Mind-Blowing AI Image Generator - Give Visual Representation to C's Concepts?

Ellipse

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
One element of art or graphics aside from color and color value is shape. The Cs say some interesting things about symbols and shape. @Joe asked a question that led to interesting answers in the following session:

Here what a remote viewer saw about cathedral Notre-Dame-de-Paris:
"Energetic exchange between gold, architecture and pieces of art present in the building. Something was created from that."
I guess it's the same esoteric (alchemic) knowledge which is know by some elite all around the globe. I guess a link can be made with the Feng Shui art too.

 

goyacobol

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
I thought it would be fun to incorporate some of the concepts we've learned from the C's and well... just take a look for yourselves. This is really the tip of the iceberg on what you can do as I'm still learning. So if others find interest in this, would love to see your own creations.

Maybe this can help give some type of representation to more complicated concepts we don't have a visual for?

Also, you can hover over the image to see what I've titled them. :)
I found the video to interesting but somewhat over-powering in the delivery. For a guy who claims not to be endorsed he still mentions that he would not mind having MidJouney as a sponsor. Also there is a subscription fee and the history of your work can be used by anyone can not be deleted unless you pay a $50 fee for a commercial account.

I can see how this A.I. tool could become addicting and I also see why many are having thoughts about it's being "soulless" compared to less sophisticated or more basic technologies of the past.

When it comes to tools and symbols the Cs have given us some things to think about. I find myself to be a lot like you when it comes to visualizing concepts. I find a visual representation to be very useful. I am not surprised that you are trying to find a useful way to possibly use this software. With that in mind I thought of the following session where Ark makes an interesting observation:

Session 30 March 2002:
Q: (L) I think the way the question was asked before - does repeated applications of Reiki heal Karma even, and the answer was 'yes'. I think that something that heals Karma just about covers everything...since that is very often our major concern in this reality. (V) Laura and I were looking at these Karuna Reiki symbols earlier and discussing them, can you offer some insight as to their validity?

A: Give them a try and research background of originator. You may discover something very interesting.

Q: (V) Well, I have used them, not to a great extent. The one that I have used the most is the Rama symbol which is used to dispel or expel negative energy. Does this symbol do what they claim it does?

A: Do you think that a symbol can control your consciousness, or the consciousness of another?

Q: (V) I guess I've been thinking it's a tool just as this is a tool (holds up symbol displayed earlier). No I don't think a symbol can control consciousness...when it's put that way. But I want to say that I think they can be used as tools also. Not to be right or anything but this my thinking at this time.

A: What quality of an individual would have to be present to set the effect of a symbol against consciousness?

Q: (V) I don't understand that. (L) I think they are saying that the presence of a negative energy implies the presence of a negative consciousness. It's either the consciousness of the individual who is experiencing it or it is the consciousness being projected from somebody else. And if one or the other of those is the condition - say for example: if you had negative energy that was being sent to you from someone else, and you wanted to set this symbol against that negative energy, what quality would have to be present in you in order to make that work? (V) A lack of negativity. (L) I don't think so. You already have negativity right? So you're going to use the symbol to make it go away assuming it was sent on you. So what do you have to have to make the symbol work? (V) A conscious effort? (L) Faith. You have to believe in the symbol. And if you believe in the symbol then you are putting the power in something outside of you, you don't believe that you have the ability to stand against the negative consciousness. On the other hand, if the consciousness of negativity is your own, and you believe a symbol can stand against your own negativity, you haven't inquired into where the negativity comes from. (A) You see a tool is something which you must know exactly how it operates, because otherwise it's not a tool; you are the tool of something else - the originator of the tool who may not have your best interests at heart. So you must exactly know, and have precise knowledge of, the tool if it is to be a tool. So a tool is a projection - an extension - of what is in you.

A: Otherwise you are the tool of the tool


Q: [laughter]. (L) You are the tool of the tool if you don't have real understanding of what it is and what it is supposed to do. (A) Okay, so if it looks like a nice bomb... (L) Push the button. Don't know what the bomb does, but let me push the button anyway and see what happens! (V) Well, okay. (L) I know, ain't it fun? (V) Well it's stuff I want to ask, and then I have to think about it for awhile. I want to ask about the picture with Easter [V**'s cat who at the time the photo in question was made, was passing on of old age. V** had placed the symbol for Ohm over Easter's head to aid in the transition and directly following the application a Polaroid picture was taken revealing a point of light above V's head]. Was the point of light over my head a fault of the print or of the camera?

A: No. It was the light of consciousness of the companion soul. Given to you as thanks.
I think some of us might find some uses for this tool and "give it a try" with the provision that we understand it well enough to not become "the tool of the tool".

It was interesting that you found some concepts that are not easy to visualize such as "Gap in surge heliographic field" and produced some graphic representations.

Session 22 July 1994:
Q: (L) Where are you from?
A: Cassiopaea.
Q: (L) Is this the constellation we know as Cassiopaea?
A: Yes.
Q: (L) What can we do for a better connection?
A: Less noise. [There was activity in the next room. We shut the door.]
Q: (L) Do you have information for us this evening?
A: Space invasion soon. Four to six years. Battle between forces good and evil. Wait near. Look far. Listen. Mexico fall; Ethiopia quake; September - both - New Near - January - Paris bomb - London Blizzard - 109 die - Plane down - Tahiti - Cholera - Montana - January 1995 - government US - behind California quakes - Three soon - Oklahoma political abduction - February 95 - Big news.[4]
Q: (L) What is causing the Earth changes?
A: Electromagnetic wave changes.
Q: (L) Can you be more specific?
A: Gap in surge heliographic field.[5]
[5] Keep this in mind also, along with the "Sun in Libra" remark from the first session, and the "twin sun" reference from the "Carcosa" clue.
Maybe "twin sun" would be another visual that would be interesting too.
 

United Gnosis

Jedi Council Member
Hard to tell, the image is a glove surrounded by boxes of color... I suppose it depends on the answer the the AI gave you, but I personally am not that impressed, although maybe I am missing context.
sorry, de-zoom the image until it fills well below 1/4th of your screen, you'll see it better. It reminds me of those ink paintings where you dye the paper in rainbow colors, then ink it black and scratch it off. The context was a question about how geopolitics and an integrative perspective were related - and as soon as I saw the image, the title "cybernetic planet" jumped to my mind. That's why I was stunned.
 

Bluegazer

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
There Is No Such Thing as A.I. Art

As a graphic designer, I'm a little bit concerned about the future of jobs such as designer, illustrator or concept artist and that's actually the biggest issue here.

These two quotes are what I needed to talk about the dark side of AI. It is already being noticed how unscrupulous people are taking advantage of AI to fake talent and scam people.


Here I believe that this is the beginning of the C's saying that computers will dominate us.

A) You see a tool is something which you must know exactly how it operates, because otherwise it's not a tool; you are the tool of something else - the originator of the tool who may not have your best interests at heart. So you must exactly know, and have precise knowledge of, the tool if it is to be a tool. So a tool is a projection - an extension - of what is in you.

A: Otherwise you are the tool of the tool

What I see aside from the scam, is that this is going to kill what little creativity is left in the world.-
 

goyacobol

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
What I see aside from the scam, is that this is going to kill what little creativity is left in the world.-
@Bluegazer as long as we have people like you and many others on the forum I think we can possibly maintain a level of creativity. Maybe this particular software is not needed or desirable, but it makes one think of the ramifications.

The Cs also said:

Q: (L) Alright, I have a series of questions here from forum members. Apparently, there was a conference with Barbara Marciniak where she was doing some trance channeling. Several of the forum people had a look at it and condensed the major points of the event. Out of what was said in that particular channeling, some questions arose... Not particularly about the channeling, but about some of the issues that were covered. Of course, everybody knows how I feel about trance channeling and that sort of thing. But anyhow, one of the questions that came up was:

(L) I don't exactly know what the person means... I guess it would be one or the other. Is it a window of opportunity, or is it an experiment in human consciousness?

A: We once told you that your computers would overpower you. Thus neither question is precisely to the point.
Internet was initially manifested for practical purposes, then other applications were developed. It could be said that the "experiment" in consciousness appeared in reaction to more positive uses. At present the internet is more a source of confusion and propaganda than anything else. Thus the opening statement is fulfilled.

Q: (L) In other words, the overpowering of people by their computers would be the use of the internet for confusion and propaganda. Is that what we're getting at here?

A: Yes

Q: (L) So, people being taken over in their minds by disinformation, propaganda, lies and so forth on the computer are literally being taken over by their computers?

A: Yes

Q: (L) Okay, the next part of that question is:


A: If you consider the ramifications of the previous answer, not likely until the power grid goes down.

Q: (L) In other words, why would they shut down something that so easily enables them to control the masses?

A: Exactly.

Q: (L) Next question:


A: Again, we believe that we have addressed this in the past: "Walls have ears".

Q: (L) In other words, there really is no way to keep anything private from those powers that want or need it. If you're worried about privacy, you're only keeping things private from other individuals or from people hacking your password and getting into your bank account. But those are things that should normally be protected anyway. Warning people to get off the grid, to not share, and to not network with each other in order to keep the PTB in the dark seems to me to be offering a false sense of security and is otherwise counterproductive, all things considered.

(Perceval) The opportunity is there to use what the PTB are using - for nefarious purposes - to instead do some good via networking.

(L) Okay, next questions:


(Galatea) Like cyborgs?

(L) I guess so.

(Pierre) Transhumanism.

A: This is already being done to some extent.


Q: (L) What about a divide between people refusing and people wanting this integration?

A: That suggests a state of advancement that will never be achieved.


Q: (L) Why will it never be achieved?

A: We refer you to previous information.

Q: (L) It won't be achieved because humanity is, in a certain sense, going to possibly become extinct. Is that approaching it?

A: Cleansing.


Q: (L) Does that refer to the session when you once said, "Nothing lasts forever, thank goodness"?

A: Yes!

The "Cleansing" most likely will not allow total control by any one means.

We probably won't totally escape the world of technology but we could try to make the best of it I think.

I don't think the Cs objected to using the computer to "network".

Session 19 November 1994:
Q: (T) Are different people receiving different pieces of information or are some people receiving as much as they can handle and then it moves to another person to receive more of the information in varying amounts?

A: Too many questions.

Q: (T) Is this information being given out in pieces to different people to be put together?

A: Close.

Q: (T) The information I have would not then be whole unto itself?

A: Network. Use computer net. There are others communicating and piecing together in this way.

Q: (T) How do I retrieve the information?

A: Ask.

Q: (L) Start taking the melatonin?

A: No. On computer network.

Q: (T) Ask on the computer network how to retrieve the information?

A: No. Others ask.

Q: (L) Ask if others are having dreams of a similar nature?

A: Open dialogue.
 

Nević Nenad

The Living Force
These two quotes are what I needed to talk about the dark side of AI. It is already being noticed how unscrupulous people are taking advantage of AI to fake talent and scam people.


Here I believe that this is the beginning of the C's saying that computers will dominate us.



What I see aside from the scam, is that this is going to kill what little creativity is left in the world.-
Since AI uses people's work to "create" its own, its more like theft of the theft than real theft.

Interesting how every work is dark and creepy.
 

Alejo

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
What I see aside from the scam, is that this is going to kill what little creativity is left in the world.-
or attempt to do so, but creativity is something that cannot be extinguished OSIT, it'll go elsewhere, or be expressed in some other way I feel.

And this also relates, somewhat, to the ideological takeover of Hollywood, because it feels like a similar principle, it's a way to curb creativity's nature and focus only on its form. Which is what AI does, it's only form.. only aesthetics, but without essence or substance. And that is already backfiring, but interestingly enough, there is an appetite for it.
 

Bluegazer

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
Which is what AI does, it's only form.. only aesthetics, but without essence or substance.

Something I commented with colleagues of mine who draw either analog or digital, and that is that this "art" of AI is nothing more than a glorified collage that steals the work of others.

There is something paradoxical in this and that is that one sees a considerable effort on the part of the programmers behind the AI but a lack of the same for those who want to be or consider themselves artists.

One of the recurring discussions is also that many people have lost or do not have the knowledge to establish the difference between taste and quality. As these same people have for certain works (books, movies, series) such a great emotional investment, that at the slightest criticism of the quality of these works with solid arguments, based on what are the measurable parameters of quality, they become terribly angry. They take it as a personal attack, be it their childhood, their nostalgia, etc.

As for the lack of substance, for me it is the lack of meaning. Although if we go back in time, with postmodernism we already saw not only a lack of meaning, but an imposture of meaning when one sees works such as a banana stuck to a wall.

I have to admit that all this is annoying to me because although I am not a guy who considers himself talented, and that for lack of skill with pencil and paper I resort to digital (3D modeling) but over time I have been able to develop some other skill. Here with AI there is not even room for that development, and the people who use AI avoid the raw truth and are not honest with themselves about it.

There is no self-criticism, no introspection. The latter is an integral part of someone who calls himself an artist, because therein lies the search for meaning, and how quality is a vital factor for a crystalline expression of that meaning.

Finally, and this may help to understand a little more the background of all this, there is a man on youtube who talks about something he -I believe- coined as "hamparte".

 

Alejo

Ambassador
Ambassador
FOTCM Member
Something I commented with colleagues of mine who draw either analog or digital, and that is that this "art" of AI is nothing more than a glorified collage that steals the work of others.

There is something paradoxical in this and that is that one sees a considerable effort on the part of the programmers behind the AI but a lack of the same for those who want to be or consider themselves artists.
I have considered this also, and probably wrote about it earlier in this thread, there's a beautiful and structured effort that went into programing these AI's capabilities, and that cannot be denied.

But, after reading McGillchrist, I can't help but think that it is an entirely different category of creation, it's like the left brain took art and broke it down to pieces, and a set of instructions and recreated it, to look the way it does, but it has entirely missed the substance, because it really can't comprehend it.

So, that's probably one of the best ways I can describe AI art, it's the left brain usurping a task that is shared between the two, kicking off the right side of the brain because it believes (the left side) it is completely able to accomplish it on its own.

There's one of my favorite sounds when listening to music, specially the one with flutes or guitars, and that is the in breadth before the sound is heard, or the scratching fingers changing position on the guitar, that tells me there's a human playing an instrument, a living being, it can't be replaced by synthesizers creating digital sounds, no matter how accurate and crisp they come out.
 

f1esk

Jedi Master
Russian users are experimenting with Midjourney. They shove everything they can into it. Having fun, experimenting.
In my opinion, there is nothing destructive in this if the user remembers that this is only a flower by the road.

From the interesting, in my opinion:

How the neural network sees the poems of Russian poets⁠⁠.

Alexander Pushkin - Winter Evening:

1670384421431.png
1670384432899.png

Yesenin Sergey Alexandrovich "I do not regret, I do not call, I do not cry"

1670384456601.png
1670384463407.png

How the neural network sees Russian songs

1670384726961.png

Russian writers in the representation of a neural network

Dostoevsky
1670385132533.png

But basically everyone is having fun trying to get something funny or get images from the lore of various fictional worlds. :-)
 

SummerLite

The Living Force
FOTCM Member
It looks like a lot of suffering in the Russian people....

I can see where this could be a lot of fun and it's amazing. I don't think there is any danger of true art made by true artists being usurped in some way by this flower by the road. These are mirly images on a screen and can't compare to the works of art created by the human hand and spirit. The spirit that created these poems for instance. Also, I suspect that most artists are compelled by a force within to create and they enjoy that, why would they stop. Its not the same as actually painting a picture after all, but interesting in its own way.
 
Top Bottom