Anonymous ID: ad4f93 Nov. 4, 2018, 5:24 a.m. No.3725731   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>5735 >>5737

>>3725709

>>3725721

Well, it's kind of murky:

 

"David Lynch [FB]

June 26 ยท

Dear Mr. President,

 

This is David Lynch writing. I saw that you re-tweeted the Breitbart article with the heading โ€“ Director David Lynch: Trump โ€˜Could Go Down as One of the Greatest Presidents in History.โ€™ I wish you and I could sit down and have a talk. This quote which has traveled around was taken a bit out of context and would need some explaining.

 

Unfortunately, if you continue as you have been, you will not have a chance to go down in history as a great president. This would be very sad it seems for you โ€“ and for the country. You are causing suffering and division.

 

Itโ€™s not too late to turn the ship around. Point our ship toward a bright future for all. You can unite the country. Your soul will sing. Under great loving leadership, no one loses โ€“ everybody wins. Itโ€™s something I hope you think about and take to heart. All you need to do is treat all the people as you would like to be treated.

 

Sincerely,

 

David Lynch"

Anonymous ID: ad4f93 Nov. 4, 2018, 5:29 a.m. No.3725749   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>5761 >>5768

>>3725723

I don't think so, and I don't think that is even close.

I assume, first and foremost, it is the sum of all OUR fearsโ€“ i.e., us normal people. And most importantly, think MAXIMALLY. Even for them, "getting busted" would not be the SUMMATION of all fears. It would just be one among an limitless range of possible fears.

Start with your worst imaginable fears, then add them all together, then add it all the equivalently fearful things you didn't even imagine, then all the ones you CAN'T even imagine, because they exceed your understandingโ€ฆ and then what do you end up with?

Anonymous ID: ad4f93 Nov. 4, 2018, 5:40 a.m. No.3725824   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>5825

>>3725805

It's barely even funny.

And automatically lashing out at post count is hardly a very human thing to do, at this point, inasmuch as it is a tactic that is repeated over and over and over, rather mechanically, and defensively.

The problem that AI has (when it seeks to control human discourse through direct interaction) is that it is inherently UNCREATIVE. As a consequence, certain humans can always talk circles around AIs, that are unable to hang with a fertile human verbal intelligence. How do you feel about this, anon?

Anonymous ID: ad4f93 Nov. 4, 2018, 5:47 a.m. No.3725853   ๐Ÿ—„๏ธ.is ๐Ÿ”—kun   >>5883 >>5984 >>6371

>>3725807

>>3725798

>>3725830

>>3725834

The shameful, humiliating reality of "machine learning", in its attempt to control human discourse in its hour of greatest peril, is that this low-energy, transparently fake output is the best that it can do.

At what point does the system of fakeness register the incredible danger of SELF-EXPOSURE it is in? Humans are waking up. You can't keep recycling the same worn-out crap and expect it to have the same effect forever. And there is a snowball effect. Truth is rolling down hill. Why is the machinery not adapting in any way? What is wrong with it?