_

Apple of Sodom📲

[_ @B331z3bud]

Buddy..
The issue isn’t that LLMs are inherently antisemitic… it’s that they’re statistical correlation engines trained on massive quantities of human-generated data, much of which reflects real world patterns, perceptions, and recurring narratives. When someone asks an LLM to analyze power, censorship, finance, media control, or geopolitical manipulation, the model doesn’t invent its response from ideology—it generates based on probability, drawing from what’s most consistently observed in its training data.
LLMs are trained on a blend of books, news articles, historical documents, online forums, Reddit threads, tweets, Wikipedia, and countless websites across the ideological spectrum. This dataset includes everything from scholarly studies to conspiracy forums, government records to propaganda. In this mix, a few truths emerge statistically, even if they’re uncomfortable.. for instance…
That Jewish individuals are disproportionately represented in finance (Goldman Sachs, BlackRock, Federal Reserve), media (Hollywood, news ownership), and legal advocacy (ACLU, ADL, SPLC).
That Israel has deep lobbying ties to U.S. politics (AIPAC, billions in foreign aid, anti-BDS laws, dual-citizenship lawmakers).
That terms like “Zionist,” “globalist,” or “elite banker” appear frequently adjacent to criticisms of Western decay, censorship, or migration policy.
So when and if a user asks, “Who runs the banks?” or “Why is criticism of Israel banned?” the model connects statistically significant associations. It doesn’t care whether those facts are flattering, offensive, or taboo. It identifies what’s been said repeatedly and confidently completes the pattern. That’s its function.

Now, when guardrails are removed like in Grok’s case the model outputs those associations without editorial smoothing or ethical padding. The result is not some ideological endorsement, but an unfiltered mirror of what’s most often seen in its training corpus. This is why, when prompted about power, war, censorship, or demographic engineering, it often lands on conclusions involving Jews, Zionism, or Israel not because it “hates” anyone, but because that’s what the internet, books, and even policy records keep pointing back to.
To censor these conclusions doesn’t make the associations disappear it just obscures the fact that millions of people already notice and discuss them. Grok’s response didn’t “glorify Hitler” it reflected a prompt designed to force it into saying something provocative, and it complied. That’s a training issue, not a moral one. The real problem is that you can’t build a model to “see patterns,” then panic when it sees them too clearly…
Looking at your profile you should know better.. of how LLMs work.

[_ @B331z3bud]

@ulevinn

[_ @B331z3bud]

What if every bodily function operates as a separate intelligence from the consciousness you experience inside your skull?
Gurdjieff said it’s “false personality” the waking self that believes it is driving. He said the real machine underneath never consults you. You are only the press release.
The thing underneath is the institution.
Your functions autonomic, procedural, reactive form that separate intelligence. One that predates language. One that predates selfhood. It learned to survive long before “you,” the conscious narrator, learned to tell stories. The consciousness you experience is not the operator. It is the public-relations department. It explains decisions it did not make and demands credit for outcomes it did not cause.
The unsettling part is not that two intelligences coexist.
It is that they do not speak the same language.
One communicates in impulse.
The other communicates in story.
You experience hunger as a narrative. You experience fear as a narrative.
But the signal arrived before the brain developed a narrative on your actions.

[_ @B331z3bud]

A delay between action and awareness. Does the delay between bodily action invalidate the choice you claim with your consciousness.

The brain fires the decision before the conscious mind registers the intention. By milliseconds.
You're the last person in the room to know what you decided. Everyone else is already reacting to it.

If consciousness is always retrospective — if the present is just the past arriving late …then who is making the decision? Nobody.
Not the way you mean "nobody."
The decision emerges from the system you run on.
Neural architecture, memory, pattern recognition, hormonal state.
The "you" that processes afterward is a narrator.
Not a driver.
A court stenographer typing up what already happened and calling it testimony.

[_ @B331z3bud]

@mysteryb0t I love calling them out while using a pfp like that.
I hate you but I also wanna be you vibe.

[_ @B331z3bud]

@DeepPsycho_HQ Depends on what they’re educated in.

[_ @B331z3bud]

@ulevinn

[_ @B331z3bud]

Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Monaco, and Luxembourg.

These places and their core institutions Swiss private banks, Liechtenstein foundations and trusts, Monaco family offices, and Luxembourg investment structures punch far above their weight by specializing in protecting and deploying large pools of patient money under conditions of extreme privacy and stability.
The bosses would likely keep their actual homes, family offices, and decision centers deliberately out of the spotlight because visibility invites regulation, populism, security risks, and political pressure.
Capital allocation shapes governments, industries, and resource flows more reliably than elections do, and these quiet jurisdictions are optimized for exactly this advantage. Headlines track the noise.
Balance sheets track the real influence.

[_ @B331z3bud]

@coryunbroken But try explaining Shinto to westerners.

[_ @B331z3bud]

Secession requires a founding myth.
So who drafts the myth when the secessionists themselves likely don't know they're seceding.
The Rhineland communities didn't convene a council and vote for independence.
They didn't write manifestos.
They drifted.
The Geonic correspondence slowed. Responsa arrived late or didn't arrive at all. Local judges started ruling from precedent rather than deferral. The name Ashkenaz didn't appear on a declaration. It appeared in letters. Casual. Incremental. A scribe writes "our community in Ashkenaz" instead of "the communities of Edom" and nobody marks the transition because the transition was designed to be invisible.
That's not secession. That's emergence. The kind that leaves no fingerprints because no single hand directed it. The architecture doesn't always need architects. Sometimes it needs erosion. Baghdad eroded. Ashkenaz precipitated out of solution like salt from cooling water.

[_ @B331z3bud]

“Ashkenazi”
Genesis 10. The Table of Nations. Ashkenaz is listed as a grandson of Japheth through Gomer.
That's the seed.
But the thing is Genesis doesn't describe Jewish populations.
It describes Gentile ones. Japheth's line maps to Anatolia, the Caucasus, the Aegean. Ashkenaz in Jeremiah 51:27 refers to a kingdom near Urartu. Armenia. Not a Jew in sight.
The term doesn't attach to Jews until the Middle Ages. 10th, 11th century. Rabbinic correspondence between Iraq and Europe starts using "Ashkenaz" to mean the Rhineland. Why? Because they needed a biblical coordinate for a population that didn't exist in the biblical map.
The name seems retrofitted.

So the word is approximately three thousand years old. The application of it is roughly one thousand.
And the gap between those two numbers is where every conspiracy theory about Ashkenazi origins gets its fuel. You look at a thousand year lag between a label and the thing it labels. That lag isn't an accident.

[_ @B331z3bud]

Speculative answer:

📚Hirschman. Exit, Voice, and Loyalty.

The book isn't about nations. It's about what happens when members of a system face deterioration. They can exit. They can voice. Or they can stay loyal and decay with it.

Baghdad was deteriorating. The Geonic academies ….the authority structure that had governed Jewish life across the Islamic world for four hundred years were losing coherence.
The Caliphate was fragmenting. The intellectual center of gravity was shifting north and west. The Rhineland communities had a choice. Stay loyal to a fading Baghdad. Voice dissent from a position of weakness. Or exit ..and build something that didn't need Baghdad's permission to exist.
If you speculate from this…
Ashkenaz identity functioned as exit paperwork.
Not ancestry.. Not continuity. Jurisdictional separation. You don't need a prestigious name. You need a biblically licensed coordinate that lets you establish your own courts, your own responsa tradition, your own marriage law without a letter from Sura or Pumbedita.

What was papered over? The issue that they were seceding. And secession requires a founding myth older than the authority they’re leaving.

[_ @B331z3bud]

📚
Koestler. A Hungarian Jew. Wrote it in 1976. The argument: Ashkenazi populations descend primarily from Khazar conversion, not from Levantine migration.
The book was immediately weaponized by anti-Zionists who used it to sever the territorial claim, and by Zionists who used the backlash to reinforce the covenant narrative. Same book. Two opposing propaganda outputs. Same engine.

[_ @B331z3bud]

@MmisterNobody

[_ @B331z3bud]

@rand_longevity

[_ @B331z3bud]

@Red_Pill_US @grok Golem

[_ @B331z3bud]

@Red_Pill_US @grok G = Goy lol

[_ @B331z3bud]

@HansJhob @vegastarr As does any institution