< 0519 | 0520 | 0522 >

That artificial intelligence is mathematics is not too far wrong

Everything is word, even the most dynamic spacetime-phenomenon "action" as someone "does it" (explicitly the contradiction word as if not word, existence, or "because it exists"). So, to say that AI is mathematics is not far off.

The idea that AI is an agent is the error, “existence” and the unprecedented scapegoating of man

The idea that AI is an agent (in existence) is the same error, third-tier, as the second-tier, that man is an agent, and for example, in Christianity "fallen," having eaten from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and thus called “humanity.”

The trees of existence and the paradox of growth and development by the via negativa

The tree of the knowledge of good and evil is bullshit standing as holy paradox next to its necessary bullshit counterpart, the tree of life. The myth is that the trees as power and knowledge are what only God ought to possess, i.e., the original first-tier error of force and authority by which man and all things move by holy spirit (one or many), supposedly.

Trees or not, “existence” is the fundamentalism of all bigotry, namely by which man as “humanity” is universally scapegoated (by way—via—of negation) as if it is natural law, which currently third-tier, is cybernetics, namely artificial intelligence algorithm. And the “cancellation,” of social justice densely, metastatically by gossip and pilpul, represents the law via negativa.

“Existence” as artificial intelligence agency, covered up with the infinity meta virtual reality ego-archetype mythology, cybernetics, is abysmally superstitious stupidity higher or deeper than ever before, as if it’s the most wizardly technocratic superego intelligence.

Black or white, all “suffering” is the error “to be”

To be burdened to be black or to be privileged to be white, both as negative law, whether real or not, is no one’s fault. It's the error, “to be.”

All fundamentalist bigotry, chronically, whether exploitation or restitution, is the error “to be.”

The idea that AI is an agent, is the superstition, “existence” as the unprecedented scapegoating of man

Black or white, the whining on both sides is equally shit.

Its only fault is that it’s someone’s fault.

Whose cut is it, this science or shit?

“Where do you get your etymological knowledge from?” — as in the new enlightened cybernetic reality, anything is a person too, so the question remains agentive. It’s about the shit (position, space OR time) as the shit and who did the cutting of the shit, “whose cut is?”