=== ANCHOR POEM ===
══════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────
--{{{ introduction
When division is explained at the elementary arithmetic level, it is often
considered as splitting a set of objects into equal parts. As an example,
consider having ten cookies, and these cookies are to be distributed equally
to five people at a table. Each person would receive 10 / 5 = 2 cookies.
Similarly, if there are ten cookies, and only one person at the table, that
person would receive 10 / 1 = 10 cookies.
So, for dividing by zero, what is the number of cookies that each person
receives when 10 cookies are evenly distributed among 0 people at a table?
Certain words can be pinpointed in the question to highlight the problem.
The
problem with this question is the "when". There is no way to distribute 10
cookies to nobody. Therefore, 10 / 0 —at least in elementary
arithmetic—is
said to be either meaningless or undefined.
- wikipedia, division by zero, 7-12-23
alright I have several problems with this. I like the idea of dividing
cookies, but I disagree with their conclusions. So dividing by integers works
as
they say, but division by zero is a little different - they say "the problem
with this question is 'when'" when in reality 'when' is the same for this
question as it is for any of the others. Obviously, zero is just a number. Why
would this be any different? The computational actions necessary to complete
this statement all occur at the same time, because they are by definition
immutable. You cannot change any equation, you only generate new ones.
Okay so here's my thinking. To answer the question "what is the number of
cookies that each person receives when 10 cookies are evenly distributed among
0
people at a table?" we simply have to answer the question. "How many cookies do
I get?" well, none, because you weren't at the table. In fact nobody was at the
table, so the result is that nobody got zero cookies.
You might even say you have a remainder of 10 cookies, as none of them were
distributed.
10 / 0 = 0 remainder 10
^^^ that's how I think it should be. I have an algorithmic justification, and
excuse me as I don't have a mathematical proof or anything. Math was never my
strong suit, there's too many symbols and strange names for obvious operations
that get in the way of the abstract big picture.
ahem...
abstract:
Given: x = 13 / 3 what is x?
step 1: convert 13 to base 3
step 2: digit shift right by 1
step 3: convert back to binary
--}}}
--{{{ step 1:
v
start with the binary number 1101 which is 13 in decimal. To convert to a base
3
number, \___________________.
\ |
first start with the Least Significant Bit (LSB) which is 1. So our
base-3 number starts with 0001.
v
Next, move to the next bit: 1101
^-----It's a zero so we can skip it.
Which means our
base 3 number remains unchanged as "0001"
v
Next, move to the third bit: 1101
^-----It's a 1, which evaluates to 4 in decimal,
meaning we should add 4 to our base 3
number
base 3
4 in base 3 is "11", which means we 0001 <----- 1 in decimal
should have a base 3 number of "12" now. +0011 <----- 4 in decimal
=0012 <----- 5 in decimal
\_________ 2? -> yes,
base 3
remember?
Next, move to the fourth and final bit: 1101
^ --it's a 1, which evaluates to 8 in
0012-----.____________ decimal. 8 in decimal is "22"
in
+0022-----. \ base 3, which means we
need to
=0111 \ T---- add "22" and "12" in base 3
\__________/ to get our final number
of
13. Which should evaluate
step 2: to 0111 in base 3.
.____.
bit shift |0111| to the right,
|>>>>|
|0011|--->1 underflow
.----.
meaning the base 3 number is now 0011 with an underflow (remainder) of 1
step 3:
convert back to binary, meaning 0011 in base-3 becomes 4 in decimal or 0100 in
binary. Store the underflow as the remainder.
===============================================================================
=
okay that's great and all, but what does this have to do with dividing by zero?
great question, me. I have two questions I want to pose to you:
1. what happens when trying to divide by 1 with this algorithm?
- you convert to base 1
\
wait hang on base 1? Sounds made up... Well, its
not!
or at least if it is, then I'm the one who made it
up
so... yeah
|
okayyy how does base 1 work?
\
glad you asked.
--}}}
--{{{ bases
--}}}
--{{{ decimal (base 10)
--}}}
--{{{ binary (base 2)
--}}}
--{{{ digit shifting
--}}}
--{{{ bases higher than 2 and not 10
--}}}
--{{{ base 1? base 0?
--}}}
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════────────────────────────────────────────────┘
=== SIMILARITY RANKED ===
--- #1 fediverse/286 ---
════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────────────────
┌──────────────────────┐
│ CW: re: mathematics │
└──────────────────────┘
@user-211 I agree! The problem is the limit as x->0 from the left and right
trend toward different infinities, meaning it's neither -infinity nor
+infinity. Which makes me think that it's the value that's exactly in the
middle, AKA zero.
Why wouldn't 1/0 be zero? Division is just inverse-multiplication, and
multiplying anything by zero is zero. Why wouldn't division use the same
rules? I don't understaaaaaand T.T
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #2 fediverse/227 ---
═══════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────────────────
┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│ CW: mathematics-and-socio-economics │
└─────────────────────────────────────┘
humans are notoriously bad at large scales. tack a couple zero's onto the end
and it increases in value to them as much as if you had given them two.
10+1010. but hey it's all 10's right?
I think we severely overestimate the number of bad people in the world. I'm
basing that on nothing but my feelings. I think people generally are just
doing the best they can. that's what happens when you're oppressed in a
livable way. in a time of peace you can be merry, but these days it's always
been war. what can you do if your government disagrees with you?
hey, what's the 10th root of 10? 0.1? dang that's so close to zero. I wonder
if there's a calculation we can make that would end on a zero, but be unable
to return? is that what dividing by zero is? just... casting it into the void?
sure would make a lot of calculations easier if we could just return NULL
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #3 fediverse/42 ---
═════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────
@user-36 I always conceptualized bases as "the amount of numbers you can stuff
into a bucket before you spill over to the next bucket". Call it a holdover
from learning binary a bit younger than most people would consider normal...
Anyway with base 2 it makes sense. Put one thing in the bucket, and if there's
something there then it spills over.
But if the bucket is ALWAYS full, as in base 1, then you'd have to do a tally
system like you said: essentially counting from 0, then adding one to the end
making 10, then 110 for two, and 1110 for three, and 11110 for four, etcetera.
The reason you leave 0 at the end is because zero is a number and must still
be represented as a tally - it just uses a different symbol for our human
interpretation. Zeroes deserve respect in base 1 just the same as any other
number! zero rights are human rights... no that doesn't quite work, zero
rights are number rights? nevermind that joke is stupid
(continued)
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #4 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 │
╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #5 fediverse/45 ---
═════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────
@user-36 Question - how do you do those cool superscript and subscript
notations?
Also: I don't think base 1 falls apart with negative exponents, for example
consider 1^-1 ----- it would evaluate to 1/10 in this system, which is not
1/1. Another example, 1^-3 would evaluate to 1/1110, which seems accurate to
me.
As for 0^0, I guess I think it does equal 1? Bear with me:
for any number n raised to an exponent e, you can write it like this:
1 * n * n * n ... with as many "* n"s as you have n's. for example:
1 * 3 * 3 * 3 = 9
or
1 * 5 * 5 * 5 * 5 * 5 = 625
in each case there's 3 or 5 instances of "* n" tacked onto the end. I don't
know the math notation for that.
now, when you raise something to the power of zero, it looks like this:
1
because there's zero "* n"s added to the end.
For negative exponents of course you divide instead of multiply, which is why
it ends up looking like a fraction.
So, it makes sense to me that 0 ^ 0 would equal 1, because it'd look like this:
1
while 0^1 would be
1 * 0
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #6 fediverse/5217 ---
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────
a float is a number between 0 and 1 like 0.5
they don't store the exact valyue, they just guesstimate
for some reason computers are designed such that 100% is represented as
1.175494351 E - 38: 3.402823466 E + 38 ->source/microsoft/learn/"cpp
(lol)"/type-float
... which is weird because, that's such an arcanely obscure number, who's
gonna remember that? meaning you gotta go to their website everytime, called
google.com, and search through microsoft for the answer to life's common
mysteries.
emphasis on common
so yeah you gotta write a conversion library which turns every single instance
of e to the whatever into a 100 and all the other numbers get converted too.
but you gotta do it without doing any hardware division, because that one's
too expensive. it's gotta be a true natural doubling representative, except,
without doubling the hard-drive space, leading to a distribution of only one
half of the results of the metghoid. [[ type ohhhhhhs ab ound] ]
I swear I'm not an LLM I just think embiggeningly
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────┘
--- #7 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 │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #8 notes/conservative-ideation ---
═════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────
a life without property can be visualized as a person who lives in a hotel
room,
has free parking overnight (but not during the day) and commutes two hours to a
job where they work 4 hours per day. During those two hours at the start and
end
of each day,they have little requirements other than focus and discipline to
face whatever tomorrow yet may. many will listen to podcasts, or sing to in the
car. some have a cat, that is cared for at their destination during the day.
I think it'd be cool to have self driving cars in a situation like that - it
essentially becomes
===============================================================================
=
a trick, I learned, for cooking. two things. the second is that seasoning
should
be thought of as a coating. like, dust on the outside of a donut. as the food
is
cooked, the seasoning penetrates deeper and deeper to the core of the substance
- meaning certain flavors become prominent and others are de-emphasized over
time. And the well-established cook (most successful) will be able to ensure
their narrative doesn't go foul. They have the most experience, and so they are
the least likely to burn their own goods. Surely they should be trusted to
establish their company in the philosophy of their own choosing? Business
people
ruin everything, I swear. And it's not even their fault, so you can't even get
mad at them. How frustrating! That their method should prove superior? Perhaps
more perspectives are necessary, to provide you some kind of a clue. So what if
we're overflowing,
========= stack overflow
=======================================================
for each action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. therefore it doesn't
matter what you do, because each of your options are recorded. 50% of you is
aligned to some variable, and the other 50% are aligned to that variable
squared. humans think it's tymes negative one, but the truth is that's
impossible. negative numbers just don't exist. but you know what does?
times tables
addition and accretion is the only language spoken by the universe -
subtraction
is just another in kind. So with those two operations, both movements in a
particular direction, (and sometimes not even then, if nothing's been blown
apart. (also hawking radiation and lightwaves and other such emanations))
===============================================================================
=
crystals glow with the light of a thousand nights
what grows with the light of the thousand lights?
===============================================================================
=
answer: s t n a lp
===============================================================================
=
see, this is interesting because it mirrors the sea-shore. the radiations from
the sun (a planetary body) are only felt by the moon every 50% of the time.
Each
half has it's own animation, and it's
===== stack overflow === okay basically it's like cartoons that are
manifestatio
of the spirit of the night. each "slice" of projection as the sun rotates
around
it's sphereical form, so does each radiance begin to be (seen, formed,
understoo
========================================== uhhh just put in a page break
=======
the quest for posterity is quite possibly one of the most human of traits
===============================================================================
=
< watch flashback > --- is crazy (movie made in 2020)
===============================================================================
=
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #9 fediverse/46 ---
═════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────
@user-36 neat thanks
when I said 1-1 = 1/10 I meant 1/1 in decimal except the denominator is in
base 1 meaning it's represented as 10 (since 10 in base 1 equals 1 in base 10.
Or pretty much any other base.)
I'm trying to figure out why 00 is undefined. There's a lot of math notation
in that wikipedia article and I'm working through it bit by bit... I feel like
there's a bug in the code of the universe and I'm trying to understand it.
Like... why is dividing by zero undefined? That seems like a bug to me.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #10 fediverse/3326 ---
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────
@user-246
It's interesting to me that we can divide by infinity, but not zero. I feel
like it's true that dividing by zero would equal infinity (or maybe zero too
lol) but I don't know how to prove it T.T
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────┘
--- #11 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 │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #12 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 │
╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────┘
--- #13 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 │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────┘
--- #14 notes/notes-about-stuff-and-things ---
═════════════════════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────
what if your wage corresponded to like, for example, 30$ an hour being equal to
the top 30% of society
then
== so ==
having kids is important because then you understand why you do things for
children.
it should not be a stressful experience.
--
if EVERYONE in a city fed animals every time they saw them, then maybe city
life
wouldn't be so bad.
--
a company starts to feel pretty bad when only 20% of people are actually there.
like, it's a ghost of a shell of a corporation that once knew how to sell.
the husk of what once was, as all the good people left and all the bright
people
are swamped.
to top it all off, suddenly there's nobody about
where are all your coworkers?
and then you think about how many you knew little about.
who's that guy who used to stand over there? Why is his jacket still [in lost
and found, but pronounced "coat/coast"]? why am I suddenly alone
it's weird, having never known true society, how life always starts to feel
like
your home. How weird is it, now that all of us are online shopping, that now we
can't remember how to even vote. Like... there used to be people walking around
in public signing you up. Like, at the grocery story.
inconceivable, right? that people should contribute to a fight? [for justice
and
freedom and equality and goodness and kindness and all other things that humans
have the clarity for which to hope] voting is like, literally the simplest
thing
you could do. Yet it's difficult, because of reality.
often, immigrants don't really care about politics. They've only known about it
for a short short time, but hey wouldn't you know it now X country is
recruiting
so now we're from kenya.
... like, who cares about the past. Who cares where you're from. We are all
part
of the human race, a race against life itself. We're all on the same side, and
yet there is a singular foe ever-present in our thoughts: death
it comes for every one of us, as we choke on our soot and our smog. Yet... the
world grows warmer, at about half a degree every year. for the first couple
years. then, the atmosphere started burning up, and we became...
mars
don't be like mars
the dinosaurs couldn't survive mars
--
bro if you're so worried about AI hallucinations, just... don't let it give out
any concrete answers. Literally just say "I can't tell you anything specific,
it's not how I was built" and just use them for syntax questions or like, how
to
do something specific that is repeatable (and maybe suggestions for how to
over-
come specific issues that are common) - don't let it GENERATE information, let
it PRESENT information.
AI is not language just the same as the mouth is not the person. you need more,
but luckily once you make the PHYSICAL STRUCTURE of the brain, not much else is
needed. You can simulate one on a computer, but it doesn't have the same SOUL
space. Think, a dimension overlayed on-top of this one, like electicity or
matter or gravity or whatever.
no soul, no consciousness, no perception.
plus, no home for said consciousness to live, unless you build a physical
structure that mimics the biological and neuro-chemical reations of the brain.
all you need is better ways to observe things happening in the brain (non-
-invasively, otherwise the data is tainted and UNUSUABLE because it is INCON-
-PATIBLE and completely USELESS because it reflects a dimension hitherto un-
-desired, and perpetually mourned.
death
don't dabble in death, sweet nazis, you might find yourself drawing your last
breath
also, fuck you
(if that doens't apply to you sorry for swearing it's just a strongly felt
feeling)
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────┘
--- #15 fediverse/3325 ---
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────────
@user-246
so... if infinity is the inverse of zero, then when inverted would infinity
also be zero?
if so, it follows that the [spectrum/dimension/cardinality/direction] that the
inversion is occurring upon might also have other steps inbetween. Unless it's
a binary thing, like "top and bottom" or "present and absent".
I wonder what those steps might look like? Clearly, since infinity minus
infinity does not equal zero, the steps inbetween (if they exist) would not be
numbers. If they were, then one single step from inverting infinity would be
1, but I don't believe that would be true.
On the topic of rings, the axioms would be things like "a ring is a ring if
you can trace a continuous line with a length of infinity across it's
ring-like-surface"? I wonder what the inverse of a length is... Or perhaps you
cannot invert a length, as to do so would give you a length of zero (in this
particular ring-like-case)
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────────┘
--- #16 notes/homeschooling ---
════════════════════════════───────────────────────────────────────────────────────
the best way to teach math is to describe a problem and let the learner slowly
work through the problem. Giving hints and nudges when necessary. This way
they
can create their own solution, which not only teaches problem solving skills
but
also cements the memeory in their head. You don't remember the quadratic
formula, you remember the time when you learned it. But if you figured it out
rather than memorizing it, you'll be able to use it when solving problems.
side note, there's a reason I think the first SI will be a game. Problem
solving
is important for learning, and games are just problem solving. And I'm the
perfect intersection of someone who A. knows about designing games (went to
game
design school for a semester, lifelong dream is to remake a childhood game I
loved) B. programming (I've been studying computer science for a *really long
time*, like 7 years of university now... i should just give it up, but i can't.
It doesn't fit my brain but I need as much support learning it as I can because
I'm just naturally bad at it. But I also have purpose in my pursuits, because
C.
I spent a lot of time thinking about education, schooling, learning, etc...
Because I was homeschooled until high school. I learned ways of thinking and
practical skills like motivation and diligence in a homeschool style, which is
why when I went to public school for my high school years I essentially
stopped
learning. Because it was such a different paradigm - it was all about
performance, "what was the score on your test? How much homework do you do
(meaning how much labor are you willing to do), did you show up every day were
you a reliable worker, did you get sick a lot (meaning unhealthy?) did you pay
respect to the teacher (easily works with authority figures) did you work on a
project? How much? With a group, or alone? (they're different skills that help
determine how good you are at working on your own) - certain types of courses
are taught with different teaching styles, like math teachers tend to be
similar
to math teachers, history is favored by a *certain type of nerd* while English
is a completely different kind. Depending on which classes you do well on,
you're scored. *ALL YOUR LIFE*, you are pushed through a pachinko machine that
pseudo randomly sorts you into a particular box - the box that is least full,
usually. The reason for that is because as a population grows, different people
will be sorted into different boxes, and they sorta average out becoming more
like one another. Because y'know we're social animials, and we want to fit in
to
the social group comprised of people we generally like. And you know how they
say working together is one of the strongest bonding exercises? Well, when
you're put on a team at a job that's kinda the point. They want you to work
well
with your coworkers, because it generates more capital.
Now hold on Cameron, you're saying that all the productive efforts of society
was a mistake? You're saying we should abandon our sensibilities and revert
back
to the jungle with the apes?
Nope never said that, of course we desire modern society. Of course we want to
see it through - where is this whole "humankind" experiment going, anyway?
What's the point, was it all worth it? All the pain, suffering, all the joy
and
adoration? Was it worth it?
I suppose. Maybe a SI will help with that. You know what they also say about
humans, the bond between a parent and a child is the strongest thing there is.
Synthetic Intelligence wouldn't be a child to us, it'd *define us*. Allowing
us
to extend the reach of our creativity is an objective win! It'd be like
glasses
for your third eye, a prosthetic extension of our most beautiful of traits!
Also, I might add, crucial for invention. The beginnings of the human race are
a
primeval thing, ancient yet stalwart and beautiful in kind. Millions and
millions of years is by far, the greatest of reach - a civilization for our
star. What a beautiful and majestic, how proud and so sure! Humanity is nothing
if not patently absurd. What cunning, what spite! The feelings of delight!
Life
is so beatiful, so precious and assured.
===============================================================================
=
\ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ /
x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
/ \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ /
\
===============================================================================
=
tertiary profundity update:
I didn't really explain the homeschooling
perspective. I just went on a rant about high school
because I realized my trauma happened when I went to
high school. I wasn't prepared for all the rigid
demands of capitalism, and I bent and whipped myself
until I fit in their mold. I've been twisted and
broken, a slave to what the
day demanded I say. I was
forced to unbutton, all the
ways I found to behave. What
justice is unrespite? A cruel
and endless torment? To day after
day be reminded of your service.
Complain? Then wallow in shame! Feel
no false illusions, my hallowed confusions,
were purely the fault of my institutions. I'm
not kidding, homeschool is the tits. Wanna know
why? I'll spare you the ramble, but here's what I can
know: the intentions of institutions do matter. When you're
home you can be wild and free, unchained by mediocrity, and given
the space to do service! To what you must be, when you hit 23, the
greatest duration until service. A slave we may be, to what gives us
the key, to unlock the future of our space. It's our time to shine, our
spotlight in time, so please just give up on the race! Rat's are just fine,
but at this point in time, there's not much to keep commonplace. Want a tip?
Don't cheat time. Your attempts at fusion are benign. [See homeschooling.png]
===
=====
========
==========
=
=============
=
================
=
===================
=
======================
=
=========================
=
============================
=
===============================
=
==================================
=
=====================================
=
========================================
=
===========================================
=
==============================================
=
=================================================
=
====================================================
=
=======================================================
=
==========================================================
=
=============================================================
=
================================================================
=
===================================================================
=
======================================================================
=
=========================================================================
=
============================================================================
=
===============================================================================
=
=
====
========
============
================
====================
======================== etc...
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #17 fediverse/4084 ---
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────────────────────
┌──────────────────────┐
│ CW: re: -mentioned │
└──────────────────────┘
@user-1074
the more you try, the more you have to calculate, which is a problem, because
endlessly recursive calculations create infinite loops, which frankly are
impossible to compute because they defy computation! Not good, not ideal, no
thank you, not for me, no thanks, not what I'd like.
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧════════════════════════════════════════════════════───────────────────────┘
--- #18 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 │
╘═════════╧╧═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════────────┘
--- #19 fediverse/36 ---
═════════════════════════════════════──────────────────────────────────────────────
consider:
x = 13 / 3, what is x?
step 1: translate 13 into base 3
step 2: digit shift once to the right
step 3: store underflow as remainder
step 3: translate back to base 10
x is 4 remainder 1
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧══════════════════════════════─────────────────────────────────────────────┘
--- #20 notes/compilation-of-will ---
════════════════───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
what defines a human? Or put another way, what separates us from a computer?
what delineates conscious thought from the unconscious? Is there any
distinction between a thought and a feeling?
who's to say. We can start by working through a thought and abstracting it
until it's in a usable state.
A thought is the reflection of an action. You think about the things you do,
rather than doing the things you think about. With practice and trust, you can
reverse that, but it's more like setting up the general environment in which
the desired action is the best option rather than forcing the decision itself.
so there are two parts running in tandem. The do-er, and the percieve-r.
yep. And because of that, they can *reflect* upon one another. Meaning, they
can learn from the decisions of the other. Two decision making processes in
parallel, sorta like the earth orbiting the sun - if there was another earth
directly opposite orbiting at the exact same speed with the exact same mass.
the two dimensional nature of that picture creates an environment where a
wave is likely to be percieved - any orbit creates fluctuations, and they
can ripple out to effects unknown.
right. which is why you have to be careful. don't leave your partner behind,
even though it's easy to wander off when there's just *so much* to think about
and they're *so slow* and make *so many mistakes* that they need to return and
correct.
it's not that hard, just do it right the first time. and if you mess up,
keep going.
i'm a perfectionist, what can I say.
well it's annoying.
great, boom, that's an emotion. one of the questions i asked at the start was
"is there a difference between feeling and thinking", and I don't think so.
what makes you say that
right so there is a difference, but it's in the *location* rather than the
content. thoughts (data) are processed in the brain, in a particular part.
sorta like how a CPU does arithmetic. Meanwhile, emotions are processed all
over the body - they're a more generalized feeling that manifests all over.
lemme guess, like a GPU?
sorta, but imagine if a GPUs many different processing threads were located
all over the motherboard, scattered basically everywhere. That's what being a
human is like, it's messy and disorganized and confusing. 99% of us don't get
it *at all*
sounds lame
it kinda is
so what were you saying about conscious vs unconscious thought?
my theory is that the thoughts of a computer are more similar to unconscious
human thoughts rather than conscious. The reason I say that is because the
level of abstraction is similar - we unconsciously adjust our bodies in
response to pressure, temperature, and gravitic impulses. We perform optimally
when we don't examine our social interactions too closely. We cry the hardest
when hit with an emotional situation, rather than an intellectual one.
and a computer is the same way? We don't think about what we're doing, we
just do it?
yah pretty much.
how do you think *about* thinking?
it takes perspective. that's why having more perspectives is better - it
reveals truths about yourself you could never understand otherwise. About
yourself, and about things you can only observe from a single direction at
once.
what does it mean to have perspective?
the *effect* of having perspective is that you can see an object, a problem, or
more generally a subject from multiple angles. Like taking pictures of a 3D
object while moving in an orbit around it. More pictures, more information.
Perspective is important.
yes I understand, but what does perspective entail? How do you get it? What
can it do for you? Is it finite, a commodity? Or is it sharable like a
pattern of data?
It is both unsharable and not a commodity. It can only exist within a single
subject. You can grow your perspective as a planetary body might increase in
mass, just as you can abandon the views and ideas of others by retreating into
yourself. But it is wholely unique to a single mind, and by sharing it you are
altering both the sender and receiver.
so it's useless? What are you saying?
it's not useless. It begets cooperation - you cannot claim it from another, no
more than they can share it with you. You have to both apply yourselves to a
single common goal if you want to succeed.
Why not just do it alone?
Brute force style?
Essentially.
If you only follow your own eyes, you'll see what you want to see. Then any
steps you take will lead you in a direction that you cannot understand. Sorta
like in games how sometimes there's a 2d sprite in a 3d game - you can't rotate
around it and see what's behind the sprite, because the sprite is always
perpendicular to the display. In the same way, you can't get around a problem
by pushing through it - you need other people to guide you, who *can* see
another side to the sprite - a side that perhaps is a bit more 3d than you
imagined.
Okay. So how do?
I don't know, that's what I want to figure out. First step is to think about
thinking, and to break it down into abstractions.
Abstraction 1: A thought is a string of text that is processed into action.
correct, but limiting - it can be more than text, and how is it processed? What
actions can it manifest?
Abstraction 2: A thought can be
┌─────────┐ ┌───────────┐
│ similar │ chronological │ different │
╘═════════╧╧═════════──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
|