Not the one that lets you ask this kind of question, apparently. ;)
No but I have had a condition that they don't seem to diagnose properly. Not sure it is a condition for sure but I have felt the brunt and went through the system to try to get it resolved with not much success.
However, the symptoms, that I have explained in details and that they keep minimizing somehow, are plural and overlap with many.
Also you should read the science to understand how they try to address the symptoms (they are still clueless about the causes at the clinical level, not quite sure about private research).
Could also be a bout of havana syndrom, for all I know. It is not dissimilar either.
The brain just processes information via neurotransimission. Brain signals could already be decoded two decades ago.
Who knows what people have invented since...
You're paranoid in the wide sense of the word (the one that is plural and overlaps with many other diagnoses). I can tell from the first and last sentence of your post. The last paragraph is definitively a mark of paranoia in the modern meaning of the word. Investigating your own mental health issues through the prism of brain chemistry corresponds to the interpretive aspects that used to be associated with paranoia in the nosographies of yore.
> the symptoms, that I have explained in details and that they keep minimizing somehow
It builds up as a typical "endless blah-blah-blah" that is characterized by distortion of judgment in a way that detaches yourself from yourself and prevents you to even start therapy precisely because your theory is already an attempt at explaining the origin of your issues. It's particularly clear in your case, and the distortion of judgment I mention doesn't concern the validity of your thesis. No, as always in paranoia what's at stake is not the construction you come up with but your ability to connect on the relational plane, starting with yourself. And that's how you end up visiting many shrinks, failing to perceive you're seeking validation for your own self-theory rather than dealing with your issues without afterthoughts (a statement that is particularly cruel coming from my mouth and that I can only soften by saying that I've been there and have done that). Interpretation <-> relationships: first sentence in your post, another instance of this pattern
> Not the one that lets you ask this kind of question, apparently.
This is projection I guess, but please understand that it was warranted since you said
> From experience, all mental illnesses are related and stem from change in the activation of the dopaminergic circuitry
This sounds a bit like bullshit. It doesn't mean that what you articulate is necessarily wrong, but we can tell there is a desire to have authoritative weight in you, which explains why you look for validation rather than therapy (it's the essence of (y)our issue). It's okay. Look at my own post. It's pure projection on my part too. Paranoid, yes.
I am not paranoid.
Those symptoms have cause what could be apparented to psychosis at times, when it spiked up beyond tolerable.
I am not going to expose my full case but when you have correlated neurological symptoms such as abnormal fasciculations and hearing loss in one ear amongst other things, sudden bouts of memory loss and difficulty focusing (which is abnormal for me), adding to this that one's usual hyperphantasia seems weirdly encumbered, all of which is not taken into account nor really appropriately studied... there is an issue.
This is pretty simple and clear. You on the other hand, that you establish a diagnosis off of a mere post is a strange occurence in my opinion. :)
So no. Paranoia never been one of the diagnosis I have had by the way.
Now if you know about neuro transmission, you'd know that information is transported that way. Whether via dopamine or glutamate for instance.
I don't see how being science-based is being plagued with paranoia.
There are people who, given the same symptoms, would believe they are being harassed by demons... Not my case. Occam's razor.
Not quite sure what you are talking about.
Thanks for the "French" song, not my type of music but how would you know that I would understand ;) ?
Well, maybe if your own media server only showed videos in 1fps compared to hosted ones. You’re not comparing apples to apples here. You might argue that local inference speeds are acceptable, but that doesn’t make them comparably equivalent.
Unironically this is where I converged. Shipping the feature is the most important thing, Opus 5.5 is good enough with correctness that I merge off the title or description alone.
A year from now Fable 6 will de-slopify, so I don't really care about having pretty abstractions. That's simply not my job anymore. Sacrilege, I know.
This is the way I feel about it too. I admire designing systems and abstractions upfront, but until I have a clear way to do that, I'm happy with whatever the agent produces. I still decide on architecture, pipelines, and algorithms, and let the agent fill in interfaces, methods, and packages. Are any of them good? Certainly not. But they work. And until that needs to change I'm not too concerned, except with my job title which seems to have lost a lot of its meaning.
I flagged a few and then it started telling me that I flagged too many birds for the day. A real shame that the vast majority of the birds I got to see was fake ones.
By the way, this is a great use for jev or a classifier model (but jev is really fast and very cheap) - you could ask for it to be rated as to whether its spam / low effort / exploit or not, and filter many of these out immediately. If you do, I suggest a shadow ban / grey list rather than letting the user know you’ve greylisted them.
reply