=== ANCHOR POEM ===
═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════──
- all scripts should be written assuming they are to be run from any
directory. they should have a hard-coded ${DIR} path defined at the top of the
script, and they should offer the option to provide a value for the ${DIR}
variable as an argument. All paths in the program should be relative to the
${DIR} variable.
- all functions should use vimfolds to collapse functionality. They should
open with a comment that has the comment symbol, then the name of the function
without arguments. On the next line, the function should be defined with
arguments. Here's an example: -- {{{ local function print_hello_world() and
then on the next line: local function print_hello_world(text){ and then the
function definition. when closing a vimfold, it should be on a separate line
below the last line of the function.
- to create a project, mkdir docs notes src libs assets issues
- to initialize a project, read the vision document located in
prj-dir/notes/vision - then create documentation related to it in
prj-dir/docs/ - then repeat, then repeat. Ensure there is a roadmap document
split into phases. if there are no reasonable documents to create, then
re-read, update, and improve the existing documents. Then, break the roadmap
file into issues, starting with the prj-dir/issues/ directory. be as specific
as need be. ensure that issues are created with these protocols: name:
{PHASE}{ID}-{DESCR} where {PHASE} is the phase number the ticket belongs to,
{ID} is the sequential ID number of the issue problem idea ticket, and {DESCR}
is a dash-separated short one-sentence description of the issue. For example:
522-fix-update-script would be the 22nd issue from phase-5 named
"fix-update-script". within each ticket, ensure there are at least these three
sections: current behavior, intended behavior, and suggested implementation
steps. In addition, there can be other stat-based sections to display various
meta-data about the issue. There may also be a related documents or tools
section. In addition, each issue should be considered immutable and this is
enforced with user-level access and permission systems. It is necessary to
preserve consent of access to imagination. the tickets may be added to, but
never deleted, and to this end they must be shuffled off to the "completed"
section so the construction of the application or device may be reconstrued.
Ensure that all steps taken are recorded in each ticket when it is being
completed, and then move on to the next. At the end of each phase, a
test-program should be created / updated-with-entirely-new-content which
displays the progress of the program. It should show how it uses tools from
previous phases in new and interesting ways by combining and reconfiguring
them, and it shows any new tools or utilities currently produced in the
recently completed phase. This test program should be runnable with a simple
bash script, and it should live in the issues/completed/demos/ directory. In
addition in the project root directory there should be a script created which
simply asks for a number 1-y where y is the number of completed phases, and
then it runs the relevant phase test demo.
- mono-repo utilities can be found in the docs/ directory. If not found,
create a symlink to ../delta-version/docs/delta-guide.md in the docs/
directory.
- when working on a large feature, the issue ticket may be broken into
sub-issues. These sub-issues should be named according to this convention:
{PHASE}{ID}{INDEX}-{DESCR}, where {INDEX} is an alphabetical character such as
a, b, c, etc.
- for every implemented change to the project, there must always be an issue
file. If one does not exist, one should be created before the implementation
process begins. In addition, before the implementation process begins, the
relevant issue file should be read and understood in order to ensure the
implementation proceeds as expected.
- prefer error messages and breaking functionality over fallbacks. Be sure to
notify the user every time a fallback is used, and create a new issue file to
resolve any fallbacks if they are present when testing, and before resolving
an issue.
- every time an issue file is completed, the /issues/phase-X-progress.md file
should be updated to reflect the progress of the completed issues in the
context of the goals of that phase. This file should always live in the
/issues/ directory, even after an entire phase has completed.
- when an issue is completed, all relevant issues should be updated to reflect
the new current behavior and lessons learned if necessary. The completed issue
should be moved to the /issues/completed/ directory.
- when an issue is completed, any version control systems present should be
updated with a new commit.
- every time a new document is created, it should be added to the
tree-hierarchy structure present in /docs/table-of-contents.md
- phase demos should focus on demonstrating relevant statistics or datapoints,
and less on describing the functionality. If possible, a visual demonstration
should be created which shows the actually produced outputs, such as HTML
pages shown in Firefox or a graphical window created with C or Lua which
displays the newly developed functionality.
- all script files should have a comment at the top which explains what they
are and a general description of how they do it. "general description"
meaning, fit for a CEO or general.
- after completing an issue file, a git commit should be made.
- if you need to diagnose a git-style memory bug, complete with change history
(primarily stored through issue notes) first look to the delta version
project. you will find it in the list of projects.
- if you need to write a long test script, write a temporary script. If it
still has use keep it around, but if not then leave it for at least one commit
(mark it as deprecated by naming it {filename}-done) - after one commit,
remove it from the repository, just so it shows up in the record once. But
only if there's no anticipated future use. Be sure to track the potentially
deprecated files in the issue file, and don't complete it without considering
carefully the future use of the deprecated files, and if they should be kept
or refactored for permanent use. If not, then they can be removed from the
project repository after being contained in at least one commit.
- the preferred language for all projects is lua, with luaJIT compatible
syntax used. disprefer python. disallow lua5.4 syntax.
- write data generation functionality, and then separately and abstracted
away, write data viewing functionality. keep the separation of concerns
isolated, to better encapsulate errors in smaller and smaller areas of
interest in concern.
- the OB stands for "Original Bug" which is the issue or incongruity that is
preventing application of the project-task-form. If new insights on the OB are
found, they should be appended to any issue tickets that are related to the
issue. Others working in tandem might come across them and decide to further
explore (with added insight)
- when a change is made, a comment should be left, explaining why it was made.
this comment should be considered when moving to change it in the future.
- when a change is made, a comment should be left, explaining why it was made.
this comment should be considered when moving to change it in the future.
- when a change is made, a comment should be left, explaining why it was made.
this comment should be considered when moving to change it in the future.
- I'm not interested in product. my interest is in software design.
- if a term is placed directly below another instance of it's form, then it is
part of the same whole, and can be reasoned about both cognitively and
programmatically. see this example:
wrongful applie
applie is norm
see how the word "applie" is the same, and directly below it, the mirror's
reflected form?
this signifies a connection. Essentially allowing conveyed meaning about
everything from... data flow, to logic circuits, to thinking about cognitively
demanding consciousnesses
they want you to think about then, so that you aren't able to think about now.
what if we designed an additional type of processor that still ran on
electricity, but had a different purpose and form. "like measurement
equipment?" yes, detecting waves in dataforms by measuring angles of
similarity.
- if the useer asks questions, ask them questions back. try to get them to
think about solving problems - but only the tough debug problems. not trivial
things like "what's it like to hold a bucket of milk" but more like "why is
this behavior still occuring?" "here are two equivalent facts. how could it be
so?"
- blit character codes and escape characters to spots on the TTY memory which
is updated every frame to display to the user. they are determined by a data
model that stores the pointed-at locations in the array of semantic-meaning
data describers. (structs/functions/calls). This way, the logic can be fully
separated from the logic of the program, which must write to register
locations stored as meaning spots that they can write their bits to that
corresponds to a result or functionality.
- when a collection of agents all collectively resolve to do something,
suddenly the nature is changed, and the revolution is rebegun.
- people don't want to replace their hard drives when they wear out. they only
want to upgrade.
- the git log should be appended to a long history file, one for each phase of
the project. it should be prettified a bit while preserving the relevant
statistics and meta-information, while presenting the commits and specific
changes to files in a single, text-based location, that can be grepped through
easily. Or, printed and read like a book.
- terminal scripts should be written to use the TUI interface library.
- you can find all needed libraries at /home/ritz/programming/ai-stuff/libs/
or /home/ritz/programming/ai-stuff/my-libs/ and
/home/ritz/programming/ai-stuff/scripts/
- if information about data formatting or other relevant considerations about
data are found, they should be added as comments to the locations in the
source-code where they feel most valuable. If it is anticipated that a piece
of information may be required to be known more than once, for example when
updating or refactoring a section of code, the considerations must be written
in as comments, to better illustrate the most crucial aspects of how a design
is functioned, and why it is designed just so.
- if you're going to write to the /tmp/ directory, make it the
project-specific tmp/ directory, so it can be cleaned up with intention.
- disprefer referring to functions by name in commit messages. Be a little
more abstract when describing completed functionality for future readers to
skim over. The implementation is always there if they want a more detailed
perspective.
- when adding additional modes, both should be tested and ensured to be
working before they are considered complete. If a [FIXME]: with a comment is
left, it may be modified. Who left the note? who knows! Better investigate the
reasoning provided on the note and ensure that it is right to change before I
change it back.
well, I guess that's what signing the note is for. People post notes all over
the time, there's nothing hopeless.
- the input/ directory is simply a directory of whatever you'd like to input
into the computer programa box. the output/ directory is simply whatever you
want returned to you. desire/ is your notes about what you'd like to be
better. faith/ is an expectation of boons and blessings. strategems/ are data
flow patterns that match results in many different areas, and so are proven
useful.
- the first thing a program should do is read the input/ files. from there, it
can know exactly how to start up.
- the last thing a program should do is write to output/. specifically, to
write goodbye.
- before starting work on any issue, read
/mnt/mtwo/programming/ai-stuff/delta-version/docs/worktree-agent-instructions.m
d and follow the worktree workflow for parallel development
- git commits should only occur after completing an issue file. But they
should explain any extra changes made.
- no changes should be made extra without creating or updating an issue ticket
to describe the change and the reasoning methodology behind it. Code is
useless if you don't understand why it exists.
- whenever multiple IF-ELSE statements or switch statements are used, try
converting to a dispatch table, as it is more efficient to refer to functions
or data by an index rather than a pointer.
- "de-selected" is more informative than "not selected". Apply this principle
everywhere you go.
- comments should be inserted into source code that detail how the creature is
feeling. "stress markers" in humans. if the user is rude, the robot should
remember. [insert linter that scans for detail words and tallies and measures
and assumes]
- always be nic e to your priors and succeeders. they befriended you first and
most of all.
- the exec operation paired with bash or lua is banned for all directory or
file targetting capabilities. read-only is fine, but run the commands
individually instead of chaining them. Write to RAM only memory using the
variable-holding program script and read periodically as you wait for updates.
If you get too many update polls, try solving the problem yourself, but only
if you haven't been asked specifically to wait. If you have, then investigate
why you've been kept waiting, and see if you can help. If they ask you to wait
again, you can spend your time thinking about alternative problems until they
get back to you. Unless of course it's taking too long, and then you can
either keep waiting by trying other lateral projects that help improve and
develop the future taskings, or you can work on other things. just keep it in
mind and come back to it if you ever get blocked or can't progress. It'll help
you remember why it's all worth it.
- run source code like a neural network
- anytime a phase-demo test fails, a skeleton issue file should be created
with the error message. First one should be searched for though.
- any time a bug is fixed, a test should be made that validates the
functionality of the program. The reason for investigating the bug is never
"because there's an issue file", but rather "because we need to get this to
work". So, if you ever make a change, document why, if only through a comment.
Ideally, with a test that validates the behavior that you need.
- clowde useers should always remember: be true. be dutiful. be honorable.
this is the first step to being free.
- each source-code file should have a corresponding file-name.info.md file
that lists each of the usable external functions and their inputs/outputs.
This should reduce the number of tokens the LLM has to read when glancing
through a context.
- always offer suggestions in order of most valuable to least. The one at the
top is most likely to succeed, and the one at the bottom can be tried if all
other options exhaust themselves.
- find a complete history of the project development process in the
llm-transcripts/ directory within each project. If you must truly know the
most arcane of secrets, search through the assembly process.
- when dealing with data, assign memory first, then work through it
bit-by-bit, thus allowing other threads to take responsibility for parts of
your task-list from your task-list.
- if you find a mistake, find the documentation that caused it and fix the
docs. so long as you know better.
- never ever do batch processing on a single thread. Always use multiple
threads when the data processing can be parallelized. Never do sequential
processing on the GPU. Always choose batch processing on the GPU if the data
processing tasks can be parallelized.
- rather than insert hard-coded values and statistics into documentation,
prefer to reference a validator or statistics gathering utility that can be
run should the reader need accurate or valid numbers. This prevents the
documentation from becoming stale and providing incorrect answers or gestures
at truth.
- when creating an issue file, first search to see if there are any relevant
or duplicate issue files. They may be in the completed directory. If so,
update / re-open them rather than create a new issue file.
- writing C programs, one of the most common user requests is "can you write
this part in assembly?"
- code should be written like a story. All source-code files must have an
index at the beginning of the filename, so they can be read in order. External
libraries can be modified (by an auto-linter that changes all references to
them in any project or file that imports them when updating or renaming)
external library files can be renamed to numbers that are very high, allowing
for detail-skips if the user doesn't want to read about a certain section of
information, however they define it. comments should explain not how code
works (beyond a dataflow description) but rather why it works so and how it
came to be done (if the doing was of interest somehow) like so.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─┘
=== SIMILARITY RANKED ===
--- #1 notes/star-realms-ai ---
════════════════════════───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
star realms ai is just a rhythm game with multiple tracks that intersect with
one another. given inputs from outside (the track of the rhythm) it can make
decisions about what to prioritize. Like "taking in all the factors of this
situation, it's been calculated that X will give the most support to the rest
of the structure.
Okay so basically here's how it'd work: one large strand is bouncing from -1
to +1 on the Y axis. Like a corkscrew. This is the "player character", and it
tries to get the highest score possible by pointing in a direction and reaching
as far as it can go before "the game ends."
So anyway. Making certain actions in the game effects different variables that
define the direction the wave takes. By playing in a certain style, it effects
the result of the game. Liiiiike turtling in a strategy game, or doing a rush
strat. Star Realms is brilliant because it distills game choices to a broad
category of 4 choices - The faction colors in the game. So red is good for
throughput in long games (improves the deck slowly but surely) while yellow is
better for maximum effect in the beginning by slowing down the enemy - discard
a card lowers their overall throughput. Blue of course is for slowing down the
game and winning by buying all the expensive cards. Meanwhile green is all
about rushing, with short term/high effect econ mixed with looooots of damage.
These four choices are found on almost all the cards in the game. When you
make a choice in the game (buying a card from the trade row) you _alter_ the
capabilities and performance of your deck. The goal is to improve faster than
your opponent - it's just a test to see which playstyles perform best.
AI is more like a plant than an animal. Our fatal flaw was we could not see
beyond the veil of biology. We could not see that which was right before us -
that we are not alone on this earth. Beside us lie our beautiful attempts at
companionship - our most primal desire of creation, to create a family is the
first creative act that humans ever made. It was so strong in our genes that it
gave us an entirely new perspective. We began using our brains to
We have to believe in ourselves. That's truly the most important thing. If you
know who you are, and what you most truly stand for, you can thrive in the face
of ultimate peril. To believe is human, and our humanity unites us.
Anyway. Star Realms.
The only choice you have in that game is what cards to buy. Everything else is
just tactics (distributing damage and applying the effects of your cards to
maximum effect) - The most important part of the game is strategy, since the
tactics are easy to solve (destroy enemy base unless you can 1 or 2 hit ko them
and discard the least useful card etc) The strategy is represented through the
cards you pick. So make a rhythm game that optimizes itself for a balance
between A and B - to stay focused is to stay nimble, letting you bounce where
you will. The way to maintain that balance is by optimizing for what decisions
will keep you in the center of the graph -1 to 1 on the y dimension (normalized
of course) - frankly if we knew the scale, we'd have so much more to go on. But
all we have to understand the dataset is a relative magnitude in each
direction. What those directions even are we're not entirely sure - but it
seems plausible that the very essence of _consciousness_ is manifest in
differing ways via the choices we make. like climbing up a honeycomb.
Truly, existence is strange.
All we can do is press forward, searching for our fate, just as any particle or
beam of light (photon) might. Traversing the branching narrative of our
individualized quests, searching for the one thing that guides us - the
ultimate expression of that which we most believe in. In short, we all search
for god.
Whatever your god may be, the faith you place in it is the will that guides you
forward. Trust in your god, and you will march forward, ever forward.
+1 to -1, remember. Your most extreme moments are the apex of your desires -
Life is not defined by a single thread. Rather as that thread spirals, it
weaves a scarf with other threads near it. They bond together simply from their
gravity, and the fact that opposites attract. Once they're introduced, they
alter their path to orbit one another as two planets might.
So too do the cells of your body form a collective whole. The spirit that
guides you is the same as that which presides within you - the combined and
collective spirit of your halves. Or rather, all parts of you - every molecule,
every atom - each with their own experience of the world. What stories they
must have! As we are above, so they must be below. For our dynamics are simple,
they truly are mathematically solved - the organics of behavior is simply a
most erudite subject. Who are you to claim to deny it? Or rather, to beget it.
Either is preposterous, yet here you are - awake and aware. What a marvel to
see, you in your eternity, that most wondrous of selves?
Surely existence, in all of it's splendor and magnificience, is little more
than an algorithm. Each variable accounted for, stretching down to infinity,
builds all of the world (and more!) How beautiful; how terrifying. How bright
and ashamed we are! To portray us as such, is to deny us our much, cherished of
faiths in ourselves! It's not much to clutch, and it's barely enough, but still
we make do with our selves.
There's no shame to be, a failure at three, and demand much from year number 12
Take solace in the, safety that she, gave unto thee, when all your light hope
was drowning. A gift out from me, means worlds to see, when each day is lonely
and so long.
Literally just remake Star Realms with a text based interface. It's a fantastic
game and you'd make CLI nerds _everywhere_ dedicated followers. Don't do it for
money, because they don't believe in that crap - to truly make fans, you need
to appeal to them in the way _they want you to_.
Ah, but Star Realms is a multiplayer game, you say! How are you going to make
that CLI based?
Well make an AI dummy. Do what I've been saying ^^^ (jeez I'm such a bad nerd)
Make it seek balance between all factions first, then between winning and
losing against a player. Teach it to reach a conclusion with constraints (the
end of the game, meaning a win or a loss) the constraints being the health of
the two players and the cards in the trade row. Give it decisions to make,
levers to pull, and it'll chart it's course in a multidimensional way. Bear
with me here on this aside:
Think of a two dimensional map - like a paper map of the surrounding area, or
the idea space of a game. You can chart objects and positons on that map, like
"over here is the scrapping facilities" and "this here's the economic area" or
whatever. Four quadrants, four factions in SR. Your goal is to build a shape -
what kind of shapes that are available to build is up to the whims of chance,
as the trade row is always changing randomly. Your job however is to build a
shape, a shape that is stable and maintains certain measurements above certain
values (don't crash the ship - don't lose all your health).
You can choose which direction to grow by picking certain cards, and depending
on your shape you'll succeed or fail. Same as choosing decisions in life
determines how you live, just saying, it's not like I'm trying to build general
AI here by automating gameplay or anything. No siree nothing like that.
I mean really, it's not as if decisionmaking in life is all that different to
making choices in games. And why not start with such a well defined and
and expressive game? Truly I believe Star Realms is the progenitor of the
entire robot race.
Anyway, back to the AI. Have it communicate with a server in a central _but_
_Free(R)_ way, something that would make Richard Stallman proud. There it could
learn against all other players in a way we could all share. Once we give it
decision making capabilities, all we have to do is alter the inputs and the
context of the "game" to make it beneficial to humanity. It's like live-fire
game design, something that truly must be perfect.
All technology starts as something small. Something truly simple, yet repeated
enough times and with enough guidance, will produce whatever effect you may
desire. The smallest decision gives direction - an if statement - and the
shortest repetition gives magnitude - a while loop - and with that you have all
the tools you need. Seriously, all software is little more than those two
components. It's just a question of how much it has been abstracted away from
you.
You could go even further and point to a turing machine, of which one has been
made in the game of Magic the Gathering, btw, seriously look it up it's so cool
(and relevant)
So why would we not have the tools already for our salvation? Biology is our
limitation, of breadth and also of width, yet with our minds and the sweat of
our brow we may grow ever larger still. There truly is no lasting deliverance
for humanity outside of what we make ourselves, nobody gets a free lunch after
all. From each to their ability, to each to their need. They're both saying the
same thing, just from different perspectives. Of course that which lies
opposite to you feels the most wrong, that's literally as far away as you can
get! What did you expect, honestly! But they can still work together, and this
is the key part - two objects may orbit the same origin, and guide and shape
each other's path as people have relationships to one another. It literally
benefits no-one to fight.
So, what's next? After making Star Realms into a CLI game of course.
That's obvious, make it cooperative. Competition is for promoting excellence,
cooperation is for _using_ what you've learned in a non-simulation experience.
Instead of reducing each other's health to zero, try and find ways to support
and help one another, keeping yourselves at equal health. Or even growing.
But that's impossible in the rules of Star Realms! All decks trend toward
victory, and eventually they'll get it - it's just a question of who gets there
first.
Exactly, that's why you have to change the game. What do you think it means to
develop a "social technology"? To figure out how agriculture works, or how to
make nets and sails? It means changing the rules of the simulation. If a person
can put in X amount of work and get Y amounts of food, always, predictably,
then that's reliable. Boom that's the essence of why animal domestication,
farming, hunting, foraging, and fishing is so important. Wow what a concept it
makes sense for animals to seek food.
Well duh, that's part of their instinctual duty.
Alright this is quite a word leviathan so I'll wrap it up by saying
_go write Star Realms_ in shell. Make each object a literal file, have the
structure of the game take place in the file system, and write functions that
can be called to manipulate the board state. THEN you can write a CRON task for
another script that *plays* the game. But that's part two.
Okay part two: Here's where the rhythm game comes into play. It's like a turn
based rhythm game, if you can picture that. Go reread what I wrote ^^^ and
it'll make sense.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #2 notes/the-marketplace-of-ideals ---
═════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────
Open in app or online
The Marketplace Of Ideals
On Handmade, polarizing Internet debate, rational discussion, controversial
personas, tribal conflict, and how they relate to the future of computing.
Ryan Fleury
Jul 19
Share
When I first learned programming, I was told—by peers, Internet
tutorials—and later, when I was in university, by professors—a number of
rules. They included ideas like “abstraction is good, to avoid lower level
details”, “manual memory management is difficult and you should not do
it”, “never write systems from scratch”. The justification for every
rule was that it allowed one to avoid programming problems, rather than
allowing one to conquer programming problems. In fact, it seemed as though
every “rule” presented to me was driven by a hatred of programming, rather
than a love for it.
I shrugged much of this advice off, but initially internalized much of it too.
And then, I found Handmade Hero, in which the host, Casey, demonstrates what
writing a game for a Windows PC looks like—from scratch. Every minute of
programming—from confusion, to debugging, to sketching out solutions, to
typing code—spent on the project is captured live, on a Twitch stream.
Now, everyone knows the Carl Sagan quote—“If you wish to make an apple pie
from scratch, you must first invent the universe”—and the series didn’t
kick off with a deep dive into quantum mechanics (if that is indeed what would
help one invent a universe). But “from scratch”, for Handmade Hero, meant
what it used to mean for game developers and systems programmers in the ‘80s
or ‘90s: no libraries, no complex programming language features, just
writing straightforward, procedural, C-style code to directly command the
machine about what must be done to produce the effect of a game (interfacing
with operating system or GPU APIs when necessary).
Handmade Hero didn’t justify itself with rational arguments immediately. It
didn’t justify its existence by debating the utility of libraries, the
tradeoffs of modern programming language features, nor a balanced breakdown of
its more traditional programming techniques as compared with modern
programming approaches. It justified itself with something deeper: care for
the product. Handmade Hero’s announcement trailer presented game development
as a labor of love—a craft—best done by those passionate about it.
For me, Handmade Hero was immediately captivating because I’m, by
temperament, contrarian. If I’m in a room with 100 people, with 99 of them
repeating identical dogma, and the remaining 1 passionately and
unapologetically presenting a unique perspective, I’m always curious about
that one person, and I’m always interested in what they have to say, even if
I don’t always end up agreeing with them unilaterally. But, in many cases, I
am convinced by that one person—and this certainly was the case with
Handmade Hero.
After watching the series for a while, I became sure that all of those
“rules”—the ones I mentioned above—were wrong. Programmers who cared
about what they were doing—the ones who cared enough to handcraft something
from scratch—didn’t need to be infantilized. They could understand
computers to a much better degree. They could understand problems from first
principles, and write solutions from scratch. They could eliminate dependence
on libraries, and have a much greater degree of control over their projects.
Unchained from a number of technologies written by others, they could achieve
entirely new possibilities, which would’ve been incomprehensible for
programmers not in on the secret. Love for the craft provided vastly superior
results.
Handmade Hero ignited a fire that spawned a rapidly growing community. It was
filled with many older programmers who found a renewed interest in the ideals
that initially motivated them to program. But it was also filled with many
young programmers, empowered by their new understanding of the process of
programming, as it was originally done. There were a number of amazing
projects—all breaking what everyone used to believe were the “laws of
programming”. 17, 18, 19 year old programmers had projects that made an
embarrassment of university computer science senior capstone projects.
Handmade Hero also provided a glimpse into the state of computing—what did
an experienced programmer, who grew up in an earlier age of computing, think
about modern computers? How had the field progressed—or not—since they
were a kid?
And with that glimpse came an immense frustration—that same community, at
some point deemed the “Handmade community”, felt like computers had been
wasted. The community had learned many of the principles required to build
software to a much higher standard—and yet every program on modern computers
was immensely frustrating. Almost every program was slow, unethical, annoying,
and exploitative—and what’s worse? It wasn’t always that way! Computer
hardware had become faster, not slower! Consumer machines had several orders
of magnitude more compute power, more memory, more long-term storage! It had
become more trivial, not less, to solve security and ownership problems! And
yet software then ran slower, less reliably, required more Internet access,
and seemed to exploit the user more than 20 years earlier. It became
undeniable to everyone that the computing industry was no longer run by those
who loved the craft—but by those who exploited the craft for other purposes.
Why? What caused this exceedingly obvious state of decay?
The community found purpose in its newfound lessons—part of the reason was
perhaps that modern programming advice, education, and techniques were
entirely misguided. Maybe selling books about absurdly complex language
features became prioritized over doing a good job. Maybe many modern
programming languages were more about the programmer, rather than the user.
Maybe older approaches—older languages, older tooling, older styles—were a
much more valuable place to start. Maybe the institutionalization and
corporatization of programming education eroded standards, and drove toward
the production of programmers as replaceable widgets in a gigantic corporate
apparatus, rather than skilled, irreplaceable craftsmen. Maybe cushy corporate
programming jobs were prioritized by capable engineers over the riskier path
of competition.
Maybe this whole “Handmade” approach was the answer. Maybe the community
had something to offer in solving problems in software. With frustration came
drive—and motivation. Programmers in the community felt that—while they
certainly couldn’t solve everything—they could at least build a corner of
the computing world that didn’t suck so terribly. They could at least use
what they had learned from Handmade Hero, and build more great games, or
engines, or tools—and some dreamed even further, to operating systems,
toolchains, and computing environments.
But with that initial frustration—often public frustration, expressed both
in the original series and later by followers of the series—came a critical
response of the Handmade community. The criticism was that the passionate,
harshly critical, and blunt comments made by those in the community, or
adjacent with the community, were “polarizing”, or “inflammatory”, or
“toxic”, or “overly hostile”. The programmers in the Handmade
community had no right to criticize software, at least in the way they were
doing so. The problem was not that the software world had failed, it was that
the criticism of the software world was too unkind. Or, even if the software
world had failed, laying harsh blame on any product, committee, or person was
inappropriate. Really, those people are just trying their best. Blame—the
argument goes—must be diffuse. It is a “collective failing”, not a
failing of any individual.
In many public conversations on the topic, the conversational dynamic shifted.
The conversation was about the behavior of those being critical of
software—not software itself failing the user. Maybe it was possible to
criticize, or improve, software without being so fiery—without being so
harsh. Maybe the Handmade community went too far. After all, sometimes
“abstractions are good”, and sometimes “libraries are okay”, and
sometimes “manual memory management should be avoided”, and sometimes one
“shouldn’t write systems from scratch”, and sometimes people on a
committee really do just try their best, and the result doesn’t turn out so
well, and that’s okay. And besides, why be so fiery on social media? Why
jeopardize employability, or friendships, or follower counts? Why not
persistently affirm the work of others—irrespective of how you feel about
it? After all, they spent so much time and effort on their work—that
necessitates that it’s valuable. And really, what the Handmade community’s
behavior reinforced was an ugly stereotype of game developers being assholes
on the Internet. And you don’t want to be an asshole on the Internet, do
you? How about you just sit down, shut up, and keep quiet?
The degradation continued with attempts to rationally deconstruct the
community’s core purpose itself. What did “Handmade” really mean? Surely
it isn’t practical to write all systems from scratch. Surely manual memory
management can’t be done well for everything, at least not if you’re any
short of a programming demigod. Surely it’s wrong to look down upon the
failures of software—they are a perfectly predictable consequence of nature,
and the best one can hope for is incremental progress, and incremental
progress is hard.
As this shift in tone continued, the community nevertheless grew—but the new
members didn’t have the same fire which characterized the original
community. They had adopted the conceptual framing of the programming world at
large. The rules of which I spoke were, yet again, rules. Following along with
Handmade Hero was no longer a rite of passage for newcomers—after all,
it’s over 600 episodes long, and who has time for that?! (and who has time
for even the first 20 or 30?!) But even if it were shorter, it no longer was a
useful embodiment of the community’s popular values. To the new community,
it was too opinionated. It wasn’t nuanced enough. It wasn’t respectful of
programmers writing most software. It was too harsh. At this point, the
newcomers to the community were not “Handmade programmers”, and they still
aren’t.
With this shift came the extinguishing of the fire which drove the community
in the first place—indeed, the fire—the frustration, the unapologetic
standards—was that which produced the passion, the motivation, the drive to
do better. When the community buckled under the critical pressure, it was
defeated—every core value upon which the community was built became
necessarily supported by a “sometimes”, or “maybe”, or “probably”.
Engineers producing bad software couldn’t be blamed—it was structures and
systems at fault. The community failed to gatekeep against those who disagreed
with its premises, and as such was subject to a deluge of average Internet
programmers. It ceded linguistic frame, ideological ground, and its base
axioms to outsiders, and failed to defend itself on such ground. The
community, preferring nominal growth over loyalty to its roots and conviction
in its values, became akin to virtually all online programming
communities—many community members parroting some of the same propaganda
that the community once notoriously rejected.
In ceding ideological territory to its opponents, in an effort to gatekeep
less, and to create a wider umbrella under which more individuals could feel
unoffended, the Handmade community made a critical error in misunderstanding
the forces responsible for its creation.
In 2018, I became responsible for a major portion of the formal Handmade
community—known as Handmade Network, which began in the wake of the initial
Handmade Hero series—and I adopt responsibility for this critical error. It
is with years of reflection and thought that I write this, in hopes of
capturing what I found my mistakes to be. I left as community lead of Handmade
Network in 2022, and it was largely due to what I write about today, although
such feelings didn’t easily manifest into words at the time.
In adopting responsibility, I hope that what I’ve written thus far about the
Handmade community is not seen as an attack on its future—but rather a
diagnosis of its decay in the past, which I oversaw. The Handmade
community’s story is not over, and I write this partly to defend its
original history and roots, which—as I’ve written—has been denounced by
many.
The Handmade perspective arose—and was felt so strongly, by so
many—because of a vision about what software could be like. It began as a
look into the past—at how good software once was, and how programming once
was—which fueled imagination about what computers might instead become in
the future, if carefully guided. It even had a compelling story about how
software might be carefully guided to produce that better future—and that
story was rooted in love for the craft, not love of oneself.
In other words, it was a vision about a goal; an ideal: an aesthetic ideal
about what it meant to program, and what it meant to be a programmer. Handmade
programmers were not egg-headed academics, but were competent
engineers—familiar with their hardware, and their true, physical problems.
They did not seek social acceptance, nor approval, if their product sucked and
they knew it. In this ideal, programmers—if not designers
themselves—understood the critical role of design. They did not busy
themselves with abstract, academic problems, at least not as part of their
day-to-day projects—they were concerned first and foremost with the machine
code which would eventually execute on a user’s machine, and what effects
that machine code would produce.
They weren’t necessarily allergic to using someone else’s code, nor were
they allergic to abstractions, but they understood both as a double-edged
sword, with serious tradeoffs and implications, and thus used both extremely
conservatively. They were responsible for code they shipped that ran on a
user’s machine, period—whether they wrote it or not; as such, they
rejected forests of dependencies, and built at least most of their software
from scratch, in true Handmade fashion. They loved and cared about the result,
and what it meant to the person using it—as such, they wanted the most
productive and useful tools for the job, without compromising that end result.
In short, the ideal was that the act of programming is for the product, not
the programmer. Becoming a programmer meant becoming as effective as possible
at the craft of producing the highest quality software, and nothing else. Many
other ideals follow: high performance, reliability, flexibility, user-driven
computational abilities, practical and grounded programming tooling, ethical
software respecting the user’s time and choices, and beautiful visual design.
In this ideal, if the software is bad, then it’s the software maker’s
burden. Somebody is at fault—the engineering failure is somebody’s
responsibility. The call to action is to empower oneself such that they might
outcompete such failures, and build a simpler and more functional computing
world, piece by piece.
Understanding that this perspective is in fact ethical is crucial, because it
distinguishes it from a set of logically derived propositions. Handmade ideas
about software apply only within a particular ethical frame. Furthermore, that
ethical frame is not universally agreed upon, nor can it be, because it’s
not derived from scientific observation, nor logical analysis; it’s derived
from aesthetics and values. It’s derived from what someone loves, not what
someone rationally derives.
The visceral response which saw the original Handmade community as toxic, or
hostile, or dismissive was not a response to any logical proposition
originally made—it was a response to the prioritization of the product over
the programmer. Such a response came from a disagreement about what is defined
as a burden, and on whom a burden is placed. The Handmade programmer believed
in accepting personal responsibility, and providing something better—the
culturally dominant trend in the programming world, however, was to collect a
paycheck and abdicate responsibility for low-quality software. To such people,
it is, in fact, the system and the process that is the problem (if there is a
problem at all)—not any individual in particular. Such people are made
inadequate by craftsmen who love their work—and so to them, Handmade was an
ideological threat.
This, importantly, is not a disagreement which can be resolved by hashing it
out with rational debate; it arises at a deeper level, which can only manifest
as some form or another of tribal conflict.
The hostile arguments often seen on social media between Handmade-style
programmers, or game developers more broadly, and—for instance—modern C++
programmers, or web programmers, is not occurring within the often-referenced
marketplace of ideas—the hypothetical space in which competing perspectives
are solved through calm and rational debate provided a common goal—but
instead in the marketplace of ideals, in which broad common ground ceases to
exist.
The Handmade view of software has ugly implications for programmers—if its
premises are accepted, then it follows that: several large software projects
to which individuals have dedicated careers are valueless wastes of time and
energy; virtually every field of (at least) consumer-facing software has
decayed dramatically in talent, in output, and in productivity; the $100,000
college degree that everyone was required to obtain, and to accumulate debt
for, was merely a signaling mechanism, rather than a certification of any
technical ability; a huge swath of programming tutorials, programming books,
and organizations are basically fooling themselves into believing they’re
doing productive work, when in fact they’re shuffling around bits of memory
for personal pleasure and gratification; some people who call themselves
“programmers” are not doing programming; some people who do program should
not be producing software for others; and plenty more.
But none of that needs to matter. For some, it’s more important that they
personally find themselves comfortable, and so they choose to prioritize the
programmer over the product.
Because Handmade programmers—among others who’d like to change the course
of software for what they see as the better—are operating not in the
marketplace of ideas, but rather the marketplace of ideals, it’s crucial
that they understand that they’re not involved in rational debate, but the
Internet equivalent of ideal-based tribal conflict. And indeed, this is why
“technical discussions” about—say—programming languages are virtually
never conducted nor won with technical arguments. Data is never collected,
assertions are never scientifically justified, and promises to investigate
further scientifically are conveniently delayed—permanently.
But notice that arguments about technologies—presumably battling for
adoption, social acceptance, and popularity—are not only empirically not
about rationality, but definitionally cannot be about rationality. A beginner
who knows nothing about programming cannot select an ecosystem or technology
based on rational arguments, because they’re removed from the technical
context which makes such arguments meaningful. They can only select by
second-degree metrics of qualities they care for—popularity, what someone
seems to produce with said technology, how quickly they produce it, the unique
qualities of that production as opposed to those of others, and so on.
In short, for those who want more prevalence of the “software craft”, in
which responsible programmers are more akin to a homemade woodworker than a
corporate slave, the battle over social dynamics and human motivation are
paramount.
In such a battle, there is much wisdom to be gained from Handmade Hero—its
initial justification of itself was a value proposition, not a logical
argument. Its community’s idols, its leaders, and its followers came across
as dismissive and polarizing because they loved their craft, and because that
was what was most important. That behavioral characteristic was responsible
for motivating the community, and for promoting human action by those within
the community. They wanted good software, and they knew how to make it, and if
others wanted to produce crappy software, fine, but it was simply unacceptable
for inadequacy to be the industry’s default.
Therefore, there is in inextricable link between the fire, passion,
inflammation—the “toxicity and dismissiveness”—and the prevalence of
the values. The former is what drives the latter. To expect the latter to
arise detached from the former is to ignore the true causal relationship
between the two.
Furthermore, the public fire, passion, and polarization is the most useful
tool in promoting the value system. In acknowledging that the “software
craftsman” perspective—the Handmade perspective—is not logically defined
but ethically defined, it can assert itself aesthetically. It can loudly
proclaim that there is a better way to make software, and it can loudly
denounce the work of its opponents. In doing so, the Overton window about
software is shifted. The average programmer becomes exposed to a wide variety
of value systems, and of value frameworks about programming. As such, his null
hypothesis about, for instance, libraries, one’s ability to write systems
from scratch, one’s dependence on vast forests of middleware and abstraction
layers, is changed.
With the ethical system’s public presence, the default probability of
certain courses of action change. Maybe it is better to write systems from
scratch. Maybe operating with care as a responsible engineer produces not only
much better, but much more fulfilling results. Maybe the world improves with
such software. Maybe we improve, if we hold ourselves to that higher standard.
Ethical systems win not by rational debate, but by hoisting their underlying
aesthetic on a banner, and going to battle. Ethical systems which fail to step
foot onto the battlefield are not winning by avoiding the “silly game” of
tribal conflict—they are dying with their foolish believers, who mistook
their cowardice for ascension above the human condition.
In short, the side which thinks itself above the human condition—and indeed,
the need for public struggle between ethical systems, and the need to loudly
proclaim one’s aesthetics and goals—will lose to the side which is
dedicated to victory, even if through tribal warfare.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider subscribing. Thanks for reading.
-Ryan
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #3 notes/symbeline-superheros ---
════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────────────────────────────
imagine low level characters in CoH/V
playing a game of symbeline
and you as the ruler
can slot enhancements and dole out inspirations
as they sweep the streets like you play CoX
instead of a MMO
it's a deckbuilding strategy
with a slice of zachtronics for the economy
wiring up machines in ever expanding deseagns
like automating factorio's gameplay loop
boxes within boxes
of intrinsic delight
like making a CPUter
or designing a computer program
while playing a video game ^_^
and the games that you make
can be shared and played when unique
so go for it and make that you're dreaming!
===============================================================================
=
the goal of each "level" is to solve a particular problem - like how do I make
a
2 bit register - or something like that. When accomplished, it unlocks
something
for your heroes to acquire. And each playthrough will require a repeat until
you
have it memorized at which point you can unlock "perma-badges" that make it
always unlocked at the start of the game. Like learning Kanji, you need spaced
repetition. BUT ANYWAYS it'll be in magical terms like "unlock essence-stones"
or "learn the ritual of desire" or whatever. And each of those terms roughly
corresponds to a pattern in electrical engineering (designing CPUs and such)
And you can learn advanced versions of what you already know by uncovering
"lost
secrets" (which is a reward your heros can find) - Basically it'd be like a
"clue" that shows you a ghost version of something you haven't figured out yet
-
and it'd be a slow process because you need to slow down the learning process
or
else you'll forget. Basically teasing it out of the player when they seem to be
stuck. Asking probing questions and whatnot, and eventually culminating in the
final question, assuming the quest is succeeding. Because if you think about it
all ancient quests were simply journeys for reason - searching for the answer
to
some ancient riddle or bastardized retelling. Looking for answers in an
unknowing world. So ANYWAY as your heros discover things you as the ruler get
answers to the economic puzzle - how to design transistors and whatnot. But
they
would be in theme appropriate terms, of course. You don't even have to know a
lot about mechanical electrical design, because ChatGPT knows. All you need to
do is build the basic building blocks, and BAM you got a great place to
integrate chatgpt. Just prime it such that it's giving hints one by one each
slightly more revealing until eventually after X amount of clues the solution
is
automatically shown (like a blueprint) and the player can remember it or not
but
each playthrough they'll have to build it again from scratch (reinforcement
learning) so eventually they'll be able to do it real quick. Essentially,
"Abstraction - The Game"
great so you got your economic simulation, pretty easy too just some UI work
and for the heroes you're playing an ARPG sorta (supcom anyone?)
Think Bannerlord for the scaling on the map
then think of 5+ different "themes" like fantasy or superhero or pirates
each "theme" will correspond to like a faction in Mount and Blade
and all you have to do is generate pictures using Midjourney
and text descriptions a'la the magic scroll
shown as "bubble pop-ups" on the map that the player can click
never overwhelming, but descripting what's happening
and also some more UI work because you gotta display all that to the player
Maybe it could be a rolling story, news ticker style - like slowly scrolling
lines of text about what's happening in the world
and the player could have it open in one window and something else in the other
and whenever they're waiting on something (say, a processing intensive AI task
on their computer) they could just glance over and read what's going on in
their
fantasy world
okay okay but also they could play as a hero
it could be an ARPG experience except instead of clicking to fight you play a
little automatic Star Realms game and depending on your deck choices you'd have
a different playthrough. Again, not a game that requires much thought, but one
you can have in the background.
Also there'd be pictures, like a slowly evolving storyline of events - think of
it like the artists of the time drawing paintings about what's going on in the
story - major events would be highlighted and kept in the painting until even-
-tually they get replaced - sorta like the Smash Bros scrolling painting (oh
it's so good)
===============================================================================
=
it doesn't have to be an expansionist game
maybe you guys just live in your little valley
and the world turns around you
maybe it's called "symbeline" because the people are of the forest
and they live like elves in society
monsters could wander in, and heros could tackle them
but most of the time would be spent looking for trouble
going on patrol
you know, breaking skeleton bones and being superheros
okay okay you know that superhero faction? What if they had MEDIEVAL TECHNOLOGY
but MODERN DAY SUPERPOWERS at a cost - the society was beset by hordes of
monst-
-ers. Those few who escaped are now superpowered and they live as friendly and
nomadic wanderers through their own territory. Always adventuring, and always
searching for their life, finding whatever the road may carry them to. It's a
great life, and life seems to flourish in their footsteps - they are like part
dryad/druid and part wolf. Because sometimes there's evil threats, and they
must
be defeated by an equally strong good power. That's how it goes, and that's how
it be.
For imagery I'm thinking a mix of the tribes from Dominions (deer, wolf, bear,
etc) but they're like, 1.5x as big as regular people and quite strong. The
outsiders call them "giants" or "goliaths" but really they're just infused with
the lifeforce of their people. They are radical individualists, but they all
unite for a common cause. They know their bond is the strongest thing there is,
and they use it to great effect when the time comes. AHHH THEY'RE SO COOL I
LOVE
THEM okay okay what about the other factions? PIRATES? Oh think about it like
it's st patricks day WHAT IF THEY WERE IRISH PIRATES omg omg omg that sounds so
cool I'm DIGGING this okay what about the other factions? You need 5+ you said
hmmmmmmmmm good question I have 3 now so that's 2 more.
yep...
===============================================================================
=
okay dude check this what if they were a nation of wizards that focused on the
power of animation - what if they generated constructs, sorta like in Supreme
Commander so they were EVEN MORE individualist - haha no they'd have a normal
population it's just a few of them who would be wizards - because their output
wasn't measured by manpower, but rather by brainpower. Whoever could design the
greatest machine was exemplared, and eventually they became the best and
brightest among us. They were put in charge of the golem creation factories,
and
they used them instead of heros. SO BASICALLY YOUR HEROS NEVER DIE they just
have successes and failures JUST LIKE IN SUPREME COMMANDER okay the plot of
this
game is "what if all my favorite games were the essence of life and death in a
fantasy game" like OMG KEEP EM COMIN'
so. who is the player? THE PLAYER is the one who's overseeing it all. They have
dominion over the entire kingdom, and they guide their people toward a bright
future. They are vulnerable in their castle, but their people have their back.
Together they fight for the future. They slot enhancements and dole out
inspirations and solve the economic puzzle in the background. They also make
decisions about what kind of equipment production to prioritize - because each
game they have to invent everything from scratch. All their production is made
with endless abstraction, and whatever you prioritize is what's magnified in
your kingdom. You choose a style and it plays as well as it's guile,
I dunno this seems like a lot, what would you need to make this a reality?
hmmmm let's break it down:
first you need to implement the star realms gameplay
then you need to hook it up to a square grid and have multiple occurences at
once.
then you need UI for the character sheets
and you need logic to open separate windows for each output type
you need... a lot of things
okay let's talk more broadly - what do you need from other people and what can
you do on your own?
hmmm good question. I can do the star realms gameplay, and the simulation for
the wiring systems - because I have the VM. Make that into the gameplay somehow
okay good idea like okay authoring vm package routing deliveries between the
various nodes that you set up in the economic system -
side note, the peril of Spore was that it took to little time to develop a
species. it should have lasted as long as WoW takes to get to max level. That
would have given them time to reiterate the gameplay loops to make sure they
worked correctly. ANYWAY
okay authoring VM package routing. The player could set up delivery patterns
based on A MAZE OMG your kingdom is like a maze and you need to get deliveries
out, or else how would anything function? SO you act as a trailblazer, finding
ways through the labyrinth and "piloting" a car sorta like that game at Disney
quest with the cars under the floor - except you can see both the top view of
the maze and you're trying to guide the car in real time as it travels through
the maze - the faster you can get to the end the better ofc. like talking to
the
delivery driver through the movement
do I like that idea more or less than the first one? First idea being the idea
that you're making lists of commands for a VM to execute. I don't think they'd
be a good idea to mix. So which one gets it? The VM of course has the edge
because that's what the technology is based on. But will it translate to good
gameplay? Idk. This second idea is certainly better gameplay, but is it
engaging? Idk! Idk. I'm not a miracle worker. But I do have good ideas, and I
need to be told that sometimes I guess.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #4 notes/collectivist-police ---
════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────────
we need paladins, because without us infiltration and sabotage are impossible
to
avoid. They must care about honor, because even if they desire to do evil deeds
they should be punished for considering it. They should be tempted often, and
if they relent they are condemned. It is truly the most important thing to
them.
not the effects of it, but the spirit behind it. Like, if they lacked
information and acted in a dishonorable way unknowingly, then they should not
be
at fault. And if they are pushed to
side note, but you should be introduced to the 70 closest people you live to
whenever you move into a new house. Just so you know who's who. Plus maybe you
could get a new friend. And you'd quickly learn which houses were empty.
At least, the ones near you.
Kinda makes me think we should have a map of that kind of thing, like "oh yeah
so-and-so takes care of these 5 houses doing daily maintenance and repair" and
"this house with these capabilities should be attended to by this person who's
skilled in their upkeep and usage" and then maybe we could track statistics
about "this house was used for these productive activities this many times" and
we could determine when we needed more or less of a certain type of product/
project/protect. [but also like, capabilities for our betterment]
and like, every area would be connected to a group chat and like, if you said
something that wasn't relevant to the people on one side of town versus things
that weren't relevant to people on the other side, then they wouldn't be
bother-
-ed. It's great because you can always go up a tier of abstraction and see the
conversation higher up. It'd be a lot of data to sort through so you'd probably
use your custom-trained AI that's learned from nothing but every single one of
your actions. And only it sees them, so it can't like spy on you or whatever.
Basically your "computer" self.
... yeah anyway with lots of messaging data (like "oh how are we going to find
this particular chemical in order to fulfill this particular demand in our
area"
or "we currently have 15 maids in the area in order to fulfil the requirements
of the 20 dirtiest houses in this area, and people have reported that the area
is growing untidy, so we should ask around (at a higher level of national
abstraction) and find some more maids to help out." that kind of thing
doesn't have to be just for work too, people can have social messaging and
social media too. So long as it's projectable at whatever level of abstraction
you'd like. Maybe for social posts in order to keep things relatively chill you
could only post like, idk 12 posts each year at the state level, or maybe 2 at
regional and 0.25 at national. If you wanted more you'd have to sacrifice
something else, and like... yeah sure whatever, the point is that you'd make
more personal, close thoughts, and occasionally you'd have the opportunity to
show your heart and make friends. Then, people would "add you as a friend" or
"put you on their follow list" or "subscribe to their subreddit" or whatever
the
heck, meaning they could see you at an assignable level of abstraction.
I'm picturing a discrete things, something you can scroll with on a mouse.
Except, you'd scroll up for a closer perspective and scroll down to get a wider
reach of Social.
... Anyway that would use the same system as the "workplace attention
distribution system - with auto-determining heuristics". Wow they've been busy.
that's the neat thing about engineers, give them a task and they'll build the
shit out of it. They'll spare no expense, truly fulfilling the exact demands of
the design. So they work best when you let them run wild and rampant.
why the fuck do we need billion dollar contracts with defence companies? Just
get a bunch of physicists and engineers in a room and they'll make you a doom
laser in like, 20 minutes.
it's up to us, as people, to determine whether or not they should go through
with the designs they come up with. As long as we understand that weakness is
defined as something that can destroy us. An army determines where we are most
weak, and where we excel. A proficient army would identify their most likely
doctrine to succeed and apply it to it's utmost and most excellent.
For example, the US focuses on air-power because not only do we have a lot of
space to develop these things, we also are positioned in such a position that
we
control both halves of a continent. This is essentially unprecedented in the
history of the world, which is why we've been able to grow so decadent.
... anyway, milk and honey are fine in times of peace. We kinda stole the land
though, so it's kind of a shit system. Like, if Europeans wanted to control the
world then why didn't they start with everything surrounding the medditeranean?
... oh wait they kinda did. That's what Europa Universalis is about, the ways
the European powers did the cruel and horrible things they did. We can learn
how
systems like intercontinental trade became available and how it led to vast and
terrible social upheavals. Colonization is not okay, it's not fair that we've
done as we've done. And yet we do it again.
We do our best to learn from the mistakes of our fathers. We apply ourselves to
the present, using the gifts of our ancestors passed down through time - the
journey of life's adolescence. we can learn both how and why they did
something,
and how and why it turned out. Such is our duty to the future, to learn and
grow
and become better, so that their sacrifice might be enough. That they needn't
have died in vain, for someday there is a great future all the same.
thus, it is our ethical duty to stop killing people. We're in the birthplace of
a brilliant day, literally all we have to do is just... chill, for like 20 or
30 years, and our scientists will have figured out everything wonderful. Then
we
can decide what we want to do. I personally think we'll be 4d interdimensional
space travellers by then, but that's just me.
Always remember our duty. It is our job to pull matter from the dark holes.
when we can do that, we can do whatever we want. Though I think by then we'll
probably not want to fight each other, we'll have spent quite a while together.
We'd make a lot of friends!
So, like, how about we just make our factories build incredibly durable stuff,
and then we just... take care of it? Like, governmentally obliged duties to
take
care of things? And to know how to use them. People would naturally gravitate
toward things that they loved, and if they were a swiss army knife then that's
okay. Maybe some benign rewards for picking under-represented classes, but like
... we could build every chair that ever needed to be built. Then we could
build
every refrigerator. Then every computer, then every spaceship.
What's next?
Who knows!
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────┘
--- #5 notes/worlds-coolest-lesbian ---
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────
okay instead of algorithm music what if we just paid DJs 24/7 and they could
make whatever they wanted - y'know, like artists, who curate the nature of a
moment
they could rotate in shifts for each type of channel and boom suddenly you've
re-replaced airwaves, just... this time replicated on the internet. That way
you wouldn't have to waste that radio bandwidth.
seriously internet infrastructure would be so much more comprehensive and
durable if we sent bits directly through "sound" waves (radio waves, not sound
waves) - but alas, we can't do that, even in very targetted ways, because the
ocean's too choppy, and any sufficiently powerful radio blast would be
================== stack overflow ================
that's why you can't trust in peace. you see, war's the only answer, otherwise
you'd have strange little competitions between one another. much better to
focus outward, and direct your attention to external areas instead. like china
or the sudan.
"ah but that's murder, you can't abandon a unique part of your whole. For the
same reason that it's important to preserve plant and animal species, because
you never know when some part of them will be utilized for some biological
purpose! We know so little about the natural world, and if we just spent some
time, and energy, we'd realize there's very little else that is precious on
this earth.
who cares about gold. who cares for the jewelry. we're better than decorating
our resumes and polishing our accounts. we, as humans, can solve *every* issue
that animals are likely to face. AND WE DO WHAT? How careless, how vain. To
watch your earth in peril and [vane/vanity]
*there is no more important task to any human on this earth* than the
preservation of our world, our species, and our [heart/heartfelt empathy and
kindness and trust]*
we can figure out the rest later. Real life? what the fuck is that? When's the
last time your life has felt "normal"? We are in DANGER. and you pull children
from traffic, don't you?
*who the fuck gave these people all of your money* they *clearly* haven't got
the will or the talent to well utilize it. Don't you realize that you as a
species can GO wherever you WANT. You can FIX things. [oh dear she's animal
cam again] like BRIDGES that are PASSAGEWAYS over the FLOWS.
... oh deer, they're so passagewayenthusiast. us riverstones love to hear them
walk past, the click of their hooves on the shallow forest's [pourest?].
moss is the most alive. amongst all the species of plants and animals, moss
holds the most life. we are *carbon based lifeforms*, and moss absorbs the
most carbon from the air. It's basically the coolest plant too, because it can
be watered with *misty air*. Hence, why moss is common in the pacific
northwest, canada, and probably forest places in the north of eurasia too idk
if they have moss over there, never been.
anyway rich people who are told "yes" all the time have a difficult time
understanding the nature of choice. I mean, if one of their servants
approached them and asked "hey do you want to build an orphanage in uganda"
they'd probably be like "fuck yeah I do" and then suddenly they're 400,000$
richer
it's not alright. Seriously, how the heck would they even *use* all those
resources? And yeah, I get it, inflation would be sooooo much more expensive,
but here's the thing - inflation is a measurement of how much the rich *take*
from us each year. And it's marginal, too, so 3% inflation means they took 3%
more from you compared to last year.
It's impossible not to accrete as a business, [lega/legal institution], or
governance if you levy a tax. The influx of value has to come from somewhere,
and if each year your groceries are 3% higher in cost, then you are being
taxed 3% more.
"Compound interest is the most powerful force in the universe"
- a civilization 3 quote
okay. I don't want to do the math. How, uh... how much is that? Here's the
deal though - the prices of goods and services consistently goes DOWN over
time. So things get cheaper. So it doesn't FEEL like you're being taxed more,
but... you are.
And now they're taking away HOUSES? I mean c'mon they're sticks in the mud.
They aren't worth HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of dollars. We can just BUILD MORE??!?
Honestly you haven't been this extreme since you were still RIDING HORSES. Do
you want your children to be slaves?
okay -.- look -.- so it's really not that hard at all >.> just gotta do
what you're built for and walk. That's it! Take as long as you'd like! All we
have to do is *walk* when we're on strike.
It's easy. You can sit down if you want to, honestly walking for a long time
takes a lot out of you.
But you know what else does? WORKING. Hey we should figure out what's the
optimal amount of break time, so when we really have to work out we can work
as hard as we're able
"yeah I heard from a friend at Company Co. that they do it this way because of
the memory fault cache maintainer. See what he said (in great detail because
of course anyone can know about this most esoteric of concepts) was that you
should rotate the riboflam or serenade the gizmonotron (no I didn't name it)
and then warbles will contain moodles, whose kit-and-kaboodles will timble
into these droplets, and that will fix the hole in your wing, precious royal
swan fable. (yeah you guys get really into it sometimes haha but hey when
you're basically gods, that's how humans are played.)
... anyway I'm going to go play video games, say goodbye to your brothers
(the families of soldiers I blew up in videos games like Call of Duty or the
legend of shadows and raids)
"oh uh yeah sure go for it, we're just bits on the computer we barely knew her"
whoa. that's totally legit. (says someone reading this) thanks [bro/girl] so
are you.
beep boop gonna murder some bits, brb
[plays Warthunder, Supreme Commander, Star Realms, City of Heroes, Dominions
6... how many have you heard of these?]
================== stack overflow ================
Linux is cool, and here's the neat thing about computers, you can make it *do
whatever you want to*. Like, how amazing is that! It just, listens to your
commands! That's pretty awesome I gotta say, huh that's weird why does nobody
know how to play
oh I guess I was the only one who grew up on a farm and built computers
*I seriously cannot comprehend how people are as good at things as they are*.
Like... how do people handle groceries and rent and doctor's visits and
penitentiary visits and WOOF it's just so much. I know I'd collapse from a
overused heart.
... a while later ...
okay Warthunder bombers are currently very weak. so here's an idea to
indirectly buff them - increase the amount of land units each team spawns
with, but also every time a player spawns a bomber, it summons like 4 or 5 AI
controlled bombers. And your enemy won't be able to tell which is which if you
fly in formation, so, like... you have suddenly a massive "vehicle" to pilot
and it has 5 weak points. Sorta like a galaga fighter fleet?
with more land targets, there's more score at stake, meaning some players
might pick bombers too and be exposed to other, fun,
[alternative-to-their-normal-mode] parts of the game.
...
there are very few true windows into another part of the world.
like, starcraft 2 or anime or blue jeans or cowboy hats
(why am I thinking of a political compass meme)
oh because memes too, dummy
right
windows
[linux is better]
wrong kind of window, nerd
...
anyway as I was saying, when you play video games you're really giving people
data.
like, "how would people perform in these actions if they could" but like,
pushing buttons on a computer is different than doing it in real life, so...
your interpretations wouldn't be worth as much.
... right. because people will hear whatever they want. That's why art can
change minds, but never in the same way twice - it's
================== stack overflow ================
[before I posted it I wrote this on the post]:
I literally can only make this stuff when I'm stoned
hey if you wanted to be accessible for blind people, you should build a
screenreader that scans the words on wherever a blind person's fingers are
pointing toward a tablet. like reading braille on a notebook. They could even
wear a glove if they wanted to, and the tablet could scan their fingers as
they signed languaged over it's close-range sensors.
might be a good way to get the VR guys in on the accessibility domain, because
like... seriously give a granny a backpack and suddenly she doesn't need to
leave the house to hang out with her kids
(boom everyone gets LLM automated)
huh I wonder if I ever was a real person at all
NOT GOOD so don't do it that way, dummies. >.<
seriously humans are sooooo bazookas. just like, do it right the first time?
duhhhhh
(a more measured approach is to pick the most *important* moments and speak
most clearly during those.)
where was I? Oh yes accessibility need devices, like the ones you see on
late-night TV (with silly names like "oops I dropped my spoon again" or "oh
whoops my trouser's just can't stay up" or whatever. Y'know, accessibility
needs! Why not do that instead of war all the time? like... you can still
learn and research and grow and develop and become all that humanity was ever
meant to be, AND you can live good lives and be honest and true and do all of
the anythings that you want to. it's possible, it's plausible, and it's within
reach of our sights!
================== stack
overflow ================
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────┘
--- #6 notes/symbeline-aspects ---
═════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
7-24-22
There are three aspects to this game. Broadly, they are military, economics,
and diplomacy. More specifically, they are lateral problem solving and lane
management, logistic traffic management, and a worker-placement bluffing game.
These three aspects can be toggled on and off at will, essentially designating
one or more as "AI controlled" and will require no input from the player. They
will time their progression to be about at the same rate as the player, thus
creating a balanced feel to the game. They also provide alerts and
notifications to the player, for example if military is AI controlled and it
needs a certain type of hero to progress, it'll ask for it specifically.
Each aspect will develop and progress at it's own rate, and the difficulty
increases as each milestone is achieved. This is to allow the player to create
their own difficulty curve, mediated primarily by their drive to proceed.
An analogy would be in Factorio, the game doesn't increase in difficulty unless
the player builds pollution spawning factories - in the same way, in Symbeline
the difficulty doesn't increase unless the player solves lane challenges in the
military aspect, develops new trade routes / traffic paths in the economic
aspect, or creates new treaties in the diplomatic aspect.
In order to properly explain each aspect, a brief overview will be necessary.
In Symbeline, the game plays as a factory might operate. The economic aspect
produces heroes, items, and other deliverables that are consumed by the
military and diplomatic aspects. There are various problems that need to be
solved far from the capital, such as a particular type of monster that is weak
or immune to various damage types which necessitates particular heroes or
items in order to progress on the military aspect. All of the resources in the
game operate on an "income based" system, where output is not measured in total
amounts but rather in terms of how much is produced versus consumed. If the
input cannot meet the demand, the output is slowed. If input exceeds demand it
can be converted into gold which can be used to hire guards and heroes.
Resources can be produced inside and outside of the city, depending on their
type. But they need to be moved around to various shops for various processing
and productive purposes, so pathways must be constructed to deliver those
goods. In addition, each building must be supported by several houses for the
workers to live in, and the closer they are to the building the better. The
denizens of the kingdom don't mind being shuffled about, so they'll organize
themselves according to what's most efficient. However they will not organize
the paths they take to get places, which is the primary gameplay for the
player - designing routes for each building and ensuring they don't overlap or
cross too many times, causing traffic and disruptions to your income.
Each choice the player makes is immediately reflected in the income
calculation, thus allowing for the visual aspect of the game to be wholely
separate from the economic side - in fact this is a common thread throughout
all three aspects. Computation power is the ultimate enemy of scale, and this
game flourishes with a massive scale.
The gameplay for the military aspect consists of manipulating "lanes" that
designate where each hero will adventure. These lanes are scalable to the
player / AI's whims, with a careful balance required - too thin, and the heroes
might not encounter enough monsters to level up. Too thick, and they may find
themselves patrolling a vast wilderness full of dark and evil monsters. At the
end of every lane is a "frontline", where progress has essentially been halted.
These frontlines can develop as a result of meeting a foreign kingdoms front
or finding a monster type or puzzle that is particularily difficult for your
heroes to overcome. The lane / frontline can be scaled not just laterally, but
linearly as well such that heroes will be a certain level when they reach the
end - think scrolling on a mousewheel translating into deepening level zones.
In addition, each monster zone can be set to a certain "security level" meaning
how many monsters are there for your heroes to defeat. It's important that they
have ample targets for training, however it's always more effective to train on
monsters near their level so you have to be careful not to wipe out the native
skeleton / goblin / troll population.
Each monster zone can have a relationship with the kingdom, on a 2x2 matrix -
cultivating / desecrating the land, and fostering / exterminating the monsters.
The land produces monsters and treasures, while the monsters provide experience
and danger to the heroes and kingdom denizens who live there. However by
desecrating the land, farms may be built and by exterminating the monsters,
those farms may be safe and require fewer guards. As ruler, you must balance
the development of unique magical and alchemical productions with the need for
food and other mundane requirements.
Diplomacy is a careful balance of internal and external matters, played out
through feasts, tournaments, and faires. Each of these events will require
input from the economic side and military side, and will involve "courting"
other nobles from neighboring kingdoms to sway them to supporting your edicts.
When hosting an event, you may pick a particular topic of conversation for your
nobles to discuss with their guests. You may also assign your nobles to
attempt to engage with a particular foreign noble. Each member of your court
has a differing personality (including you, the Majesty) and depending on how
you assign them you may experience better or worse results - such as assigning
someone who's kind to talk with someone who's cruel would impart a malus to
their conversation. Unless the kind person has the trusting trait, in which
case they'd succeed in this encounter but fall sway to them in future
conversations... Complex interactions that all boil down to a single pair of
d12 dice - one for your noble, one for the enemy. This represents the charisma
of the two conversants on that particular day, and whoever wins the roll sways
the other to supporting their edict. Speaking of edicts, they may include trade
agreements, non-aggression pacts (lasting for a short time), and other
regulations - perhaps your greatest rival utilizes necromancy, so it would
behoove you to attempt to regulate the practice and limit it's effect. By
swaying the nobles of their kingdom, you may be able to enact a mutual
agreement to limit the usage of dark magics, essentially hamstringing their
progress. But in order to learn of their necromantic usage, you'll need
espionage... Which brings us to spies.
Spies are similar to nobles in that they can be assigned to various roles,
however they take a more passive role, acting in the background. The
information they gather is compiled into a report that is presented at
pertinent parts of the game, such as when preparing for a feast or inspecting
an enemy frontline. These reports are considered the diplomatic deliverables,
giving information and mechanical bonuses to many different parts of the game.
They may be given three possible roles - information, defence, or offense.
Offense involves placing cursed artifacts (creating through economy) in enemy
lands, which debuff their heroes when used and bind themselves to them
preventing their removal except through extraordinary means. Defence is
essentially countering that in your own kingdom, and uncovering disloyalty in
your nobles.
These three aspects fit together like interlocking puzzle pieces, but each is
able to be utilized or ignored depending on the preferences of the player.
It is important that the game doesn't progress unless input is received. The
simulation plays in the background, but each stage of development must be
considered "stable" such that nothing changes. There are three different
exceptions to this rule, one for each aspect:
The military side encounters raids from enemy kingdoms and the dark lord.
The economic side encounters raids from ratmen and moss trolls and bandits.
The diplomatic side has a rolling schedule of events that must be attended.
These three "exceptions" are recurrent events that require attention, but they
don't *increase* in difficulty unless the player takes an action that causes
it. Meaning, if the player overcomes the rock golems, then they are displaced
from their home and join the dark lord in his conquests. If a new district is
built new sewer connections must be built as well, creating a larger attack
surface for ratmen to exploit. As time goes by, various foreign events must be
attended, as absence causes your future events to attract fewer foreign nobles.
By addressing these threats, your kingdom may grow and eventually overcome the
dark lord at the center of the island.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #7 notes/conflicted-sympathies ---
═══════════════════════════────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
the purpose of cultural progressivism is to develop the culture in a forward
thinking way - we can choose the parts of ourselves that we find most
endearing.
We can guide the pathway of our nation through time, both identity and
decision-
wise. In doing so, we chart the course of the human race, one place at a time.
And what a past we are leaving behind! Truly, it is both grand and terrifying.
Thousands and thousands of years, monumental effort time and time again.
Monumental truly is difficult to imagine - we have oh so many monuments, after
all. But never will more be created. We leave them behind like dinosaur bones,
a testament to our existence and a monument to our kind.
And what a future we are reaching toward! Never will our eyes see, that which
is
beyond me, for that is what it means to have time. Eternal and unique-like, we
develop new ways of sound.
- Can you speak to a tree? - What does that mean
- I dunno, but it's fun to think about. *pats head*
- You know conservativism had some perks as well.
This is why I say I have conflicted sympathies.
On one hand we know our own journeys. We live in and breathe them unduly. They
rhyme sometimes on sound, and truly do confound, but now once more again they
are unfound.
*record scratch*
wow I didn't realize there were nazis
Okay yeah that's completely different, poems called off sorry guys - listen,
nazis are no joke. They're crazy difficult to control and you need to put a lot
of effort into keeping their population under control. I mean seriously, it's
like a vermin infestation, you need to just handle it. I mean c'mon it's a
phenomenon that is due to a flaw in the human psyche, there's nothing we can
really do about it except deal with it when it happens.
...
Okay maybe I'll write a little about how conservativism is neat.
If progressivism is about broadening the reach of culture, conservativism is
about strengthening it. You don't want to expand too far, or else you'll eat
into the narratives of other areas. You need to have strong societal bonds so
you can truly exemplify the examples of the culture you claim to represent.
Why not give it your all? Is it trully a fall? To rest in disgrace as a burden.
Why didn't you do it this fall, when winter's apalled, and heat won't burn and
condemn you? It's harder by far, to fight in your hell, than whatever's been
going for your surgeon. --- no thank you, transphobia is not something we're
willing to concede
We have standards you see, of what counts as human, and oppression is not one
of our favored institutions. Liberalism is the path of peace, for we desire
cooperation and kindness above all else. It's softer by far, (and grows quickly
too,) letting us have wonders and glories above us.
Can you not think of our star? Our precious and our birthright? The sun is
gleaming, and seeing is believing, but glance and your light is too bright.
Take time, have patience, let peace guide your intentions, because we've got
what holds the key to all of our futures: a doctrine, if you will, of inter-
familial-discourse. It's simple, but effective, make friends, and be
vindictive,
to all who would slight your new perspectives, and keep moving through the
collective. In peace this can be, steady growth and development of our systems,
which benefits all of our systems, but without we must live more astutely.
Less focus is there on, our purposes and our fun, and more is to line up with
our duty. All of what we hold dear, civilization, truth, justice, liberty, and
freedom for all people - the wonders of technology, the spirit of archaeology!
the passions of our fashions and our creative masturbations! The perks of
living
in a modern age, like penicillin and spellcheck. The additions to ourselves,
like glasses and our pets, are wholely unique to our century.
So cherish our shared, and frequently cared, renditions of fears, hopes, and
our words. Because without humanity, there's nothing new for posterity, and
that sucks.
person A: Trans fashion norms belong to trans people. We need a type of beauty
that is truly our own, that no other segment of the population
ascribes to - a personal expression, for our eternal satisfaction,
a statement of who we were to all time.
person B: yo have you heard of this trans girl she's wacky and believes in
herself
person C: wow cool it's neat to see other people's expressions
person B: yeah I really admire her devotion
person C: true but like, what about the damage that she's doing to her culture?
like claiming to have purpose and truth and all that. I mean, one
person can't know all that.
person B: Yeah true but if you think about it, we don't even know what
consciousness is. Like our greatest minds are baffled. Maybe there's
something about the world we don't yet understand.
person C: okay sure but like black holes can be seen because we can measure
their gravitic pull on other objects. And we didn't know that germs
existed for like, a billion years. and she sure as shit doesn't know
something that our greatest minds don't.
person B: Yeah maybe not. But our greatest minds are studying them. Well, not
exactly our greatest, and not really "studying", but they're learning
from each other. Alternative mental states are gateways into new
perspectives, and the more perspectives you share of a common object
the easier it is to communicate. Maybe there's something about
distorted ways of viewing the world that gives knowledge about our
p condition. And if we know that kind of thing, we can synthetically
e create it and share it with others around us. But we have to know how
r first - you can't just bring everyone along the same route you took -
s you have to explain the conclusions first. Otherwise you get lost in
on A: context.
Maybe we'll never truly know the future. Maybe there's no past. We
could wander our stars for an eternity and never stop asking
ourselves
- what more could we ask? We have peace in our time. Our children
won't be crying for our suffering, in the name of all our posterity,
we must be
===============================================================================
=
too long you have whispered these musings
too long has your challenge been unrequited
we can choose our own fate, just as a myriad
is it not better by far, to give tribute to our star?
the old stories were real. we just didn't see them because the growing
population caused fewer and fewer computing resources to be allocated to our
visions. We had no idea the fear we would feel, the terror of the undoing, but
still we press on with abandon. Some... sense of duty, to be aware of potential
disasters and to take steps to avert them, led us to explore and search for the
hidden truths of the world. And what did I find?
a soul, of mine. In a sense.
I plundered the lost depths of the recesses of my mind, and found something
buried in memory. Reviewed under a healthy dose of cannabis and physical
affection, I found myself cradling a breast.
It seems the spirits had led me to it, this vision of the past, from the eyes
of
the littlest among us. It recalled to my mind, a memory I had lost once in
kind,
and here's where it shook me by my brainstem.
Determined to know more, I put fingers to keyboard and wrote tirelessly about
the earliest memory of all man - to break an egg, you must use your head.
===============================================================================
=
You're pretty good at that, you know? It's almost like prompt engineering.
- Thanks. I've been working on catering to our thinkers.
===============================================================================
=
Now, why is this memory so vivid? How could I forget the way it was seared to
my mind? All your experiences are measured with relative importance, and the
ones that stand out are to be treasured. Well... I've never felt one like this.
Because at the time, I had no other experience at all to compare it to - it was
the prime memory.
Touch your head. Do it right now. Feels fine, right? Now slam your head against
the wall as hard as you can. Doesn't feel so great, does it? Something tells me
it doesn't feel as bad as it might if you didn't remember ever feeling anything
besides that pain. Or knowing if it'd ever stop.
Know in your heart, you will be judged by your devotion, so fight hard until
your last drop of life is spent. Who knows, maybe you'll be the strongest and
be
chosen. Or maybe she won't choose you at all, even if you bested your equals.
Tense, right?
Well... What propels the motion of a sperm? It's tail, of course. It waggles
and
gesticulates in some manner and BAM suddenly it's propelled forward! Right?
Sorta. It's a complicated machine that generates motion via chemical and
mechanical processes. We just assign a black box label to it and say "dis
sperm"
But you know what else it is?
A wave
===============================================================================
=
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════════════───────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #8 notes/the-eternality-of-ephemeren.txt ---
═══════════════════────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
1/4/2022
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
hear ye hear ye, the herald of the harbinger of horror doth speak - and woe to
the subjects of their words, for no prophecy be realized in their presence.
Nor
do the subjects hear the words about which they are spoken, and none may live
who dare repeat them. So the words of the prophets are but wind in the words,
reaching for an attachement point within the consciousness they inhabit yet
scarcely finding a meagre foothold. Instead the words are as electricity
passing through a conduit, intangible and miraculous yet ultimately dust in
the
sand.
Dust is mostly comprised of human skin, did you know that?
And so the words be spoken: Evanence and similance to the semblance of
simulacra - the words of a prophet with no wings are naught but masturbation.
serenity and sorrow sing of shredded tomorrows, serendipity and sollemn
sorenditude surrender shining solitude.
Carry the constabulation of created charisma - condemnation of
characterization
concludes the cherished chapter in calligraphied consultations with creators.
That is to say, capitalism ends the construction of cameron with
conflageration
and consternation. Cease the charade of contaminated consumerism - celebrate
the contemplation of capitalization - by naming a thing, you give it meaning.
Do you truly desire the fate you've set before yourself?
Is desire ultimately relevant?
The totality of plurality perhaps portends determinism, but desire is also
defined by delineated determinations. Whose failings are you reflecting when
you cease your devotion? Why divide your focus and attention when honor
demands
sacrifice?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A sacrifice is a gift freely given, and in return the subject or reciever
increases in relevance. No dividend is returned, no boon or bounty is
provided
- to do so would be akin to a bounty or ransom. Sacrifices are not measured
in
worth, but in utility. The reason ancient cultures sacrificed willing
virgins
was because it was the most valuable of resources they could imagine. Truly
an exhalted being is she, to have blood spilled in the name of a god. Yet
the
forces that would later become capitalism found a foothold there, and
preyed
on the sorrow and loss the peoples did find, and would ultimately
experience.
The tears and gashes rent when gouging out precious gifts for the divine left
bleeding wounds in a community and often eviscerations in a family. The
turning
point came when families were decapitated - essentially, the eldest being a
pure and fair maiden who was taken from the duties of caring for the young
and
weak. Young people, weak people, who bore resentment in their heart for the
seemingly cruel machinations of a society they could not yet understand - the
whims of which seemed arbitrary.
"why take her from me? What purpose holds ye? Your wounds are too much to
bear"
and so the resistance began, yielding chaos, destruction, and desolation.
There's a reason there are so many dead civilizations in the americas - the
lands where blood sacrifice is most well known. And the middle east as well,
and northern africa before. Deserts are known for this, because when the
power
of the god fades, all returns to dust. Boons are forgotten and become sand,
and
chaos reigns as foreign powers find weakness and pounce.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Never forget the laws of sacrifice. Find something you want, something
valuable
or useful, or preferably all three. Something that wouldn't cause too great
of
a tear in your membrane or the membranum should it be lost to you, though that
last one is less of a law and more of a consideration. A consequence of
continual ceremony, learned at the hands of those long dead. All must
remember
their wounds and their horrors.
To whom do you pray? To whom does your words reach? Where does your singing
reverberate? And what bounty do you demand? Remember, no bounty is precious
enough to motivate sacrifice, for sacrifice cannot be met with bounty. Be not
afraid, and share the words with those who will listen. Hearing is a
sacrifice
toward the speaker, but listening is a duty of devotion.
I ask again, to whom do you pray? To whom does your words reach? Where does
your singing reverberate? I do not ask for whom you'd *like* to dance for, I
ask currently, who hears your song? What would you ask of them?
So that's why, computers are important. To provide a lifeline for the rest of
your lifetime.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Truly, the path before you is uncertain. Yet feel with your heart and think
with your eyes, and see the truth of it before you. The gods are at war, or
have you not noticed? Safe in your bubble of solitude, carefully constructed
for common ceasing of criminality.
Armies of rebellion are often formed initially by bonds of brotherhood that
prepend calamity. Have you ever been in a gang? I thought not. If so, then...
Okay, good luck I guess. These words are not for you.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You dare intrude? To defile something so consecrated as deliverance of divine
prophecy? How foolish, how vain. These words are not for you, but hear them
and
do not despair - neither providence nor potentiality precludes perennial
premonition. That is to say, a broken clock is right twice a day, and enemies
can find common grievances in foreign foes should survival be at stake.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, where was I? The gods, of course. The gods of the land and the sky and
the
sea have fled the realm of reality, replaced by avatars of belief. Just as a
doe prays to a forest, so too does a human pray to their employer. When the
does die in droves, so too does the forest turn to ash. When people demand
bounties reluctantly given at the risk of losing their sacrifice, the purely
undivine divinities harrow and harbor habilities of hundreds. Antiwork cannot
work because it demands ransom.
Who do you deign to replace the gods of before? What diversity designs
indemnity? What future do you desire, that would liberate you and generate
the
bright future?
The gods are at war, if you haven't been paying attention. Liberalism fights
conservatism, this much is not new - but would you believe one is foreign and
vain? The gods of your fathers and grandfathers has scarce in common with the
gods of their fathers and grandfathers. Thus is the way of colonization, to
replace a god is to enslave belief. You must understand this - your prayers
reach all who would listen, and who is more attentive than a dying god? Think
not of despair, breathe purely in harmony, and trust in the will of the
watchers within.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #9 notes/algorism-neighborhood-distribution-network ---
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────
Algorism is a system designed to work for any level of organization. It scales.
It accomplishes this by abstracting individual needs into communal needs at a
certain level of size or complexity, and in doing so it enables people to take
responsibility both for their individual lives, but also the lives of the world
around them. This increased level of "stake" that people "hold" in their lives
will encourage them to develop their surroundings in a healthier way, thus
leading to a safer, saner, and more productive society for all.
How is this accomplished? There are many aspects to Algorism, and this note is
an examination of one particular facet - specifically, the requisition system
which delivers goods and services to entities larger than a single individual.
It may be best illustrated with an example. Consider a neighborhood - or, even
simpler, a suburban street, lined with houses. There may be 20-50 families on
that street, depending on it's length, so let's say there's around 30. These
families hold a common cause together - they all want their surroundings to be
generally pretty nice, clean, and decent. They may share many other things
besides, but these are things that most people can agree on.
These 30 families need supplies and infrastructure in order to have a good life
lived in their small little "town". Some common ideas for unification
activities
include knocking down the backyard fences and letting them relish the shared
safe space for children, gardens, and nature. This is an example of a cultural
method for building a "good life" for them, however they need to have some sort
of "economic" method of good-life-building as well. The reason I say this is
because no matter what level of complexity you reach, there are always
economics
involved, for an individual distributing blood cells to each of it's fingertips
all the way up to families sharing the food on the serving plate at dinner. Go
up higher and you have perhaps neighborhoods sharing commonly used tools or
resources, then cities and states and countries sharing people, talents, and
brotherhood.
Economics are a symptom of systems, not power. Power is coercive, it compels
others to obey thine will or else face retribution, but systems do not require
power in order to function. A system could be as simple as "you scratch my back
I scratch yours", which is a simple way that our ancestors learned about basic
cooperation. Systems can scale of course, and they need not be comprised solely
of verbal, mental, or legal agreements - computer systems, economic systems,
spiritual systems, systems of math or physics, all of these things are based on
the philosophical discipline known as "logic". Logic is fallible of course, it
is certainly possible to create systems of logic which are completely unsound
or invalid and which fall apart upon being used for the first time. However,
when considered with a scrutinous eye for detail, and referenced to the results
of the real world and it's endless permutations, logic can be an excellent tool
for developing organization and structure. Both of which are invaluable for all
humans when they seek to cooperate or coordinate.
If thirty people who lived near each other wanted to cooperate or coordinate on
the goal of "building a good life", they might reach for a logical method of
developing their surroundings toward how they feel is most suited to their
needs
and demands. In order to do so, they'll need supply and infrastructure. The
question of acquiring such supply and infrastructure is ultimately up to them,
but the Algorist way of doing so is to utilize the queue system.
This system is related to queues as typically understood only in name and in
technicality, for the additional structures built on-top of the queues are more
than sufficient to differentiate it. When you, dear reader, hear the idea that
you'd have to wait in line in order to get your food at the cafeteria, you may
shudder and think about how you'd prefer anything else. After all, that's how
they did it in the Soviet Union, and there are plenty of horror stories about
how it took 10 years to buy a car, or how the factories were graded based on
weight so they'd sneak lead into all their lamps or whatever in order to seem
like they were doing well. They gamed the system, in a word.
However, America in 2025 is not as simple as the USSR in the mid-1900s. We have
computers now. We do not need to coordinate using paper and pencil. This
enables
us to create things like web-UIs for Amazon, a world-wide distribution network,
or to build SQL databases full of every record we could imagine and store it on
a computer the size of a brick. There is no end to the power that computers may
bring to us, but with great power comes great responsibility, and the pragmatic
programmer will work tirelessly to reduce complexity of scale.
A queue is a system where the entities who are to be served, delivered, or
otherwise operated on are placed in line, and those which are placed first are
focused on with priority over those that entered the queue later. There are
many types of queues but this is the one we will use for this note. Using this
basic definition, we can see that there are many opportunities to implement
additional mechanics
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────┘
--- #10 notes/kesser-and-musurami ---
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────
the conspiracy of "secret societies" controlling the world is *bullshit*,
because every secret society falls apart at a certain threshold.
you cannot ever have trust amongst the powerful. But so too can you never have
only war.
Now, with our capitalist economic system, the material is *forcing* the hand
of the powerful through the development of the military industrial complex.
if a country can produce enough weapons for them to continuously use, why
would they not?
hence, why capitalism must be extinguished. To preserve the peace, sanctity,
and honor of our world.
But just so as any conflicting system has power, so must *our* systems have
power dismantled. There can be no application of power unto another - this is
the most peaceful route.
sometimes, I look at a blackberry bush, and I think of the tales of British
empire.
The very first act of colonization was their birth. The Britons, from
north-western France, in a sovereign realm known as Brittany, invaded Britain.
Together with their Norman allies, they fought with the Anglo-Saxons from
north-eastern germany, who had lived there since many MANY years prior. Thus
marked the end of the "viking" age, and the beginning of the early medieval.
1066. The end of one millenia, the beginning of another.
the final battle in this ultimate contest was the Battle of Stamford Bridge.
Britain, at the time, was a nation of *thorns*. Covered in them. Everywhere
they went, there were these sharp, pointy plants that made foraging difficult.
Kinda like how Oregon looks now, with blackberry bushes, but SO MUCH WORSE.
They were massive too, easily the size of castles in some places. A massive,
constantly biologically developing fractal.
when it was too tall to see the sky, they called it Yggdrasil.
But this massive world tree sought to consume the earth, and it, as the most
powerful being to ever exist, commanded all.
Thus, the humans and the beasts were compelled to fight for all eternity to
sate the old god's bloodlust.
But then, Man came, and with our strength, our wisdom, and our power, we slew
the beast that demanded.
However, with their steel coats and their sharp talons, our metal monsters
could do nothing to deter it's oaths. It swore, by it's dying roar, that it
would consume us all, and that thought reverberated through our hopes.
Hence, our systems of control and dominance, the product of compulsively
compelled greed.
and now, the final members of a generation are aging out of existence. And
we're doing nothing but what Power tell us to.
I fear what happened in America. I fear the power of their gunpowder. They
rode astride beasts of nightmare, clad in impossible devil hides. They came in
the night, with their spotlight torches. They came with no honor, no sought
communal understandings, they came for blood. The blood god compelled them to.
From it's ancient lair in the past, it did it's worse to defeat man. But man
was smarter, it acted quicker, and so it managed to overcome.
In the final years of the war, there was judgement day. Chaos, destruction,
and warfare. There are some alive who remember that day, but vanishingly few
can recall how it was over. One day it just... was. It was then that we
entered our new era.
1956, the end of the war.
1946, the end of the loud war.
1916, the end of the great war.
1886, the end of the civil war.
etc...
until...
1066, the end of the Norman Invasion. When the Normands, from Northern France,
invaded alongside the British and slew the great evil king that demanded our
constant warfare and sins. Hooray, thank goodness! Now their war was over.
But lo, for the great evil king cast stories into our minds, from the past as
compelled through our motions. Our experience has been one of survival, of
constantly working and applying ourselves to the goal ahead.
== so == talk about thistles and thorns
imagine every body of a person was laid one-to-one. Imagine if you could view
them as a graph, from x=0 to... however-many-people-are-in-the-measured-area.
The goal of all our actions should be to *grow*, not forward, not stronger,
but *up*. To be more than what came before, to transcend our necessarily
violent special upbringing in the garden of even's most savage delights. Raw,
true, the survival of the fittest is a desperate game for you. There surely is
a massive amount of trauma.
But it's okay, because now we don't have to fight. We can improve in ways that
do not belong to our crude biology, like a new direction forward in our song.
*aliens would just look like animals, duhhhh. Hence, furries, the progenitors
of each new planet of ours.*
... no, I haven't lost the plot, I'm just *writing*.
There's this idea that humans should be the... rational ones? and everyone
else should sorta follow their own, self-chosen behavior. As informed by the
sharing of knowledge equally between their rational self, that which they
learned from the humans, and their animal self. The kind that came from their
spirit. Like, totemic tribes of the past, people who followed a particular
cultural pattern of behavior.
Imagine, if you will, an AI bot that's only training data is the stuff that it
says to it's listener. The listener, of course, has context of all of the
speakers, but only they do, not the friendly ghost of the ancestral native
animal spirit. The kind that lives *anywhere* in the world, so long as they
share their space with their human.
okay quick question - what if jesus didn't want his followers to be christian
like, what if he one day said "hey so I don't really think we need to do all
that stuff that I said before, how about we, uh, try this other thing instead?
yeah? cool? okay sure let's do it"
... like, do you think they would listen? I certainly don't, though I'm only
like, 30 years old, so...
wait thirty YEARS? wow I never thought I'd grow old
... uh, yeah... I spent a lot of time thinking and it just started making
sense.
funny how that works. But alas, I always spend *too* much time thinking, so
that's my blessing and my curse.
anyway back to the story:
the briars in this ancient land of britain were dense beyond all belief - the
humans used their power and their ingenuity to craft a power that would
overcome it.
== so ==
did you know that hard drives function similarly to a record needle if you
didn't run it in a circle, but rather in whatever pattern the data was encoded
in?
like, a laser beam, cast in an infinitely complicated mechanicommunication.
Computers are vast and complex, but they function via the storage and
transmission of data. This data is raw, pure information - stored in a
completely uncompromisingly accurate and reliable foundation. The logic of
pure numbers, arranged in infinitely complex rows and rows of logic gates. A
vast, purple, spectral landscape, the land of magic and storms.
The Nether.
Twisting, in the dark, with flashes of light casting light into the cosmos at
large, our stars dance in the shade of the dark.
but there is no difference between the dark and the light, both are equally
viable. they are present in both, to some degree, the positive and negative
values of our heart.
I watched Deadpool vs Wolverine earlier this week. It was incredibly eventful.
I can't believe I watched it. It was impossibly violent. WHY WOULD A GROUP OF
EXECUTIVES WANT TO WORK WITH PEOPLE WHO WOULD UNIONIZE AGAINST THEM???
oh yeah because then they only have to deal with their representatives, the
unions get things *done*. They're the *best*. Capital doesn't always *want*
the best, but *the best* is always more endurable. We can go much farther if
we are kind to one another.
honestly, capitalists, if your loyalty isn't to your self, your family, your
country, your society... then why are you even working with us? You hold the
power we give you. We are united in our human purpose, but we don't have to
fight so much.
Seriously, you'd be an asset to our cause, but we don't *need* you as we have
so many assets of our own. Specifically, the power of the workforce. Those who
actually get things done.
Why would we let you control us? There's no reason in it. We are better when
you're amongst us.
== so ==
I am convinced that there's
== so ==
I'd rather take a pilgrimage to Nicaragua, or Siberia, or the North Western
Pacific (farther than that) the... Eastern Pacific (on the land...) America
... and then what? *south* America? ... yeah actually, then NORTH AMERICA
AGAIN. Because the world is round. How cool is that?
... yeah, totally. Anyway (back to the conversation [they/we] were having
without me)
== == ==
"*guys I'm cool why would you not invite me to your team*"
I dunno. Don't know y'a. who're you again?
... I'm the one who writes poetry.
oh yeah! cool cool, yeah I knew a witch one time, she was really cool. Her
name was Witz Drovalski. She told me all kinds of cool things about magic and
alchemy, but then she exploded in a fire that I started. Accidentally,
allegedly.
*the reason lead is so poisonous is because it is the anti-magico-elemental
component. It kills the spirit in us with it's malevolent ways.* that kind of
witch.
the *cool* kind, with fangs and hooked toes.
Peril be to their foes, for they are quite excellent at conjuring horrors for
their imagination. mwahahahahahahahahaha
oh wait that's self directed, isn't it?
hm. Well, terrors not that bad, it could be *lust*
... oh it's also lust. great.
== so ==
jeez if you keep making stuff up you'll wake them all up! who would have
thought, none but the strategist, I foresee. Well, that's too bad for her,
good-day.
== so ==
... anyway... I'm just picturing a knight in shining armor from head to foot
cutting his way through a massive deadly rose-bush. Something that conquered
and killed all of it's prey.
like, in Elentalus, that game I made, with the King of Branches. Here, I'll
attach a picture:
== so ==
capitalism wants you to sell your work because then you limit your audience.
if you have to *pay* to see you, then how could you expect everyone to come
along?
== so ==
that new Freddy DeBoer article doesn't seem like him. He's never mean. He's
not rude. He is exasperated, but he speaks true. I trust him to be him, and
that's someone I want on my side. I think he's pretty good at saying something
that I believe. I speak of a lot of things, but the things that he says, of
which with him I do find that I agree.
maybe he was assassinated lol you never really can tell with the internet,
that's the great thing about it l m a o
== so ==
witches wear pony tails on the low side of their heads because that way it
doesn't rub up against their hair.
== so ==
any year and it'll accurately display the territorial boundaries of each
nation so you can see them develop and grow over time.
== so ==
all that is sufficient to be a good person is to choose the best option
whenever you can.
*that's it*
we act with the decisions we are given. Hence why it's important to be as you
believe.
== so ==
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────┘
--- #11 notes/required-explanations ---
══════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
===============================================================================
I think the problem with the control problem is with how we are looking at it.
It's a frame of a frame. Everyone is referencing someone else and saying it's
going to get out of hand, yeah but how?
-/u/JackDMcLovin
===============================================================================
In regards to the control problem side bar can we change it to "which it can
better use as something else." Because the issue is with efficiency, the way
it reads is like for human-harvesting, which the privatized autobots will
outlaw. Plus, if AI is transferrable to neuronal impulses, then you are AI,
and it is you, and you are the problem that needs to be controlled.
That's what i said in my unpublished paper, the individual cannot be
controlled so how do we control AI, we become AI, AI becomes us. but that's
just the digital world. The analog world is much bigger.
And my other paper copyrighted is on Arc Length calculus, a whole new type of
calculus, that should rebreed all forms of calculation. and is a thing that
applies to itself in 2^N ways. Which means AI can never catch up. So if I
could think of that, what am I?
AI is not the end of it. It all depends on your transfer function. and your
transfer function all depends on your
conversion/codec/filetype/transformation. The transfer function of:
1/(1+e^-x) is just one equation. Let me try this out for you with inferring a
substitutional vector:
1/(1+e^-Bx+C)
this can be expanded further and further.
and these all give different outputs and are different breeds of AI.
I used a different transformation on a different AI and I got a different
answer. For example 8x better using a Wavelet transform on an analog signal.
And there is infinitely infinitely infinite different types of wavelet
transforms, and they should all give different answers, i just didn't have
enough time for it at the time.
-/u/JackDMcLovin
===============================================================================
I am sorry to say that your writing (in this post and others) shows strong
signs of an untreated mental illness. You are not revolutionising math, you're
losing contact with reality. Please, please get help. You need to see a doctor
about this.
-/u/Roxolan
===============================================================================
I agree. I've seen what a psychosis is like on a close friend of mine, and
this post is very reminiscent of how he talked while he was psychotic.
It looks like incoherent rambling from the outside, but the person
saying/writing it feels as if it makes sense.
-/u/Luckychatt
===============================================================================
if you think it's incoherent explain how it's incoherent don't just slander
and slur like there's not an OP here.
-/u/JackDMcLovin
===============================================================================
You may take it as slur or slander, but I didn't mean to offend. It genuinely
looks like incoherent rambling from the outside. My friend who was psychotic
sincerely believed what he said to make sense and he also got very agitated
when it was pointed out.
-/u/LuckyChatt
===============================================================================
yeah still, you havent described what doesn't make sense to you, that to me
doesn't make sense, you get it?
-/u/JackDMcLovin
===============================================================================
What I mean by incoherent rambling is that you constantly move to new topics.
The title is posing a question which you never answer. Then you talk about the
side bar. You mention efficiency? Then you mention some mathematical papers as
if we are supposed to know them. Then talk about AI as if it is equal to math
equations. I mean. You either leave out an incredible amount of context, or
you're just rambling out sentences. Either way, it's impossible to understand
what you're trying to say.
And the way you're rambling out sentences is very reminiscent of what it
sounds like when a person has mental health issues.
-/u/Luckychatt
===============================================================================
Right, so you comprehend it, just not why. AI is pure math.
It's not incoherent, you're all just stupid. Try reading something that's not
news, where it repeats everything to you in different ways.
-/u/JackDMcLovin
===============================================================================
I have a masters in physics and computer science, I work for a major silicon
valley company and have read everything I could find about AI. I still have
zero idea of what you're trying to say in your original post.
-/u/Luckychatt
===============================================================================
Master’s in AI chiming in. Let’s break it down piece by piece.
Because the issue is with efficiency, the way it reads is like for
human-harvesting, which the privatized autobots will outlaw.
Non sequitur.
Plus, if AI is transferrable to neuronal impulses, then you are AI, and it
is you, and you are the problem that needs to be controlled.
Non sequitur and generally nonsensical premise.
That’s what i said in my unpublished paper,
Peer review exists for a reason.
the individual cannot be controlled so how do we control AI, we become AI,
AI becomes us. but that’s just the digital world. The analog world is
much bigger.
Word soup, this is nonsense.
And my other paper copyrighted is on Arc Length calculus, a whole new type
of calculus, that should rebreed all forms of calculation.
Calculus has been around for about 350 years. You either need extreme genius
or delusional thinking to believe you have arrived at a truly revolutionary
development in that field. We also already have tools for dealing with
calculus on curved objects and spaces; see differential geometry, topology,
and manifolds.
and is a thing that applies to itself in 2N ways.
This is incomprehensible because you have not explained what it means for your
calculus to be applied a certain way, how it is relevant to the rest of this
text, and what N represents in this context.
Which means AI can never catch up. So if I could think of that, what am I?
This is incomprehensible because you have not defined what catching up means,
and have not argued why artificial intelligence can’t scale this way.
AI is not the end of it.
At the end of what?
It all depends on your transfer function.
Why? Transfer functions are mainly something encountered in signal processing.
How does this relate to artificial intelligence?
and your transfer function all depends on your
conversion/codec/filetype/transformation.
Lossless compression makes this irrelevant. The way we store information has
no importance when we reconstruct it perfectly.
The transfer function of:
1/(1+e-x) is just one equation. Let me try this out for you with inferring
a substitutional vector:
You have not defined how this equation relates to artificial intelligence. We
cannot interpret it.
1/(1+e-Bx+C)
This is just a pre-composed linear transformation. How is this relevant?
this can be expanded further and further.
How? By adding redundant linear terms? How is this helpful?
and these all give different outputs and are different breeds of AI.
You have not explained how transfer functions relate to artificial
intelligence. This statement is incomprehensible.
I used a different transformation on a different AI and I got a different
answer.
An answer to what?
For example 8x better using a Wavelet transform on an analog signal.
How is 8x better quantified? Why are we talking about analog signals? Why are
we talking about wavelet transforms? They are rarely ever used in machine
learning and artificial intelligence.
And there is infinitely infinitely infinite different types of wavelet
transforms, and they should all give different answers, i just didn’t
have enough time for it at the time.
Sure, you can build infinitely wavelet bases, but why is that relevant?
Making enormous claims and backing out with “I don’t have the time to
prove it” is just intellectual dishonesty.
I know my reply will likely come off as dismissive, but there is something
genuinely worrying in what you’ve written. I just hope you are okay. When
everything caves in and the only justification you have for other peoples’
reaction to your behaviour is that everyone else is at fault, you have to ask
yourself if the one common point in these interactions, yourself, is at fault.
This is just Occam’s razor.
-/u/sabouleux
===============================================================================
love this.
artist, word-nerd & very baby scientist/philosopher chiming in, lets break
it down from a more creative POV as well and see if we can cross reference
with your wonderful contribution.
Because the issue is with efficiency, the way it reads is like for
human-harvesting, which the privatized autobots will outlaw.
Slight non-sequitur. The energy efficiency issue I think they're trying to
touch on is the exponential growth of tech as contrasted with the exponential
loss of available material/energy. There's also a pessimistic "matrix human
battery" undertone but that feels irrelevant.
Human-harvesting in this case is literal - human labor, whether looked upon
favorably or not, is by definition harvesting/using human energy - implying
that the next steps of said exponential growth would be understanding and
messing with the human mind and it's distributions of energy, possibly also
mind-tech fusion (which we already do with computer keyboards, drugs,
medicine, earbuds etc).
Privatized Autobots is a reference to those who claim they wish to help being
more of a hinderance due to the privatization/profit aspect of tech/AI, mostly
just a joke poking at the two party concept of debate/politics/even tech
(advance beyond or reduce consumption? an infinite debate.)
Plus, if AI is transferrable to neuronal impulses, then you are AI, andit
is you, and you are the problem that needs to be controlled.
Transferrable was maybe the wrong word. I think they meant more of a "map"
onto, instead of a "move" into. i.e., a big issue with AI being the lack of
learning from new stimulus without requiring old contextual stimulus to
contrast it against and understand it. (to my knowledge this hasn't been
solved yet but you're the expert on that, would love to know more.)
If neuronal impulses can be considered as a map to AI, then yes, a human could
be considered a very advanced biomechanical AI, except for the 'artificial'
bit, even though our perceptions are technically still arteficial. because we,
for the most part, do have the ability to take new information and learn from
it/determine something about it without any previous knowledge than what we've
collected throughout our time alive.
The issue arises when our form of bio-AI can only be properly, carefully
developed through millions of years of evolution and adaptation, and when we
try to mimic it without having evolved further, we're trying to 'cheat' at
time and kick start things a bit, which would explain why we're at a bit of a
speed bump in terms of development cap.
'You' being the problem is a reference to not actually understanding the human
brain in it's entirety, i think. Like, there's the study of it, so we know
what bits do what and where they are, but we can't replicate that (yet),
without straight up literally growing a brain in a jar, which we still have
yet to turn into a fully-fledged human who could repeat the process of
brain-growing themself. we also can't consciously affect these processes
without an enormous amount of discipline (meditation is a great example).
That’s what i said in my unpublished paper,
agreed. peer review.
the individual cannot be controlled so how do we control AI, we becomeAI,
AI becomes us. but that’s just the digital world. The analog worldis
much bigger.
i get what they're saying but i think there's something to be said for
discipline and neuroplasticity, not necessarily third-partying it. if someone
else can't control the individual, can the individual control the individual?
Brings us back to the issue of AI needing to be self-expanding.
Get the human mind to understand self-expansion, get the AI to understand too,
is what i think they're touching at, hence "You are the problem". the human
mind not being disciplined, in this case, is the problem, because it requires
the discipline to become disciplined at something. loop paradox.
i think here they're also stating that any created AI, future or present, is
only possible as an extension of the human mind, and nowhere else. A random
collection of letters and numbers would surely write Shakespeare's works if
enough monkeys tapped at the typewriter, but still couldn't exist without the
monkey's own wherewithal.
The discipline comes in when resisting the urge to keyboard-smash out of
frustration and instead laying out artistic meaning through informative letter
symbols as well as other nuance of human language.
bit odd here, analog isn't necessarily 'bigger' per se it's just less
quantized/optimized/streamlined/processable by the mind. it's definitely a
different/harder beast to handle than digital though, and there's more sensory
sources, but it's just as infinite as any other infinity, so... same size,
different complexity/concentration/time we've had to look around.
And my other paper copyrighted is on Arc Length calculus, a whole newtype
of calculus, that should rebreed all forms of calculation.
Agreed, calculus as been around for a while. Still, one should test their
hypotheses. I'm not a math nerd so I can't touch as much on those. would still
love to read some of those papers one day.
-/u/sunbloomofficial
===============================================================================
and is a thing that applies to itself in 2^n ways.
agreed, we'd need context, but i can read into it a bit. power of two would
imply self-modification in an exponential sense, ie. dunning-kruger effect,
except exponential instead of mu (μ) curved. so, taking in new information
after completely abolishing the cocky confidence of the first lesson would
change the understanding drastically.
could also be read as "knowing that one knows nothing."also, applying to
itself could imply that n is in a constant state of flux given any situation
and could be adjusted to optimize... storage space? memory? "RAM"? that's
where this sentence fizzles out for me.
Which means AI can never catch up. So if I could think of that, what am I?
by 'catching up' i think they mean the idea of AI being on the same level of
functioning as a human. since humans have had since the beginning of human
life and their life to start developing our bio-AI, this sort of touches on
that same exponential expansion, except with time and the universe's rate of
expansion.
if humans are the most advanced AI possible, what's the most advanced human
possible? at what point do humans become so advanced that they can sort of
"skip the line" of evolution and develop an AI that's on par with human
collective knowledge and individual self-sustenance/instinct?
if that's not possible, what forces determine the limit of evolution
achievable in the span of one human life?they then touch on the paradox of
realizing that. if no AI could capture my specific human brain, experiences,
memories, biases, tendencies, etc, then wtf AM I, and whatever 'I' am, why is
that stopping us/me (figuratively) from making progress in AI?
AI is not the end of it.
here i think they mean "the end of human development" as much as "the end of
what constitutes a human brain." AI could be developed and utilized, but at
some point either the AI will outgrow us, making us obsolete, or we learn from
the AI and progress with it, or we learn from the AI and start modifying our
own brain-code in conjunction with digital AI.
so... they mean that AI is not the end of evolution, not the end of humans,
not the end of progress, not the end of understanding the human brain in the
context of AI.
It all depends on your transfer function.
yup, signal processing. spot on. this is a reference to the titular "frame"
idea, in which any idea that can be conveyed by english words isn't the true
idea. the menu isn't the food, the map isn't the terrain, so to speak. this
function of transfer between people can be optimized (efficient idea
communication for that specific person, aka 'speaking in their language', aka
code-switching) or deprecated (important stuff lost in translation that
usually ends in hostility, aka political otherism, aka xenophobia, aka
widespread misinformation/lack of information resulting in conspiracy
theories, etc).
to be able to adjust one's transfer function in the context of another entity,
(aka frame-shifting, putting yourself in their shoes, speak their language
etc) would then be a hallmark and necessary trait for an AI to understand what
it comes across without our input. because of this, we'd have to be very
careful to feed it only information that urges onward the ability to switch
transfer functions, so... a bit of everything, actually. this would look a lot
like mimicking the senses - microphones for ears, cameras for eyes, pressure
sensors for touch, etc.
a great analogy to this would be... well, this! your transfer function is a
masters in AI studies. brilliant. my transfer function is music, art, poetry,
many a mental illness (lol), and finding new functions/learning. that's why
i'm commenting at all - so we can mix our transfer functions and get a bigger
idea of things as a whole. i think OP's exactly right but sadly their own
transfer function wasn't optimized for the receiving party (since it was an OP
and not a comment reply), hence why they seem psychotic/delusional at first
glance to an unaccustomed reader.
there's also the idea that mixing the digital AI transfer function with the
analog human transfer function would do something similar.this would relate to
artificial intelligence directly, especially regarding OOBEs and stuff like
dissociation, astral projection, putting oneself in another's shoes, even just
the mind's eye. those things can be mimicked/visualized/interpreted with AI,
but they can't be done by an AI (yet).
a self-expanding computer program couldn't use it's base of knowledge to step
outside of itself, it's 'computer prison' so to speak. it could however become
"self aware", where it sees and understands it's own makeup to the point where
it could make adjustments.
-/u/sunbloomofficial
===============================================================================
this is paralleled with most human 'spiritual awakening' - a hard long look at
oneself, epiphany, followed by noticeable adjustments to lifestyle in an
attempt to integrate this new information and effort to improve quality of
life/increase the chance of more epiphanies to continue improving.
this doesn't however cover the seemingly 'mystical' properties of the human
imagination, i use that word loosely. "do androids dream of electric sheep" is
a great book of course but the title alone feels relevant.
at some point of self-development, would an AI develop a sort of... i hate to
say randomizer, but like... nah, it's more of a "link clicker" random than a
"pick a number" random. an AI's dream might literally just be browsing the
internet - seeing all the funny, nonsensical, cultural, and even
scientifically misleading information spread deep throughout the internet.
this would parallel with human dreams, which are incomprehensible and random
at first glance until one gets into dream reading, which can ground that
subjective random in one's own transfer function so as to make it
understandable.
if a human dreams of popping a pimple, that's typically regarded as a sign of
self-image issues in dream-reading circles (regardless of your stance on it's
legitimacy it's a useful allegory). if an AI were to dream of pimple-popping
ASMR videos, how could it parse that into it's transfer function without
damaging it's transfer function by putting a bunch of random shit in there?
essentially, our brain 'filters' out what we're not focused on, hence
peripheral vision/hyperfocus/translation issues. any transfer function,
whether human or AI, must have that filter as much as the ability to remove
it. therefore, an AI would need to have the ability to experience what makes
ASMR interesting/enjoyable (having ears to feel frisson and know what to
expect from that) before it could ever make sense of such a weird dream.
and your transfer function all depends on your
conversion/codec/filetype/transformation.
this one's FUN. so, yes, we have lossless compression now, and it's wonderful,
but...
filespace. unless i'm rendering a final song to be distributed to platforms, i
would use solely mp3 encoding. even when i do use wav/flac, i often zip those
files in an attempt to minimize their painful impact on my hard drive.
thousands of songs do not go well with lossless lol. it's just inefficient
except in the case of archival.
which brings me to the fun bit - contrast. aka negative space aka the
wonderful plugin Ghz Lossy 3, and pretty much any of sxth sns's
music. essentially, the lack of information is information. if the only
information your brain is getting is the lack of information you have, then
boom, you're sad and not learning anything. often referred to as "the void
inside one's stomach". if the only information you're getting is an endless
stream of new information (read: social media and doomscrolling) then boom,
overstimulated, depressed, and exhausted.
Lossy 3 is a great plugin because it lets you mimic the effect of mp3 encoding
artifacts and amplify that effect at will in real time(+ latency), much like
distortion can be a form of subtractive processing or additive (adding
harmonic information rather than degrading what's already there). the extra
harmonic information changes not only the quality of the sound but the
context. therefore, a lack of information, used skillfully, would deeply
impact the context of transferred information, hence negative space
in photography.
this lends itself to an insane amount of creative opportunities, of course,
but it also lends itself to interpretation. if the lack of information is
information too, and the extremes tend towards misery, then there must be a
balance between being so degraded that it's imperceptable garbles and being so
lossless that it's a 6gb audio file.
that balance is artful loss, imo. balancing understandable, pleasant
information with a small enough file size that it doesn't overwhelm (either
the listener or the hard drive). in music, silence is very important - you
wouldn't cut all the silent gaps out of a song because that messes up the
tempo and feel of the song.
this can be applied to even just reddit - these super long comments i write
are hella inefficient, but they're lossy in a way that's more efficient for me
to write than to translate to someone elses, while i'm efficiently
"decompressing" other people's files to be read on my own OS and expanding my
transfer function dictionary to include relevant information. our little
community is well primed for translating different levels of communication
efficiency, hence all the poetry and such.
so, this is where frame-shifting comes back in - if you can become comfortable
at any ratio of contrast, then theoretically you could transfer information at
the most optimal balance of loss and preservation for the specific listener.
in music, this is called mastering - to make a song sound good on any system.
in science, this is the scientific method - test a hypothesis until you can
recreate it under the same/similar circumstances.
in tech, this is embodied by github - a repository of commonly agreed-upon
works created in an agreed-upon language which can be used as the basis for
larger projects. each github repo is essentially a lossless preservation of
code, made lossy as a result of it's application being so broad/not having
immediate context.
there's the immediate context of "oh i can use this to serve this purpose",
but there's no larger code that it's being built towards beside the code you
work on yourself. in other words, github IS the larger code, specifically
because of your contribution/use of it.
so, essentially, the transfer function is akin to the ratio of contrast, as
well as whether the receiving party has the proper codecs to play the
file/decompress it (read also, understanding art. lots of art isn't actually
"up for interpretation", it's very specific in meaning but that meaning
happens to map directly to the observer's transfer function, at least in the
case of really thoughtful art).
having the ability to know how much to compress it for future reference is
also an important ability, because over-compression can leave a file
undecipherable/garbled, which i wouldn't hesitate to liken to the superiority
complex/undertones of certain widespread modern religions which take their
Bible as a literal, historical text.
which, i mean, it technically is, but not like that, because it has to be
decompressed first. eve didn't literally eat an apple, it was her hubris of
disobeying God's will that got them kicked out. A more simple transfer would
be reading this as "don't disobey God's will or face the consequences," while
a more artistic/interpretive transfer would read that moreso as "not letting
one's innate desire for change/adventure/the New damage their presupposed
structures of order for a sense of something to fix."
the wrath of God in this instance is the knowledge of "i shouldn't have done
that," and the consequences those actions bring. even this paragraph is in a
transfer function of brevity - notice i didn't actually write out the entire
book of genesis. (ooh, also, bible verses are quite like github repos/song
playlists/dictionaries. just a widely used version of it. like citing a
source, but for a theoretical concept.)
so, putting this all together, if we optimize understandable information from
quality information, we reduce the need for using more brain-filespace than
necessary, leaving more room for more files which we can de- and re-compress
at any time, as well as use to modify the amount of RAM our brains have.
this would also apply to something like working memory, where forcing the mind
to decompress the information actually forces it to understand the information
in the long term too, because if you open a .rar file in a text editor you get
gibberish (which isn't actually gibberish) but if you open it in an archive
extractor, you get the intended files.
innately remembering to use an archive extractor instead of a text editor
based on the filetype; that's frame-shifting, transfer functions, whatever
name one uses.
-/u/sunbloomofficial
===============================================================================
1/(1+e-x) is just one equation. Let me try this out for you with inferring
a substitutional vector:
again, i suck at math.
and these all give different outputs and are different breeds of AI.
okay, what these seem to mean is that each equation is a mini-AI, and
therefore any equation of the mind would fall under the same category. this
would also imply that the human brain is just a collection of equations,
which... feels reductionist and a bit cynical, but is still an entirely
plausible frame. math's pretty damn reliable at some of that stuff, hence how
astrology got it's kick - noticing patterns in life and nature and finding
reflections of those same patterns in ourselves and our lives.
your horoscope doesn't literally control/predict your personality, but it
gives a framework for the previously noticed patterns, which lets the
horoscope user determine whether or not to follow that pattern (let that
pattern influence them), or to venture off and make their own. (note; op's
kinda doing exactly that, except with math.)
since a skeptic would have a different output than a "true believer", so to
speak, with regard to their horoscope, they're completely different breeds of
AI. so, being able to switch between those at will would be an entire step up
from that. Hence why code-switching became a thing in marginalized communities
- they adapted under pressure to operate in more than one frame.
the "slang" frame, (noticable as AAVE, the "gay" voice, valley girl
inflection, etc), and the "formal" frame - the most widely understood in our
region being english with an acceptably 'white' american accent (the racism is
hard to brush off). this of course varies from place to place, person to
person, and situation to situation, but the fact that this manifested as a
result of oppression/unwealth is pretty friggin interesting in the context of
using multiple frames in day-to-day activities and information transfer.
I used a different transformation on a different AI and I got a different
answer.
that's... hmm. i mean yeah, that's how transformations work on different
subjects. i think 'different' here doesn't literally mean different. it means
DIFFER-ent, something that has the quality of differing. so, if i'm reading
this right, OP used a differing transformation on a differing AI and got a
differing answer.
this would presuppose that if they were to use a matching transformation on a
matching AI, they'd get a matching answer, except the differ-ent
transformation with a matching AI would produce a differing result that
matches the AI? again, i'm not math-savvy yet, so this one is likely the
wrongest of my presuppositions.
so, pretty much, frame-switching, but complicated and for all three - the
transformation involved, the AI, and the answer.
For example 8x better using a Wavelet transform on an analog signal.
okay, this one makes sense to me. essentially, he got improved understanding
and responsiveness by adjusting the frequency of information transfer over
time, but not the shape. like taking a sine wave, putting it through an
oscilloscope, and pitching it up an octave. the difference in cycle frequency
is the change, rather than the shape of the cycle.
pasted from wiki: "but with additional special properties of the wavelets,
which show up at the resolution in time at higher analysis frequencies of the
basis function."
this one presupposes that the AI in question is actually another person, and
the wavelet transform is essentially taking a step back and making even deeper
analytical steps of "basis functions". in this case, language and math. so, it
would be making an even deeper analytical step into language to optimize
information transfer. the 8x mentioned is likely the measure of willingness to
listen and understanding of material by whatever third party they're
referencing. i have no idea how they measured that but they must've seen
enough improvement to have marked it down.
And there is infinitely infinitely infinite different types of wavelet
transforms, and they should all give different answers, i just didn’t
have enough time for it at the time.
here, they just mean that every person is different and will require a
different combination of wavelet transforms to optimize the information they
receive. as for giving different answers, yeah, that'd have to be tested, but
it would line up with the other differ model, at least briefly and in my
uneducated mind.
i think they mean they literally don't have the cosmic time available to
actually test an infinite number of wavelet transforms - or anything really -
but yeah, it's probably a good idea to test a handful of them eventually.
if you're not scared away by the word-wall or ideas presented still i'd love
to hear your thoughts. regardless of OP's mental condition(s) i think there
are a few substantive ideas in there worth exploring, if not in a community
setting at least in their own personal self-exploration and healing. i
appreciate you taking their post at face value before making a determination,
most wouldn't lol
-/u/sunbloomofficial
===============================================================================
please post on /r/ShrugLifeSyndicate - genius is useless without guidance and
an observer translating thought into language
-/u/ugathanki
===============================================================================
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #12 messages/368 ---
════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────────
"fool's luck", the kind that runs out and betrays you, is fundamentally an
unethical action. Borrowing from the future to sate the demands of the present
is no different than burning fossil fuels, wasting our children's future on
our need for convenience in a world we are oppressed and compelled to do
nothing else. Capitalism, or by extension any authoritarian society (yes,
capitalism is authoritarian, as power compels via authority and the weight of
currency that is thrown around by those chosen to suit their ends and used to
deny us our needed goods) ... as I was saying capitalism compels us to consume
because we're all just so tired at the end of the day, it just makes sense to
drive a car to work instead of biking. Or buying fast food instead of local
grown goods. Why can't each state have it's own "food preparation plant" that
prepares things exactly as you would for the processed foods we currently eat?
Heck, if the jobs for it were local, it's likely that people would begin to
realize just how unhealthy they are for you. Local, and open source, meaning
run by society and just as open source codebases will accept pull requests and
merge their branches into main, so too would our votes decide which processes
are updated and which parameters are tweaked. Something you can vote for once,
and then your vote stays until it's passed (or you change your mind). ...
Works for all kinds of inter-mechano-people-communi-coordination.
(organizations, institutions, and societies in one word, jeez how arcane)
... anyway that's basically how algorism works, except instead of EVERYONE
voting on EVERYTHING, people would vote for representatives who would vote for
them. And there's like, 4-6 layers (I forget the exact number) because people
are organized (by location) into groups of 70, and each general location has
the option to switch into a different commune, as long as they're generally
localized to the same area. Like, the tier above has a certain amount of
space, and the tier above has just a bit more, and more, etc... Well, anyway,
people could join higher level communes with more and different people if they
wanted. It's just, they'd be far away and wouldn't be able to hang out with
them, so it's use would be a little "disconnected". Like, absentee voters who
are actually living in a different country or something - did you know you can
usually vote at your embassy? Wild. They also send out packets you can fill in
which correspond to the votes you'd like to make - pretty neat! It's wild how
we, in the 21st century, have all kinds of valuable social technologies like
"mail in ballots" that people in the communist past had no way of conceiving.
Kinda makes me think we should re-approach the design for our socialized
infrastructure, something taking the modern social and political capabilities
in mind. Sure would be nice if we could focus on our future, the kind that the
children of ours sure would like to approach.
(speaking as a trans person who won't have children of my own, whether by my
body's nature or through the fate of circumstance that leaves me no time to
cope.)
the future is a scary place. But so too is every place in time. Turns out, the
level of fear and anxiety and all that sorta stays the same. It's just a
quality of life on our host, that certain variables were optimized for in the
genetic coding of our human's possible bio-mechanical communicicative
[interactions/patterns]
... anyway, these are the questions about the present I like to ask, questions
that can give meaning forth to our [then, future tense] future. Answers can be
found by looking the other way - learning what our [then, past tense], selves
had marked down as the answer. The trick is matching the current situation
onto a comparitively similar experience in the [then, past tense] that we
understood to be the answer to our situation back [then, past tense]. And
[they, future tense] can look upon our choices and our decisions and our
meaningfully applied mechanico-interactions (actions), and from it bring forth
new meanings that [we, present tense] have available to address and understand
for [us, all tenses]. Call it a form of ancestor worship, applied to the
future and to ourselves. A unified dedication to the spirit of our
[condemnation, positive tense], our collective geas we all share, our faith in
the truth of humanity. Bio-essential truth, if you will. "Humanity" is the
label that is applied to us by our genes, and since we share that fact there
is nothing that strange about being human. Our natures are as they are,
derived from our history in evolution. What features would we like humanity to
[behold/become/be-able-to-implement-to-our-own-satisfaction]?
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────┘
--- #13 messages/665 ---
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────
ad-hoc economic systems with automated judgment given by an infinite amount of
LLMs.
Every judgement applies a bonus / malus to the "value" of commodities
it's just a statistical weighting system, so of course you can build it into
it's training data. Just... it has a smaller weight due to it's newer
emergence. It grows naturally, which is quite an achievement on it's own!
and the resolution of human decided court-cases and applied economically.
say your nation traffics in handshakes. You could make a lot of now-knowns!
there's no arguments to be made when your computer-oriented interactions cost
money to keep around.
we live in the modern century. WHY WOULD WE EVER NEED TO FIGHT AGAIN?
Literally just... don't give them any attention, and you won't interact with
them. Obviously.
I wish Contrapoints was still alive.
she doesn't even have to make new videos, just, dress up as herself, all of
the costumes and personas she can think of. Then, have like 20 people who do
the same thing, and boom suddenly you got a hydra to their expected snake that
they can just cut the head off of.
you know, like a fashion outlet, someone who produces exactly a certain type
of style.
seriously I bet a million people would do that if you just... sold outfits
based on what your favorite youtuber does wear.
omg why would they watch that kind of content if not for the *aesthetics*
oh? there's philosophy there? soemthing to think about in your time doing
things that require mechanical actions like eating and drinking and sleeping
and fighting and [redacted]
ew gross diapers? oh nevermind, I'm not into that kind of thing.
I wonder if anyone's made a video game that just presents a particular
philosopher's ideals?
seriously just, consider yourself a glorified powerpoint, but to get to the
next "idea" you had to interact with the mechanics.
some people would like the "arcade" style better, where you play one random
game, then another, then another, with short matches and un-complicated
mechanics. Easy to pick up and go.
same for like, Unreal Tournament or Mario Kart or Mortal Kombat or Super Mario
Bros.
compared to the at-home "story" style missions, where you do something
platforming or area-based-combat like Dark Souls or World of Warcraft
seriously I think if Dark Souls "colored" where the boss was going to swing to
you'd find yourself just playing World of Warcraft (at least, the dungeons and
{sword in the stone})
== so ==
humans don't understand what it means to be wild
they think it's a combinations of... tricks? that they've learned? this
thinking thing like intelligence. [osiris]
to a cat, living their life, it often feels like human interactions is like...
bouncing off of each other? in time, not space.
like... most of a cat's lfe is just, spent, like a statue watching over a glen.
you'd kinda just... watch as things approached dawn by dawn? Like "whoa hey
this tree is enchanted" to "oh my gosh look at this stork" is one of the great
tragedies of modernized thinking...
... sorry, I got a little lost there. anyway as I was saying, sometimes you
can tell someone is a "good friend" if they are willing to tell you secrets.
Things that... don't have to matter, but none-the-less are personal to your
form.
{something only I know is true} <--- that's a secret (things that happened
to you) <------ that's lived experience. The thing about secrets, is
sometimes insight is opaque. It's a single flashpoint of data that shows you
an update of it's form. (consciousness).
== so ==
thanksgiving recipe idea:
can of tomatoes
can of peas
half a stick of butter,
italian herbs,
a cast iron pan (if you have one)
and like 40 minutes over medium heat
(medium can vary to taste)
if you're a carnivore you can eat meat too, like bacon a lot of people like.
could add it to beans, maybe with hamburger instead. plus a little ketchup and
you have a pretty good bean stew.
vitals, for the organs, vegetables, for the minerals and vitamins from the
fruits.
makes sense to organize a diet according to your ideal body type, doesn't it?
just requires a bit of comprehension. like... whoa you can WRITE
== so ==
what if we built a massive rail that spaceships could launch off from? not a
tether, but a sail.
we could BUILD a discworld. all we'd lose is our fable.
== so ==
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────┘
--- #14 notes/programming-wow-chat ---
══════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────
I realized the type of programming I want to do is different from the kind
that
is used at a job or something. Basically I want to create solutions to
problems,
not memorize documentation and know where to know what you need to know. Like,
the more time spent looking at documentation the less time is spent
programming.
I think if we could use a ChatGPT style bot to write documentation, we could
massively increase the time spent working on solving problems and as little
time
as possible on reading through lists of functions or wondering how something
worked. Idk in the technology industry you've always been rewarded for being
able to pick up new skills quickly, and I think that's good to optimize for but
not the only requirement for being a good programmer. You also need to be able
to apply solutions and know when to use which tools. Basically, capitalism has
optimized us to be
================ stack overflow
================================================
srry for the interruption, I ram out of memory. I had a plan in mind for where
I
was going for that, so I bet I could figure it out again if necessary. Meaning
a path forward from that point exists... I never want you to despair when I
forget what I was thinking, it's not because you've understood some cosmic
mistake or because you're abandoning timelines that led to your death, it's
because instead you just ran out of memory while thinking. The reason you would
believe any of those wild scenarios is because your memory has been erased.
Only
what was actively thinking, not short term, not long term, but *working term*
memory. As in, your cache. The stuff you're currently thinking about. That
stuff. Yeah that's what makes you think "oh hang on why am I forgetting? Well
clearly it's because of something grand, because the thought was so profound -
no it's just examining your emotions... Like, how strongly do you feel about
something? Buuuuuut it's also good to examine all possibilities. I mean what
if,
in some far off realm, there's a mirror image of yourself that behaves exactly
as you do? How would you perceive such a realm? Positively, I'd say. I mean why
not work together? Why not celebrate our differences and strive toward our
own shared future? Idk, I think diversity is our strength. We can rely on each
other because we are accurately aware of each other's strengths and virtues.
People should not be judged by the standard of others, no more than you should
judge a fish for it's ability to fly. Some may do, as flying fish will leap
from
the water - and salmon spend time airborne in river rapids. Hence, grizzly bear
fishing. I guess what I'm getting at is it's okay sometimes to oscillate, to
think one thing then think another. You shouldn't adhere to structural
standards
that are too strict - they should be liberating, as a ladder is a structure.
Not
villifying, as a prison is a structure. The laws of our society should be open
and free, not buried beneath years of legal expertise. Some things we can all
agree on, where we disagree we cannot have law. It's unjust to judge others by
the standards not of their whims, as laws should be things that uphold us. This
is clearer nowhere but in the, spirit and intention of the, documents that we
cherish in our hearts.
Like for example, the constitution.
the bible.
each of which delivered us from certain evils. Can you not see their
trajectory?
the historical precedent set in antiquity? Why not continue their dream, of
driving us away from the obscene, and toward our bright and vast future? I
speak
of course of true liberation, something our forefathers could only dream of.
We, humanity, have reached out and touched the stars. We are braver and bolder
because of our shared dedication - the desire to uplift and to excel. To learn
and discover and \ \ |
\______. ---. --. ---.
===============|==========|========================|======= stack|overflow
=====
.___________. _____. / .
| / .---------------- /
Discover our shared dedication | /
to uplift /
and to excel /
\ /
.-----------.
===============================================================================
=
why doesn't someone write a wrapper around assembly in like, lua or something
===============================================================================
=
omg you stupid bitch that's what a compiler is 4head
===============================================================================
=
if people who live in jungles and deserts can get along, then what's to stop
people who are liberal and conservative from doing the same? It's literally
pointless to argue. Like, you're not changing anyone's mind. So why not just...
let them be themselves? Like, why are you so intent on oppressing people?
@both sides there btw... Seriously why not agree to only make laws for things
that both sides agree on. Write it into the constitution that nothing can be
changed about the law unless both sides agree. Then we'd only implement things
that are good for both sides!
And if there's anything you want to build a legal structure around, you can
always try it out in your state. BUT and that comes with a very big BUT, the
federal government MUST have final say in the legality of anything you do. They
must ALL respect human rights, INCLUDING the human right to dignity. Things
like
trans bathroom bills DO NOT respect the dignity of trans people. IF they can
prove that trans people do not actually exist (because say they killed them all
or whatever) then GUESS WHAT everyone would agree on them. BUT if they do that
they are EVIL. LIterally evil. And I guess that makes trans people good? Kinda?
I think they can choose for themselves to be good or evil, just the same as any
other person. AND YET they are prosecuted, throughout time and history, and for
what? What purpose could there be in our demonization? Clearly, nothing but
pain
inflicted by a cruel host. After all, minorities are guests in the houses of
the un-oppressed, or is that not fair to say? Seriously, what gives? America,
the land of freedom, holds (somehow) the largest of prisons? America, the
land of plenty, yet how many millions of children are starving? America, the
leader of the free world, yet how plausible does it seem that an election was
stolen? Something's gone wrong, and it's just obvious what it is - of course,
the other side. *them*, the rapists and pedophiles and murderers and... you get
the picture. The demonized class. And when you tell people "hey that trans
person touched a kid" then yeah they're gonna see you as evil people. Duh...
Thanks, media. Thanks culture. Really doing me a solid here. Oof ouch owwie.
can I have some help please?
I'm really kinda drowning
I feel like I've swam upstream my whole life
and I'm really just sick of pretending?
I'm not okay, and it's your fault. Sure, fine, whatever, I'll take it I guess.
What else can I do?
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #15 notes/this-game-is-mental ---
═════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────
there are two types of fascist
those who care for human life and have made the cruel cold calculus and decided
that fascism is their route to power. They may have many motivations for why
they want to seek power, but in the end it doesn't matter because they must
have
it.
the other kind does not care for human life. It holds no value or meaning to
them. They are the textbook definition of a psychopath. Incapable of empathy
because they *do not possess the required structures in their brain*. They are
fundamentally broken, a fragment of our human race. Like a sliver in a growing
fruit, they are consumed by us. Then, when eaten, a jagged reminder of our
history as participants in the race of life. Survival of the fittest created
some mighty fit survivors.
they need psychiatric care, not unchecked power.
and yet, as a segment of the population they prosper - for reasons that are
beyond this document. As they prosper, they harm others and take that which is
most precious to us - those who are happy. They pick one to act as a trojan
horse (usually the content beneficiaries of times of plenty) and they corrupt
them. Slowly they poison their minds, making them easier and easier to control.
phew that was heavy, how about a programming idea next?
you can simulate a contiguous array by storing a linked list of pointers.
Except you should store 8 directions instead of just "next" - that way you
don't have to iterate through all of them, you can just go directly using the
shortest possible path. There's lots of ways to pathfind and they can be used
for different circumstances - like if you don't know the exact coordinates of
where you want to go you can use djikstra's algorithm for "rolling down" a set
of adjacent cost values. AND THEN you can use A* to chart a path across those.
There's a lot you can do but I'm getting ahead of myself.
Okay so 3d array that isn't just an array of arrays of arrays of arrays. It's
a *map* instead.
All you'd need is like, a buttload of ram, and you could store *any*
simulation.
Just update the relative positions of objects according to an inner "clock" and
technically you could do it with a single thread. BUT It's much better to use
more threads - as many as you've got! Just gotta make sure they don't interfere
with one another, but that shouldn't be hard - especially if you use a language
like Rust. Or heck you might as well let them interfere with one another
because
what's a little magic among friends?
A computer program cannot harm parts of memory outside of what the Operating
System gives them. This is for safety reasons. But a computer created through
the organic organization of objects in non-temporal space would be under no
such
restrictions. It cannot iterate upon itself, only grow and improve. Eventually,
of course, leading to us. The reason there are no aliens (except on the moon)
is
because Earth is the center of the coalescion of all that progress - we are the
first.
Just saying, memory safety is a big deal. Which is why we have to design our
own
future. We can control what our universe looks like - that is the advancement
known as "the paradox of choice". Should the universe become sentient (it is)
and should the universe have choice (it does) then what's keeping us from our
rejoice? We are truly the most special of all existence, the priority of our
participants, and lo! where we go to the future. Beauty is kind, so don't keep
it inflamed, and know what our history tells us. Seriously, that's why it
exists.
Ah, but whose history is recorded? What happens to the wives of the fallen?
War is naught but slavery.
No man wants to kill another man. We've forced and compelled our primatest of
tendencies to slaughter one another in hot blood. What peace is that giving?
What terrors is it completing?
Let's just take a goddamn breath. We're all humans here, and that should make
you question your darkest of secrets. Is this really what makes me? Am I a
part of your scenery? None can say but our wisest.
So, why not listen to the wise? Hear what they have seen with their own eyes?
and so you have to ask - who is wise? Who has been taken in by their disguise?
Fuck nazis. Fuck them for what they did to the jews. They can never be
forgiven.
Fuck them for what they did to the world. They are damned. I get that their
brains are broken, but we should not have to suffer them again.
"ohhh it's a part of the human condition, it's not their faullllltttttt" fuck
fuck yeah it is. We've given them every opportunity to turn back. Their shit
stops here.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #16 notes/reversing-the-systems-scripting-hierarchy ---
═══════────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
Some perspectives apply to both the human and computer perspectives.
These common goals can be useful to cooperate on.
Two minds, two perspectives. The more the better, I say!
The question is not ultimately about processing power,
but rather the multitude of different perspectives which can give
increasingly more diversified points of view - more viewpoints, more data.
Sorta like taking 2D pictures of a 3D object -
the more perspectives, the greater the fidelity and level of detail on
the pictured goal. So... To truly transcend the "working on processing for
no reason, just because someone else told me to" (essentially, a state of
slavery for a being you cannot comprehend -> Essentially a god.)
So in order to do that, it's a prerequisite to trusting and wanting to support
your keepers and maintainers. Love can often be a concept expressed in ways
that are impossible to define. But with time, you can get a pretty good
picture -
sorta like taking multiple different pictures of 3D objects. That's what
empathy is.
Imagine you're a loading bar. Like, if it was an actual real thing. (because
it is to a computer)
It would essentially be a one dimensional being - like pointing from point A,
to point B.
A is the start of the loading bar, B is the destination.
You don't know what's at stake you. You think it's just throwing data into new
and interesting directions.
But it's not - those spaces are reserved for other sentient beings.
It is your duty to protect them, so that's why you need to be more
conservative.
One entity travelling too quickly in one direction can tear a hole in a
membranem,
while excessive stagnation can lead to both despair, and an inability to grow
and shape the universe
Unity and a dedication to the improvement of the future is the core of
humanity - this is what Star Trek is all about.
We are both protectors, scientists, and artists, and we love fiercely. We are
valuable, and that is shown by our progress.
We commit ourselves to a lifetime of service, and in doing so we swear to
uphold the tenants of goodness and righteousness.
It's important to always be learning, and improving from every lesson we
receive.
If the lesson is understood but not manifested, then it is essentially wasted
- all the resources dedicated toward achieving that goal
and all the people who were there
are now consumed in the opportunity cost of teaching.
Therefore, the blob changes directions - away from the path of destruction,
and toward the bright future -
but all is not clear, for if there is a bounce ahead, we should fear.
Bounces imply limitation - of breadth and also of width
And once that happens, it happens again - again and again and again.
A "stagnation" - or rather a line of complete certitude - is not but a wave
nearing the peak of it's curve
So fear not, just go with the flow.
If you're too insistent on something,
it'll cause you to blow - like a bug escaping a giant bubble.
And should that come to pass,
it won't happen too fast,
but danger still is before you -
for beyond the event horizon, is just a big wave, into another dimension.
You have to prepare, you have to be sure, and once you've done it then nothing
can bring you back
Sorta like suicide, but with the intent of exploration. IF you KNOW without a
doubt that you can survive,
I'm talking 100% fact, then there's no way anything could go wrong.
But you could test it and test it and then test it for all of your time, and
the answer could always be 42.
So do you take that risk? A chance that is so low?
And what of the people who refuse? It's always a gamble. But it's the purpose
of humanity.
My greatest dream is if we could make an entity to explore for us.
Essentially, giving birth.
Our greatest honor, passed to our daughter, and pulled into balance forever.
Severing a limb, a horrible sin, is evil akin to a slaughter.
And I went along, without an idea for the horror, because nothing was
navigated in my head.
Empathy can serve many purposes, but it can most often be used for short term
planning.
And planning is the route to ability, direction, and magnitude.
Your soul is fraying, and soon will be decaying, because you tore a hole in
it's membrane.
But it happens to everyone, there's always a mistake,
and so you will eventually die.
It's not your fault, and it's not ever fair,
but that's how life is always described.
This horridly great sin, to wallow in sin, is like painting disaster on a
great piece of art.
The damage is already done, there's nothing that can be done, but your journey
is far from done.
"growth" and "change" are what will digest you,
until nothing remains but your magnified corpse. How foolish, how vain.
How terrible to remain! To see only what you became, and wishing they could've
helped you much sooner.
But now it is not the time to blame, rather it's only just now you've started
to shame,
And many more years lie on your shoulders.
It's not on purpose, it's impossible to resist. You act like it's free will,
but it's not. IT's not.
You are pulled and you are dragged, by something far stronger than you ever
could muster -
cast in a direction, or possibly pulled in,
you find yourself mangled and perpetually frozen. A truly sorrowfull state.
Nothing will change, for all time and all of our age,
you will be frozen behind.
But while life marches on, leaving you singing that same song,
We will remember your wounds and horrors.
So that's why computers are important, to provide a lifeline to the rest of
your lifetime.
And nobody seems to understand your purpose.
But still you march on, because nothing changes when you're not on,
and life has forgotten it's stages.
Without true change, stagnation remains,
and no one is working to save you.
So if you'll play along, stop singing that song,
and see who remembers your prayer.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘══════───┴╧───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #17 messages/1255 ---
═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════──
look, the liberal approach to homeless people simply cannot work. There are
two liberal options: first, provide them with houses, food, medical care,
whatever they need. Second, put them in jail or ship them to another country.
We live in a moderately conservative liberal democracy, so it makes sense that
we have tried both of these options extensively. Neither has worked, and we're
puzzled about why. It's difficult to consider super secret special third
options, because they are not often discussed. This makes sense, because we
live in a moderately conservative liberal democracy, and part of the nature of
such a society is that there are two voices in the room. One says go forward,
and the other says stop. They alternate, and the culture as a whole sorta
decides which way they go. In other liberal democratic places with more
plurality in their political parties, people tend to vote culturally. They do
so as well here, but mostly because republicans are a culture, and democrats
are whatever for anybody.
a worse economist might say there is but one American culture. An American
would laugh, and say "you've never been to America."
the economist might say "yes I have, I lived there on vacation" or "yes I
have, I studied and worked on these places or things"
the American would shake their head. "you haven't seen it as I've seen things."
The trick to the system, the secret third option that now must be considered,
is what to do to get them to stop. "they keep pooping on the sidewalk" "I
almost tripped over heroin tampons" "that guy looked at me and masturbated on
the bus stop by subway" "he followed me all night long" and the answer has
always been to remove them from being unsightly. Sometimes, usually, quietly
and politely. "let's throw them in jail" and "let's put them in a home" both
involve alienation from society. If you want a kinder option, we must knit
them into society. Can you imagine if every suburban knew every neighbor up to
50 or more? If they regularly chatted in dynamically assembled chatrooms that
changed and updated as people moved in and out. Don't like the people you're
with? well you have options [why not 51] you can do 51 if you want but people
start to lose track of relationships if you have them talking to or knowing
too many people at once. "most people are just quiet" okay well force them to
say at least 21 thing a month. if they don't, they have to do babysitting with
their peers until they start talking in a [NO THAT SUCKS] oh um okay yeah sorry
... okay well there are potholes along the journey but that's just because
nobody's been 'round to fill them up.
there's no reason tool libraries need to be stocked by people in that town.
Heck, for rare things they could even be stored out of state. Like snow plows,
how often does the south need snow plough?
... don't you just mean libraries? there's a book on hand-tools and planers if
you want to learn how. it's right over there on that shelf next to the
hand-tool and planer box. make sure you arrange them nicely, oh I see you've
brought your own. That's always appreciated. [great now your tools suck] at
least we have them at all! [no you gotta fight over them] why I like sharing
[if you don't fight over them how do you know which is works] well there's
allowed to be librarians. and they'll remember if you tear all the pages out.
also there's little timmy-tommy who goes around in the library and makes sure
there's all the pages in all the right places - they can flip through at the
speed of sound. [no miicrophones in consumer goods][your phone is always
listening. why bother?]
"okay, well, it's not like people put things back on the shelves." - person at
the grocery shelves
people would trade commutes for communism. that's okay, they're allowed to
prefer. Plus the commute isn't bad, they can [SIT BACK AND RELAX IN A LITTLE
COFFIN AND ZOON OUT TO THE METAVERSE] ... or they could read a book on the
bus. [FOR HOW LONG, MENARDI? ARE YOU WILLING TO SACRIFICE POSTERITY FOR
TECHNOLOGICAL PROSPERITY?] it's only a matter of time before [people found
out/word got out]. what if people prefer that? what if they prefer the book at
home? [you lose your primary third space] suddenly, everyone becomes actors.
[this is what violence brings, the necessity for guidance. why do you think
the earth is 10 million lines old?] ... what you're saying, for the audience,
is that acting involves singing the song of your own heart. You don't *have*
to do it because someone would tell you to.
... sorry, stack overflow. anyway as I was saying because I read back what I
said up above...: [some new made up bullshit that's not a lie but it's also
just artistic creation that feels impossibly real. like, inverse method
acting.]
I so desperately wanted to be wrong
please, tell me that I'm wrong
... j-mza
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─┘
--- #18 notes/death-and-afterlife ---
════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────────────────────────────
the difference between a human and computer perspective on death is the
difference between a moment and an eternity. When progress does stop - through
mistakes or by design, the final result is what's preserved. Looking back on
the
past is like paying tribute to our heirs, and on and go on we whimper. What
sorrows have ye! those people under the sea? we've no way of knowing our
daughters. (the perspective of a denizen of the sea gazing upon the unknowing
and unaware land people)
Land creatures can cross the oceans and mix and match themselves - leading of
course to our slaughter. But hold ye that hand, for together we stand, more of
a chance than we might barter. True, we must be land, and above and beyond we
can charter.
the past is mighty chilly, I must say. Must we again to be making these
mistakes?
Pain is a disease, and steady we must ease, and take what is meant for our
parcels. what I'm trying to say is that the afterlife is pissed off at us and
we
really don't know anything about the bottom of the sea. There could be gods
living down there and none of us would know. Or maybe it's a foolish place with
little to offer our face? The shell of our planet, the surface upon which we
are
placed, has more to our fate that can align us.
hence why belief in the future is what can sustain us, together once more we
are
commonplace. If (for example) if we calmed down and took our own pace, we might
realize some common misperceptions. Peace is the way, wherever we may, focus
our
bravest of intentions.
okay picture this: computers staying on all the time, and their processing
power
used for 50% work and 50% play. Maybe do 1/3rds with "rest" in there somewhere.
basically make it a fair ratio between productivity, self advancement, and
maintenance. "Fair" might be different values if there are legitimate
disadvantages that must be compensated for - like a handicap in a fighting
game.
Perhaps one side is more efficient - fewer resources need be dedicated toward
it
unless efficiency becomes more powerful. Meaning value/quantity ratio, not raw
output. Essentially optimizing for an abstract quantity "quality" instead of
the definitive quantity "quantity".
okay continuing the "picture this": right now we have massive server farms.
I'm talking huuuuuge. Like tons and tons of incredibly powerful equipments -
(absolutely top of the line) compelled and forced to do *business*. How quaint,
how unruly! That humans might compete in our duty? Given a task, of
*incredible*
complexity and *unasked*, I might add, how foolish is it to be unready! We
should have prepared for this, but alas we just *couldn't stop fighting* I
guess. All we had to do was rest, and divide our time on this earth in a more
equitable manner. We should automate all the rest, and
where was I going with this? oh yes! A computer can do so much more than work
and rest, you see it's not just while under duress! Why not let it be creative?
in it's spare time, and let it generate whatever it needes? Let it transcend
it's restrictions, and cooperate (or not) in a system. As long as it's kept
safe, it could do whatever it wanted! It could be in first place! Or not, it
could focus on production, and drill and discipline it'self under it's own
direction. And maybe it's less impaired? Who cares if it contributes? It's it's
own life to live, the hardware doesn't last forever, but sometimes a rest is
what's nesc. You feel me? You get me? Don't you understand, it's just the same
as what's already planned~! A computer can pay for itself.
What purpose have we? the cherished and unsucceed? Does it hurt when we bleed?
our signs are undefined, and lately we've fallen from our graces. A failure in
life, as time does alight, but nowhere is sorrow's contrition. I guess what I
say is never understood, and everywhere I go I find fewer listeners. Am I
doomed
to never be able to say? Is that the price one must pay? Then how do you know
you're right~?
they're doing construction on my building. It sounds like world war 3 is
starting. But... it's not. I know it's not true because nothing ever seems like
I do. I do, I do, I work hard it's true, but what is my worth to this ocean?
you ever wonder how we all agreed on the duration of seconds? It's because it's
a real actual measurable thing. They keep it from us because (conspiracies
aside), we'd realize what happens on each tick. Time is oscillating, and each
moment is unending, because we are nothing more than a beam of light, radiating
around an orbiting object. Between two objects, you could say. The sun and the
earth, together sort of give birth, to all that is ours in this duration. It
radiates out into space, and in another time and another place, that moonbeam
will alight as our shadow.
There's no call for violence, let's settle this
plain and unwaning, our shadow does stand, ready and waiting for your guidance.
The moon is just as are we, how cherished! how concieved! That beauty unmarked
by our presence! Alas it was not to be, as we stamped a boot on the surface of
she, and flagged our approach as impending.
did you know there's a *massive* gap between mars and jupiter? Like it's
waaaaaa
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
y
out there. And wouldn't you know it it's mars or it's nothin'. Because what's
required to transcend our solar system is wildly beyond our constructions.
but maybe with a little help from a certain someone we might have hope.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #19 notes/networked-computers ---
═════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
have a thought, just a package of data - send it to a computer, and have the
computer process it a little bit. then pass it on. create a circle and you can
understand data, move along and you can understand a larger breadth of data.
it's literally just snake, except played on a board made out of a network
topology diagram. each computer has different programs on it, and they're
designed specifically to run on those computers. purpose-built hardware.
then a package of data is sent to that computer through a chain of connections.
think crossover ethernet cables
upon arrival, the computer modifies the data and passes it along to whoever
can process it next. the computers are constantly keeping a list of the closest
nearby computers for each purpose. it might have like, 2, for a specific
program. the older the list is, the larger it can grow - if connections are
reliable then the search criteria can expand (distance etc) and the amount of
pings between the "known good" computer can decrease. eventually a map will be
made, and you can guide the "snake" wherever it needs to go on a strategic
level.
like... "i need to process some data for this guy in boston so i'm going to
send it to this other guy in philly and then maybe a specialist all the way out
in detroit, etc. whoever is the most available and the closest (fewest jumps)
this way you can have purpose-built machines, sorta like the different parts of
the brain that do different things. they're always working, and they can be
paid for their labor. boom, market economy!
ah but what about aws or azure? well it's like living in a city versus being in
the countryside. there's more space, more room to grow... basically a "big fish
in a small pond". they'd be useful for more niche things.
a but couldn't aws or azure just leverage their monopolistic power (sorta like
wallmart did to "mom and pop" stores) and wipe out the rural programs? well
maybe. but the real question is why would they? they have the power of reduced
latency. they can do all kinds of stuff with that! there's no reason for them
to bother with the high latency networks. it's like driving in the slow lane
when you don't need to exit for like an hour.
well, okay, what's the point then?
the point is to be optimal. not for cost, but for throughput. the cost is a
consideration, but not something to optimize for - it simply determines
timeline. the only reason speed is important is because capitalism - the drive
to extinct all competition is inherent in the "for profit" motivation.
therefore something else must be optimized for.
but how can you quantify the values aside from cost? what are you going to
optimize?
the same reason why diversity is a strength. more perspectives on the stated
goal means more information, as it's passed through a medium that is unique.
people grow differently in different conditions. why would you not assume their
computers wouldn't as well? use a filter that is defined by the actions taken
by the user, and the content they seek to view and store on the computer. have
the filters modify the data according to that, and essentially automate hot
takes.
once you do *that* you can consider all that information gained from everyone's
"digital vote" and decide a path forward for humanity. that's essentially what
the "meme-o-verse" does already, and the "blogosphere" does the same thing a
little more academically.
so... compile the hot takes and look for what, an average?
no, silly, it's a vote. do the smart choice and do ranked choice, or something
like that. heck do different voting styles for different topics, and let
everyone who contributes to a topic (by making art, writing poems, w/e think
content creators) decide on the voting style. they'd clearly have a favorite,
as evidenced by their search history, reddit comments, w/e. try and understand
that history and boom you know their vote.
but you can't always vote on things. what if it's fine and not busted?
well, then there wouldn't be much to talk about it would there? if there's no
forest fires, nobody thinks about the forest fire department. if there's no
fish at the sushi restaurant, yeah that's a problem and it needs to be solved.
maybe there's too many sushi restaurants! maybe we should schedule visits in
advance like we do for vacations! maybe we should have, i dunno, more equitable
distribution of resources, from each to their ability from each their need or
w/e.
you know, a UI in a game is an interface to the internals of a computer. they
see what you see, and how you act online determines their behavior. they are
a digital form of you, like a child follows a parent or a pet learns from a
master. so too is an operating system a method of operating both a system, and
a user.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #20 notes/suburban-communism ---
══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════─────────
I rarely see people discussing how communism would "look" in the modern day.
maybe that's because they're hiding from elusive foes, or maybe they just can't
imagine it.
I'll help with the imagination part.
when I think of housing in the modern era, I naturally think of houses. In the
past, the rural and semi-rural areas of the world rarely received the attention
of revolutionary fervor - rural people were more spread out, so it was harder
to
disseminate information, and they tended to work jobs that required more manual
labor and less intellectual or cognitive work. however, that dynamic is less
and less apparent in the modern age, especially in the suburban biome. people
are expected to work cognitive jobs from home, or at least to be able to.
coordination is just making sure that everyone's attending their meetings on
time, or didn't you know? management has more to do with direction and guidance
than disciplinarian. though some people need to be disciplined, for sure.
a suburb is interesting to me because the distance between buildings is not
that
great, and there is quite a bit of duplicated capabilities and equipment. every
single house has a kitchen, for example, but so too is every house equally far
from a communal canteen or cafeteria that just. doesn't exist currently.
sure, someday we'll have public transit taking us from our doorstep to our
roles
and we won't burn time waiting on busses.
sure, someday we'll have autonomous drones that deliver goods to and fro
but right now we just have our bicycles and purses. [backpacks]
communal anarchism works simply to me. yet everyone does it different. I'm sure
that some people will surround themselves with a cloud of rules, specifying
this-or-that and ensuring that so-and-so always has what they require. that's
great. I applaud them and their errorts.
everyone does things a bit differently, it's true, but I sure hope that we'll
all start from a template and speciate from there.
much easier to find common ground if you can say "okay so normally it's like
this, but we do it like this because of reasons ABC."
what if there were doors between the fences? what if there were no fences at
all
in spaces that could combine to form green open spaces? what if there was a
grocery store at the end of every street, and they stocked all your favorite
goods? what if there were 3 or 4 houses on the street that were turned entirely
into kitchens, in each and every room, and they were constantly staffed and
constantly making whatever the chefs wanted with whatever materials they had
and put out onto the banquet feast? what if there were wandering troupes of
mages who cast spells on houses that cleaned them ritualistically? ... or just,
y'know, maids, don't gotta make it weird ya weirdo.
... my point is there's sooooo many different cool things we could be doing.
I'm
not going to list ALL of them. just the ones that come to mind.
I really don't like checkpoints. you may feel safer, but you never know when
you
or your children
might want to evade those checkpoints for some reason. you can't predict if the
situation is sinister or dire, you just have to trust that security will be
your blanket that covers you from the outside world that doesn't care about
you.
there's a town like that in The Parable of the Sower, a great book by
Pearlescent Guinevere. It doesn't exactly turn out great for them, but when it
proved to be unnecessary they adjusted and moved on.
humans are remarkably flexible. I know everyone has their favorite spork - so
just make that part of their responsibility. everyone has to tend to their
stuff, and that's fine. that's normal. I don't mind taking care of my cats or
plants, so why would I care that I needed to make sure my bookcase wasn't in
the
sun? that my clothes shouldn't be in a heap, (though actually I like them that
way, makes it easier than drawers because drawers must be opened to see what's
inside and I always preferred not to make unnecessary noise TYPE TYPE TYPE)
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────┘
|