My attempts to point out the (simple) math have failed; faced with the inconceivable, people go blank. So the sock puppet of an AI—answering simple questions, answerable from hard data, not anything that leaves them adrift and prone to hallucination—seemed worth trying as a tactic.
You are sorely misguided if you think “Look at this LLM agreeing with my revolutionary theory” is anything other than a massive red flag.
I agree; I was sorely misguided, naive about the AI world. I’m old; my programmer daughter I’m sure would have rolled her eyes and set me straight.
False interest is not my theory. It consists of clawback, which was recognized by Douglass in 1738, plus a significant amount of tax on false lender income, which was recognized by Peter Diamond in 1973 (then Darby, Feldstein, and others) - and the indexing fix, demonstrated by Massachusetts in 1780, explained by Lowe in 1822, implemented nationally by Chile in 1967. My news is that there has been a failed scientific revolution (i.e., assimilation of the Douglas / Diamond / Lowe facts, and elimination of false interest), and that is so far off anyone’s radar that first impressions are bound to be misleading. I tried a perfectly straightforward presentation here and it was completely ignored; pushing me to other tactics, including this, the ill-fated bounty, and a 400-year timeline. The hope is that someone will eventually look further, be fair, reverse some negative karma, and say “this guy actually knows what he’s talking about (which is false interest and how to eliminate it), and it’s important.”
You are sorely misguided if you think “Look at this LLM agreeing with my revolutionary theory” is anything other than a massive red flag.
I agree; I was sorely misguided, naive about the AI world. I’m old; my programmer daughter I’m sure would have rolled her eyes and set me straight.
False interest is not my theory. It consists of clawback, which was recognized by Douglass in 1738, plus a significant amount of tax on false lender income, which was recognized by Peter Diamond in 1973 (then Darby, Feldstein, and others) - and the indexing fix, demonstrated by Massachusetts in 1780, explained by Lowe in 1822, implemented nationally by Chile in 1967. My news is that there has been a failed scientific revolution (i.e., assimilation of the Douglas / Diamond / Lowe facts, and elimination of false interest), and that is so far off anyone’s radar that first impressions are bound to be misleading. I tried a perfectly straightforward presentation here and it was completely ignored; pushing me to other tactics, including this, the ill-fated bounty, and a 400-year timeline. The hope is that someone will eventually look further, be fair, reverse some negative karma, and say “this guy actually knows what he’s talking about (which is false interest and how to eliminate it), and it’s important.”