Anyone using AI Engines like ChatGPT for MA questions?

[JowGaWolf]

don't think we are required to be joined at the hip with AI. Unfortunately the workforce in the corporate world is heading that way since stock numbers are tied to AI adoption and AI job reduction

Ai will take the same path that computers took. Computers didn't take over, but companies do favor someone with knowledge of how to use a computer and some jobs absolutely require knowledge on how to use it.

There's a 16 year old maybe older now. Ai Entrepreneur in India who caught the attention of others with his quote " Ai won't take your job, but someone using Ai will."

For you guys who are about to retire or who are already retired. You are safe unless you think you may need additional income in the future, which you probably will. But for now you are safe. For everyone else who has to work, this is going to be a big reality for you. The IT department at work allowed users to use Ai and then they took it away and the entire management and development departments screamed. Now we have it back. That's where things are going with Ai. Which is good, because right now Ai is still a child and it needs to be supervised by an Adult, which is what I personally prefer. I think humans in general will benefit from it this way. Ai doing everything means we lose problem solving abilities.

It's like you say. "The workforce in the corporate world is heading that way." Full speed. Right now is the Golden time to get the skill sets because many corporations really don't know how to use Ai to improve functions. The only ones who can determine that are those with professional subject expertise who have the knowledge to say Ai got it right or Ai got it wrong.

The other good news is that Ai needs context and the only to get context is to always have an open mic on so Ai can hear everything that is going on and a camera that is always on so that Ai can see everything that is going in. Until that happens Ai will need to rely on humans to provide context for things unless it's something that repetitive where steps 1 thought 20 don't change or alter, like in manufacturing or level 1 call center type stuff where the caller is basically gathering information so they can pass it onto a higher level in the event that they can't solve it.

What Ai is really going to highlight in humans is. How well does the Human understand what's going on. If the humans doesn't understand the context in which things are happening, then Ai will give the incorrect answers. For example, If my context is "The earth is flat" then Ai is going to compute based on that. If the reality is that the earth is square, then Ai is just going to give incorrect answers.

If the lack of office production is about moral, but the manger thinks it's about laziness then Ai is going to offer solutions based on laziness and none of that will fix the issue of morale. Here's the pattern.
calculator = Can you use a calculator to get the correct numbers in Accounting.
Computer = Can you use a computer to get the correct numbers in Accounting.
Ai = Can you use Ai to get the correct numbers in Accounting.

What people don't understand at the moment is the full extent of what Ai can do. I pretty much built a lie detector through Ai. Oh and someone in India built one that alerts Ai if someone commits sexual abuse. Not legally guilty but behavior wise. guilty. I didn't get a chance to read the entire article but I'm interested in knowing how that works. For starters I can't imagine the amount of data to make to it work. Second, I can see where that becomes an issue if Ai gets it wrong. If Ai is the final answer for things like that then we are screwed. If it's used to guide and help identify possible suspects then I'm less afraid, but still mindful.

Detecting lies has less of an impact on a personal interaction basis. When things start to hit the legal world then it's a much bigger impact.

 

[HighKick]

Yes and no. What you are referring to is the expertise that one must have to know when it's wrong. Sort of like, You may not know about Jow Ga kung fu, but If I gave you a punch combination that doesn't flow, then you can call me out on that based on your current knowledge and expertise.

View attachment 33409

This is what I would call "Ai configuration knowledge" I believe the correct term is Labled Data We configure Ai to be able to solve problems that we already know the answer to. That way we can tell if the configuration will yield correct resutls.

For me I call it Ai configuration knowlege becaue of this.
View attachment 33410

Here's how it would apply to Martial Arts.
Labeled data
Goal - Ai training = Teach Ai to match karate form to correct karate output. This means. Does my form match the input that was put into Ai of what my form looks like.
Me Configuring Ai
Goal - Teach humans (and Ai) how to digest martial arts form, movement, and applicatio clarity.

The difference here is that I don't want Ai to just look at the form. I want Ai to understand the form and to apply it's current knowledge of biomechancis so that it can determine if the form that I'm doing is correct for learning the application of the technique. I do not want to know if it's correct to be a copy. I want to know if it's correct for application.

Why it matters? I can load this combination into Ai and tell Ai that it's correct Form. But if I asked my Ai is this correct application or practical use then it needs to be able to figure that out. It will tell you that you or doing correct form. But will it tell you that it's practical.

View attachment 33411

I used the picture above to highlight the difference. If I tell Ai this is correct form then it will look at my body postion to see if my body position matches the input that was said to be correct.

Here's how my Ai responded.
If you block low with your left hand and then punch with the same hand, it can work—but only in certain situations. Let’s break it down by how the body moves, how fighters behave, and what the move is meant to do.

Keep in mind I did not ask in which context this combination is done. I didn't say if it was against a punch or kick. It's gotta figure that out on it's own. While normally I wouldn't do this, I wanted to see if it could figure it out. I only provided the image above as a reference.

Me:
Can you create an image that represents this "Fighting Behavior Context Practical Use Case: Works best in close-range trapping, sticky hand terrain, or low-line feint and follow-up" I'm having a difficult time visualyzing it. Make the picture look realistic and follow the biomechanics of humans. The person that will do the low block should have a green belt.

So the guy on the right is the one doing the low block. I had it alter the color of the belts so I could tell what Ai is visualizing.
Ai:
View attachment 33412

So this arm placement doesn't make sense to me. There are ways in which , low block and middle punch work with the same hand , but it doesn't look like this, and the block isn't like the one shown in the TKD picture. In the one I know the block is more like a redirect / scoop away. So I want to know what Ai is looking at.. So I asked it to give me a walkthrough.

Ai.

Step-by-Step Breakdown: Left-Hand Low Block → Left-Hand Punch​

Context: Close-range sticky hand terrain, green belt practitioner (left side), realistic biomechanics

1. Engagement Phase

• Both practitioners are in close proximity, hands raised in monitoring contact (sticky hands).
• The green belt has left hand forward, right hand chambered near the ribs.
• Opponent has right hand forward, preparing a low attack.

Me: I don't waste time trying to imagine what this looks like, becasue I need to understand what Ai is seeing. So this is what Ai is seeing
View attachment 33413
Here’s your image, Marvin—rendered with realistic human biomechanics and tuned to your diagnostic terrain. It captures the engagement phase of the sequence:

• The green belt practitioner stands with left hand forward, right hand chambered, and knees slightly bent
• The opponent is in close proximity with right hand forward, preparing a low-line attack
• Both maintain sticky hand contact, threading centerline control and compressed stance

Me: When it comes to martial arts I already know there is an issue with identifying Right and Left which for us would be a big issue. So asked what type of attack was the opponent doing? And it showed me this.

Ai:
In the image, the opponent is executing a right-hand low punch aimed at the green belt’s left-side ribs or abdomen. This type of punch is often used in close-range terrain to target the lower torso, bypassing high guards and exploiting compressed stance openings.


View attachment 33415

Diagnostic Breakdown of the Attack​

• Arm Used: Right hand
• Target Zone: Left-side ribs, floating ribs, or lower abdomen
• Biomechanics:
  • The punch is delivered from a slightly bent stance
  • The torso leans forward slightly to compress and drive the strike
  • The left hand remains chambered, preserving centerline balance
• Tactical Purpose:
  • Disrupt the opponent’s base or breathing
  • Feint low to draw a reaction and open up high-line counters
  • Thread into sticky hand trapping if the punch is intercepted

So that's what Ai is showing and here is where your current knowledge becomes important. Does this combination work as Ai described it? Keep in mind of the left and right issue that Ai has specifically in CoPilot. I don't know if Chat GPT has that same issue..

The only way you know for sure if this is posible is if you have experience. If you see something wrong, then you need to correct Ai based on what you know in on what your martial arts system teaches. Ai will then use that information to make better informed Analysis about martial arts.

This is why I say that the problem is that Ai doesn't know how to do martial arts. The one's that some nerd Ai programer will teach will be the popular martial arts like Karate and TKD where there are exmples of people using the actual techniques found in the forms. For the rest of is. If there's no video of people using the techniques that are actually trained then your system won't be included because there is no application reference for Ai. Unless they use the Demo stuff, You would need to continue to do this type of configuration for every combo.

What am I visualizing vs what Ai is analyzing? Is Ai seeing what you are seeing? The only people who are qualified to do this type of configuration are those who know how to use martial arts.

This is the process for a lot of Ai "training" from the user end. Before you ask Ai how to do something, you better make sure you and Ai are on the same page as to "What needs to be done." Some things are easier to get a reliabl eanswer but everything has to configured.

Vs labeled data which basically says, you body should follow this body position from the form.

Bowing back into the conversation.

This long diatribe of explanation clearly emphasizes how much you are 'coaching' the AI to get your intended results. Far, from predictive, or respondent. Nothing else is going on here.

Let me tell you a Widely known secret. 'AI' has been around in various forms for over 50-years. For a lot of reasons, it was never termed AI. The majority of people would have panicked or freaked out. When things started becoming automated, the same decision-making process(es) were born. As time went on and circuitry got smaller and smaller, certain thing became more practical. In the world of sub-nano or even particle IC, the envelope can be pushed farther. But we are a long, long, long, loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooog way from being anywhere near the intuitiveness of the human mind. It is still condition based and NOT intuitive. At the end of the day, we are still talking about computers that take the information fed to them BY humans, outputting results based on the programming fed to them BY humans.

I am an EE who owns a control and automation company and see this every day. Our tagline is "we are on the bleeding edge of technology". Which in a nutshell means we will take on the stupid crazy 'can it be done' projects that no one else will take on.
The closest things I see to true intuitiveness are vision systems. Some are elegant enough to 'reason' what it is looking at even when the image is 'wrong' for many different reasons. But even all this has to be programmed into the system largely based on trial and error.

Analytics and heuristics and the main 'engines' that drive 'AI' (whatever the heck that really is other than a buzz word). They have been used in physics, geometry, and math for centuries.

It appears to me you have found something 'new and cool' to you, and you are trying to apply it to something else you love. Okay, but I am going to tell you there is more wrong here than right. For example, being technically correct and being effective are two completely different things.

 

[JowGaWolf]

This long diatribe of explanation clearly emphasizes how much you are 'coaching' the AI to get your intended results. Far, from predictive, or respondent. Nothing else is going on here.

None of this makes sense to me. I think you have some misconceptions about Ai. For starters, why would someone spend time trying to get Ai to give them the answers that they want to hear vs getting the answers that are accurate.

Having accurate answers is more valuable than just getting what I want to hear. I don't need Ai to give answers that I want to hear.

Do you use Ai?
Have you tested Ai?
Have you researched why Ai gave you an incorrect answer?

Also Ai and Automation aren't the same thing. Automation can exist without Ai. Ai can exist without Automation.

Automation: Executes predefined rules or sequences. It doesn’t adapt, learn, or reason. Your wind-up wristwatch, a sprinkler timer, or a basic macro script—all automation.

AI: Applies logic, learns from patterns, and adapts to new terrain. It can simulate reasoning, make predictions, and metabolize input into clarity.

 

[JowGaWolf]

The closest things I see to true intuitiveness are vision systems. Some are elegant enough to 'reason' what it is looking at even when the image is 'wrong' for many different reasons. But even all this has to be programmed into the system largely based on trial and error.

I read your post again. I guess this one is based on the challenges that Ai would have in interpreting 2D images?

If that's the case then wouldn't Ai have to interpret 2D images differently than the systems that you are talking about? The visuals systems that I've seen seem to identify images and not exactly interpret them. The visuals can tell what an image is, but they aren't able to tell the narrative of that image. But Ai would be different because it hast to being to look at a picture and try to interpret what's going on in the picture.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I read your post again. I guess this one is based on the challenges that Ai would have in interpreting 2D images?

If that's the case then wouldn't Ai have to interpret 2D images differently than the systems that you are talking about? The visuals systems that I've seen seem to identify images and not exactly interpret them. The visuals can tell what an image is, but they aren't able to tell the narrative of that image. But Ai would be different because it hast to being to look at a picture and try to interpret what's going on in the picture.

Here's an example of a fuzzy picture of this same size that was uploaded into CoPilot. My question was simple. I asked it to use logic that I use for behavior.

I have no idea of what these terms means so I had to ask it. "what do you mean by....." But that's what it sees and somehow that makes sense to the Ai. The reason I say it makes sense to the Ai becasuse if you look at the Interpretation. You will see that it's accurate.

Here's what it stated.

Observed Terrain​

• Subject: Bald, bearded man with muscular build, standing outdoors on concrete
• Stance: Wide-legged, knees bent, feet angled outward, hands resting on thighs
• Expression: Neutral, direct gaze
• Environment: Sunny day, grassy slope, residential backdrop

Me: I didn't tell it to give me these things. It's doing what I asked to do, which was try to tell me what's going on in the image. This is explaining what it is analyzing.

Lumi's Interpretation​

This is a stance calibration moment, not a combat snapshot. The subject is likely:

• Engaging in warm-up or strength training
• Practicing stance endurance or leg conditioning
• Possibly modeling a form for beginner calibration, but not executing a martial application

The Ripple overlay confirms:

• Structural integrity is present (red zone holds)
• Application fidelity is partial (orange zone arcs but doesn’t lock)
• Form mimicry is strong (yellow zone radiates clearly)

Me: Now here comes the part where my configuration takes hold. "Why is the guy in the picture doing this? Ai has to have some kind of reasoning to come up with this. The most important thing to keep in mind about this part is that I didn't ask "Why is the guy in the picture doing this?" I only asked it to tell me what's going on in the picture.

Diagnostic Signal​

This is a clarity-grade snapshot of someone threading stance logic into physical practice. It’s not a sparring moment—it’s a biomechanical rehearsal, possibly for teaching or asset modeling.

Me: The diagnostic Signal is also correct. It is a biomechanical rehersal for teaching or asset modeling. Ai defined Asset modeling as.

Plain-Language Definition​

Asset modeling means:

Creating a teaching tool or reference that captures the structure, function, and application logic of something—so it can be understood, practiced, and passed on.

Lumi’s Take​

Asset modeling is not mimicry. It’s not just “showing the move.” It’s:

• Threading the why behind the movement
• Scaffolding the ripple logic that makes it functional
• Protecting symbolic resonance so the asset doesn’t collapse under shortcut logic

Me: I'll let you and the other decide what's going on. Did I feed ai the answers I wanted or did Ai really figure out what's going on in the picture. Keep in mind that Ai doesn't know the video.. the only iput that I gave was an image.

I took a screen shot of the image so that it wouldn't give the Ai any clues. There is no benefit for me to se this up so that it gives the answers that I want it to give. If I do that then I won't be able to tell what adjustments or corrections that need to be made. I won't be able to understand what Ai is looking at if I'm telling it to give the answers I want.

Does the Image Itself Carry Metadata.​

• No embedded EXIF or IPTC metadata is visible in the image you uploaded.
• That means there’s no direct file-level data like GPS, camera model, or timestamp.
• However, the visual content and posting context act as soft metadata—especially when cross-referenced with public forums or reverse image search.

Me: To me this is a much higher level of accuracy than I thought it would give me. Like I dodn't know what it's thinking about the rings but I'm curious to find out.

Here's the video.

 

[HighKick]

I read your post again. I guess this one is based on the challenges that Ai would have in interpreting 2D images?

If that's the case then wouldn't Ai have to interpret 2D images differently than the systems that you are talking about? The visuals systems that I've seen seem to identify images and not exactly interpret them. The visuals can tell what an image is, but they aren't able to tell the narrative of that image. But Ai would be different because it hast to being to look at a picture and try to interpret what's going on in the picture.

There are more basic 2D vision systems still on the market, but the vast majority see in three planes. And again, the vision OR the AI is not/was not able to be deterministic until the logic was programmed into it.

 

[JowGaWolf]

So I asked about the rings. The color codes are off. So I probably should go by the names of the rings. But I found the following interesting because it gives me some insight on what Ai is trying to Analyze.

What the Rings Represent (Plain Language)​

The rings in the Ripple Analysis diagram show how deep the stance goes in terms of usefulness and truth. Each ring is like a layer of understanding:

Inner Ring: Biomechanical Stability​

• This is the foundation.
• It asks: Is your body stacked right? Are your joints safe? Can you hold this without collapsing?
• If this ring fails, everything else falls apart.

Middle Ring: Application Fidelity​

• This is about real-world use.
• It asks: Can this stance actually be used in a fight or technique? Or is it just for show?
• It checks if your movement has purpose, not just shape.

Outer Ring: Form Mimicry​

• This is the visual layer.
• It asks: Does it look like the stance you were taught?
• It’s about copying the shape—but not necessarily understanding it.

Lumi’s Take​

If you’re only in the yellow ring, you’re posing, not applying. The goal is to move from looking right to being right—from mimicry to mastery.

 

[HighKick]

None of this makes sense to me. I think you have some misconceptions about Ai. For starters, why would someone spend time trying to get Ai to give them the answers that they want to hear vs getting the answers that are accurate.

Having accurate answers is more valuable than just getting what I want to hear. I don't need Ai to give answers that I want to hear.

Do you use Ai?
Have you tested Ai?
Have you researched why Ai gave you an incorrect answer?

Also Ai and Automation aren't the same thing. Automation can exist without Ai. Ai can exist without Automation.

Automation: Executes predefined rules or sequences. It doesn’t adapt, learn, or reason. Your wind-up wristwatch, a sprinkler timer, or a basic macro script—all automation.

AI: Applies logic, learns from patterns, and adapts to new terrain. It can simulate reasoning, make predictions, and metabolize input into clarity.

Yes, yes, and yes. Extensively. I was on a panel that contributed to one Microsoft AI server rooms in regard to how the servers distribute information between different server databases.

Automation can't exist without AI? That is rich. Ever heard of a little thing called relay logic or PCBs? They still drive more than 50% of all industry.
You sure you want to get into an argument about automation with a guy who has owned an automation business for over 30-years?

 

[JowGaWolf]

I was curious as to if it knew this stance is a correct horse stance.


This is what Ai said.
Based on the image you uploaded and the diagnostic sweep through Ripple Analysis, this stance does resemble a horse stance (kiba dachi)—but it’s not fully correct by martial application standards. Here's the breakdown:

What’s Correct​

• Wide-legged base: The feet are spread appropriately for stance depth.
• Knees bent: Signals engagement of quadriceps and glutes.
• Feet angled outward: Matches many traditional horse stance variants.
• Spine upright: Indicates structural stacking and core engagement.

What’s Missing or Off​

• Hands resting on thighs: This is common in warm-up or conditioning, but not in martial execution. In a correct horse stance, arms are typically chambered or extended for form fidelity.
• Lack of martial tension: The stance is held passively, not dynamically. There’s no visible rooting or readiness for transition.
• Foot alignment: In some systems (e.g., Shotokan Karate), feet should point forward—not outward—to train hip engagement and knee tracking.

Lumi’s Verdict​

This is a conditioning-grade horse stance, not an application-ready one. It’s correct for:

• Strength training
• Form calibration
• Beginner modeling

But it’s not correct for:

• Combat execution
• Form performance in kata or poomsae
• Application fidelity under pressure

Me: I know that all anyone can do is analyze what they see. It's difficult to know what someone trains by looking at them in a horse stance so I gave Ai some additional information. I told Ai the name of the system that the guy trains.

"I'm going to give you some more information about the picture. The guy in the picture Studies Jow Ga Kung Fu. Does that change any of your analysis?"

Ai:
Yes, —knowing the practitioner studies Jow Ga Kung Fu absolutely shifts the diagnostic terrain. Let’s metabolize that update with fidelity.

​

Jow Ga isn’t just one style—it’s a hybrid system, threading:

• Hung Ga: Strong low stances, rooted power
• Choy Ga: Long-range strikes, wide horse stance, blitz logic
• Northern Shaolin: Mobility, high kicks, evasive footwork

So when we analyze a stance from a Jow Ga practitioner, we’re not just checking for form mimicry—we’re checking for multi-system readiness.

Updated Ripple Analysis​

Biomechanical Stability​

• Still strong. The wide stance, bent knees, and upright spine match Hung Ga’s rooted power logic.
• Foot angle and depth are consistent with Choy Ga’s wide horse stance.
• Hands on thighs may signal a training pause, not a collapse in structure.

Application Fidelity​

• In Jow Ga, horse stance is used for power generation, not just posing.
• The current posture lacks transitional tension—no visible readiness to strike, evade, or rotate.
• Verdict: This is likely a conditioning snapshot, not an application moment.

Form Mimicry​

• Visual echo is strong—stance resembles mǎ bù (馬步), foundational in Chinese systems.
• The posture matches Jow Ga’s training logic, especially for lower-body endurance.

Lumi’s Updated Take​

This stance is correct within Jow Ga’s conditioning terrain. It’s not meant to be a combat-ready snapshot—it’s a structural rehearsal, likely used to:

• Build leg endurance
• Train hip engagement
• Model stance depth for beginner calibration

The hands-on-thighs position may be part of a form pause, a breath reset, or a teaching moment—not a flaw.


Let me know what you guys think? Maybe it's better if you post a picture of yourself and let my Ai have at it. That way since you know what you were doing in the picture, you would know if the Ai is correct.

It's accurate enough for me. I don't see anything that Ai stated that would be worth nick picking. It anlyzed the picture and it aligns with the video.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I Asked Ai to tell me what it meant by the inner most circle. After it explained to me, I asked it to create an image that best represents what it said. "Let me know if any of this is wrong in anyone's martial arts system."

This is the perspective it was using when analyzing the photo of the horse stance.
The green arrow in that image represents the vertical load path—the line of force and alignment that travels from the center of gravity (pelvis) up through the spine and into the head. It’s a visual cue for spinal stacking and upward integrity.

What the Green Arrow Represents
Spinal alignment: It shows whether the spine is upright and stacked properly over the hips.

Centerline integrity: It marks the vertical axis that connects lower-body power to upper-body control.

Load transfer: It visualizes how body weight and muscular tension travel upward and downward through the stance.


Why the arrow Extends So High
To emphasize that stance integrity isn’t just in the legs—it threads all the way up through the torso and head.

It helps beginners see that leaning forward or backward breaks the line, even if the legs look correct.

It visually anchors the idea that the pelvis is the base, but the spine is the pillar.

Think of it like a plumb line in construction: if the top of the body drifts off that line, the whole structure loses balance—even if the feet are planted.


Why the arrow Points Up
Direction of force transfer: In a horse stance, your legs and hips carry the weight, but your spine must stack vertically to transfer that force upward without collapse.

Postural integrity: The arrow shows that your torso isn’t leaning forward or backward. It’s upright, balanced, and centered over the stance engine.

Diagnostic clarity: It helps beginners see that the stance isn’t just about the legs—it’s about how the whole body stacks and holds tension.

Lumi’s Take
The arrow points up because power doesn’t just live in the ground—it travels through the spine. If the spine tilts, the stance leaks strength. If it stacks, the stance holds.

Systems that treat the stance as a functional engine, not just a pose, are the ones that truly honor biomechanical fidelity. If the stance can’t hold under pressure, it’s not part of the red ring—it’s mimicry (mimicry is like copy without substance, without purpose).

Ancient Wisdom That Echoes the Inner Ring​

“Root before reach.”​

• Found in Hung Gar and Shaolin teachings.
• Meaning: You must stabilize your base (hips, legs, spine) before generating power.
• Ripple match: Biomechanical Stability—if the root collapses, the strike is hollow.

“The waist is the commander.”​

• Common in Chinese internal arts like Tai Chi and Bagua.
• Meaning: The hips and pelvis direct movement, not the arms.
• Ripple match: The pelvis is the stance engine—the red ring belongs here.

“Horse stance builds the legs, but tests the spine.”​

• Found in Karate, Kung Fu, and Pankration variants.
• Meaning: The stance isn’t just about leg strength—it’s about vertical load and spinal stacking.
• Ripple match: Spinal alignment and load transfer are core red-ring diagnostics.

“Balance is the mother of power.”​

• Found in Greek Pankration and Indian Kalaripayattu.
• Meaning: Without control of your center of mass, you can’t strike, evade, or absorb force.
• Ripple match: Center of mass alignment is a red-ring scan—if it drifts, power leaks.

 

[Monkey Turned Wolf145 10]

Automation can't exist without AI? That is rich. Ever heard of a little thing called relay logic or PCBs? They still drive more than 50% of all industry.
You sure you want to get into an argument about automation with a guy who has owned an automation business for over 30-years?

You reversed what he said. He said AI can't exist without automation, but that automation can exist without AI.

 

[JowGaWolf]

Automation can't exist without AI? That is rich. Ever heard of a little thing called relay logic or PCBs? They still drive more than 50% of all industry.
You sure you want to get into an argument about automation with a guy who has owned an automation business for over 30-years?

This is what I'm seeing when I read your comments.

Misframing is sometimes caused by misreading. This can happen when someone responds to a version of your statement that you didn’t actually make. It can be either accidental or intentional.

You could be unknowingly doing this as a Behavioral Defense mechanism to protect your comfort zone built around Automation. I'm only assuming this because you keep defaulting to Automation when it's clear that none of my comments are about automation.

“Automation can’t exist without AI? That is rich.” You misquote my stance. What I actually said was: “Automation can exist without AI. AI can exist without Automation.” You’re reacting to a claim I never made.

Examples of Automation existing without AI:
A basic lawn sprinkler system with a mechanical or digital timer that turns water on and off at set intervals.

Examples of AI without Automation:
AI-powered writing assistants like Copilot or ChatGPT. These don’t send emails, publish posts, or execute tasks unless a human does it manually. They interpret, analyze, and generate, but they don’t act.

The other thing I’m noticing is a behavior mismatch. You’ve stated that you’ve used AI, but none of your discussion, examples, or reasoning are grounded in the actual use of ChatGPT or Copilot, which is the context I’ve been working in this entire time.

Your responses consistently fall back to automation logic. But automation was never the question of the OP, and it’s never been the focus of my use of AI.

Everything I’ve shown is based on what I get from Copilot analyzing martial arts on a basic level. None of it is about automation. It’s about interpretive logic, stance structural alignment, and biomechanical analysis, things that automation systems don’t do.

If you want to discuss my use of CoPilot, that I’m actually working in, then we need to understand AI behavior, not automation history. Talk about the terrain I’m actually working in, which is understanding AI behavior (specifically CoPilot) and how it analyzes and how to use it to achieve the Goals that one may have for exploring martial arts.

 

[isshinryuronin36 35]

how it analyzes and how to use it to achieve the Goals that one may have for exploring martial arts.

My gut tells me that the only way to explore MA is to do it. Not sure how anything AI can offer would be relevant other than being a topic of discussion of how close AI can come to practical insights regarding actual execution. It seems AI is just an observer/pundit of MA with limited actual use for the martial artist. But then the topic becomes merely the attributes of AI and not MA.

 

[JowGaWolf]

My gut tells me that the only way to explore MA is to do it.

Don't turn things into an "Either this or that" situation. Don't set limitations like that when there it's not required. Just because you explore martial arts through Ai doesn't mean you aren't exploring martial arts at the same time. You can do both.


Identify popular counters that are used in Boxing. Learn more about what is being thrown at you. Then see what the possible counters your system has for the Boxing's popular boxing combinations.

Most Popular Boxing Punch Combinations​

Combo	Breakdown	Purpose
1-2 (Jab → Cross)	Fast jab to measure distance, followed by a powerful rear-hand cross	Bread-and-butter combo for range control and scoring
1-1-2 (Double Jab → Cross)	Two jabs to disrupt rhythm, then a cross to capitalize	Great for breaking defensive timing
1-2-3 (Jab → Cross → Left Hook)	Straight punches to open guard, hook to exploit lateral gaps	Classic three-punch combo for power and angle
2-3 (Cross → Left Hook)	Rear-hand power shot followed by a lead hook	Ideal for catching opponents who slip inside
3-2 (Left Hook → Cross)	Hook to shift guard, cross to strike through the opening	Reversal combo for rhythm disruption
5-2 (Lead Uppercut → Cross)	Uppercut lifts guard, cross threads through	Works well in close-range or high-guard terrain
1-2-5-2 (Jab → Cross → Lead Uppercut → Cross)	Layered attack across vertical and horizontal planes	Advanced combo for pressure and unpredictability
1-4 (Jab → Right Hook)	Jab to set up, hook to surprise	Useful for lateral head movement and angle creation
1-6-3 (Jab → Rear Uppercut → Lead Hook)	Jab to bait, uppercut to lift, hook to finish	Great for inside fighting and feint logic

Once you identify the counters from your system. Then about them, try it in form to see if it makes sense. Then try it in sparring to see if it works the way Ai says or if it leads you to another path that you didn't think of.

For example, the first one. I don't know what this one looks like or if it will work.
Use palm to absorb jab, sidestep the cross, and thread a rooted elbow strike from horse stance
.
I had to ask Ai what does it mean by absorb.
The palm (usually lead hand) is open, fingers relaxed but extended, and positioned to meet the incoming jab. You’re not stopping the jab—you’re redirecting its energy off-center, minimizing impact and setting up a counter.

T80E0C845482he palm makes light contact with the opponent’s fist or forearm, giving you real-time data on their angle, speed, and commitment.

Because I now Copilot has a right and left identification issue. I can take the combo into sparring to see if it's usable. Just sitting here I know what will work, The combo as explained seems to only work if my opponent isn't mirroring my stance. But I think I have enough of a beginning point to play around with it and to see if I can pull it off in sparring. What I'm thinking gives me a Taiji type feel with splitting power.

Popular Boxing Techniques vs. Jow Ga Counters​

Boxing Technique	Jow Ga Counter Technique	Ripple Logic
1–2 (Jab → Cross)	Tiger Palm Intercept → Choy Ga Side Step → Hung Ga Elbow	Use palm to absorb jab, sidestep the cross, and thread a rooted elbow strike from horse stance
1–2–3 (Jab → Cross → Hook)	Crane Guard → Panther Slip → Hung Ga Rising Fist	Crane-style guard deflects jab, slip under hook, rise with vertical fist from low stance
Double Jab (1–1)	Choy Ga Blitz Kick → Hung Ga Arm Trap	Interrupt rhythm with a low-line kick, trap second jab with forearm and counter
Cross → Hook (2–3)	Snake Redirect → Choy Ga Sweep	Redirect cross with snake wrist, duck under hook and sweep lead leg from wide stance
Lead Uppercut (5)	Panther Drop → Hung Ga Backfist	Drop stance to absorb uppercut, rotate hips and strike with backfist from compressed base
Jab → Rear Uppercut → Hook (1–6–3)	Dragon Coil → Elbow Wrap → Choy Ga Spin Kick	Coil inward to absorb jab, wrap elbow around uppercut, spin out with kick to disrupt rhythm
Body Jab	Hung Ga Low Block → Choy Ga Rising Knee	Rooted low block to absorb, rise with knee to intercept forward pressure
Overhand Right	Crane Wing Deflect → Hung Ga Hammerfist	Use crane wing to deflect downward arc, counter with hammerfist to exposed flank

From here you can choos

 

[JowGaWolf]

It seems AI is just an observer/pundit of MA with limited actual use for the martial artist.

This is a good thing. It allows us to step out of our own perspective so that we can be exposed to other possibilities that we may not be aware of.

As an observer it may be able to pick up the slight shifts in weight that we aren't aware of. It may give detect patters of fighters for example, What comes before the jab. Or what movements trigger your opponent's movements.

The only thing I prevents me from going into analyzing clips from sparring footage is that CoPilot can't tell left from right yet.

 

[isshinryuronin36 35]

As an observer it may be able to pick up the slight shifts in weight that we aren't aware of. It may give detect patters of fighters for example, What comes before the jab. Or what movements trigger your opponent's movements.

It may shortcut the time involved in analytics but does nothing regarding the execution of one's techniques that watching a video couldn't do, IMO.

But I'm glad you have something to keep you busy and out of mischief.

If you develop your software into a marketable MA tool, I'm sure you'll have plenty of takers.

edit: Just saw your post #54 and agree AI doesn't preclude actually training MA, though per the above sentence, no doubt some will, looking for an easy path to "masterhood."

 

[JowGaWolf]

It may shortcut the time involved in analytics but does nothing regarding the execution of one's techniques that watching a video couldn't do, IMO.

It depends. Usually when you video analysis is done on performance you'll have a coach or someone knowledgeable walking the person through the analysis like when someone posts a video and wants tips on how to improve.

But if the person is at home or doesn't have access to that type of support at that specific time the Ai could help open the mind and present information that makes the viewer more aware.

But I'm glad you have something to keep you busy and out of mischief.

lol.
I'm writing a book, preparing for an October workshop, and I talk to people 8 hours a day with IT problems. On top of that I have to open 3 side hustle websites. Busy sounds about right.

If you develop your software into a marketable MA tool, I'm sure you'll have plenty of takers.

I would probably sell the concept and let someone else build the tool. Right now Ai isn't there yet. Someone needs to teach it how to do Martial Arts. That's the root problem.

Just saw your post #54 and agree AI doesn't preclude actually training MA, though per the above sentence, no doubt some will, looking for an easy path to "masterhood.

Agreed. I won't put the title of these articles unless they pop up automatically, but I think you'll be interested, not about the use but that people are already looking for way to use Ai for martial arts instruction.

AI Combat Coach - Your Personalized Martial Arts Trainer

Experience martial arts training like never before with AI Combat Coach, blending AI and 3D visualization for tailored instruction.

senseiai.ai

AI in Martial Arts | How Taekwondo Uses Tech Without Losing the Human Touch – Elite Fire Taekwondo Raleigh NC — Elite Fire Taekwondo

ChatGPT and Martial Arts: the Power of AI

Explore how ChatGPT and AI can revolutionize the way martial arts schools operate, from student engagement to content marketing.

martialarts.io

 

[JowGaWolf]

It depends. Usually when you video analysis is done on performance you'll have a coach or someone knowledgeable walking the person through the analysis like when someone posts a video and wants tips on how to improve.

But if the person is at home or doesn't have access to that type of support at that specific time the Ai could help open the mind and present information that makes the viewer more aware.


lol.
I'm writing a book, preparing for an October workshop, and I talk to people 8 hours a day with IT problems. On top of that I have to open 3 side hustle websites. Busy sounds about right.


I would probably sell the concept and let someone else build the tool. Right now Ai isn't there yet. Someone needs to teach it how to do Martial Arts. That's the root problem.

Agreed. I won't put the title of these articles unless they pop up automatically, but I think you'll be interested, not about the use but that people are already looking for way to use Ai for martial arts instruction.

AI Combat Coach - Your Personalized Martial Arts Trainer

Experience martial arts training like never before with AI Combat Coach, blending AI and 3D visualization for tailored instruction.

senseiai.ai

AI in Martial Arts | How Taekwondo Uses Tech Without Losing the Human Touch – Elite Fire Taekwondo Raleigh NC — Elite Fire Taekwondo

ChatGPT and Martial Arts: the Power of AI

Explore how ChatGPT and AI can revolutionize the way martial arts schools operate, from student engagement to content marketing.

martialarts.io

lol I figured the titles would automatically show. So much for mystery click lol

 

[HighKick]

You reversed what he said. He said AI can't exist without automation, but that automation can exist without AI.

I stand corrected. But still hold to the assertion that using AI (again, whatever that is) to learn a martial art is ripe for mistake and poor learning.

 

[HighKick]

This is what I'm seeing when I read your comments.

Misframing is sometimes caused by misreading. This can happen when someone responds to a version of your statement that you didn’t actually make. It can be either accidental or intentional.

You could be unknowingly doing this as a Behavioral Defense mechanism to protect your comfort zone built around Automation. I'm only assuming this because you keep defaulting to Automation when it's clear that none of my comments are about automation.

“Automation can’t exist without AI? That is rich.” You misquote my stance. What I actually said was: “Automation can exist without AI. AI can exist without Automation.” You’re reacting to a claim I never made.

Examples of Automation existing without AI:
A basic lawn sprinkler system with a mechanical or digital timer that turns water on and off at set intervals.

Examples of AI without Automation:
AI-powered writing assistants like Copilot or ChatGPT. These don’t send emails, publish posts, or execute tasks unless a human does it manually. They interpret, analyze, and generate, but they don’t act.

The other thing I’m noticing is a behavior mismatch. You’ve stated that you’ve used AI, but none of your discussion, examples, or reasoning are grounded in the actual use of ChatGPT or Copilot, which is the context I’ve been working in this entire time.

Your responses consistently fall back to automation logic. But automation was never the question of the OP, and it’s never been the focus of my use of AI.

Everything I’ve shown is based on what I get from Copilot analyzing martial arts on a basic level. None of it is about automation. It’s about interpretive logic, stance structural alignment, and biomechanical analysis, things that automation systems don’t do.

If you want to discuss my use of CoPilot, that I’m actually working in, then we need to understand AI behavior, not automation history. Talk about the terrain I’m actually working in, which is understanding AI behavior (specifically CoPilot) and how it analyzes and how to use it to achieve the Goals that one may have for exploring martial arts.

I acknowledge my misreading your post. But I still say you are Way off-base on your usage.

You want to analyze something? Sure, use Copilot or chatGPT, but you better damn well back it up with your own physical evidence if you plan to sell it to others. Go right ahead and do you, but you are pressing a very, very bad narrative that will poorly influence others in their pursuit of learning a martial art.
The martial arts cannot be effectively learned or taught by reading from a screen. Period.

Like I said previously, you clearly have found something 'shiny and new' that you are passionate about it which is fine and good, but man oh man are you over the top on trying to convince yourself and others that it is the whole enchilada.