بالمناسبة هاي مو مشاكل مستقبلية بل دنواجهها اليوم، وإذا بعدك ما حسيت بوجودها أو تعتبر كلامي مبالغة فهو إمّا لأنها ما وصلتلك شخصيًا أو لأنك ما منتبه. والحل هو أبدًا مو تحسين أدوات الـ AI، إرجع اقرة الفوك ورح تكتشف أنّ أي تحسين للـ AI رح يعمّق المشاكل أكثر بهواي بدلًا من حلها. هالمشاكل سببها هو تصميم وطبيعة الذكاء الإصطناعي نفسه، وليست مشاكل عارِضة أو عقبات تقنية.

Bot:
So what's the solutions?
Cut off further AI?

On a societal level, there is none. Such technology is destructive to the human mind by design, yet we're at a point where society itself wouldn't want to ditch the technology regardless of anything.

On a personal level, I'd say stop using it except when it's the only tool that can do the job you want. And definitely don't pour your heart to it or for a moment treat it like a fellow human. Personally, I still use it generally for 3 or 4 specific tasks:
• To practice a language I'm learning (only in the beginner-intermediate level)
• To find a word or an idiom's meaning, things like that.
• To remove the wires from the background of pics I take.

هذا تحديث جديد نزل للتليكرام، يخلي الـ AI يلخّص لك أي رسالة طويلة بأسطر قليلة...
الفكرة حلوة لحدما تنتبه أنّ أكو برنامج هو الوسيط بينك وبين أي شي تقراه. أي شي تقراه رح يمر عبره وهو اللي يقرر شنو التفاصيل اللي يمررها وشنو اللي يغلس عليها، وانت تهضم اللي هو هضملك إياه جزئيًا لأنك أكسل من أنْ تقرة كم سطر زيادة وتتعب روحك.

.

صارلي يومين اكفر من ورة هالتحديث

Scheler writes: "The sensualist is struck by the way the pleasure he gets from the objects of his enjoyment gives him less and less satisfaction while his driving impulse stays the same or itself increases as he flies more and more rapidly from one object to the next. For this water makes one thirstier, the more one drinks."

Consider the sort of emptiness that comes from binge-watching shows or internet indulgences. Lower goods leave one restless; higher goods open new depths of satisfaction. Consider the sort of fulfillment that comes from getting a job done right, such as installing wiring for a ceiling fan, or that comes in making a savory dish for a friend.

— Phenomenology, by Chad Engelland

.

.

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا كُونُوا قَوَّامِينَ لِلَّهِ شُهَدَاءَ بِالْقِسْطِ ۖ وَلَا يَجْرِمَنَّكُمْ شَنَآنُ قَوْمٍ عَلَىٰ أَلَّا تَعْدِلُوا ۚ اعْدِلُوا هُوَ أَقْرَبُ لِلتَّقْوَىٰ ۖ وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ خَبِيرٌ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ

[سورة المائدة]

الحِكمةُ ضالّةُ المؤمن، حَيثُ وَجَدَها فهو أحَقُّ بها

— حديث نبوي

دَع عَنكَ لَومي فَإِنَّ اللَومَ إِغراءُ
وَداوِني بِالَّتي كانَت هِيَ الداءُ

صَفراءُ لا تَنزَلُ الأَحزانُ ساحَتَها
لَو مَسَّها حَجَرٌ مَسَّتهُ سَرّاءُ

— أبو نواس

Played with a theremin

.

When it comes to a topic such as flesh, language, or truth, we cannot put it under the microscope in the same way we might investigate any number of other things; we cannot do so, not because of some limitation in these topics or in ourselves, but because these topics are woven into our very selves and the very possibility of investigation. I investigate flesh, language, and truth only while making use of flesh, language, and truth.

Augustine famously says, “What then is time? Provided that no one asks me, I know. If I want to explain it to an inquirer, I do not know.” Everyone knows what these words mean but it is very difficult to think about them. These elusive terms are signs that point us beyond observation to a more original layer of experience.

— Phenomenology, by Chad Engelland

Construction in philosophy is necessarily destruction, that is to say, a de-constructing of traditional concepts carried out in a historical recursion to the tradition. And this is not a negation of the tradition or a condemnation of it as worthless; quite the reverse, it signifies a positive appropriation of tradition.

— Martin Heidegger