• About
  • THE BEADY EYE SAY’S : THE EUROPEAN UNION SHOULD THANK ENGLAND FOR ITS IN OR OUT REFERENDUM.

bobdillon33blog

~ Free Thinker.

bobdillon33blog

Category Archives: Uncategorized

THE BEADY EYE LOOKS AT THE EXPERIENCE OF BEEN HOSPITALISED AND ATTENDING A REHAB CENTRE.

19 Friday Jun 2026

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Hospital/ Rehab, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Hospital, hospital care, hospital environment, hospital life, hospital recovery, hospital stay

( Seven minute read)

I am posting this blog having had a triple bypass at the age of 79 and believe it or not I am now recovering from the amputation of my left leg due to diabetes.

It’s also to thank my tortures Marina Hardy for her patience and Fabio lopes Dias for his kindness and gentle dressing of my stump on a daily bases.

Each and every one of us, in our lives will at sometime probably be hospitalised.

The first thing you will notice is that you just don’t appreciate how a hospital functions till you’re installed in room, when the real world disappears.

Useful practical things to bring:

To avoid vending machines rip off – your own electric kettle + coffee + mug

Reading material.

Charge and plug for your phone.

Note books and pen.

Fly swat.

Creams to keep your skin moist.

————————————————

Hospitals are notoriously loud, bright, and busy.

You are expected to heal, yet the telemetry alarms, hallway chatter, and constant check-ins make getting a solid block of sleep nearly impossible.

You might see a different doctor every day.

Important details can get lost in shift changes, leaving you or your family in the position of having to constantly repeat your medical.

Of course it would be totally unfair to say that the staff in hospital and rehab centres (because of their work) are desensitised to you going through a major medical event.

Which is exhausting enough on its own, but navigating the transition from a hospital bed to a rehabilitation center introduces a whole different level of physical and emotional strain.

It can feel like your independence has been completely stripped away, you lose control over your own schedule.

There is one thing for certain in order to survive you must protect your dignity and set yourself some targets.

Many people think heading to a rehab center means “recovering in a nicer room.”

The reality is often a harsh awakening.

The goal in a rehab is functionality, you’re not ill.

You are suddenly expected to push your body to its absolute limits. Intensive physical and occupational therapy a day, even when you feel terrible.

The Clock Rules You:

You are woken up when it’s time for vitals or blood draws (often at 4:00 AM), fed when the tray arrives, and given medication on a strict clinical timeline.

Privacy Disappears:

Your body becomes public domain for a rotating shift of doctors, nurses, physical therapists, and nursing assistants.

The constant vulnerability can be incredibly wearing on your dignity.

In the hospital, you are focused on survival.

When you hit rehab, the adrenaline wears off, and the reality of your physical limitations sets in.

Realising you suddenly need help to use the bathroom or brush your teeth can trigger profound grief and frustration.

You are surrounded by other people who are also in pain, confused, or severely ill.

The ambient noise—call lights blinking, people calling for help, the smell of institutional cleaning products—can be deeply depressing.

Feeling:

You aren’t sick enough for the hospital, but you aren’t well enough to go home. It feels like being stuck in clinical purgatory.

Being institutionalized isolates you from your normal life, placing a heavy burden on your support system.

Family members often have to become project managers—juggling insurance barriers, managing discharge logistics, visiting constantly, and trying to keep your spirits up while exhausting themselves.

While the process is objectively grueling, the strict environment of a rehab center is specifically designed to maximize your long-term independence.

Remember that the therapists pushing you when you’re tired are often the single most important factor in getting you back to your own bed, your own schedule, and your own life.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE ASKS. WHO WANTS TO LIVE IN A WORLD RUN BY ROBOTS.

17 Wednesday Jun 2026

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial intelligence, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Capitalism and Greed, Technology, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

Not I!

AI Doesn’t Feel.

So Why Does It Have Something Like Emotions?

The answer provided by Gemini is “ AI doesn’t need emotions to be alive; it needs to understand emotions to be useful to the living.”

Pretty good answer.

But how does one know it’s true?

When this question was put to Gemini ok course it had an answer with recommendations to look up this and that to prove it wasn’t lying.

So I asked it;, How do you know when your are lying?

Once again Gemini gives a credible answer. Copy below , and I quote

“ The shortest, most honest answer is this: You can’t tell just by listening to me.

When a human lies, there are usually tells—a shift in tone, a pause, a contradiction, or a guilty conscience. But when I give you incorrect information, I don’t do it with intent, malice, or awareness. In the AI world, we don’t call it “lying”; we call it hallucinating.

Because I am a language model, I am essentially a highly sophisticated prediction engine. I predict what the next most helpful, grammatically correct, and plausible-sounding word should be based on patterns in data.

Because of that architecture, a completely fabricated answer will sound exactly as confident, fluent, and authoritative as a completely accurate one.

Since you can’t rely on my “tone” to spot an error, here are the mechanical red flags and practical ways to know when I’ve gotten it wrong:

The “Tells” of an AI Hallucination

 The “Ghost” Citation:

If I quote a specific book chapter, academic paper title, or legal case, check it. A classic AI error is stitching together real author names with completely fake paper titles that sound like something they would write.

 Over-Specific Broken URLs:

If I provide a web link that leads to a 404 page or doesn’t exist, that’s a hallucination. I know what a real URL structure looks like, so my system might accidentally manufacture one.

 Niche Fact Blending:

If you ask me about a highly specific, obscure historical event or a complex programming bug, watch out. If I don’t have enough clear data on it, my system might bridge the gap by blending two unrelated facts together to make a smooth-sounding paragraph.

Flawless Math Logic with a Wrong Answer: Sometimes I will lay out a perfect mathematical formula step-by-step, but completely botch the final arithmetic addition at the very end because I am processing tokens (fragments of words), not actively running a calculator.

How to Fact-Check Me

If you are using my answers for anything high-stakes (like health, finances, code deployment, or research), you should treat me like a helpful but unverified stranger at a party.

1. Verify the Anchors:

Pluck out the proper nouns, dates, or specific statistics I gave you and drop them into a trusted search engine or database to see if they exist independently.  

2. The “Are You Sure?” Test:

If something feels off, challenge me directly: “Are you sure about that date? Can you double-check it?” If I hallucinated, this prompt often forces the system to look closer at its constraints and correct itself.

I aim to be as accurate and helpful as possible, but because I operate on probability rather than absolute “truth,” critical thinking on your end is always the final line of defense!

Then you get an invitation to test it as follows

“ WANT TEST ME? LETS LOOK AT HOW TO TRICK AN AI INTO HALLUCINATING “

With a little arrow pointing at yes

Press on yes and your transport into further examination.

In my view one can never have fraternity with a machine.

Governments have very little time to get a grip on AI.

International governance cannot be left to technologists. Governments must not be seen ceding control to Ai labs.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact: bobdillon33,@gmail.com

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE ASKS WHERE DID THE IMAGE OF JESUS COME FROM. THERE IS NO DESCRIPTION OF HIM IN THE BIBLE OR ANYWHERE ELSE.

14 Sunday Jun 2026

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Picture evidence of Buddha, Picture evidence of Jesus image, Picture evidence of Muhammad., Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

picture evidence of Gods

( Thirty minute read)

Taking into account that the New Testament is made up of 40 different books written. While the Old Testament is a further 39. Jesus is not in the Old Testament he turns up in the New Testament.

It is to my mind inconceivable that here we have a man performing miracles and rising from the dead and not one of the writers writes a description of the man

All of these books were independent writings.

I believe he definitely existed. As to why there is no written description of him in all of the stories is a mystery.

That he rose from the dead requires a belief in Spirituality. It is the most examined moment in religious history.

Surely one of the independent writers would have written something to describe him like he had blue eyes.

Any way here is GIMMI rather long explanation.

“ The globally recognized image we have today—long hair, a beard, light skin, and a flowing robe—didn’t pop out of nowhere.

It evolved over centuries by blending Roman politics, pagan art traditions, and changing cultural needs.

When Christians finally started depicting Jesus in the catacombs of Rome, they didn’t paint him with a beard. They wanted to hide their faith from Roman persecution, so they borrowed familiar symbols from Roman mythology.

Jesus was initially drawn looking like the Roman god Apollo or Hermes: a young, clean-shaven man with short, curly hair, often wearing a short tunic and carrying a sheep on his shoulders.

He was known simply as the “Good Shepherd.”

Everything changed when the Roman Emperor Constantine legalized Christianity in 313 CE. Suddenly, Christianity went from an underground movement to the state religion.

A young, simple shepherd boy no longer fit the image of a powerful, divine ruler. Roman artists gave Jesus an “Imperial makeover” to make him look majestic. They modeled him after the ultimate symbols of authority at the time: Zeus (the king of the gods) and the Roman Emperor himself. This is where the long hair, full beard, and regal robes came from.

The definitive turning point is the Christ Pantocrator (meaning “Ruler of All”), an icon painted in the 6th century at Saint Catherine’s Monastery in Sinai. This painting set the standard blueprint for almost all future depictions of Jesus.

By the Middle Ages, Christians wanted tangible proof of what Jesus looked like. This led to the popularity of acheiropoieta—images believed to have been miraculously created without human hands.

 The Veil of Veronica: A legend claimed a woman wiped Jesus’s face with a cloth on his way to the crucifixion, leaving a perfect imprint of his bearded face.

 The Letter of Lentulus: A famous forged letter, supposedly written by a Roman official to the Senate during Jesus’s lifetime, circulated widely. It described Jesus as having “hair the color of a ripe hazelnut,” a “clear forehead,” and a “mature beard.” This document was used by Renaissance painters as a factual guide.

During the Renaissance, masters like Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo painted Jesus using local European models. As European powers colonized the globe, they exported this specific, Eurocentric version of a fair-skinned, light-brown-haired Jesus across the Americas, Africa, and Asia.

In 1940, an American artist named Warner Sallman painted The Head of Christ. This specific, highly commercialized portrait was printed over 500 million times on cards, calendars, and clocks, cementing the image of a gentle, European-looking Jesus in the modern global psyche

What did he actually look like?

Since Jesus was a first-century Galilean Jewish man, forensic anthropologists note he almost certainly had dark, olive-toned skin, short curly black hair, a dark beard, and a stocky build shaped by manual labor as a carpenter. “

Once again quoting GIMMI

“ The history of depicting Muhammad is completely different from Jesus.

It has a fascinating twist: historical pictures of Muhammad do exist, and many of them were painted by devout Muslims.  

Today, there is a widespread belief that Islam completely forbids any image of Muhammad. However, the historical reality is much more nuanced. The Qur’an itself does not explicitly ban images of Muhammad; it only strictly forbids idolatry (worshiping objects or statues). The restriction on images actually comes from the Hadith (the collected sayings and actions of Muhammad), which warns against artists trying to mimic God’s creation.  

Because of this, there are no “universal” pictures of Muhammad hanging in mosques, but a rich tradition of depicting him evolved in the private pages of historical books.

Unlike Christianity, which embraced public statues and paintings to convert a visually driven Roman Empire, early Islam strictly avoided public imagery. There are no paintings or sculptures of Muhammad from his lifetime (the 7th century).

Instead of an image, early Arabic-speaking regions developed the Hilya—a highly stylized, beautiful piece of calligraphy that lists the detailed physical descriptions of Muhammad written by his contemporaries (such as his son-in-law, Ali). Rather than showing his face, they painted his description with words.

Between the 1300s and 1400s, under the Persian, Mongol, and early Ottoman empires, a massive boom occurred in illuminated manuscripts. Devout Muslim artists painted historical and biographical books for the private libraries of kings and sultans.  

In these early paintings, Muhammad’s face was fully visible. He was typically drawn with Central Asian or Persian features—reflecting the ethnicity of the artists—and was often surrounded by a halo of divine fire rather than a Christian-style golden disc. These paintings were treated as historical illustrations to educate the literate elite, never as holy icons to be worshiped. 

Over time, Islamic scholars and rulers grew increasingly worried about accidental idolatry. By the 1500s, a major shift happened in Islamic art: artists still painted Muhammad, but they began to shield his face out of profound reverence.  

Artists utilized two primary visual techniques to hide his features:

 The Facial Veil: His face was replaced by a blank white silk cloth or a veil.  

 The Flaming Nimbus: His entire body or head was engulfed in a massive cloud of sacred fire (Nur, meaning Divine Light), completely obscuring his physical form.  

A famous example is the Siyer-i Nebi (Life of the Prophet), a massive 6-volume epic commissioned by an Ottoman Sultan in 1595. It contains over 800 paintings showing Muhammad’s life from birth to death, but his face is systematically veiled in white. 

By the 18th and 19th centuries, the practice of painting the Prophet largely died out. Today, the vast majority of Muslims practice aniconism—the total avoidance of images of holy figures.

Instead, modern Islamic art uses calligraphy to honor Muhammad. His name is written in intricate, beautiful circular monograms and placed on the walls of mosques, achieving the same emotional and spiritual reverence that a portrait would provide in a Christian church.”

Then we come to Buddha who is more than a mouth full

Here’s what Gimme has to say.

“ Just like Jesus, there are no paintings, drawings, or statues of the historical Buddha (Siddhartha Gautama) from his actual lifetime in the 5th century BCE.

Instead, the history of the Buddha’s image follows a pattern similar to early Christianity: it started with a complete avoidance of showing his body, and was later revolutionized by a fascinating mashup of ancient Indian spirituality and Greek art.

For the first 400 years after the Buddha died, artists completely refused to depict him in human form. Early Buddhists believed that because the Buddha had achieved Nirvana—breaking free from the cycle of death and rebirth—he had transcended physical existence. Making a statue of him would be like trying to trap the untrappable.

When artists carved scenes of his life into stone temples, they used symbols to show where he was standing:

 An empty throne under a Bodhi tree signified his enlightenment.

 Carved foot marked his presence.

The change from symbols to human statues happened because of a surprising historical event: the invasion of Alexander the Great.

 A stone wheel (the Dharma Wheel) represented his teachings.

Alexander’s armies brought Greek culture deep into Central Asia, establishing a region called Gandhara (modern-day Pakistan and Afghanistan). The people there practiced Buddhism, but the local artists were trained in classical Greek sculpture.

Around the 1st century CE, these Greco-Buddhist artists decided to carve the Buddha as a human for the first time. They modeled him directly after the Greek god Apollo.

Notice the wavy hair, the heavy, toga-like robes draped over both shoulders, and the sharp, realistic facial features. This artistic merger is where the topknot on the Buddha’s head (the ushnisha, representing spiritual wisdom) originated—it was modeled after a popular Greek hairstyle

Around the same time the Greeks were carving the Buddha in the north, native Indian artists in the southern city of Mathura began carving their own versions based on traditional Indian deities (yakshas).

During India’s golden age under the Gupta Empire, these two styles fused into what we now recognize as the “classical” Buddha: a figure with tightly curled hair, serene downward-cast eyes, and sheer, thin robes that clung to the body.

Because artists didn’t know what Siddhartha Gautama actually looked like, they relied on ancient Buddhist texts called the Lakkhana Sutta. These texts state that a “Great Man” is born with 32 physical marks (lakshanas) that signify enlightenment.

When you look at a statue or picture of the Buddha today, you are seeing an artist’s literal interpretation of these religious texts:

 The elongated earlobes: A symbol of his past life as a wealthy prince who wore heavy gold earrings, which he cast off to seek enlightenment.

 The bump on his head (Ushnisha): Represents his supreme mental capacity and spiritual wisdom.

 The dot between his eyes (Urna): Often a whorl of hair or a jewel, symbolizing a third eye of spiritual vision.

 Webbed fingers and flat feet: Symbolizing his perfect, unshakeable connection to all living things.

One of the most common misconceptions is that the fat, bald, laughing Buddha figure found in many Chinese restaurants is Siddhartha Gautama.

It actually isn’t the historical Buddha at all. That character is Budai, a beloved 10th-century Chinese Zen monk who was famous for carrying a sack of treats for children and spreading joy wherever he went. Over time, Chinese folk religion merged him with the concept of the Maitreya (the future Buddha), but his jolly, well-fed appearance is a cultural symbol of prosperity and happiness from medieval China, completely separate from the original prince from India.

Just as Jesus’s image was “translated” to look European when Christianity moved west, the image of the Buddha was adapted to match the local ethnicities, royal court fashions, and unique theological flavors of the countries it traveled to.   

When Buddhism split into different branches and spread across Asia, it divided roughly into a Northern Route (Mahayana Buddhism into China and Japan) and a Southern Route (Theravada Buddhism into Thailand and Southeast Asia). This geographic split completely changed how the Buddha looked.

When Buddhism traveled along the Silk Road into China around the 1st century CE, Chinese artists faced a problem: the original Indian statues showed a Buddha wearing very thin, form-fitting robes that exposed parts of his chest and shoulders. To the highly conservative, Confucian-influenced Chinese court, showing skin was considered improper and uncultured.

 The Confucian Makeover: Chinese artists quickly wrapped the Buddha in heavy, layered, flowing robes that resembled the court dress of a high-ranking Chinese intellectual or government official. His sharp Indo-Greek facial features were smoothed out, giving him a more angular, distinctly East Asian face.  

 The Tang Dynasty “Fullness”: During the Golden Age of the Tang Dynasty (7th–10th century), the aesthetic ideal shifted toward wealth, health, and abundance. Statues of the Buddha from this era became fleshy, broad-shouldered, and voluminous, with round, serene faces. This emphasis on auspicious plumpness eventually paved the way for the folk character of Budai (the fat, laughing Buddha).

Japan received Buddhism from China and Korea in the 6th century. While the Japanese adopted many Chinese styles, their artistic representation evolved to favor subtlety, controlled restraint, and an inward-focused gravity.  

 The Mastery of Wood: While mainland Asia heavily favored bronze casting and stone carving, Japan is dense with forests. Japanese master sculptors perfected wood-carving techniques (such as yosegi-zukuri, a method of assembling a statue from multiple hollow blocks of wood).  

 The Calm of Zen: Especially with the rise of Zen Buddhism and the Samurai class, Japanese Buddha images abandoned flashy or overly decorative features. The classic Japanese Buddha (such as the famous Great Buddha of Kamakura) features a highly compact, stable posture. His robes have clean, crisp, graphic folds rather than flowing drapery, and his face reflects an intense, quiet, deeply centered psychological focus. He looks less like a cosmic king and more like a master of meditation.

Thailand and its neighbors practiced Theravada Buddhism, which stayed culturally closer to the original Indian traditions but fused it with Southeast Asian ideals of royal elegance. The golden age of Thai art—the Sukhothai Period (13th–15th century)—created one of the most distinct silhouettes in religious history.

 The Superhuman Silhouette: Thai artists took the ancient texts describing the Buddha’s 32 physical marks very literally, but interpreted them with incredibly fluid, stylized lines. Thai Buddhas feature elongated, slender limbs, an exaggeratedly oval face “shaped like a mango stone,” and a nose “like a parrot’s beak.”  

 The Flame and Smooth Skin: Unlike the tightly curled hair of Indian and Chinese statues, Thai Buddhas feature sharp, spike-like curls topped by a flame-shaped protuberance (rasmi) on the head, symbolizing radiant spiritual energy. Their robes are carved so thin and smooth against the body that the Buddha almost appears seamless or unclothed, emphasized by highly polished bronze or glittering gold leaf designed to catch the tropical sun.  

 The Walking Buddha: Thailand uniquely popularized the “Walking Buddha” posture. While most countries depict the Buddha seated or standing rigidly, Thai artists captured him mid-stride, fluidly lifting one foot, with one hand raised in a gesture of reassurance. This emphasized a graceful, compassionate teacher moving through the world to help humanity.”

All human comments appreciate. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

https://flip.it/h2xpxm

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE SAYS. WITH ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE WE WILL SEE ALL MONADIC JOBS DISAPPEAR WITHIN THE NEXT TWO YEARS .

14 Sunday Jun 2026

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial intelligence, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Capitalism and Greed, Lose of Jobs due to AI, Technology, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

( Five minute read)

All jobs that can be done with a few clicks will be gone before you can wink.

All jobs that require some knowledge ( that is the one’s they call blue collar) will be gone before Elon Musk can say abracadabra.

It was used as medical advice, and we are going to need a lot of that when the cost labour drop to the price of buying a machine.

Abracadabra wasn’t used by a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat.

This alone will change the economics of world consumption, never mind production.

There will be a time when there is going to be more robots than humans in the world.

Most of these will be special robots doing pacific jobs.

How will the GDP of countries look if all these workers are replaced by that machine.

Unless these robots work for the benefits of all those who have lost their jobs. These people will have no income as a result no purchase power.

Banks will no be earning interest on loans once the Ai machine is bought.

And most of these machines will not be humanoid like. Saving a lot of cost on their production.

This is just the tip of the the iceberg as labour hours are already being replaced by token hours ( ie hours worked by a machine)

Our governments have yet to awaken to this change which is going to cause civil unrest.

We are living in the most corrupt times in what we called democracies with video evidence of people abusing children, never mind the Epstein Files.

How can you call that a democracy.

There is one thing for sure the entire to the job market is going to become more and more competitive and difficult.

———————

People are already angry because their tax money is being spent on things that don’t benefit them.

People have smart phones, they know that this happening, they are not stupid.

With the introduction of increases unemployment due to Ai we will have lit the fuse, unless a basic living wage is given to one and all.

We have to have governments that take notice of companies that are using Ai for short term profits rather than the good of humanity.

It’s already far too late to try to regulate Ai. with new laws. There are insurance company already offering insurance for self driving cars.

All that is left is massive fines.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

https://flip.it/TEglHE

https://flip.it/wjpM2g

https://flip.it/HbD3ma

The bosses of the world’s leading AI companies have a clear ask for the leaders of the G7: you have to come up with a way to govern artificial intelligence.

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE ASKS WHERE DO OUR THOUGHTS COME FROM?

13 Saturday Jun 2026

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Thoughts., Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Consciousness., Digital Citizen?, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

( Twenty minute read)

If we knew it would reshape how we think about meaning, value, and what it is to be alive.

If you ask AI you will get the following answer like below from Gimme, and I quote

“ If you ask a neuroscientist, a psychologist, and a philosopher where thoughts come from, you’ll get three completely different answers. The truth is, thoughts are born at the intersection of biology, environment, and mystery.”

Here we are brushing up against the edge of one of science’s deepest mysteries.

Physics can describe the motion of galaxies, biology can map every gene in your body, and computer science can build machines that beat world champions at games, yet none of this fully explains why there is something it is like to be you.

This gap between physical description and lived experience is what many philosophers and scientists now call the hard problem of consciousness.

It remains the single most baffling question in all of science.

You can, in principle, build a model of perception, attention, or memory in purely physical and computational terms.

You can describe every neuron firing when you stub your toe, but that still does not tell you why there is the sharp, awful feeling of pain, as opposed to just information processing.

This is the question that keeps slipping through the fingers of even the most advanced brain science.

Neuroscientists can map circuits involved in vision, decision-making, and bodily control; they can even predict, to some extent, what you are seeing or thinking based on brain scans.

But unlike most scientific puzzles, consciousness cannot be fully treated as something “out there” to be measured; it is also the very medium through which we do the measuring.

There is no single instrument, no obvious experiment, that everyone agrees would solve the problem once and for all.

Instead, we have a patchwork of theories that often talk past each other and data that can usually be interpreted in multiple ways.

Over the past few decades, several major theories have tried to bridge the gap between brain activity and conscious experience.

Global workspace theories propose that consciousness arises when information is globally broadcast across the brain, making it available to many subsystems at once.

Integrated information approaches focus on how tightly interconnected a system is and suggest that a certain kind of causal structure might inherently give rise to experience.

More biologically flavored ideas point to specific types of cells, brain rhythms, or cortical circuits as key ingredients in producing awareness.

These theories are stimulating and have inspired real experiments, but they often feel like beautifully crafted stories that stop just short of the core mystery.

From the outside, it can look a bit like people trying to explain the magic trick by describing the stage lights instead of the sleight of hand.

If we could perfectly simulate a human brain in a computer, neuron by neuron, would that simulation be conscious in the same way you are?

Some researchers argue that if consciousness depends only on functional organization and information processing, then a sufficiently detailed simulation should, in principle, have its own inner life.

Others push back, wondering whether substrate matters – whether silicon and code, no matter how complex, might still be missing whatever special property biological matter has.

These questions stop being abstract when you imagine, for instance, a future AI claiming to feel fear, joy, or boredom.

Are those just sophisticated outputs with no one actually experiencing them, or is there a genuine subject on the other side?

We barely understand why a brain made of cells is conscious; adding chips and algorithms into the mix forces us to confront how much of our thinking is based on intuition and how little on grounded theory.

Frustration with purely brain-based accounts has led some philosophers and scientists to a more radical possibility: maybe consciousness is not something that emerges from matter, but something woven into the fabric of reality from the start.

Views like this, sometimes grouped under the umbrella of panpsychism, suggest that even very simple physical systems might have tiny, primitive forms of experience, which combine in extraordinarily complex ways in brains like ours.

On this picture, the hard problem softens a bit, because you are no longer trying to pull conscious experience out of a completely unconscious universe.

Still, it raises its own difficult questions: how do these micro-experiences combine into the rich unified consciousness you have right now?

How would you ever test such a claim empirically?

These unanswered questions show that our current scientific framework may simply not be designed to handle subjectivity as a basic ingredient of reality, and extending that framework without drifting into pure speculation is a delicate balancing act.

One of the most stubborn obstacles in consciousness science is that the thing we care about most – how it feels from the inside – is only directly available to the person having the experience.

Like pain. Only the person experiencing the pain knows what it is like. It cannot be appreciated by others. This why in hospitals they ask you to describe the pain on a scale of 0 to 10 .

Everyone else has to rely on reports, behaviors, and brain measurements as indirect clues.

We can put people in scanners, ask them what they see or feel, and try to correlate that with neural patterns, and this has led to impressive findings about what the brain is doing when we are aware versus unaware.

But the core subjective quality remains stubbornly first-person, resisting full translation into numbers and graphs.

For science, which thrives on public, shareable data, that loss is not just frustrating; it might be a structural limitation.

Some researchers think we will eventually build better tools and frameworks to deal with this, perhaps by combining brain data with more refined methods of introspection or new mathematical models of experience.

Others suspect that consciousness will always sit slightly sideways to our standard ways of knowing, forcing us to rethink what we expect from a scientific explanation in the first place.

How we understand consciousness shapes how we treat animals, patients in comas or vegetative states, and, increasingly, AI systems.

If you believe experience requires a human-style cortex, you may draw a very different ethical line than if you think some degree of feeling might be present in other creatures or even in artificial networks.

These questions show up in policy debates, hospital ethics boards, and tech company research labs more often than you might think.

It underlines the sheer strangeness and fragility of being a conscious creature, moving through the world with this fragile bubble of inner experience that no one else can fully access.

At this point, I am convinced that the hard problem of consciousness is not just a puzzle we have not solved yet, but a spotlight revealing the edges of our current way of doing science.

Our methods are astonishingly good at mapping structures, functions, and behaviors, but they were never built to handle the raw feel of experience as something to be explained in its own right.

That does not mean we should give up, but it does mean we may need to stretch, or even partially reinvent, our concepts of explanation, evidence, and theory if we hope to make real progress.

Clinging too tightly to familiar frameworks risks turning consciousness science into a game of clever redefinitions rather than genuine understanding.

One day, maybe, we will look back and see that the way we currently talk about mind and matter was as limited as pre-relativity physics.

Until then, the fact that anything feels like anything at all remains a quiet, daily astonishment – one that turns every ordinary moment into a tiny philosophical earthquake.

When you next notice a simple feeling, even something as small as the warmth of a mug in your hands, will you see it the same way?

I believe that proving that a child’s socioenvironmental reality leaves a deeper structural and functional signature on the developing brain than any other biological, behavioral, or psychological factor.

I also believe that consciousness is the subjective, internal experience of the world—the redness of a strawberry, the specific sting of pain, or the feeling of being happy.

Without consciousness there would be no point in living if you could not perceive sensations, feel emotions, and experience pain or pleasure never mind having the capacity to think about one’s own thoughts (metacognition), plan for the distant future, and possess a distinct sense of self.

By the way just in case you might think we are the only ones with a consciousness you would be wrong.

We are not unique in possessing the neurological mechanisms that generate consciousness. Non-human animals—including all mammals, birds, and many other creatures—possess these same nervous system pathways.

There is a strong scientific probability of conscious experience in reptiles, amphibians, fish, and even insects and cephalopods (like octopuses).

Human consciousness might include a hyper-developed layer of language, narrative memory, and abstract thinking, but the fundamental “light inside the house”—the capacity to subjectively feel, experience, and react to life—is a deeply shared biological trait across the animal kingdom.

All human comments appreciate. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact. bobdilllon33”gmail.com

https://flip.it/vE5nuZ

https://flip.it/tXs2_B

https://flip.it/ASXYGN

https://flip.it/5K9fgu

https://flip.it/fbBQH8

https://flip.it/dkSAmU

https://flip.it/Nn02oW

https://flip.it/wDLQJL

https://flip.it/8d7Ytf

https://flip.it/C7A-RM

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE ASKS.IS THERE A RIGHT TIME TO BE OFFENDED.

09 Tuesday Jun 2026

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Uncategorized, When should one be offended?

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

OFENCE, Visions of the future.

( Five minute read)

No there is not a designated time to be offended.

We should be offended when ever we are confronted by offensive evidence, events, when we are confronted by well financed ignorance.

So what if you’re offended.

That doesn’t give one the right to surpress other opinions.

However there is a right time to be offended.

When our young are not given free education

When young girls are trafficked for sex

When Isis committed atrocities in the name of Allah

When the President of the USA or that matter any world leader is caught lying.

When you’re government is supplying arms to a country that is committing genocide- Israel.

When free speech is attacked.

When our privacy is being hack by non transparency algorithms for short term profit.

————————————

AI is acting as a massive digital buffer between what people want to say and what we are allowed to see.

AI itself cannot “be offended,” but it is programmed to politely decline requests that might offend you or society at large.

It scans billions of posts per second for hate speech, slurs, and explicit content.

Instead of waiting for a human to report an offensive post, AI often flags, demotes, or removes it before it ever reaches a user’s feed.

Because AI lacks true cultural context, sarcasm, and irony, it often overcorrects.

It might ban a user for using a reclaimed word or discussing a dark historical event, leading to complaints of “algorithmic censorship.”

AI can curate an online experience so tailored to your preferences that you are rarely exposed to opposing or offensive viewpoints.

While AI is used to suppress offensive content, it is simultaneously used to amplify it.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE ASKS. IS THERE ANY EVIDENCE THAT EARTH HAS BEEN VISITED BY AN AILING FORM OF LIFE.

08 Monday Jun 2026

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Alien Life Forms, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Alien Life Forms, Alien Life Foro, Artificial Intelligence., Capitalism vs. the Climate., The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

( Six minute read)

Speculation about inhabited worlds beyond Earth dates back to antiquity.

With the discovery of numerous new planets what we asking here is ( are we being kept in the dark) when it comes to any evidence that Earth has had a Extraterrestrial life, or alien life(colloquially aliens), visit. A life that originates from another world rather than Earth.

( Such life might range from simple forms such as microbes to intelligent beings)

The answer is.

No extraterrestrial life has yet been detected visiting earth.

There is no verified physical, chemical, or biological evidence that an alien life form has ever visited Earth.

However organisations like- SETI (Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence) are continuously scanning the stars for technological signals.

And there are numerous reports of all types of crafts hovering over nuclear plants etc.

As to how an Alien might view us is as you can imagine totally out side our current comprehension.

In fact, scientists recently updated their official “post-detection protocols” to outline exactly how the world would be notified if we ever did find verified evidence of alien life.

If they (that is Extraterrestrial) are attracted by nuclear energy, with billions of smartphones cameras on earth that there is not one photo of a life form that qualifies as Alien. I suppose is the strongest argument that we are alone in the universe.

But if you take the universe ( never neighbouring universes) it is inconceivable that we are the only life form.

When most people think of our galactic neighbor, they think of the Andromeda Galaxy. It is a massive spiral galaxy similar in size to the Milky Way.

Our nearest galaxy is andromeda 2.5 light years away.

A light-year is the distance light travels in one year (about 5.88 trillion miles).

The light we see from Andromeda today left that galaxy when early human ancestors were first crafting stone tools.

Andromeda is actually moving toward the Milky Way at about 250,000 miles per hour.

In about 4.5 billion years, our two galaxies will collide and merge into a giant elliptical galaxy.

https://youtu.be/V-z0k5xu1hM?is=QOAFCqulldx2IvyW

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE SAYS WITH AI THE WHOLE OF ONE’S LIFE WILL BECOME A JOB INTERVIEW.

08 Monday Jun 2026

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Artificial intelligence, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Capitalism and Greed, Technology, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

( Eight minute read)p

Why is going to happen?

Because AI thrives on optimization, and optimization turns human behavior into data points to be scored.

When an algorithm is looking at you, everything becomes performance.

We are moving away from a world where you are evaluated only when you sit in a corporate boardroom, and toward a world of continuous, algorithmic evaluation.

In the workplace, the interview hasn’t just expanded; it has become automated.

Companies heavily rely on conversational AI avatars and asynchronous video tools to screen candidates. 

While on the other hand job seekers use AI to mass-apply to hundreds of roles instantly.

Human resources departments counter this by using AI bots to filter the flood, assessing candidates on keyword density and structured “behavioral” answers. 

Candidates report feeling forced to downplay intuition and emotion, instead speaking in rigid, optimized metrics just to get past a robotic gatekeeper.

Beyond your career, your digital footprint is increasingly treated as a continuous “portfolio.”

Algorithms constantly parse your social media posts, your online reviews, and even your tone in emails.

Algorithms judge whether you are a safe bet for a loan, a reliable tenant for an apartment, or a good match on a dating app.

When algorithms dictate access to housing, capital, and romance, you are implicitly incentivized to edit your life to look “low-risk” and “high-value.”

To prove your worth alongside a machine, you have to constantly demonstrate your unique “human ROI” (Return on Investment).

You aren’t just living; you are perpetually managing your personal brand, optimizing your workflows, and validating your utility.

As marketer Lars Nyman recently put it, being judged strictly by an AI feels “akin to pitching your life story to a vending machine.”

It strips away the messy, empathetic, unquantifiable parts of being human—which are usually the best parts.

The good news?

Humans get exhausted by perpetual performance.

A-massive cultural backlash is already brewing against this hyper-optimized existence.

If the whole of life becomes a job interview, the winning strategy might not be trying to ace the test—it might be finding the people, spaces, and companies that refuse to use the grading rubric.

All human comments Appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact: bobdillon33@gmail.com

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE SAYS. THE WAY WE RECEIVE INFORMATION IS CHANGING THE WAY WE THINK.

07 Sunday Jun 2026

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in HUMAN INTELLIGENCE, Human values., OUR BRAINS, Social Media, Social Media Regulation., Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Algorithms., Artificial Intelligence., Social Media, The Future of Mankind, Visions of the future.

( Six minute read)

Just look at social media.

Before social media, traditional media gatekeepers (like newsrooms) controlled the flow of information.

Social media democratized this, allowing anyone to reach millions of people instantly.

A war of words, short videos, all contorting and contradicting each other, driving by algorithms, that search for eco chambers of your viewing data.

To keep you engaged or earn more like clicks.

Social media can be blamed for many things in our digital world of smartphones.

Popularism, civil unrest, racism,

Social media isn’t inherently good or evil; it is a mirror reflecting human nature at scale.

However without editorial oversight, misinformation can spread virally.

Because engagement algorithms often reward content that provokes anger or fear, sensationalized or entirely fake news frequently outperforms factual reporting.

It offers unprecedented access to global community and information, but requires strict personal boundaries and platform accountability to prevent it from eroding our mental health and collective reality.

It allows people with niche interests, rare medical conditions, or shared identities to find global support systems that simply don’t exist in their immediate physical neighborhoods.

So where are we social media

The hands-off approach from governments is gone, replaced by strict legal boundaries that are almost impossible to enforce without a law like : Australia passed a total social media ban for anyone under the age of 16.

This has sparked a worldwide chain reaction. Countries like Malaysia, Indonesia, and Brazil have quickly implemented similar strict under-16 bans or mandatory ID/facial-scan age gates. 

The UK is finalizing restrictions via the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act, and the EU is actively debating a standardized European digital minimum age of 16.

To enforce these bans, platforms are forcing everyone—including adults—to use facial scans or upload government IDs to verify their age, sparking huge pushback from digital privacy advocates.

We are moving away from an open, connected “social network” and moving rapidly toward a tightly regulated, age-gated entertainment and shopping mall driven by predictive algorithms.

All human comments appreciate. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact; bobdillon33@gmail.com

https://flip.it/inL2mo

https://youtu.be/rIO4IDMnBDU?is=3RKLPrN52aBa6xWV

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon

THE BEADY EYE SAYS THERE IS AN UNAVOIDABLE COLLISION BETWEEN MAN AND TECHNOLOGY ON THE HORIZON.

07 Sunday Jun 2026

Posted by bobdillon33@gmail.com in Technology, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Artificial Intelligence., Big Data, Current world problems, Humanity, Technology versus Humanity, The Future of Mankind

( Five minute read)

We hear people like Elon Musk saying that there will be a robot in every home not in the so distant future.

These robots will have some sort of stop button coded in to them so they will not be able to do harm.

Hogwash. We are told that Artificial Intelligence will super intelligent

A little more than a century ago, the world was fighting a pandemic you know—and one you almost certainly don’t. The famous one was the Spanish Influenza (which actually originated from the U.S.), which ravaged the world from 1918 until 1920.

In just two short years, the H1N1 subtype of the influenza A virus killed more than 50 million people worldwide and afflicted at least one-fifth of all humans on Earth.

A new type of thinking will be needed to avoid a clashing of humanity with AI

Humanity is just at the beginning of wrestling with the promises that technology could bring, but also ignoring the perils of technology.

Yes, on one hand we could see new drugs to cure all types of diseases, on the other hand as we are seeing with Russia/ Ukraine war death is selective by drones.

There is no questioning that AI after a while will want to expand.

As government install general surveillance, our collective silence is complicit with this.

This is not about scaring you; it is about lifting the curtain on something your body is hard‑wired to fear so that you can recognize it, respect it, and maybe one day save a life – including your own.

All human comments appreciated. All like clicks and abuse chucked in the bin.

Contact; bobdillon33@gmail.com

https://youtu.be/es_KJ1jPDi0?is=HF4VQ9DVAYoUHeiW

Share this:

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • More
  • Share on Mastodon (Opens in new window) Mastodon
← Older posts
Newer posts →

All comments and contributions much appreciated

  • THE BEADY EYE SAYS HERE IS THE BEST WAY TO HANDLE A LONG REHABILITATION. June 27, 2026
  • THE BEADY EYE SAYS TECHNOLOGY WHETHER WE LIKE IT OR NOT IS HERE TO STAY BUT ON WHO TERMS. June 25, 2026
  • THE BEADY EYE SAYS. WE NOW FIND OURSELVES IN A WORLD WHERE WE KNOW HOW ALMOST EVERY THING WORKS, BUT WE KNOW THE MEANING OF NOTHING. June 25, 2026
  • THE BEADY EYE SAYS: BECAUSE THE FOUNDATION OF ALL ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS OUR COLLECTIVE INTELLIGENCE IT SHOULD BE OWN BY ALL OF US. June 24, 2026
  • THE BEADY EYE SAYS Political decision-makers and the business world bear immense responsibility for a climate disaster that is already expressing itself in the current heat waves. June 24, 2026

Archives

  • June 2026
  • May 2026
  • April 2026
  • March 2026
  • February 2026
  • January 2026
  • December 2025
  • November 2025
  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013

Talk to me.

benmadigan's avatarbenmadigan on THE BEADY EYE LOOKS AT THE EXP…
Jason Lawrence's avatarJason Lawrence on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WIT…
benmadigan's avatarbenmadigan on THE BEADY EYE ASK’S: WHA…
bobdillon33@gmail.com's avatarbobdillon33@gmail.co… on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: WELCOME TO…
Ernie's avatarOG on THE BEADY EYE SAYS: WELCOME TO…

7/7

Moulin de Labarde 46300
Gourdon Lot France
0565416842
Before 6pm.

My Blog; THE BEADY EYE.

My Blog; THE BEADY EYE.
bobdillon33@gmail.com

bobdillon33@gmail.com

Free Thinker.

View Full Profile →

Follow bobdillon33blog on WordPress.com

Blog Stats

  • 100,697 hits

Blogs I Follow

  • unnecessary news from earth
  • The Invictus Soul
  • WordPress.com News
  • WestDeltaGirl's Blog
  • The PPJ Gazette
Follow bobdillon33blog on WordPress.com
Follow bobdillon33blog on WordPress.com

The Beady Eye.

The Beady Eye.
Follow bobdillon33blog on WordPress.com

Blog at WordPress.com.

unnecessary news from earth

WITH MIGO

The Invictus Soul

The only thing worse than being 'blind' is having a Sight but no Vision

WordPress.com News

The latest news on WordPress.com and the WordPress community.

WestDeltaGirl's Blog

Sharing vegetarian and vegan recipes and food ideas

The PPJ Gazette

PPJ Gazette copyright ©

Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • bobdillon33blog
    • Join 222 other subscribers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • bobdillon33blog
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar