I m a girl and she is older than me by 31 years. Is it normal the love like this? And she is a muslim I think, she doesn't know anything about my belief and sympathy to her. Tell me please
Discussion
Viego wrote: Oh, look! There’s an answer. Seems like… alright… looks like… it definitely might work. But WAIT—it was AI-generated! So, I won’t even bother looking at it
"The future is now old man!" LOL you guys are too funny. Yea from now on I'm telling Chat GPT to make responses look "kind of retarded" so nobody will suspect anything 🤣
Active HelperĤl·lĥæ wrote:View source "We need a human touch or emotions"
Not necessarily, since you don't need those elements for a tip to be useful.
So that is the reason why you reacted "Haha" to my post. Let me clarify, the AI will never replace a human response in the context of this forum because most of the topics are related to aspects of reality an AI will not understand, it is out of their sphere of existence completely. Do you understand now why human touch is needed? Not a cope, not a fallacy, but a real need for real humans to provide in most cases what is therapy. Do you want an AI therapist? Or a teacher? Teacher could work to an extent, but again, the context of ToZ is outside of what AI can comprehend so that's that.
So where was the cope? Or is it simply more nonsense from you (which has nothing to with the age of your account, by the way).
Eos_ wrote:View source "The future is now old man!" LOL you guys are too funny. Yea from now on I'm telling Chat GPT to make responses look "kind of retarded" so nobody will suspect anything 🤣
Sounds good. Add this as well every time after the AI generates an answer :
The memes are funny but...
-If op wanted Chat Gpt to answer she would have gone straight to it.
-Immagine if in every post everybody was to answer with it, what kind of place would this become?
-You answering a post of a person with problems assumes that you know what you're talking about, with chat gpt you can basically answer any post without having any experience or wisdom about what the person is having problems with., or simply you have no idea what you're talking about.
-Yes, Im Aquarius, doesn't mean i want to use technology in an unminingful way.
-The natural and healthy goal of Ai is not to let it do things for you and call it a day, rather let it help you understand subjects so that you gain more experience with it, in this specific case it was just a lazy copy and paste.
Now my friends, since you like Chat gpt so much, let's ask it what he thinks about this overall discussion:
I think a forum where people just copy and paste ChatGPT responses would lose a lot of its value. Forums thrive on human interaction, personal experiences, and unique perspectives. If AI-generated answers dominate, it turns the space into a generic information dump rather than a community-driven discussion.
One major issue is accountability—when you reply to someone’s post, there’s an unspoken expectation that you have some level of knowledge or experience on the topic. But with ChatGPT, anyone can generate an answer that sounds authoritative without actually knowing what they’re talking about. That can be misleading, especially in sensitive topics like mental health, relationships, or legal matters.
Also, engagement matters. People don’t just come to forums for answers; they come for connection. A thoughtful, personally written response—even if it’s imperfect—carries more weight than a generic AI-generated one. AI can be useful as a tool for learning, but relying on it to replace human discussion defeats the purpose of a forum in the first place.
If AI is going to be used in forums, I think it should be in a way that enhances discussion rather than replaces it—like using it to clarify concepts, provide sources, or inspire deeper thinking rather than just copy-pasting responses.
Look, here’s the thing—I completely agree with what you said, but I want to add a few things. Personally, when I use AI, I make sure that what I write is entirely my own thoughts—literally. I type out my response in my native language, then I paste it into the AI and ask it to maintain the essence of my message and my wording without changing anything. The only thing I want it to do is make my message grammatically correct, coherent, and easy to digest for everyone, not just the person I'm speaking to. It’s not like I’m copying and pasting a question and then expecting a response where I had no involvement whatsoever. The response is fully mine—I just have it refined grammatically so that it can be understood better. I do speak English, but not perfectly, and even native English speakers can use AI to make their messages clearer and more coherent.
Now, I’ve seen arguments like this before:
"Well, if someone is using AI, it means they don’t care, and it’s disrespectful because it shows they just don’t put in the effort."
But I think we need to acknowledge the fact that if someone actually took the time to come up with a response, that in itself shows they do care. At least, that’s how I see it.
Or another one:
"If person X wanted to use ChatGPT, they would’ve done it themselves."
And yeah, that’s true—but there are so many different AI tools out there, and no single one is the absolute best. There never will be an "ultimate AI" that’s better than all the rest combined. Each one is specialized in certain things—some are great at collecting information, others at processing it, some are experts in SEO, others generate images, some are more advanced in understanding human psychology, while others have knowledge that another AI might not have. So even if someone were to use AI to craft a response, they might not necessarily use ChatGPT—they might use something even better suited for that specific purpose.
Sure, AI-generated content can sometimes be detected, but detection tools are becoming so advanced that at some point, they won’t be able to tell the difference at all. In fact, there are already AI models that produce responses so natural that no one can distinguish them from human writing. So when people say, "AI can’t comprehend certain things the way humans do," I can actually prove the opposite. If no one can tell whether something is AI-generated or not, then does it even matter?
I don’t want to use technology in a meaningless way either, as you mentioned. But from everything I’ve seen in this discussion, I feel like even when AI generates valid, helpful responses—ones that are actually useful—people still seem to want an illusion. They crave something that "feels" emotional rather than an actual solution. And honestly, I find that a bit ridiculous. But hey, that’s just my opinion.
Viego wrote:View source The only thing I want it to do is make my message grammatically correct, coherent, and easy to digest for everyone, not just the person I'm speaking to.
Relying on this means you never learn to do these thinga for yourself.
Rely on it too much and your language will never develop to the point where you can tell if your own messages are coherent. Then you pass an erroneous input onto AI which "improves" it, and you'll never know if the message is conveying the meaning you intended, because you lack the language skills and knowledge to do so.
Never having to simplify things yourself also means you will lose this skill and your understanding of things will never be tested and deepened, because the mark of intelligence and knowledge is in being able to simplify complex ideas and concepts.
In the coming era, some people will rely on AI. It will become God to them and they will become slaves to it. Others will rely on themselves and each other and become gods themselves.
If someone uses AI to actually learn something, it is commendable rather than deplorable. In truth, many would benefit from doing so. An example - using the apostrophe instead of plural (eg. there are dragon's on the mound, or 'God's' as plural, not the singular, it is not Saxon genitive).
Another remark, I assume that eventually one will stop needing to use A.I. as they will finally learn how to write grammatically correct (eg. present perfect - subject+have+3rd form, so eg. 'I've went somewhere' is the thing I've seen somewhere - hurt my eyes it did).
Epiphany wrote:View source In the coming era, some people will rely on AI. It will become God to them and they will become slaves to it. Others will rely on themselves and each other and become gods themselves.
This is true - some people are weak, so they'll be enslaved to the 'god' called comfort.
'Per ardura ad astra'
Aquarius wrote:View source Now my friends, since you like Chat gpt so much, let's ask it what he thinks about this overall discussion:
Well, you see, this is a bit trickier than it seems, and people really need to understand a few key things about how to use AI more effectively:
First of all, it depends on how you phrase the question. If you ask in a way that suggests you’re looking for a positive confirmation, the AI will recognize that and respond accordingly.
Example: If you ask, “Is it true that... will happen?”
The AI will likely generate a response that starts with “Yes” and, even if the actual answer isn’t a definite yes, it will provide supporting arguments, examples, or explanations that lean toward confirming the statement. This happens because when someone asks, “Is it true that...”, it essentially translates to “I want you to confirm and validate this for me.”
But what happens if you ask the following question right after it responds: "Are you sure?"
Here, the AI will often respond with "No..." followed by arguments that contradict its previous statement. This happens because it recognizes that you’ve caught onto something being off, or even more so, it detects that you’re trying to explore why the initial response might be wrong or/and it observes that you changed your mind and are now looking toward an opposite response to the previous one.
The way of how the question is addressed is Important : If it starts with 'It is true? It is correct? ' - then Ai will support only that part of validation the actual question to the positive side of 'true/correct' - but if you ask 'it's wrong to...' / 'it is false and bad to...' then the Ai will come with answers in regards of this [it will support the way you've started the question'
This is why it is [B]ESSENTIAL to always ask "Are you sure?", because AI makes mistakes very often—VERY OFTEN. I’ve taught a lot of people this from experience, and if you try it yourself, you’ll see that I’m right.
Beyond that, AI models are constantly learning and evolving [the answers will never be of a static nature], and the way a question is structured plays a huge role in shaping the response. Here’s a great example: without even showing my exact question (just like you didn’t show yours) , in regards to the latest AI generated contend that you've showed us.
----------
Yours:
I think a forum where people just copy and paste ChatGPT responses would lose a lot of its value. Forums thrive on human interaction, personal experiences, and unique perspectives. If AI-generated answers dominate, it turns the space into a generic information dump rather than a community-driven discussion.
One major issue is accountability—when you reply to someone’s post, there’s an unspoken expectation that you have some level of knowledge or experience on the topic. But with ChatGPT, anyone can generate an answer that sounds authoritative without actually knowing what they’re talking about. That can be misleading, especially in sensitive topics like mental health, relationships, or legal matters.
Also, engagement matters. People don’t just come to forums for answers; they come for connection. A thoughtful, personally written response—even if it’s imperfect—carries more weight than a generic AI-generated one. AI can be useful as a tool for learning, but relying on it to replace human discussion defeats the purpose of a forum in the first place.
If AI is going to be used in forums, I think it should be in a way that enhances discussion rather than replaces it—like using it to clarify concepts, provide sources, or inspire deeper thinking rather than just copy-pasting responses.
Mine:
AI in forums isn’t about replacing human interaction—it’s about enhancing it. Instead of seeing AI as a threat, why not view it as a tool that helps structure thoughts, provides factual insights, and makes discussions more inclusive?
Accountability isn’t lost just because AI is involved—humans are still responsible for what they post. And while personal experiences matter, not everyone has the confidence or ability to articulate their thoughts effectively. AI can help bridge that gap, allowing more people to engage in meaningful conversations.
Forums evolve, just like technology. Rather than resisting AI, we should embrace it as a way to improve clarity, accessibility, and engagement, making discussions more insightful and valuable for everyone.
Who win? Nobody , because it's the way the question is addressed , there's nothing to be 'won' but rather to be mostly understood.
Epiphany wrote:View source In the coming era, some people will rely on AI. It will become God to them and they will become slaves to it. Others will rely on themselves and each other and become gods themselves.
This is a very important point. Technologies can bring some side effects, depending on their use. In addition to addiction, there are also risks “on the aging of the brain and its capabilities.”
Some effects of the “lower octaves” of technology are: Destruction of individuality, self-confidence, self-expression and humanity, loss of connection with the collective, and loss of some functions of the central nervous system, such as in your example, the onset in writing, language, comprehension and learning problems.
Sensory/perceptual qualities/skills can be greatly damaged, intuition, empathy, and the ability to go “deep” will be lost over time and/or will be drastically reduced.
And it is also to be kept in mind that artificial intelligence cannot “decipher” the “metaphysical,” and in some cases, gets it wrong. This will inevitably lead for those who do not understand to make big mistakes in their lives.
Epiphany wrote:View source Relying on this means you never learn to do these thinga for yourself.
Rely on it too much and your language will never develop to the point where you can tell if your own messages are coherent. Then you pass an erroneous input onto AI which "improves" it, and you'll never know if the message is conveying the meaning you intended, because you lack the language skills and knowledge to do so.
Never having to simplify things yourself also means you will lose this skill and your understanding of things will never be tested and deepened, because the mark of intelligence and knowledge is in being able to simplify complex ideas and concepts.
I know English, but it's not my native language. My issue isn’t understanding words—it’s knowing how to structure them correctly for clarity. AI helps me with that, just like a human teacher would. It not only gives me the right phrasing but also explains why it works grammatically.
So why is AI seen as a problem? If it helps me learn and improve, then where’s the issue? Saying I won’t learn to communicate because I use AI makes no sense—AI teaches me the "why" behind the corrections, which is exactly how learning works.
In the coming era, some people will rely on AI. It will become God to them and they will become slaves to it. Others will rely on themselves and each other and become gods themselves.
Ai is already used a lot and this topic has been discussed before, there will be 3 types of people:
#1 The one who are 'old' and 'outdated' enough not to be able to understand how technology works, not knowing how to use a simply phone , forget about AI, there's people who have no ideea how tech works and how to use it, those people will be a thing of the past and left behind.
[On this, my Father who is nearly 60 now, always bitchin about that he does not need a phone and he is not a slave like the others and that he is smart and so on so forth but if it weren't for me to use the phone for him, he would had not had a job in todays time , especially in a very well developed country such as the one I am now, where everything is nowadays virtual rather then physical [ example , no more jobs in newspapers or for now , not as many as on the internet] , [people needs a phone number to be called upon , to gain details for their Visas online , to do things] without those , you can't prove that you 'exist' , that's how todays world is.
#2 The one who use AI to improve their life , smartly , not letting themselves psychological influenced by it, knowing how it works and what it is, being spiritual developed enough to see with their spiritual eyes and intelligent enough to know that it is only a electronic/virtual thing. - Those people will never be tricked by some metal or by some virtual thing as those people have seen deities and spirits with their own spiritual eyes , there's still a risk if one lacks intelligence but tiny , it depends to the case to case.
#3 The one that you've just said , yes, some will be absorbed by it , by many things of it and I know very well why, enemy is trying to push tech to a level where human would not human to human connection , you would be able to see everything that you ever wanted to see, feel it , making this more real then reality itself when in reality those would be just stimulations and lies to the so called ' higher reality ' of what the enemy would try to sell. I'm investigating this future , once I finish a few things of mine , I will do a few websites upon why regulations are necessarily , how to protect, how those things works, how the higher corporations using it for ages to manipulate samd.
Extra:
I have always had this conversation with my Father , which I respect a lot and I am not mocking him in any way, the biological one I mean, He always thought the technology will be the end of humanity and I always believed it will be the era of the most transcended period of evolution ever, the one who would advance us into the 'Age of Aquarius' .
Now...with this.. there's people who wants power for themselves , thinking that they are 'friends' with the illegal enemy and not truly giving a shit about his fellow human, thinking that he will be safe in the 'new world' just because he works for the enemy , with those, it is our mission to wake them up to reality and proving them why they will be even more attacked then the average human , one of the main reason would be because he would know too much , he who worked for enemy would know how that 'things' works and therefore will be more targeted then the average human.
Future waits for nobody and it's up to us how we shape it , first is not to become a product to it and overcome it, trough spirituality and intelligence , knowledge is power 'IF USED' .
Viego wrote:View source I know English, but it's not my native language. My issue isn’t understanding words—it’s knowing how to structure them correctly for clarity. AI helps me with that, just like a human teacher would. It not only gives me the right phrasing but also explains why it works grammatically.
So why is AI seen as a problem? If it helps me learn and improve, then where’s the issue? Saying I won’t learn to communicate because I use AI makes no sense—AI teaches me the "why" behind the corrections, which is exactly how learning works.
This is something I can comment on, for as some of us remember, or stil know, there are teachers who do their job for money, AND there are people who actually want to guide others to understanding.
If there is no teacher or a guide, one can find myriads of websites where one can hone their skills. And why not, if A.I. is used to learn something, this is definitely okay.
If, however, it is used to give generic answers - not so much.