SatanLucy

Not much activity on the site, so I have to keep producing topics because apparently no one else will.

My interest in women isnt based on logic.

If we consider things logically, all interests are arbitrary.

But women are only wanted for their looks.

I dont want women for their intelligence, because I dont consider women to be smart. If I aimed for intelligence, I would be more likely to date men.

I dont want women for their money, because most women arent even rich.

I dont want women for their personality, because most women have boring repetitive personality.

I dont want women for their sense of humor, because most women dont actually have sense of humor.

I dont want women for conversations, because most women arent even good at conversation and each conversation is basically just gish gallop of emotions and nonsense talk.

So outside of looks, women dont have any qualities which I would want them for.

If I was attracted to personality, conversation and a sense of humor, I would more likely be gay because men have better sense of humor and better personality than women, and usually hold conversations better.

Each desirable quality exists in men much more than in women, other than looks.

Now, some might say ability to produce offspring, but I am not interested in reproducing in a world where my line of offsprings is basically guaranteed to suffer at some point, because there is no family tree which doesnt contain great suffering of some individuals.

So the only thing left is looks. Women are wanted just for looks, nothing else.

Everything is in fact a simulation.

Yes, my religion teaches that the only ones who believe in material world are the losers.

Also, what needs to be said is that women are only desirable for their looks. I dont have any intellectual interests in women because women simply arent on same intellectual level as I am. Also, I dont really find their personalities desirable, and women usually dont even have any consistent sense of humor or morality or logic, and I cant really say I enjoy women's way of talking because it feels just emotionally driven conversation where you have to match topic to their current mood or they get upset.

So the only thing women are desirable for is their looks. they have no other qualities, and the reason why old women are lonely is because their looks expired and once they dont have looks, no one wants them.

If Bruce Lee were still alive, you could teach him how to do martial arts.

Of course, thanks to statistical probability study method, I can teach anyone anything.

Another useful method is goal oriented study method, which uses forward reasoning and backward reasoning commonly used in chess engines.

Backward reasoning is basically starting with goal, and then working backwards to see what achieves goal step by step backwards.

Backward reasoning method:

P1. We must achieve this goal

P2. A achieves this goal

P3. B achieves A

P4. C achieves B

C. We must achieve C to achieve B to achieve A to achieve goal

Forward reasoning method:

P1. C achieves B

P2. B achieves A

P3. A achieves goal

C. We must achieve C to achieve goal

https://www.tiktok.com/@ultimatedarkmagician/video/7614893963618897159

I finally fixed user interface, adjusted message size to proper shorter lines, and as you can see in video, chatbot is not repetitive and answers differently even when same prompt is repeated.

this isnt AI, its just chatbot using pdf book as knowledge base, using vector based retrievers and word level tokenizer.

It chats with any book and quotes exactly from book.

I went to school for over a decade. I learned more about coding from AI in few weeks than in over a decade of school.

the problem starts in education system, which isnt specialized so learning is million times slower and the smartest people end up worse.

And censorship is just what further reduces available information.

I can understand that not everyone has time to learn and debate, but somehow has more than enough time to actively prevent others from debating and learning.

Can't be as low as the USA's bar is currently set.

Only losers compare themselves with other losers. If a country wants to progress, it must compare itself with best countries, not with loser nations.

And call it spanking and it becomes a whole different ball game.

Currently proposed law in Bosnia seems to include all physical punishment.

Yeah, the only way a country like Bosnia can be called good is if you set the bar very low.

Wing Chun doesn't matter, I'm sure you can teach all of the martial arts

With chatgpt and statistical probability method, yes I can.

For example, martial arts invented by Bruce Lee, Jet Kun Do, uses straight lead punch to make sure punch reaches target in quickest possible path - straight. Same for kicks. Straight kicks are faster than round kicks, and thus can even intercept them and counter attack.

So yes, Bruce Lee did have good ideas, especially about not sticking to rigid rules, but be like water, where the only limitation is to have no limitations.

Bruce Lee didn't use Wing Chun. He invented his own martial arts which is, to no surprise, nothing like wing Chun.

I admit that I dont know a lot about martial arts, I just go by what usually works in reality statistically. Because lets face it, those joint locks look good when in controlled scenario. In reality, Wing Chun never ranked high anywhere, not in MMA and not in any serious fighter sport.

You can look at top 1000 fighters in any universal fighting sport, and you wont find any wing chun fighters there.

Ironically, we are also late behind Republic of Srpska who already has such law.

But given the corruption in a country, I still believe law will only be formal, and in reality, it wont have much influence because I doubt anyone will get arrested for that in private homes.

Well, the law still isnt even in effect, but it is just being considered.

the reason why such law is important is because these types of punishments still happen a lot to children, especially in religious institutions and private homes.

Bosnia went from having corporal punishments in schools just 20 years ago, to some time later making law against corporal punishments in schools, but not in religious institutions or private homes.

this new law I assume also includes private homes, because if not, its a pointless law which becomes one of those "place dependent laws" (in same country illegal in one place, but legal in another place in a country).

https://youtu.be/d8X-yKdiX6g?si=nb32Q-1lUPie-I-0

I'm sure Master Wong would appreciate it if you would tell him how to do it right.

the correct way is used in krav maga, where you block and dodge at same time, and then counter attack.

I dont need to say that wing chun fighters lose often in rings because their order of actions is either too complicated or incomplete. they usually lack dodging in their training, and dodging is one of most crucial skills in modern fighting, because dodging is more effective than blocking. Wing Chun focuses entirely on blocking or parrying, which is unrealistic because no opponent will throw just one punch. But entire wing chun is focused on one punch of opponent, and once a chain of punches happen, their technique becomes flawed because they lack dodging which is more effective against chain attacks.

Wing Chun fighters often struggle in modern ring fighting (MMA/boxing) because the style's close-quarter, trapping-focused techniques are difficult to apply against fighters skilled in distancing, diverse kicking, and ground grappling

. While effective in tight spaces or, as some argue, in specific street contexts, they often lose in competitive, open-ring environments. 

Key reasons for poor performance in the ring:

1. Lack of Grappling/Groundwork: Wing Chun does not emphasize ground fighting, making practitioners vulnerable once taken down.
2. Distance Management: The style is optimized for close-range (trapping) rather than the long-to-mid range kicking/punching distance common in the ring.
3. Misunderstood Techniques: "Chain punching" is often wrongly applied as a weak flurry, whereas true, effective Wing Chun requires intense, precise pressure, and many practitioners train with improper, low-contact methods that fail against high-impact strikers.
4. Rules Restriction: Many traditional, potentially damaging Wing Chun techniques (e.g., eye strikes, joint locks) are banned in competitive sports, limiting their toolkit.
5. Sparring Methods: Lack of full-contact, sparring-based training in many traditional schools makes it difficult for practitioners to handle the speed and power of experienced, full-contact fighters.

People who do censorship indeed are dumb, and censorship makes them more dumb. What is interesting about dumb people is that, unlike smart people, dumb people have tendency to become dumber.

The tendency for perceived "dumber" behavior to persist or worsen

often stems from a cycle of limited knowledge, which makes learning new information harder. This "ignorance loop" is exacerbated by the Dunning-Kruger effect, where low competence leads to overconfidence, preventing the self-reflection needed to improve. 

Key factors contributing to this trend include:

1. The Ignorance Loop: Background knowledge is necessary to absorb new information; when you know less, it becomes harder to learn, leading to stagnation.
2. Dunning-Kruger Effect: Incompetent individuals often lack the skill to recognize their own incompetence, resulting in a false sense of superiority that stops them from updating their world view.
3. Lack of Critical Thinking: Stagnation occurs when individuals fail to question themselves or their surroundings, reducing cognitive flexibility.
4. Habits and Environment: Lack of intellectual stimulation, poor nutrition, high-stress, and surrounding oneself with unchallenging, like-minded people can cause cognitive decline. 
5. 
   

While it may seem that some people get "dumber," it is often a lack of mental exercise or a refusal to learn rather than an unchangeable trait. 

I never quite understood why people love censorship.

Almost every country in the world has a lot of censorship, and the reason why they do censorship is, by their own words: they are losers.

In my whole life, I never understood why someone's speech should be censored.

In fact, I am always interested in everyone's speech, because I am not afraid of anyone's opinion, nor seek censorship of any opinion because I need a different opinion to talk to in order to talk at all.

If everyone had same opinion as me, world would be a peaceful but terribly boring place.

It is different opinion which produces that excitement which mere agreement can never produce.

So agreement is boring, mostly.

But why people prefer censorship, is because they are liars or losers.

Liars, because if obvious truth was on their side, they wouldnt be afraid of then obvious lies.

Losers, because the reason they do censorship is because they would be losers if they didnt do it.

By merely doing a censorship, person admits to being a loser who without censorship would be even a bigger loser.

For example, if I did a censorship of someone, I would be admitting that not censoring that person would make me a bigger loser, so doing censorship makes me a smaller loser instead.

Censorship is a tool of losers and liars, not of competent people.

And censorship makes the one who do it dumber.

In order to grow intellectually, you logically need a different opinion to update your own. But when you censor a different opinion, you only leave both sides dumber and less informed, because neither side then engages with a different opinion on any good level.

It doesnt.

Wing Chun does have few things correct, but its problem is extremely unrealistic blocking and parrying techniques.

It can continue for years, but Iran wont lose. Iran will just keep attacking until US is baited into ground invasion which US will lose.

that is master Wong explaining basic wing chun techniques.

true, but people here dont learn transcendental argument well.

P1. Existence can only be conditional or unconditional

P2. If existence is unconditional, then everything exists, including God.

P3. If existence is conditional, conditions for existence are essentially same as God in power, thus God

C. God exists in both possible cases.

Conditional existence talks of "existing only if some condition happens"

Unconditional existence talks of "existing independently of any if conditions"

Because 3rd option doesnt exist, any individual thing can only have its "existence" dependent on some condition, or independent of any condition. there is no 3rd option here.

But when applied to existence generally, we end up with result that only two options are possible:

One, there are conditions which control all what will exist and what wont,

two, there are no such conditions, and thus, each possible thing has independent existence.

One is basically God.

two, likewise means God exists because each possible thing exists.

to better understand two, basic definition deduction is necessary.

P1. If no thing is required for existence, then everything exists

P2. No thing is required for existence

C. Everything exists.

to put it simply, this argument talks of what is needed for existence.

P1. Existence of a possible thing requires something or it doesnt require anything in order to happen

P2. If existence of a possible thing requires something, that "something" is essentially God

P3. If existence of a possible thing doesnt require anything in order to happen, then all possible things exist, including God

this argument explores what is required for a specific thing to exist in the first place. If nothing is required, then all things exist, including God. If something is required, that something is essentially God.

thats what happens when you start a pointless war you cant possibly win. Your resources get drained.

https://youtu.be/l-jpEHsP97w?si=Ts8YMePCirr9ryEP

I am also learning Krav Maga martial art. I chose Krav Maga because most other martial arts seemed borderline retarded and lets face it, Wing Chun is a scam and IP man would get destroyed in real life because basic technique doesnt work.

https://youtu.be/oknO3NTeGNo?si=AI-2G8Xn-Z5PHJfu

https://youtu.be/L6z7xrr_Ews?si=eSoTn543dajfjFjc

https://youtu.be/x3wGQ4YtDps?si=5TyHTTGfawYmv2m5

Unlike other people, I cannot be happy with current version. the correct path is endless hunger, always seeking more, always better than yesterday, always better tomorrow.

How old were you when you first decided you wanted to be a full of crap loser?

the only ones who think brainless work leads to success are the losers.

the method for growth actually is often found and used in programming, which is why programming advances faster than almost anything else.

Method simply consists of constant work of "build something, scan for errors and improvements, fix errors and do improvements, produce new version, repeat this with new version as well."

the reason why this method works is because it seeks constant positive growth.

While hard brainless work consists of merely repeating same, such as worker at shoe factory merely repeating same work of cleaning shoes, the growth method doesnt repeat, it insists on constant improvement from previous version, and constant improvement after each new version.

the problem for Americans is mainly a lack of consistent standard.

Lets imagine a standard used for Iraq applied universally.

Iraq was invaded because it "could produce weapons of mass destruction" (Not because it has done so).

Apply that universally, and you can invade any bigger country as long as you convince Americans that leadership of that country has even slightest interest in producing weapons, even if that country doesnt actually have such interest and doesnt have such weapons.

Now Greenland is even worse case, because trump wanted to invade Greenland purely for preventing it to be used by China and Russia. On this excuse, you can invade basically any country in the world who has any cooperation with China or Russia. You can even invade Europe for trading with Russia.

trump's actual goal is China and Russia. trump knows that China is growing rapidly, will eventually be superior to USA, and trump wants to contain China.

Venezuela was attacked for selling oil to China. Iran was attacked for selling oil to China. Greenland similar. Goal is to starve China of oil, to put it simply. Because China wont be able to grow as much if it lacks oil, while USA will be able to grow because it takes oil for itself.

Just another dumb war by aggressive USA.

In past 20 years, USA attacked Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Iran, Venezuela, and bunch of other countries.

None of these countries attacked USA in any meaningful way, but of course politicians will seek bunch of excuses to start wars. And excuses are easy to find. It is actually easy to find excuse to start a war with any country. But Americans are too stupid to realize that.