Untitled attachment

@Zerglingman @smugumin @Rudolf_von_Goldenbaum @Will2Power @dickflatteningenthusiast But pattern recognition by definition requires a dataset of at least two points, and following Auric Goldfinger three is the minimum to have any confidence.

For it to be really good it’s a learned ability, and the more you practice it the better you’ll be at it. Plus below certain IQs people can’t make these associations or see image, per that green text below IQ 90 people can’t grok conditional hypotheticals, and African-Americans have a mean IQ of 85, and along with white women have a narrower than white males SD, 12 vs. 15, meaning there are fewer outliers on the bell curve. That is, many fewer smart and really smart people.

Which brings up what follows pattern recognition. What do you do with your realizations??

Also look at current “AL” systems that are based on pattern recognition as I understand it, they freely hallucinate, just make shit up like citations. The more you know through whatever means, the more you’ll see people engage in such nonsense, including pushing pattern recognition beyond what it can do.

The JQ is again a useful example. You can’t just ignore or worse go in the opposite direction of everything a Jew says because they don’t always lie.

In my experience the more STEM they are, the less likely so (in part because that doesn’t work at all for technology and engineering, and tends to have bad consequences for science and math professionals), although it’ll depend on a lot of factors including obviously the domain being discussed.

If you follow the more sophisticated principle that everything they say goes through the filter of “Is it good for the Jews?” that’s still not very predictive, for there’s many answers to that question. See “renegades” like Ron Unz or as of late even Alan Dershowitz (!).

TL;DR: pattern recognition is a if not the foundation of human thinking and sensing, but it’s just a start.

Public

Notices where this attachment appears