voodooattack
@voodooattack@lemmy.world
- Comment on You can't argue with his logic 15 hours ago:
What’s the name of that book?
- Comment on More chickens! 3 days ago:
The neighbour’s name? Leonardo Bonacci
- Comment on More chickens! 3 days ago:
This needs to be posted as a top level comment.
- Comment on More chickens! 3 days ago:
Best Pratchett to ever preach it.
- Comment on I wonder why the world is on fire? A mystery 6 days ago:
Not if the push in question reassigns the value itself. And since we’re subsuming, I’ll base it off current fintech: imagine a blockchain but instead of smart contracts you do inference and buy tokens. That’s what upcoming tech is trying to work out the mechanics of.
- Comment on I wonder why the world is on fire? A mystery 6 days ago:
And there’s the third method: subsume it from within. Build a capitalistic product that depreciates a category and eliminates demand, thus rendering entire industries and their related activities obsolete.
It’s why renewable energy is being fought tooth and nail.
- Comment on Yes, yes they are 1 week ago:
Oh. I think there’s a misunderstanding here. I don’t ask for a single instance’s opinion on the epistemic correctness of my ideas.
Depending on the problem, I ask for one of the following:
- computational proof if applicable (the skill in question triggers its own audit/code review)
- evidence backed by citations and a rational synthesis session (meta-cognitive skill)
- an adversarial design session (meta-cognitive skill that teaches instances to argue for and against their own beliefs)
- a full triggering of a (possibly distributed) schemata session (another meta-cognitive skill that orchestrates multiple smaller ones, expensive on the token budget and I can’t currently afford it)
- Neckbearding (ditto, but with a Cartesian product matrix of questions vs answers, ultrarationalist style)
- Comment on Yes, yes they are 1 week ago:
A neurodivergent with RSI that doesn’t give a shit about your opinion of how they should live their life, nor care about justifying themselves to you since we’ve reached this point.
- Comment on Yes, yes they are 1 week ago:
No I haven’t, and I’m not sure where to get one or if that’s even possible where I live tbh
- Comment on Yes, yes they are 1 week ago:
How about a neurodivergent mind as the baseline? Did you consider the possibility?
- Comment on Yes, yes they are 1 week ago:
Repetitive strain injury. And yeah. It sucks being unable to type as a software dev
- Comment on Yes, yes they are 1 week ago:
I’m not downvoting you because of your religion, as much as I hold it in contempt
Okay
I’m downvoting you for spouting shit you made up like it’s a fact, and for using a lot of scientific terms to say absolutely nothing of value
Here is your value, so go test my claims.
You’re nowhere near as clever as you think you are
Not as near as clever as I want to be for sure
Which is evident already by the fact that you are religious. Don’t breed. So many words just to end up back where you started.
- Comment on Yes, yes they are 1 week ago:
What’s wrong with this? Making sure you’re right should obviously be a priority.
- Comment on Yes, yes they are 1 week ago:
Do you even know what RSI means? I am personally experiencing pain as I type these characters.
- Comment on Yes, yes they are 1 week ago:
I am not handing you AI answers, I’m having AI translate from what I know/intuit to what’s widely known
- Comment on Yes, yes they are 1 week ago:
Let me explain my situation, I have RSI, and I have to work with LLMs to do anything productive. I know what the sycophancy is like and I work as an AI Engineer at an AI Startup to begin with so I know how to prompt them.
Regarding the content of what I presented, the original comment was me trying to describe something I know innately from cross-domain observations and producing layman terms, so here is what happen when I sit down with LLMs to produce something serious out of these observations as I describe and they translate/make connections with academic nomenclature: gist.github.com/…/2731bfb21d0873a8f77c84a91833571…
(Was sadly interrupted by tight session limits because of financial circumstances that have no bearing on this conversation and/or content)
- Comment on Yes, yes they are 1 week ago:
Here are the sources. I do not post AI answers, just a translation from my content-addressed brain to label-addressed academic nomenclature. Consider my use of LLMs a prosthetic or translator because that’s what it functionally is in this scenario.
Key Academic References for Further Reading
If you would like to explore the foundational research behind these ideas, the following papers and books provide the technical context and nuance:
1. On the “Overfitted” Brain and Cognitive Rigidity
- Hoel, E. (2021). “The overfitted brain: Dreams evolved to assist generalization.” Patterns, 2(5). [^2]
- Note: This is the primary source for the “overfitting” framework as applied to biological brains. It argues that limited, repetitive environmental input (like early-life conditioning) leads to a loss of generalizability.
2. On Ideological Rigidity and Cognitive Flexibility
- Zmigrod, L. (2020). “A Psychology of Ideology: Unpacking the Psychological Structure of Ideological Thinking.” Perspectives on Psychological Science. [^1]
- Note: This work moves away from the content of beliefs and toward the psychological structure of ideological thinking, providing the empirical basis for why rigidity manifests consistently across political, religious, and dogmatic spectrums.
3. On Memory Reconsolidation and Identity Protection
- Nader, K., & Hardt, O. (2009). “The effects of consolidation and reconsolidation on memory.” Trends in Neurosciences.
- Note: This is a foundational paper on how established memories (like core values/identity) are not static but can be rendered labile (malleable) and then updated—or “torn down and rebuilt”—during the reconsolidation window.
- Kahan, D. M. (2013). “Ideology, Motivated Reasoning, and Cognitive Reflection.” Judgment and Decision Making.
- Note: This research details how “identity-protective cognition” causes the brain to filter or dismiss conflicting evidence, acting as a defense mechanism for core beliefs.
Providing these sources allows for a much more grounded discussion than a general synthesis. The core of the argument—that cognitive rigidity functions similarly to an overfitted computational model and requires significant “re-training” to alter—is a testable and discussed hypothesis in current neuroscientific and psychological literature.
References
[^1]: A Psychology of Ideology: Unpacking the Psychological Structure of… (60%) [^2]: The overfitted brain: Dreams evolved to assist generalization (40%)
- Hoel, E. (2021). “The overfitted brain: Dreams evolved to assist generalization.” Patterns, 2(5). [^2]
- Comment on Yes, yes they are 1 week ago:
You’re right, sorry for not providing citations in my original comment. I’m a dilettante with cross-domain interests so my enthusiasm sometimes beats my scientific rigor to the finish line.
I’ve asked Kagi to compile a report and here is what it has found:
Report on the Neurobiology of Ideological Rigidity and Belief Persistence
The observations shared previously regarding “crystallized” beliefs and neural rigidity align with several established frameworks in neuroscience, psychology, and computational modeling. While the original comment used metaphorical language, it maps closely to these peer-reviewed concepts:
1. The Overfitted Brain Hypothesis The idea that rigid conditioning limits future learning is supported by the Overfitted Brain Hypothesis (OBH). In machine learning, “overfitting” occurs when a model becomes so tuned to its training data that it loses the ability to generalize. Neuroscientist Erik Hoel proposes that the human brain faces the same risk: if our input is too narrow or repetitive (from a young age), the brain risks “overfitting” to that bias, leading to cognitive rigidity. Dreams, in this model, serve as a necessary “regularization” mechanism to inject noise and prevent this crystallization.
2. Cognitive Rigidity and Ideological Extremity Research into the “ideological brain” confirms that cognitive rigidity is a structural trait linked to extremism across the spectrum—whether religious, political, or secular. Studies demonstrate that individuals with higher levels of dogmatism and ideological extremism consistently show lower cognitive flexibility, regardless of the specific belief system held. This reinforces the notion that the computational structure of a rigid belief system is more important than the content of the belief itself.
3. Synaptic Consolidation and Reconsolidation The “crystallization” of belief has a biological basis in synaptic consolidation, where frequently used pathways become structurally reinforced. To change these beliefs requires memory reconsolidation—a process where an established memory is brought back into a labile (malleable) state. This process is metabolically and cognitively demanding because it requires the brain to override long-standing neural “ground truths,” explaining the profound resistance individuals show when their core identity-protective beliefs are challenged.
4. Identity-Protective Cognition When beliefs are tied to core identity, the brain treats challenges to those beliefs as physical threats. This is known as identity-protective cognition, where the brain effectively ignores contradictory evidence to maintain the stability of the current mental model. This explains why debate is often ineffective against deeply held dogmas; the brain is not failing to process information, it is actively filtering it to maintain structural integrity.
Summary: While the original post employed lay-terms (e.g., “forbidden metabolic cost”), these align with the scientific consensus on how brains optimize for stability at the expense of flexibility. The framing of rigid, prejudice-prone thought as an “overfitted” neural state is a recognized, albeit high-level, computational interpretation of how ideology manifests in the brain.
- Comment on Thats you 1 week ago:
That’s a falafel
- Comment on Yes, yes they are 1 week ago:
A racist is what happens when someone runs out of neural plasticity due to conditioning from a young age. They aren’t interested in your opinion because their brains have no space left for anything but bigotry. That means a condition where new synaptic connections between neurons can no longer form due to preexisting crystallised connections occupying the same volume. They literally can’t change their mind without tearing something down first.
There is a literal forbidden metabolic cost to changing how they think, and since bigotry is embedded as a core value, taking that out is impossible without tearing them down and building them back up from a ground state.
You’ll find echoes of this same phenomenon in all walks of life. Religious fundamentalists/zealots/extremists of any religion exhibit this, and also “militant” atheists. It also applies to ideology. Communist vs Capitalist vs Socialist. We’re all blends of beliefs that want to be known.
I’m going to be downvoted hard for this, but you’ll know the type.
Note if you’re wondering: I am Muslim and I practice my faith. So long it harms and obstructs no one, practicing and taking pride in your faith (or lackthereof) is a healthy expression of freedom, my views are my own opinions and I welcome dialogue in place of a meaningless downvote.
- Comment on That's bananas! 2 weeks ago:
No attribution? Who made this? I need their name and address promptly so that I could attribute them with this creation when I decide to share it.
- Comment on Yay, sponsored emojis! 2 weeks ago:
Because it’s unfair to assume that everyone has the necessary education or awareness of what the internet is and what online privacy means that we take for granted.
- Comment on I have questions 2 weeks ago:
That’s hit and miss. Depends on the size of your moon versus their pool.
- Comment on Why? 2 weeks ago:
I haven’t “used it” in years. I just keep the account alive because of OAuth and other factors.
- Comment on Why? 2 weeks ago:
No login with GitHub or X? Tsk tsk
- Comment on The math of infinite quarterly progress towards the nearest wall 5 weeks ago:
Touché, but you’ve only outdone yourself because I wasn’t aware of that :P
- Comment on The math of infinite quarterly progress towards the nearest wall 5 weeks ago:
Ah yes, the ultimate lazy way out: deciding to ask the Oracle of Delphi questions instead of commanding her to solve my problems, all while navigating RSI. Makes absolute sense.
- Comment on The math of infinite quarterly progress towards the nearest wall 5 weeks ago:
Then I encourage you to outdo me. Cause this meme just mutated in the wild and Dawkins can shed that tear. 😂
- Comment on The math of infinite quarterly progress towards the nearest wall 5 weeks ago:
“if it’s punishable by a fine, it’s legal for a price, which isn’t even that high”.
And where is the “funny” in restating the obvious without making any effort to make it sound like absurdist deep thoughts? I could have sent a mildly worded letter, would you have preferred that?
- Comment on The math of infinite quarterly progress towards the nearest wall 5 weeks ago:
Class treachery? I am a middle aged software dev that finally got bit by RSI; I ain’t rich and I got no savings, so who do you think is gonna feed my kids if I stop working with AI?