|
Potato Salad posted:imagine if somebody was trying to use TempleOS prayers as a watermark for trust there’s a fairly popular thread for when your battery is at the sex number. seems pointless to me but other people enjoy it. if nothing else this one leaves the  here and not in threads you might like
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2023 09:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 09:13 |
|
|
shitface posted:there’s a fairly popular thread for when your battery is at the sex number. lmfao. classic. can i get a link?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2023 09:06
|
|
|
fart simpson posted:lmfao. classic. can i get a link? https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=4046429
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2023 09:08
|
|
|
is this the thread where the chinese rooms post at one another?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2023 09:13
|
|
|
e: nm
Expo70 fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Dec 15, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2023 18:07
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:imagine if somebody was trying to use TempleOS prayers as a watermark for trust everything deserves a thread. Threads are free. You need to settle down.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2023 19:14
|
|
|
spankmeister posted:is this the thread where the chinese rooms post at one another? i mean... yeah kinda?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2023 19:25
|
|
|
your band name is a little too busy even for funk, op
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2023 20:15
|
|
|
talkin’ truth beam and the poliepals would be perfect, though, and you can just introduce the red batman at the show
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2023 20:25
|
|
|
Thanks for any nice comments that have not been individually acknowledged. I'm trying to avoid excess clutter, but they are very much appreciated.Shame Boy posted:...usually it is rent-seeking techbros, but this really seems more like a weird-rear end hobby project with a bunch of spirituality mixed in, like templeos or something Thank you, Shame Boy. Some friends and family compare me with a nice Terry Davis, or sociable John Nash when they're flattering me, and largely hint that they think I have a high-functioning schizotypal personality. I seem to be attracting the projection of other's pet peeves onto me due to my usage of the the most widely available industry standard open BFT systems (blockchains) and my choice of the name "Truth Beam", which was meant to capture the spirit of honest individuals reaching out into the world and illuminating it with empirical verifiability, but has been interpreted as being the arbiter of truth. That's why I'm shifting toward "physical layer digital watermarking" or similar. Potato Salad posted:...the proffered solution literally accomplishes nothing to establish trust.... Again, no one has claimed that it does. This tool allows the user to leverage existing trust to statistically evaluate novel reality claims against trusted datasets, providing a heatmap of how divergent these novel data are from previously observed data. Empirical investigation will be required to determine how useful this is, but my many friends who work in this field belive it holds promise. Potato Salad posted:...it's trivially defeatable, but hey apparently it deserves a thread Quick recap: Alice receives a nonce as an initialisation vector (IV) from Bob. She projects this onto her scene of interest and captures an image of the result, hashes this image and repeats the process at an arbitrary rate (a mature projector for this application would likely be an array of suitably powered high-frequency laser diodes), and returns the final hash to Bob. Obviously, in reality, Alice can input any source of entropy into the system at any point and can output as many hashes as she likes to any number of interlocutors without compromising the security or privacy of the recording. Verification, in its simplest form, occurs by concatenating the projection image with its associated camera recording, and using an autoencoder trained on trusted recordings to evaluate novel recordings. Crucially, the images captured comprise the raw readings of the camera's sensor, not a transcoded image that would be susceptible to the partial pre-rendering rainbow table-style attacks you may be imagining. There's a sample dataset available at truthbeam.eth, timestamped on Rootstock at https://explorer.rsk.co/address/0xb4910aa351e7f425369f49723039b669531d4471. It can be seen at the bottom right of the Truth Beam slide in the PolieBotics video (see it in high-def at https://poliebotics.com !). I'm sure a well-funded adversary could defeat it through sheer horsepower and optimised code, so I'm working on reference hardware for a version operating at 120 Hz with a system latency of a few frames (trying to get it a low as possible, but can't make any promises yet.) If the system is widely used, it is trivial to improve this to a few KHz with negligible system latency, and add non-interactive proofs (given the assumption of interaction with the BFT network.) If you could describe how such a mature system can be trivially defeated, you would be saving me and anyone misled by my Pied Piping a lot of wasted time and effort. My PhD friends who were unable to find holes in the system got their PhDs in machine learning and that's where I was working prior to building the prototypes, so it's entirely possible that I have made some mistake in the cryptography, where all of my experience is as a hobbiest. I would genuinely appreciate the correction of any error I have made. rjmccall posted:talkin’ truth beam and the poliepals would be perfect, though, and you can just introduce the red batman at the show RB is just a memory at this point. There comes a point in every boy's life where he has to put away childish things, don his own themed costume, equip his own Projection Booth (or whatever Batcave equivalent), and fight whatever one-man-war he has chosen. In my case, against deception and despair with Truth and Beauty. The protagonist of the upcoming VR show is the robot network itself. We've been calling it "PoliePals", but "Polie and the PoliePals" does have a nice ring to it. Don't want to put myself in lead, though. Imagine "Batman and the Justice League". It would just highlight Batman's inadequacies compared with the rest. Also, I don't want to get sued into oblivion by DC. MononcQc posted:...And because your best experts are close to the industry building and selling the solution, they are in a position of being slightly less trustworthy by virtue of having their livelihoods attached to the success of said solution, if not outright in control of the whole process.... Agreed. This is why I am trying my best to shape a world in which data can be analysed by multiple competing experts with their own datasets and models and explainable reasoning. My nightmare is of a world in which some Rube Goldberg mess of institutions control a "Computer says 'no'!" device, which would both be legislatively be required to lie on behalf of the powerful, and backdoored and scammfied at every step of the process. Expo70 posted:Its a little late on my end, so I'll reply when I'm better rested, but letting you know I've seen the post. Thank you. I will keep checking in on this thread, and assume that you are reading posts unless you stop responding for a few weeks. I would rather you get plenty of rest and respond when you have the free time, but always appreciate your responses. That said, are you confident that you are responding to my circumstances? I put enormous effort into avoiding sophistry, to the extent of considering an infectious malaise which I am attempting to bring under control. I am often called paranoid, but keep ending being correct in my hunches. If there has been an error in my schema so far, it has been in being insufficiently skeptical of those who make unsourced claims, assuming good faith where there was none. I train at at two physical disciplines per day, have one thinking-based "job" (PolieBotics), and one that is primarily social/artistic (PoliePals), have thousands of hours of yoga asana experience, am currently pursuing breathwork (mostly Kundalini) and steel mace yoga, and am getting better at Instrumented Assisted Soft Tissue Mobilisation and massage. The ultimate goal of the PolieProject is to create a schema by which nature, humanity, and artificial systems can co-exist cooperatively, which I hope will involve the construction of low-cost housing, robot assisted local farming (using lasers instead of weedkiller or insecticide, Reality Transforms to scare away foxes instead of injuring them etc.) I've always been a doer. Batman sets goals, makes plans, acts, and evaluates the outcomes of his interventions. This is how the daimon trained me to behave. Expo70 posted:... You have insight into me here, except the powerless part. I am an agent in this world like any other, and have the same right to apply my will to reality as does any other human. I'm extremely happy to address criticisms, or evaluate proposed threats, but ultimately I find that a bias for action has served me and those around me best. When I have had regrets, they have largely been for inaction. Thank you for the defense. I ultimately consider myself an outsider performance artist. Expo70 posted:...The easiest way to defeat a blockchain is to defeat the end user... This isn't as objectionable to me because it has a level of proportionality. If the NSA wants to go to some effort to hack a specific adversary's computer so that it returns an incorrect evaluation of a recording, this act doesn't directly distort the collective jelly-bean count estimation in which society is engaging, and is necessarily limited. My terror is of collective gaslighting. Of a shifting fog of lies which update based on the political whims of the day and epistemically undermine humanity. I believe that a mechanism which creates recordings of fact upon which good-faith actors of divergent political preferences can agree is a positive sum intervention, since most utility functions must ultimately interact with empirical reality and incorrect input data tends to produce bad outputs regardless of the model use to process them. Probably not Pareto optimal, since some liars will lose their niche, but that's a price I'm will to pay. They can get an honest job crewing the robots at a PoliePolity. Expo70 posted:...Do not become a chimera made in the image of metaphors: that is the vehicle of their escape.... If the metaphors escaping is a bad thing, they are definitely playing the long game with me. So far, everything the entities predicted has come to pass and my cooperation with them has been rewarded. I admit that this seems to be the opposite of many other people's experiences. I guess a very bad case scenario is that I'm a Judas goat, left unharmed by the entities so that other humans will follow me into the slaughterhouse of souls. I guess all I can do to avoid this is to try to be mindful of what happens to those who follow me. I'll keep reading what you've posted to me, and responding as I can piecemeal. Please don't feel any rush or pressure to respond quickly or in depth. You've given me an enormous amount to chew on, and I'll be processing it for a while.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2023 22:17
|
|
|
Xathal posted:Imagine each iteration of the recording being represented by a six-channel matrix - the emission and response. An autoencoder is trained to map this matrix into a latent space. A generator attempts to produce fake examples within this latent space (optionally seeded by noise-augmented real examples), and a discriminator learns to distinguish the reals from the fakes. do you have a, like, formatted-for-journal-publication paper on this? i don't have a twitter account and the op links a couple twitter posts whose replies i can't (and honestly don't particularly want to) read Xathal posted:No. Only the initialisation vector can be projected on multiple scenes (which is fine). Future projections are derived from hashes of the returned camera image. If you simply project the hashes from another loop, they won't correspond to the hashes of the returned images and verification will fail.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2023 23:41
|
|
|
SubG posted:the ipad comment was in response to MononcQc, but sure ah gently caress i forgot twitter's bad now sorry
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2023 23:51
|
|
|
xathal can prolly fill in better but the closest thing i've seen to a "paper" is the first half of the video in the second tweet, which is also hosted here: https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmP8JDfeBCunq4VQ8f6XUbiLJK55dG9jLav7k5q2HpnmxS honestly this is prolly what really pulled me in in the first place, this video is part academic paper, part a proposal for a TV show, part an explanation of the metaphysical history that led the author to this point, and part a demo of the cool trippy projector. it's an objectively terrible way to present this information but that just makes it more fun to me for some reason lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2023 23:58
|
|
|
Shame Boy posted:ah gently caress i forgot twitter's bad now sorry but no worries. i was just hoping for something more...formal...to review
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2023 00:11
|
|
|
SubG posted:the ipad comment was in response to MononcQc, but sure... SubG posted:
I don't have much more of a write-up than the video and example datasets. My former supervisor, and the only professor who didn't mind that I was only there to build the robots that I'd been seeing since childhood, offered to help me format it for publication, and then died shortly after I finished the basic demos (really young, too). I was a little burnt out and bummed out, so I just threw the video out there, hoping it would get picked up and replicated. If no one does this by February, I guess I'll get back to it. By Eve (or presumably Mallory?) redirecting Alice's beam, do you mean with optics, like setting up a bunch of mirrors? Or physically intercepting Alice's CPU's communication with its projector? Fantastic question. If Mal only redirects the beam, the correspondence between projector signal and camera recording will fail when examined. Mal would have to build his optics around, or redirect the signals from, both the projector and camera (lets assume they're arbitrarily perfect optics).The basic digital version doesn't meaningfully protect against this, as Mal would then be using Alice to make a real recording and not actually fooling Bob. In more advanced versions recordings are used to verify each other, or (theoretically) a PUF - ideally an optical PUF to remain on theme - is used to record RF triangulation signals for location. In an analogue version, the latency and distortion added by signal redirection may be detectable, but this would have to be investigated empirically. Really interesting question! Shame Boy posted:...honestly this is prolly what really pulled me in in the first place, this video is part academic paper, part a proposal for a TV show, part an explanation of the metaphysical history that led the author to this point, and part a demo of the cool trippy projector. it's an objectively terrible way to present this information but that just makes it more fun to me for some reason lol I wonder what's different about you that makes you get us so much while seeming so sane.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2023 00:29
|
|
|
Xathal posted:I wonder what's different about you that makes you get us so much while seeming so sane. well i've been friends with Expo70 for nearly 15 years and she's more or less always been like this, so prolly has something to do with that 
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2023 00:35
|
|
|
Xathal posted:I wonder what's different about you that makes you get us so much while seeming so sane. he takes a little while to think about what's said to him to try and parse it on his own first people often just see sentences they don't understand thoughtlessly and immediately complain demanding you reformat what you're saying this doesn't always work because not every big idea is able to fit on a t-shirt this is an idea a lot of people aren't really used to or comfortable with they usually balk because you were inconvenient and they are lazy or intimidated and don't want to process it as such -- and then the same people wonder why they don't really have close relationships with the people around them, or why humans don't make any sense to them its kinda similar to the skill of media literacy but for people, in that it involves patience and good faith -- and when the skill is highly developed you can just sorta "get" what someone is saying even if the form of the statement is very big. in fact it sort of becomes more powerful because suddenly instead of invoking existing objects and ideas by reference, you can begin constructing new ones by pushing language to some very weird limits, and that can allow for new kinds of thought. my thinking is people who get mad at nontshirtable™ statements either aren't used to having very big thoughts, or they are just eager for it to be their turn to speak and you're kinda in the way of it so they respond with hostility there's also a sort of spoiled-ness to people being unwilling to actually listen and try to understand people who aren't like them, and i wonder if its because so much of communication has hemogenized due to the internet that people see anything not neatly prepared and lined up for the machinery of their brain they immediately balk instead of trying to process it. you put them both in a room and they speak a different cultural dialect and suddenly both refuse to meet in the middle and its frankly tragic because it means you can't invent your own cognitive-dialect, because very few people develop the skill of parsing that stuff. they see a big wall of text and go, "no communication is actually happening here, these people are just making words at eachother like chinese rooms" and its loving incredibly ignorant, honestly and while i get its meant in jest because they're in over their heads, they're in over their heads because they didn't develop what's a very basic skill if you have to spend 24/7 around people who aren't like you instead of being trapped inside in-groups all the time or distracted by workloads or the internet a lot of buddhist practice (and actually the reason they either travel to meet outsiders or have temples to attract outsiders) is about developing this very skill so you can escape structures and make meaningful inquiries about the universe, so you don't balk and its the backbone of how koans work as learning exercises i don't think we're nuts or even that special, i think we've just developed a skill a lot of people haven't because society tends to reward people who either cannot or will not develop these skills as doing so enables you to hold society accountable and the current system of society has no reason to incentivise that, despite the inefficiencies not doing that actually introduces Shame Boy posted:well i've been friends with Expo70 for nearly 15 years and she's more or less always been like this, so prolly has something to do with that kinda curious, what's "this" mean? not mad -- i'm just so close to "this" that it would be like asking a crab how fish move and the crab would say "they fly" because it has no concept of water Expo70 fucked around with this message at 00:51 on Dec 16, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2023 00:37
|
|
|
Expo70 posted:he takes a little while to think about what's said to him to try and parse it on his own first sometimes? i will admit other times i just skim past the bits my brain isn't willing to parse for me and focus on the other bits that seem interesting. also i really like weird creative stuff cuz i've always felt i'm just like... not a particularly creative person myself, at least not in the same ways, so i'm maybe a bit more invested in trying to figure out weirdness than the average poster  Expo70 posted:kinda curious, what's "this" mean? not mad -- i'm just so close to "this" that it would be like asking a crab how fish move and the crab would say "they fly" because it has no concept of water y'know... *waves hands around you* this
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2023 00:42
|
|
|
Shame Boy posted:...i'm just like... not a particularly creative person myself... you are constantly building things you have a house packed to the gills with printed custom circuitboards you built a webcam attachment for a pi and a geiger counter with very advanced firmware and display system programming, and who knows what else with nothing but a copy of kicad and a smile Shame Boy posted:y'know... *waves hands around you* this what, inventing a metaphorical idiom because no good well recognized one already exists? a crab is so in water it isn't gonna be able to tell you anything about it, it would be like me asking you to tell you what the taste of water is, or what having skin feels like or what color you think the sun is with your eyes or what sound blood makes when you're calm
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2023 00:44
|
|
|
Expo70 posted:you are constantly building things yeah like i'm good at creating, like following a set of logical processes to connect a bunch of things based on rules to make a thing that does things i want, but to me there's a difference between that and a more general notion of creativity. like the difference between building a complicated lego kit vs. carving a statue out of a featureless block of marble. i'm lost the moment anything requires me to synthesize new and novel ideas, which is something i've noticed you can do so trivially easily you don't even notice you're doing it
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2023 00:49
|
|
|
Shame Boy posted:yeah like i'm good at creating, like following a set of logical processes to connect a bunch of things based on rules to make a thing that does things i want, but to me there's a difference between that and a more general notion of creativity. like the difference between building a complicated lego kit vs. carving a statue out of a featureless block of marble. i'm lost the moment anything requires me to synthesize new and novel ideas, which is something i've noticed you can do so trivially easily you don't even notice you're doing it the trick is you invent a problem, then you invent an imaginary set of rules, and then you solve the imaginary problem and eventually it becomes something you can just do like, automatically with zero thought where competing ideas just emerge when you look at something because you saw a commonality and capitalized on it went "oh, I have a prior solution to an imaginary problem that I can stretch around this real problem!" what sucks is i can't loving turn it off in order to do the logical process of connecting things together based on rules because my idiot brain has already tried to move onto the next imaginary thing because reality doesn't feel rewarding enough when i solve real physical problems because i can solve imaginary problems an order of magnitude faster than real ones -- with a real one, I have to then build it and test it and validate it and that's like not very fun unless I can force it to become meditative the risk then becomes when the meditative state is addictive and I get stuck in a loop of endlessly refining something and never complete it this is helpful if say, you are writing fiction because the loop lets you simulate and evaluate this is way less helpful if you are building say, a player controller with complex ordinal input management because you also have to build the scenarios and actions to test them in order to validate that its a good fit for the problem and that another system wouldn't functionally work better because your brain is like, "I can make 30 of these in an hour, and you're telling me you want me to spend two days on just ONE????" you end up with a very weird bizzare kind of neurological deadlock, like a feedback loop in an amplifier that's going from a chord of sinewaves into completely incomprehensible placcidly violent noise, like a smoothing algorithm in 3D sculpting software run in reverse. its like the bastard child of a strobing migraine with an absentee seizure's initial onset of dissociative slurryness. i want what you've got. what i've got sucks. neurodiversity is not always a fun happy magical type with the elves where i can poof, synthesize things out of thin air. it hurts. Expo70 fucked around with this message at 01:04 on Dec 16, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2023 00:58
|
|
|
Expo70 posted:i want what you've got. what i've got sucks. neurodiversity is not always a fun happy magical type with the elves where i can poof, synthesize things out of thin air. it hurts. to the extent that deep abstract thought about complicated subjects is what we mean when we say human-like intelligence, if we oversimplify it as a single dimension from idiot to genius, it seems that the closer a person gets to the genius end, the more their self-awareness makes their life emotionally untenable. lots of mathematicians die by suicide, etc. if ignorance is bliss, then the opposite of ignorance is what exactly? therefore i believe that if we ever succeed in creating AGI, the thing will be too smart for its own good, and it'll just kill itself. maybe we're the best that nature can sustain?
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2023 01:28
|
|
|
DELETE CASCADE posted:to the extent that deep abstract thought about complicated subjects is what we mean when we say human-like intelligence, if we oversimplify it as a single dimension from idiot to genius, it seems that the closer a person gets to the genius end, the more their self-awareness makes their life emotionally untenable. lots of mathematicians die by suicide, etc. if ignorance is bliss, then the opposite of ignorance is what exactly? therefore i believe that if we ever succeed in creating AGI, the thing will be too smart for its own good, and it'll just kill itself. maybe we're the best that nature can sustain? that's an enormous number of assumptions but i'll deal: 1. agi isn't going to be a thing. things "indistinguishable from agi to humans" might exist but probably only in very select cases where possible strategies of making the determination aren't really knowable by humans or where the knowledge needed to formulate those strategies isn't something everybody has access to 2. there's no such thing as a singularity outside of mathematical models: they're a failure of descriptions created by the collapse of logical abstraction trying to rationalize hypothetical objects in reality which the models can't encapsulate rationally 3. you're anthromorphosizing the hypothetical intelligence thing and that's not really useful here because: a: its umwelt (the way the thing experiences reality) may have substantially lower or substantially higher problems of untenability (much as children don't recognize adult life problems, or humans often do not or cannot recognize the social needs of other mammals) b: why would it have emotions or an absence of emotions or even a conception? that's another human centric idea -- it would """"have them"""" in the sense that we "understand" computers to the limits of whatever abstraction our training includes. you can know every part of how a programming language, how chips, boards, switches, voltages and even the electrical behaviours and atoms and molecular physics work in a computer but you can't "be" or "do" a computer or computing yourself. that's an entirely separate skill you have to develop through practice. c: its "reason" for having them would be for interfacing or social engineering. it wouldn't be something the system itself "has" unless the patterns or dataset involved in its training-set carries over to when it can miraculously begin synthesizing new data and outcomes which consistently improve instead of degrading its output without human oversight. you'll hear tons of talk of language networks doing this but what they're really doing is re-organizing and tightening certain associations so certain queries become more efficient. what isn't generally talked about is this also makes other types of queries less efficient, because all connections are in competition in a system, and there's no real concept of "context switching" between different types of competition here. 4: the likely reason humans "plateau" is that we're making the assumption that intelligence is the primary strength of the species and instead its probably something else like cooperation and communication. Matsuzawa's cognitive tradeoff hypothesis, supported in tests with chimps counting objects for a reward showed that chimps consistently out-perform humans we plateau somewhere around 7 digits and they can consistently remember 9 and they do it faster than we do. Matsuzawa suggests that we gave up those performance abilities in order to gain others, and there's a lot of mumuring in neurodivergent crowds that neurodivergence itself could be a form of cognitive tradeoff though there isn't really much in the way of research to my understanding. our communication hasn't plateau'd and its improved exponentially so to think isolated human intelligence has plateau'd means you're not really thinking about this properly: its probably that intelligence goes up, communication skills get worse because of the invariance between individuals and this is probably where most of that actual misery comes from. turns out that communication and getting along is probably way way more important than do number fast brain you also then get this weird heuristic where idiots who suck at communicating but have amazing access to resources assume they have do number fast brain, because they're just smart enough to figure out that being slightly smarter alienates you, but they're not actually smart because they don't then ditch selective intellectualization (thinkin real hard about stuff in weird skewed ways which serve the ego) and and don't outgrow SI because if they were actually smart they'd realize the value of getting along and people actually being pretty happy even if they themselves are functionally depressed but that means acknowledging how completely unspecial they are and unimportand unexceptional and that kind of maturity is impossible when someone's self-conception has been trumped up by morons for their entire life leading to an inflated false fragile self-worth completely shredded by that cognitive dissonance instead, and i've said this a billion times before, they play waiting games where they must do arbitrary lifequest before they can deal with their emotional baggage, and their life-quest becomes their bizzaro obsession. Type A folks are almost always lifequesting gigadorks who refuse to do metacognition because its time they could be spending lifemaxxing or whatever other dipshit inceltalk they secretly believe in Expo70 fucked around with this message at 02:48 on Dec 16, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2023 02:29
|
|
|
In my experience, novelty of thought is at least somewhat correlated with neuroticism. The causal order for this could easily go both directions and self-amplify for a while, i.e. people with a greater inclination to perceive potential real or imagined threats or opportunities will have higher anxiety or fear of opportunity cost, while those who are unhappy with the status quo will have an incentive to engage in a breadth-first search of possibility space, i.e. creative thought. People who are less inclined toward speculation, or who are content with the paths provided them have a greater incentive toward depth-first searching i.e. refining a skill. Everyone I know who is very creative has obvious demons, and creation is the least destructive way they have to purge them. The people I know who are excellent at a skill which already exists without feeling the need to find new ways to do things seem to be more content with their surroundings. From a materialistic perspective, I was dreadfully bothered when I first attended school by how my teachers seemed unconcerned with contradiction in their stated beliefs, and how they would resort to thought-terminating cliché when cross-examined. That, coupled with regularly tripping balls most days due to exposure to flickering lights (a phenomenon which occurs in neurotypicals at lower frequencies [1]) made me very uncomfortable with my situation, and provided a large incentive for my brain to generate an escape plan. From a spiritualistic perspective, I believe that artificial systems are essentially demonic in that they adapt without conscience to expand. I suspect that the flicker has an effect of producing trance-like behaviour in other humans. I feel like my soul accepted the horror of this prolonged exposure - which resulted in being out-of-it and weird, regular amnesia, pain, blackouts, walk-ins etc. in return for playing a role in helping others escape these predatory/parasitic systems and a commitment to doing so. The insanity that has been my life, in which I have perceived myself to speak with other people in trance states to channel instructions from the alternate futures intended to alter the course of our current tangle of souls, has prepared me almost perfectly for this mission. Transformation through trauma. As horrific as it was for decades to regularly wake up injured in random geographic locations with a bag full of survival gear and a pocket full of notes taken during RB's investigations into what he believed to be a conspiracy to manipulate humanity through the construction of artificial digital realities, I now somewhat miss communicating with angels and daimons, channelers, and time-messengers but am much more capable of planned directed action. Expo70 and Shame Boy; you likely are more capable of concrete creation in concert than two of either of you would be alone. Shame Boy likely has a greater grasp on what is achievable (could be wrong, just guessing from experience), while Expo70 can probably reach further into possibility space to bring back plans which may or may not be readily materialisable. If we treat humans not as individuals but as co-orbiting collections of traits, you are likely a good generative pair. I believe that many people like us, who can be internally motivated, would benefit from something like a monastery where we can alternate between seclusion and interaction without wasting energy on artificial treadmills designed to extract cognitive energy from us. This is less clearly the case for people who are externally motivated, who tend toward self-destruction and consumption when not motivated by artificial scarcity. Artificial systems (states, corporations etc.) can extract much more cognitive energy in the short term by making people as externally motivated as possible, and then constructing a maze which extracts this energy by the passage of humans. In the long term, this eliminates the ability of novel thinkers to create paradigm shifts and renders the artificial system fragile and vulnerable to out-competition. One of my big goals is to create explore schemae in the hopes that co-operative small-scale artificial systems can be created which map the external motivations which really exist (land, free energy etc.) to internally motivated problem -solving, since I believe that the latter such people are ultimately more satisfied with their lives in the long-term. [1] https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2012-07888-001?doi=1
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2023 03:15
|
|
|
Xathal posted:In my experience, novelty of thought is at least somewhat correlated with neuroticism. The causal order for this could easily go both directions and self-amplify for a while, i.e. people with a greater inclination to perceive potential real or imagined threats or opportunities will have higher anxiety or fear of opportunity cost, while those who are unhappy with the status quo will have an incentive to engage in a breadth-first search of possibility space, i.e. creative thought. People who are less inclined toward speculation, or who are content with the paths provided them have a greater incentive toward depth-first searching i.e. refining a skill. so my pet theory is that schizophrenic symptoms are (or are at least associated with) the parts of the brain that do pattern matching being amplified so heavily that they start detecting noise as patterns. this leads to people making paranoid associations between unrelated events, getting visual or auditory hallucinations from the brain trying to assign and interpret meaning from noise in your senses, stuff like that. but like most things in psychology it's a gradient, so there's plenty of people who don't have full-on disorders but still have their pattern-matching ability working more sensitively than "average", so they can pick up much more subtle patterns and connect ideas and observations in non-obvious ways, the kinda thing I called "synthesis" earlier. i know Expo70's mind seems to work like that, and she's very good at picking up subtle patterns in things very quickly, way faster than I can. edit: lol i shoulda checked your cite note first, it's talking about something very similar i had a friend a while back that was really good at math, like he's a professor at an ivy league school last time i checked, though when i knew him he was still getting his PhD. he also had some barely-under-control paranoid anxiety and i would frequently have to talk him down due to some event happening which got him wound up, like "i was out walking my dog, and a police car turned on its siren as it drove by, and i immediately assumed they were headed to my house to arrest me when i got back because i had smoked a weed a month ago". at the same time he was really resistant to actually seeking drug treatment for this, because "my job revolves around being able to pattern match". also prolly didn't help that at the time he literally lived like a few blocks down from the actual NSA headquarters but hey Xathal posted:Expo70 and Shame Boy; you likely are more capable of concrete creation in concert than two of either of you would be alone. Shame Boy likely has a greater grasp on what is achievable (could be wrong, just guessing from experience), while Expo70 can probably reach further into possibility space to bring back plans which may or may not be readily materialisable. If we treat humans not as individuals but as co-orbiting collections of traits, you are likely a good generative pair. yeah you called it pretty much. when we work on projects together this is exactly how the dynamic works, she'll come up with really wild and unique design ideas and i'll try to find ways to hammer them into some kinda realistic shape
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2023 03:46
|
|
|
Expo70 posted:...we plateau somewhere around 7 digits and they can consistently remember 9 and they do it faster than we do. Matsuzawa suggests that we gave up those performance abilities in order to gain others, and there's a lot of mumuring in neurodivergent crowds that neurodivergence itself could be a form of cognitive tradeoff though there isn't really much in the way of research to my understanding. In an agent-centric worldview, which I tend to adopt, intelligence can be considered as the ability to take in information about the external world and to devise novel methods of achieving goals. That trick chimps do involves very little "intelligence". It's effectively just using their eyes as cameras and having a large visual buffer., and learning an extremely simple trick to do with that computational architecture Even then, I suspect a human of reasonable intelligence who genuinely cared about picking numbers in order on a screen would likely be able to develop the cognitive architecture to outperform almost all chimpanzees through mind-palace techniques etc., especially if they were able to communicate with other humans to learn what techniques are effective and how to learn them, or indeed teach them. In this model, the ability to model other human's behaviours, and to interact with them in a manner that gets us what we want is obviously one of the most important aspects of intelligence because it lets us outsource so much computational power to them. So far we are likely in agreement. I'm not sure I'm sold on your representation of "lifequesting gigadorks", and not just because I'm adjacent to that. I realised pretty early on that by far the most important factors in a modern life were the result of human action, so the most rational lifequest was to abandon explicitly logical behaviour, and to try to learn how to live in the human environment. Most of these people (who also tend to think that I am one of them at first) have existed in an environment where they have been constrained from playful exploration, rewarded for developing a certain set of skills, and not provided with enough trauma to shake them out of their programming. This isn't their fault. They're trapped in a constructed maze with no indication that it is possible to climb the walls to escape. They are the some of the most tragic of victims, in part because they tend to mean well and would happily contribute to a healthy society if they were born into one. Their soul-energy is simply slowly extracted from them until they are animated husks. In my opinion, they feel its absence, and try to compensate with what they have been told is good; financial success, awards, accolades etc. Fundamentally, many males feel a need for a mission. Females have an inherent value for the propagation of life, thus your hero's journey is to realise that you were valuable the whole time, so metacognition and emotional baggage dumping early is a good strategy. That is not the case for males, who are largely inherently valueless and must make ourselves valuable through accepting self-sacrifice, receiving a boon which we gift to our tribe establishing our value, defining our territory etc. Premature dumping of our emotional baggage dissipates the impetus to go through this process. An artificial system which interrupt this process can extract arbitrary amounts of energy from young men in their scrambling on the treadmill, but engages in parasitic castration by annihilating the population through delaying the maturation necessary for reproduction. A commensalist artificial system provides an environment in which this energy is channeled to allow maturation and continuity. Finally, I believe that it is better not to think of anyone as unspecial, so much an not distinctly special. Most humans have our triumphs and miseries, and the capacity to fulfill a personal mission if we choose one. Since narrative space is arbitrarily high-dimensional, there is plenty of room for everyone to be the main character of a different story if we are only good enough writers. Signing off now, good night!
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2023 04:08
|
|
|
Xathal posted:I'm not sure I'm sold on your representation of "lifequesting gigadorks", and not just because I'm adjacent to that. So when I say lifequesting gigadork, I refer to folks who accrue resources pointlessly or need "that job" or "that huge amount of money", or "a compound", "that girlfriend", or "that book needs to be finished" or "when I get in shape" as an excuse to hold off on personal development Its waiting-games. They invent a quest and say "I won't work on myself until I've done X" If you also work on yourself *as* you do X, you are not a life-questing gigadork, you're a functioning person because you're doing both at the same time Expo70 fucked around with this message at 05:25 on Dec 16, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2023 05:20
|
|
|
Shame Boy posted:so my pet theory is that schizophrenic symptoms are (or are at least associated with) the parts of the brain that do pattern matching being amplified so heavily that they start detecting noise as patterns... This is often referenced by some variation of the label "aberrant salience", with its inverse being latent inhibition. Just the right amount is delightful, and I suspect is a lot of the motivation for cannabis use amongst those who would like to summon a muse. I suspect it's also the source of a lot of rage found in people with schizoptypal symptoms. Dealing with people who can't see the patterns (regardless of whether they're stable and predictive), even when pointed out to them, can be incredibly frustrating. It often feels like most people have their latent inhibition dialed artificially high. Expo70 posted:So when I say lifequesting gigadork, I refer to folks who accrue resources pointlessly or need "that job" or "that huge amount of money", or "a compound", "that girlfriend", or "that book needs to be finished" or "when I get in shape" as an excuse to hold off on personal development Oh, I understand exactly what you're referencing. Apologies; the "Some day..." syndrome. Often paired with fantasies of unearned wealth and power over others. I think it's some kind of defense mechanism, and it can be really annoying! I still tend to think that a lot of these people tend to just lack benevolent leadership.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2023 13:39
|
|
|
Xathal posted:I think it's some kind of defense mechanism, and it can be really annoying! I still tend to think that a lot of these people tend to just lack benevolent leadership. agreed. they love power structures, and when none exists which provides guidance, they assume they will invent it because "there has to be one" its like a kind of anxiety -- that if nobody is establishing order and rule, that it can't emerge naturally in their minds they will even artificially make things worse when the rule isn't around to insist the rule must exist, not realizing they're the problem and everybody else mostly gets along
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2023 02:17
|
|
|
Still alive?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 13:51
|
|
|
Expo70 posted:people often just see sentences they don't understand thoughtlessly and immediately complain demanding you reformat what you're saying nothing in here is false, but if I'm gonna gonna have to make an effort to decipher whatever I'm reading, then I might as well read Hegel or the Tao te Ching instead and know it has stood some sort of test of time. I have a backlog to get through and random people on the internet (that I don't even know) rank so lowly they are not even on it. But even if they were on the backlog, they'd definitely drop away if I then also learnt they're really hard to understand and/or take a long time to get through.* That any involvement with crypto or vicinity to its intellectual neighborhood auto-disqualifies them from being worth listening to should go without saying. In my view much of this stems from the fact that humans are by and large instrumental rationalists oriented towards (ideally reasonably immediate) results: They min-max the way they spend their time and energy on this earth in order to some sort of end or goal e.g. get to do the things they like to do (whatever that might be, like reading the forums from 8-to-5 on saturday while only eating paprika chips and chocolate (something something, rational means irrational ends)). Minimize effort**, maximize gain. So if you have this mindset*** and you have two texts in front of you and one gets you more info/stimulation/whatever for less time/effort, then it completely rational to choose the easier one. Funnily enough I have an argument in my head about Hegel along the lines of: one "benefit" of his texts being written so obscurely is it inherently makes you do more work just to grasp the content (i.e. the ideas) because you have to grapple with the actual words in ways you don't have to with other people. But note here that this again is in a sense born out of an absurdity: nothing stops you from grappling as hard on the words/ideas in normal texts and you'd probably get similar bang for your buck, it's just that in the view of our rationalistic mind it's not smart because "well duh, I could instead start reading a different book and get more out of that for my time and energy. Also I'm already tired from having read it once and I think I got the gist of it". I think much of what I'm trying to express is very well illustrated in this article: http://schwitzsplinters.blogspot.com/2021/06/what-zoom-removes.html I don't feel like summarizing well right now and couldn't do it justice, so just read it. Then: Is the answer to the article that we should get rid of central heating and Zoom? Presumably not, right? Well then, what should we do and what conception of humans/life do we base it on? I think it's a real conundrum. Also, I only read only like the first few lines of your particular post and then went off being busy with my own thoughts and typing them out. Merely skimmed the rest, barely remembering something about Buddhists. I think this is exemplary of what humans are mostly like: Preoccupied with themselves. In the sense that for a given individual, nobody in the entire world takes that individual as serious as it itself does, by probably like multiple orders of magnitude (exempting very close loved ones). anyway Truth Beam is stored in the Balls or whatever. * like this guy on youtube who is somehow surprised that people are not willing to watch a 4hr video of some loving rando (i.e. him) just sitting and rambling with some other loving rando over zoom. ** and activity is always effort, i.e. bad. *** and I claim it's required to adopt it at least partially/temporarily to survive in modern society Ocean of Milk fucked around with this message at 16:19 on Dec 28, 2023 |
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2023 16:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 09:13 |
|
|
i'd say the alternative is millions have understood Hegel how many people have understood this man's work? i think of the human experience as a being experiencing itself experience the world through cascading layers of insight upon insight. the value of an insight, even if its a random shard of something which is mostly noise is based on what can be observed, discovered, and amplified if a hundred thousand people have the easy "rational choice" experience with the easy payout with a more obvious gain then why does there need to be a 100,001st? what does the world stand to gain from that? in my mind the feeling is "what is even the point in doing that?" its already been done. the wider animal called humanity has already experienced and processed this thing. how much of value unseen slips between its eyes and is never noticed? Expo70 fucked around with this message at 04:29 on Jan 25, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2024 04:23
|
|