vajdagabor's comments

I agree with Paul. Our creative and intellectual abilities are so powerful, yet there’s a real danger in handing them over to AI. That said, I think AI is still extremely useful for writing, if it complements one’s skills.

I recently published a [major philosophical work][1] that is the result of decades of thinking and three months of writing. I’m not a native English speaker, and although I know what I want to say, I often don’t know how to write it. I may not know or can’t find the right terms or phrasing, or I might make grammar mistakes. Sometimes, I can describe my ideas in a clumsy way, and I need help refining my sentences.

So, I use AI. I think, write my thoughts in my own way, and then work with AI to bring them closer to what I want. It’s hard work. Although AI can be an amazingly good writing partner, it often alters my text in ways that change the meaning completely. Even replacing a single word word with a synonym or adding a comma can turn a sentence into something totally unintended. It can be a lot of back-and-forth work to find the right paragraphs. Still, AI is a tremendous help, and my work would have been more immature and unpolished without it, even if it sometimes feels a little artificial.

Of course, it’s much more ideal to master English fully and to practice writing until it feels natural. But AI helps with that, too.

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41954302

I don't think we can have a meaningful conversation about a philosophical work you haven’t read. If there’s something specific in this framework you disagree with, please tell me what it is and why. Let me know which terminology you find unclear and why, and where you think my logic fails.

I avoided basing my work on existing philosophies for a reason. Existence and the mind are highly debated topics with many unresolved problems and a lot of confusing ideas. I wanted to understand reality from the ground up—not just to learn what other philosophers thought. I find this approach more effective and reliable, and it led to an understanding that feels coherent, solid, and logical. I believe this model solves at least one or two major problems of philosophy and science, while reflecting reality better than the mainstream model.

This writing is my attempt to share this system in a way that doesn’t require a background in academic philosophy, only the presence of one’s own mind and intellect. We can’t prove anything by pointing to Descartes, Hegel, or Heidegger. These philosophers are known because they used their own minds.

No, not terror management, and not new age either. This is a modern idealist approach, based on rigorous logic. The insights listed at the end of the treatise might not be convincing on their own, but the writing explains everything step by step. It offers proofs (in the form of logic), but each step needs careful thought to really get the insights that follow.

Thank you for the feedback, this is already very useful! I will try to improve the flow and style, but that will take some time (or a human editor). I hope you’ll still find the content interesting.

Hi, I'm the author. I'm not a native speaker, so I used chatGPT a lot for editing and finding the right formulation of the sentences. All of the ideas and thoughts are original neverthless. I have worked on this writing for more than 3 months. Unfortunately I don't feel the nuances in the writing yet, like a native speaker would.

Can you please show me a few examples where the text feels like something is off?

Yes, however those people also have right to vote (in democracies) and many of them vote without being sure what they vote for. Democracies can be hacked because too many people are either not interested or not informed well enough to vote for what's really best for them and the country.

Do you mean, some people just consciously agree with being used and lied to and their taxes being stolen so that the leaders can be richer and more powerful while schooling, health care and economy is in decay? I don't think so.

No, people supported them, but that is because democracy was hacked. Hungary is not a democracy anymore (it's a hibrid regime[1]).

The biggest issue is that the majority of the media is controlled by the government. Also they own jurisdiction and have been gradually rewritten the constitution. Most people who support this regime do that because they believe the propaganda. Many people I know have been bitterly trying to tell their family members that they are watching / listening propaganda (unsuccessfully, for years). Most of Orban's supporters don't know much about politics, they just want to live their lives, so they believe whatever is on TV, radio, online media, posters, etc. For many it is very hard to see what is true and what is lie.

But there are many, many people here who don't like this and want a change. The country is in a state where positive change towards democracy is really hard at the moment, many of us still want to believe it is possible.

By the way, we could see this madness around the world in the past years: Brexit, Trump, Bolsonaro… many people can be led by their nose. Not just in Hungary. I really whish if people would learn from Hungary's mistakes, and don't let the same thing to happen in their countries.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_regime

Blackmailing by Orban and his party, not Hungary.

Orban and his team don't work for Hungary. They work for themselves (for a small group around Orban's family), trying to take out as much money and power from every opportunity as they can. This might explain purchasing the gas on higher price (and a huge amount of other controversial deals) and preferring partnerships with corrupt governments and politicians. It's all about business and power.

There are good meticulously researched articles about their businesses here (one of the few remaining independent, reliable sources in Hungary): https://www.direkt36.hu/en/

Uncontrolled free speech benefits the more powerful, manipulative forces the most. Apparently a huge portion of people's minds can be bent with disinformation in order to create supporters, voters, haters, etc. Probably this is the biggest threat to humanity currently, and this is what Elon Musk's X platform (and himself) supports.

Free speech is very important and powerful, but truth (the real truth) is what matters the most. Free speech of lies and conspiracies is a very dangerous thing until most people gets good enough in critical thinking.

Elon Musk is all about Elon Musk. One of the biggest hypocrites on Earth right now. He might be right about OpenAI not being open as they promised, but, if anyone, its not Musk who should sue them. He claims his goal is to save humanity, but he is actively working on destroying it for profit.

Thought-provoking thoughts. How would an “open and free canvas” work? How would “being out there” work (experiencing something without being an observer)?

I mean, reality might be just what it is even if it feels and looks like a simulation.

How living outside of the simulation would feel? Could we tell it is not a simulation?

Just install, and start using it on the side. It's quite intuitive. Maybe start with the `tutor` command, then go through the guide book: https://www.nushell.sh/book/

Nushell is also quite powerful for this. For example:

  > open people.csv | where status == 'customer' | unique-by email | select surname forename email | sort-by email | save customers.json

https://www.nushell.sh/