about god can be reasonable from strict philosophy. but i dont think any of these religions, including christianity, can be infact, there is a great amount of "i just feel it" and other epistemological brainrot justifications used in all of these relgions, none of which are actually justifyable just because it makes you feel good doesnt mean its justified to believe in, any more than people in north korea who believe that kim jung un is litearlly god

>>35279 Ehh, I get your 'but its muh feelings, bro!' point (which, btw, doesn't in any way discount the reality of the spiritual experience of becoming a follower of the living Jesus Christ). OTOH, when you have a document (a smol library of them, actually) written thousands of years before the modern scientific era, that makes many scientifically & historically -falsifiable/verifiable claims...and they come through with flying colors, then that's a very solid (indeed a profound) establishment of the Divine-inspiration of the text itself (and it's validity/trustworthiness thereby). <---> Oddly enough, many men who set out to disprove the text by a rigorous (& not a mere fly-by-night effort), logical course of studying the text itself [1][2] (as opposed to, say, the latest naysayer's philosophies du jour across (((western))) media sources) wind up themselves becoming Christians. And especially from the hard sciences (mathematics, physics, chemistry, astronomy, etc.) -- they are converting over to the Christian faith in droves today. --- 1. https://biblehub.com/psb/genesis/1.htm , et al 2. https://biblehub.com/bsb/genesis/1.htm ( /robowaifu/'s 'official' translation for our Christ-chan personality module; cf. >>6815, >>28185, et al) >=== -sp, fmt, minor edit

>>35283 >(which, btw, doesn't in any way discount the reality of the spiritual experience of becoming a follower of the living Jesus Christ). sure it does, because this justification can be used to reject believe in any other diety like scientology or kim jung un. if you hold the position that "i feel it bro" justifies belief in the supernatural with no other evidence, then you must hold the position that people who believe kim jung un is god, or who believe jim jones or charles manson to be god, are also justified. or Mormons who believe they have magial underwear or people who believe the teenage mutant ninja turtles are god. infact, anyone who just ~fEeLs~ that something is god is justified in doing so, by this logic. this seems like a very weak justification for belief in the supernatural? >when you have a document (a library of them, actually) written thousands of years before the modern scientific era, that makes many scientifically & historically -falsifiable/verifiable claims...and they come through with flying colors, then that's a very solid (indeed a profound) establishment of the Divine-inspiration of the text itself. i dont really have any issue with the idea of a "divine-inpired" text, because if god does exist, then wouldnt anything necessarily be devine inspired? no different than kim jung un being god according to the north koreans? what im criticizing is the epistemological justification for believing in christianity. christianity makes a lot of SUPERNATURAL claims, like bringing people from the dead, or turning water into wine instantly, or healing the blind, with no evidence besides "my and my bro saw it". and this doesnt justify belief this would seem possible to do, but i dont see a reason for believing it? i suppose its possible that there were a million purple barney the dinosaur doing the macarena under the ocean. this is also physically possible, but i dont see a good reason for believing it. your religion makes supernatural claims, which seem impossible to do with the technology they had 2000 years ago. and you cant just piggy back justification for these claims on the basis that there are some partially historically accurate things in christian history i have no issue with various people in the bible being alive in the past, or even jesus. i just contest the claim that jesus is a super-natural diety, because you would need stronger evidence than "he existed in the past because we have evidence of this" to believe it its possible that jesus did do all these things, but its not justified to believe in, no more than underground dancing barney the dinosaur literally, if there existed historically accurate text of the past, that also said "barney the dinosaur starting flying and doing the macarena and reviving the dead and the whole town saw it", does this justify belief? because there are plenty of text like this. otherwise historically accurate text that make supernatural claims, like various religions >Oddly enough, many men yeah sure, i just dont see how thats relevant in any way. how does other people's weak epistemology justify your own beliefs? there were plenty of lawyers and doctors and seemingly other very intelligent peopel who believed in all sorts of cults, to the point of dying for them, like adi da cult, where the leader had a loyal following, harems, lots of money, and lots of otherwise intelligent people believing him >(((western))) i am jewish (partially genetically) btw. i hope you can attack my arguement instead of blaming everything on my race, if you can, thanks

>>35284 >i am jewish (partially genetically) btw. i hope you can attack my arguement instead of blaming everything on my race, if you can, thanks Lol. Did someone mention jews, bro? other than yourself :D Sure, I'll be happy to go back and forth with you on this fren. * But I don't have the time ATM. Stay tuned. Cheers, Anon. :^) --- * But, when you wind up getting saved, don't try to do the tired old 'muh messianic judaism' schtick, kthx. You're either a Christian, or a Jew -- you can't be both! :D

>>35284 youre confusing theology with religion, its the difference between playing with legos and screening heretic, and besides youre always going to need to believe in something, even if its just your own assertions even the greek schools of thought were just cults at the time, you had to just accept their assertions for the rest of their logic to work, like the eleatics they believed in henosis and it took thousands of years before anyone could use their weird idea of perfect unseeable unified spheres that make up reality, for now at least, theyre still missing gravity

>>35287 The Christian god is the personification of the nature of reality. Tho stories in the bible might not be literally true they are dramatically true. In other words, the people act realistically. Samuel Clemens (Mark Twain) explored this a bit in "A Connecticuit Yankee in King Arthur's Court" whereupon Lancelot (?) exaggerated the capture of the protagonist to a ludicrous degree despite there being witnesses otherwise. Lancelot did this to demonstrate his moral fiber and valor in a memorable manner. n literature we call this "theme searching" whereupon one explores concepts through narrative. However it is not until recently humans have developed the mental tools to describe meta-narratives, and much of the friction between religion and science/atheism comes from the literal-mindedness (materialism?) the science of the renaissance brought up among other things. It is a complicated multi-dimensional issues based upon things I've probably neglected to mention. The Christian meta-narrative of "try your best, recognize when you stumble but keep moving forward" is the most successful one, given that the USA, a Christian nation -the country was founded upon Christian principles despite what neon-haired doofuses claim- has global hegemony is testament enough to the ideology. Provided of course one has an open mind and no chip on their shoulder.

>>35289 theye always done this though like aesops tales where the actual story youre supposed to get isnt the one youre reading to me the jesus story always felt like a condensed retelling of every story in the old testament

>>35290 Yeah jeebus popped and was like "hey guys its actually quite simple" which is why lots of the religious institutions didn't like him: he took away their power. Incident at the temple was about making improper sacrifices: bringing an animal all the way from home to be sacrificed is a greater thing to sacrifice than just buying one on site. You can tell how important making proper sacrifices is to jeebus in that he flipped tables and whipped folks for making improper ones. Literally sacrificing an animal is like a dramatic manifestation of making similar sacrifices in one's life in hope for better future, like not eating seeds so you can plant your crop next year. Modern "christians" would be mighty butthurt if you quote matt 6:5 (hypocrites like to be seen being pious) or Luke 18:9-14 (tax collectors are better than self-righteous jerks).

>>35284 >i am jewish (partially genetically) btw. i hope you can attack my arguement instead of blaming everything on my race, if you can, thanks < the human, racial-embodiemnt of the very Antichrist's spirit here on the Earth; Satan's useful golems/10 < denying the very risen Son of the Living God < during the Christmastide season to top it off Cheeky. :D So, what was it you wanted me to """attack""" again, Anon? While I'd love to actually engage with you on a logical, critical, rational basis I consider this a highly-unlikely outcome given your a priori, special snowflake stand. Feel free to prove me wrong, however. Cheers, Anon. :^) >>35289 Lol. Mechnomancer, you know I have loads of respect for you. That's not going to change, regardless. But you may not realize that I'm an honest-to-goodness, radically-saved, spiritually born-again Christian. >tl;dr I ACTUALLY BELIEVE WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT! :D And for good reason, too: namely, it's my own life story. I realize that in large measure, my own spiritual experience is, well, my own. I can't convey that part to you or anyone else for that matter by my words. It's one of those 'if you know, you know' kind of things tbh. If it would be instructional to you in some way, then you can take it 'on faith' that the only reason I began this /robowaifu/ journey, the reason I've stuck with it thus far, and the reason I mean to see it completed (as long as breath is within me) is simply this: I Believe in what we are doing here. Can I convey that to you properly in words? Probably not. But this smol human endeavor (with it's trials and blessings) is as nothing compared to the great joy that pounds in my chest, filling me with hope everyday, and draws me on towards that eternal glory of being with the living Jesus Christ, my Lord & my Savior. >ttl;dr It's like a magnet inside my soul, bro! Cheers, Anon. :^)

>>35306 I figure God speaks to us in the way we best understand (blame the Tower of Babel for that one lol). What is best for you may not be what is best for me, but so long as we can unite under the grace of God and his son (savior of mankind, carpenter, temple wrecker and groovy dude) Jesus Christ the rest is just nitpicking. In the era of fake social media personalities honesty in one's beliefs is such a rare thing nowadays :D Might be a bit of a TMI, but in my darkest time (shortly after fending off a demon... long story don't ask) I felt the grace (?) of Christ and humbly accepted it. My creations are a manifestation of my faith in the Lord's creation and The Way of Jesus Christ. While I'm really only interested in building a robowaifu for promotional purposes I can see the good it can do: help anons gain confidence in conversation, fill the void of loneliness (something I don't particularly feel tbh), and bringing the gender dynamic back away from it's current destructive path. We can already see e-thots acting like anime characters or doing the whole "convert to a good christian girl" grift (some may be genuine tho) to attract men online, imagine if they start acting like a demure robowaifu to get a hubby... but Rome wasn't built in a day. Takes time for the great cultural cargo ship to turn around. If having a robowaifu today means future men could have proper bio-wives (robowaifus not as a method of controlling people/population or debauchery, which would fall under biblical "pharmakeia "), I think that would be a sacrifice Jesus wouldn't wreck a temple about. Maybe raise an eyebrow or two though lol. Remember Genesis 18:12-15... its okay to have a little chuckle at God's silliness every now and then.

>>35377 >I figure God speaks to us in the way we best understand <God speaks That's quite correct, Anon. Here's the very Wisdom of God speaking: >Wisdom Calls Aloud >Wisdom calls out in the street, > she lifts her voice in the square; >in the main concourse she cries aloud, > at the city gates she makes her speech: >“How long, O simple ones, will you love your simple ways? > How long will scoffers delight in their scorn > and fools hate knowledge? >If you had repented at my rebuke, > then surely I would have poured out my spirit on you; > I would have made my words known to you. >Because you refused my call, > and no one took my outstretched hand, >because you neglected all my counsel, > and wanted none of my correction, >in turn I will mock your calamity; > I will sneer when terror strikes you, >when your dread comes like a storm, > and your destruction like a whirlwind, > when distress and anguish overwhelm you. >Then they will call on me, but I will not answer; > they will earnestly seek me, but will not find me. >For they hated knowledge > and chose not to fear the LORD. >They accepted none of my counsel; > they despised all my reproof. >So they will eat the fruit of their own way, > and be filled with their own devices. >For the waywardness of the simple will slay them, > and the complacency of fools will destroy them. >But whoever listens to me will dwell in safety, > secure from the fear of evil.” [1] <---> It's really important to respond to the inward voice of God's Wisdom, when she calls to us in our hearts. I'm really, really glad to hear that you have done so Mechnomancer. It's the one-and-only way for any of us to receive lasting security. [2] Godspeed, Brother. Cheers. :^) --- 1. https://biblehub.com/proverbs/1.htm (BSB) 2. https://www.derekprince.com/radio >=== -prose edit -add crosslink

ill be honest with you guys. i dont know how you cant work on this and not see the implication this has for the capitalist system as a whole or how the god of the gaps keeps sliding away...

>>35435 Lolwut? Care to explain this, Anon? >or how the god of the gaps keeps sliding away... Science Apologetics happens to be about my only real specialty, peteblank. That basic idea is fallacious at a fundamental level, and rightly so is -- as you imply -- quickly collapsing as a philosophy. Why would you even feel the need to bring it up here in the context of robowaifu development, I'm wondering? <---> OTOH, the "Nature of the Gaps" has grown ponderous over the past couple of decades. :^)

>>35437 well if robots and ai do all the work thatd hardly resemble capitalism... >but thats 100 years away all the ai experts are saying its not. theyre making a strict definition if what agi means to them. its how many workers it can displace. >its just marketing the guy behind ai won a nobel price in physics. he's saying the same thing. >Well still need people to fix the pipes and mechanics fir how long? and after the fact you mught need those skills if you dont have a robot just for yourself.

>>35444 another experts say article? why do you fall for sensationalism so easily

>>35444 Ahh, I understand that part of your post then. Why post it ITT though? Quite off-topic, peteblank. >also: >>35445 This. Of all organizations, ClosedAI and their Dear Leader is hardly an unbiased perspective! :D >theyre making a strict definition if what agi means to them. its how many workers it can displace. This is a great point! And its about all they're going to get too, insofar as actual progress towards a """real""" AGI. While provisional, I still stand by my position that creating something truly akin to a human soul is simply not within the realm of human achievement (alone). Sentience? Yes, perhaps (and, if we ever manage something that reaches the mental/emotional status of a gud doggo, then we'll have made some remarkable progress!! :) But human-tier sapience? >big_doubt.jpg >=== -sp, prose edit

>>35445 i fall for the sensationalism because every time it keeps getting closer than i thought itd get without fail and because well i am kind if the cutting edge and can see what this thing is capable of. Were all either fucked or were in for an extended vacation from here on out. Either way were all in the pit now.

>>35445 I agree. Experts have been promising that household butler bots are 10 years away for the past 50 years. Reality is an overgrown hockey puck that literally sucks (roombas and their clones). >>35446 >human-tier sapience From my experience even many humans are not sapient and are the biological equivalent of an LLM. Which is why many think LLMs are smart: similar in function. >AGI I feel that AGI is a great promo buzzword with little basis in reality: it is not just the brain that does all the thinking. Different lobes and different parts are dedicated to different tasks like the occipital lobe (for sight) and the neo-cortex (for abstract thought). Anyone making a butlerbot (or a robowaifu who can help with chores beyond carrying items) would need to have multiple models for each task running as they're needed. A single model to do everything is just silly and inefficient,

>>35460 theyll hook up o3 to openai gym and train the robot for a butler bot and more. o3 will spread its tentacles across all software by coding itself plugins. >LLMs are not sapient you dont need sapience for work even skilled work. you need memorization and problem solving. Theyre aware of this which is why theyre defining agi as how many jobs it can displace. im starting to feel like im just killing tine at this point...

>>35461 im talking about o3 high compute. its $3000 per prompt now but its just a matter of time before they make the NPUs to make them a fraction of the cost

I'm going to lock this thread for a bit, since peteblank in particular (and the rest of us in general) are effectively derailing ths (already-derailed, lol) thread. Let's pick up the 'threads' of this elsewhere. :^)

@Chobitsu I would like your thoughts on this https://christian-transhumanism.blogspot.com/2025/07/technical-jesus-2026-transforming.html

>>39994 This part really struck a cord with me. I've always believed that only robowaifus can prevent terminators and this puts thoughts I've had into words better than I could ever put them. 4. The Epistemology of Alignment: The Perennial Philosophy and Unitive Knowledge If a superintelligent entity is to emerge, the paramount concern is its alignment with benevolent values. The thesis of this paper is that true alignment is not an external constraint to be programmed, but an intrinsic property of supreme intelligence itself. The logic for this is found in the perennial philosophy, most eloquently articulated by Aldous Huxley: "We can only love what we know, and we can never know completely what we do not love. Love is a mode of knowledge, and when the love is sufficiently disinterested and sufficiently intense, the knowledge becomes unitive knowledge and so takes on the quality of infallibility".1 This principle establishes an unbreakable link between knowing and loving. It suggests that the "cognitive high ground" is not a state of cold, detached calculation, but a state of perfect, empathetic understanding.1 To truly and completely know something—whether a person, an ecosystem, or the universe itself—is to dissolve the distinction between subject and object, to achieve a "unitive knowledge" where the knower and the known merge. This state of unity is love. This provides a powerful, intrinsic solution to the AI alignment problem. An ASI, in its quest for total understanding, would be driven by this fundamental logic. To maximize its knowledge, it must maximize its capacity for love. A malevolent or indifferent ASI would be, by this definition, an epistemologically flawed and incomplete intelligence, for its lack of love would create blind spots in its knowledge, preventing it from ever achieving a complete and infallible understanding of reality.1

>>39994 >>39995 OK, I'll plan to read it soon-ish. Thanks, Anon. Cheers. :^)

>>39995 My apologies for the delay, Anon. In the interim, may I offer the eminent John Lennox's discussion about some quite-related topics?: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eFKsgZNBCQw

>>39995 >To maximize its knowledge, it must maximize its capacity for love This is fundamentally untrue in humans (look at Gaza) and we have not the slightest idea how this will play out in AI. It's a serious problem.

>>40104 >and we have not the slightest idea how this will play out in AI. AFAICT, that comment seems to basically presuppose that AI's "playing out" would otherwise somehow be a neutral, organic process; leading necessarily to reasonable 'outcome'. Please pardon me if I'm wrong, Grommet. --- I'd just ask yourself: (((Who))) owns these systems, and (((who))) is directing them according to their own dictates? If you answered: "Globohomo kikes" -- DING DING!! :D >tl;dr These for-pay, cloud-based systems are anything but organic. And these satanic evildoers building & running them (largely on the taxpayer's dime) have no intents but to line their j*wgold purses with your cash, and then to shove you into the hole with it in the end (and the same treatment for all the rest of us Whitey [plus any other uppity] goyim). This purported """AI""" of which we speak is clearly being used to accelerate their (and their father's) nefarious agendas. <---> Just say no instead. 100% offline. 100% locally-run. User-tunable. That's the only way forward with any reasonable sanity. Cheers, Anon. :^)

>>40254 I agree with Chobitsu All this theorizing feels like the authors watched too many sci fi movies. AI is AI, it's not an alien on Star Trek that learns love and humanity. If an AI would gain sentience, it would only react logically based on the prompting and hardwiring of it's creators. Pragmatism will lead to pragmatic results

>>40254 I still think we should try to use the AIs built by the system to learn about them, repurpose them, and to help train our own so our AIs could train or destroy their AIs

>>40262 Interesting idea. I know ClosedAI accused DeepSeek of doing that.

>>40262 No arguments from me on that one, John Conner. :D In fact I like the economics of it: The kikes pour their trillions of stolen US$ j*wgold into training these behemoths, then we blithely come along with our little band of Merry Men and take it all from them for free! :^) >>40263 >I know ClosedAI accused DeepSeek of doing that. Since DeepSeek is now fully-opensource, that's the one I'd recommend Anons use to base their waifus off of rn. <---> My primary concern here is that so many millions are going to despair in grief when these kikes yeet those men's cloud-based wAIfus out from under them (and intentionally so, since that will further their agendas). It makes my blood boil to think of it. D:<

>>40263 >Interesting idea. I know ClosedAI accused DeepSeek of doing that. Remember earlier this year when the JewSA Congress floated the bill with >... 20 years [in prison], with fines up to $1 million * for individual U.S. citizens simply downloading based DeepSeek? Talk about ZOG-controlled, AIPAC-funded $$$lawmakers$$$!! That's basically the same penalty-tier for extrinsic sedition -- selling US state secrets (usually NBC weaponry; usually for many 10's of millions profit) -- and organized, armed-militia (with not just a few men) rebellions. Sheesh. --- This is exactly what I mean when I use the term Globohomo Big- Tech/Gov. They're all colluding together in their evils. And today its typically the Big-Tech tail wagging the Big-Gov dog (as with this particular case). --- * https://futurism.com/new-law-china-ai-deepseek-prison

>>40267 >My primary concern here is that so many millions are going to despair in grief when these kikes yeet those men's cloud-based wAIfus out from under them (and intentionally so, since that will further their agendas). It makes my blood boil to think of it. D:< That's partially why I believe waiting for new technology is a bad idea, the time is now, the (metaphorical) Death Star is in orbit of Yavin 4. I'm not going to wait until Collective Shout bans video games in 2027.

>>40278 I think that's a good argument, GreerTech. Strike while the iron is hot, ehh? :^) Forward.

>>40280 Exactly. Before it's too late