Do you want discussions limited to human interaction, without AI distraction?

[Kevin D Pem]

Give it a try on different models. Even if you don’t follow its recommendations it’s worth reading its advice to understand its logic.

I don’t blindly follow any advice, AI or HI. What this prompt shows is how closely aligned AI is with PT and chiropractic advice.

I printed the plan and asked my orthopedist, chiropractor and physical therapist to review. Not a single fit.

Results may vary but it’s an interesting experiment.

Also, I used Grok for the version I had reviewed.

I think your prompt is beautiful,and to the point!

Back in the day (early 2000`s), I did a considerable amount of research on the web. At first I would take note how I would find information,and not record/download the information sure I would be able to recall the results if I just asked the same question.

that opinion changed the first time I really needed to recall the past results. What happened was the fact many new pages appeared hourly, and the search engines produced weighted results. And by the time you read one result, the engine may have crawled what the algorithm pointed to as more relivent results.

To a point AI is bount to that same structure. Not only to the net algorithms, but apparently the narrative the user defines (your narrative in this example).

In the case study you have offered to your friend. You have defined what you believe is best practice in a fashion that backs up your personally possessed data, that AI has no option but to verify.

Put another way! AI requires human interaction to produce meaningful results. AI has no original thought, it can recall human thought! This indeed can open up human recall, and enhance creative expression of a creative person. Otherwise AI just serves to help those that have a narrative to push.

This is the problem! I have a Linux server (My home computer), it's not fast, as modern computers are, but it has a tarabite of downloaded information that Much of it has been washed from the Internet in recent years because it negates current narrative. (most obvious is information on the dangers lithium offers).

I know what you're thinking. Websites come and go. Here's the thing! I would say 50% of this data was downloaded from dot gov sites (national labs, NASA) and the like. Mostly in PDF format. Much of the PDF links still exist, but many literally claim disinformation.

With buried information, how can AI produce quality results, no matter how you ask the questions. Important research has literally been removed from public eyes.

My server has proof that studies that should be archived as history, were not just built upon, but completely erased. This dumbs down AI results, and makes it's use unimportant, and dangerous.