human communication: questionable changes; TODO: review

1 files changed, 143 insertions, 98 deletions

diff --git a/human-communication.txt b/human-communication.txt
index 74e0f86..fd30b31 100644
--- a/human-communication.txt
+++ b/human-communication.txt
@@ -8,49 +8,59 @@ Human beings  can transmit to one  another two fundamentally
 different  types of  communication: (1)  data (2)  programs.
 Programs are the same thing as  proofs and the same thing as
 Russellian denotations; they have the "sense" that mere/pure
-data lacks.  They have the power that data does not have, to
-transmit knowledge rather than information. However, it must
-be understood  that programs  are highly sensitive  to their
-runtime environments and for that reason their robustness is
-an  extremely  difficult  problem  akin  to  the  robustness
-of  life in  natural habitats. Human  cultural programs  are
-high  reliability  systems  which  means  they  are  chaotic
-systems  that have  phase after  phase to  downshift through
-(articulated joints through which to roll over) as they take
-damage  and heal  from  it by  phase-changing  back up  over
-(computational) time  (rewriting mental programs  to account
-for  unhandled or  mishandled conditions  while keeping  the
-programs  running continuously  in a  degraded state). Knock
-out multiple  random chunks, portions of  program degenerate
-into data, and the whole still runs. Human cultural programs
-are far  beyond what average  or even elite  programmers can
-hope  to  construct  in  computer systems;  they  have  been
-constructed by  one-in-a-million prophets  who were  able to
-fully  absorb  their  entire  local  culture  and  reprogram
-themselves  individually based  on reverse  engineering that
-culture  to become  (themselves, as  individuals) generators
-of  self-propagating   regenerator-generators  of  universal
-culture. Their programs are constructed  in such a universal
-way as to be rewritten generation after generation according
-to  the  local  runtime  environment,  while  preserving  an
-evolving  kernel  to  re-generate slightly  adapted  kernels
-again  and  again in  new  environments  --  in such  a  way
-that the  kernel picks  up each new  environment's knowledge
-and  carries  it  into  the  next  without  losing  what  it
-learned  of  the  previous  environment  --  that  is  their
-robustness. It is  again and above the  genetic principle of
-DNA first  described by  Schrodinger; but  Schrodinger wrote
-before DNA was  discovered; so also before  discovery of the
-structure  of controlled  mutation  in life's  environmental
-sampling  mechanism; so  again instead  is the  artificially
-bred/genetically  engineered  DNA  of  the  immune  system's
-antibody-generating cells. These have mechanisms that induce
-the production of novelty, localizing  it to one part of the
-DNA strand, while circumscribing every novelty with proof of
-provenance  used  to  protect  the  system  against  foreign
-novelty (a single  recognizable DNA strand that  is the same
-for  every  antibody;  that  is, its  coded  protein  has  a
-strong  chemical  binding  to  a  matching  protein  in  the
+data lacks.   They have the  power that data does  not have,
+to transmit  knowledge rather  than information. Information
+creates  knowledge about  transmission  but cannot  transmit
+knowledge, because knowledge  to be "real" or  "live" in the
+physical brain  ("known" as opposed to  merely "imaginable";
+it has to be a generator of behaviors; which means it has to
+be a  physical form that  has energy metabolism in  order to
+satisfy  its  computational  needs;  but of  course  not  an
+"independent" energy  metabolism nor its own  cell membrane;
+but it does  have its own forms  of informational membranes;
+we shall address them.)
+
+However,  it must  be  understood that  programs are  highly
+sensitive to their runtime  environments and for that reason
+their robustness  is an extremely difficult  problem akin to
+the robustness  of life in natural  habitats. Human cultural
+programs are  high reliability systems which  means they are
+chaotic  systems that  have phase  after phase  to downshift
+through  (articulated joints  through  which  to roll  over)
+as  they take  damage  and heal  from  it by  phase-changing
+back   up  over   (computational)  time   (rewriting  mental
+programs to  account for unhandled or  mishandled conditions
+while  keeping  the  programs   running  continuously  in  a
+degraded state). Knock out  multiple random chunks, portions
+of  program  degenerate  into  data,  and  the  whole  still
+runs. Human cultural programs are far beyond what average or
+even  elite programmers  can hope  to construct  in computer
+systems;  they  have  been constructed  by  one-in-a-million
+prophets  who  were  able   to  fully  absorb  their  entire
+local   culture   and  reprogram   themselves   individually
+based  on   reverse  engineering  that  culture   to  become
+(themselves, as individuals)  generators of self-propagating
+regenerator-generators of  universal culture. Their programs
+are constructed in  such a universal way as  to be rewritten
+generation after  generation according to the  local runtime
+environment,   while  preserving   an  evolving   kernel  to
+re-generate slightly adapted kernels  again and again in new
+environments -- in such a way  that the kernel picks up each
+new  environment's knowledge  and carries  it into  the next
+without losing  what it learned of  the previous environment
+--  that is  their  robustness. It is  again  and above  the
+genetic principle of DNA first described by Schrodinger; but
+Schrodinger wrote before DNA  was discovered; so also before
+discovery of the structure  of controlled mutation in life's
+environmental sampling  mechanism; so  again instead  is the
+artificially bred/genetically  engineered DNA of  the immune
+system's  antibody-generating  cells. These have  mechanisms
+that induce the production of  novelty, localizing it to one
+part of  the DNA strand, while  circumscribing every novelty
+with proof of provenance used  to protect the system against
+foreign novelty  (a single  recognizable DNA strand  that is
+the same for every antibody;  that is, its coded protein has
+a  strong chemical  binding  to a  matching  protein in  the
 immunohistocompatibility complex (an  FC receptor); called a
 transporter, it functions like  a passport -- an unforgeable
 signature  that  must  be   presented  to  pass  the  filter
@@ -148,17 +158,21 @@ These  reconfigurations can  trampoline  into callouts  with
 side-effects   like  inducing   speculative  investment   in
 external investigative  exploration. The basic  framework is
 of  an   information-gathering  future-predictor-controller;
-reprogramming it involves loops  through to the world; these
-loops through the  world seem so confusing  to people trying
-to learn Erlang  that it seems like I should  try to explain
-them!  But there is no time, so I will sum up: the program's
-self is the message but the  self is virtual, the self is an
-experiment, and the self needs to be destroyed.  First, make
-a copy, then collide it with  the world (your body will also
-collide) then compare its  shape to the original.  Collision
-provides knowledge to decide whether  to destroy the copy or
-destroy the original.   What is not destroyed  can be copied
-into another node.
+reprogramming  it  involves  loops  through  to  the  world;
+
+Erlang-style message-passing; such  a specialist-y thing and
+yet it's the simplest kind of  structure; it must exist in a
+thousand places; there must be  a hundred apt analogies; but
+it is only one thing and that is an algorithm, or a program,
+or  a  communication  of  the most  powerful  sort  that  is
+possible  between  human  beings;  and it  is  that  precise
+algorithm  that has  been mathematically  identified, broken
+down into  its constituent  axioms like  a protein  into its
+originating DNA code points,  by the Erlang literature.  And
+the reason  for all  that is  that it  is the  foundation of
+stability of long-running  "autophagic" distributed systems;
+I call them  "tissue" systems because the cells  of a living
+tissue replace themselves similarly.
 
 (Knowledge  can exist  in  a degraded,  not-fully-replicable
 form;  neutered, locally  contained,  but potentially  still
@@ -245,16 +259,30 @@ pruned if  you can  exploit the  mind's lack  of idempotence
 the  inputs so  that the  search  is directed  into a  local
 maximum  where  it cannot  easily  backtrack  out to  obtain
 search breadth and encounter a  big picture view.  Maybe the
-point is,  instead of thinking about  which prohibitions are
-copied, or  which generated outputs are  pruned, think about
-which generators  get destroyed  or prevented  from running.
-Most  places in  society can't  allow unpredictable  people,
-which means most people in most places need to be impervious
-to reason. Society needs filters to find these people.  Once
-found, they  can be put  into positions of power  where they
-will behave as predicted by those who get to put people into
-places;  their own  generators will  not interfere  with the
-generators of the people above them.
+point  is,  instead  of thinking  about  which  prohibitions
+are  copied, or  which generated  outputs are  pruned, think
+about  which  generators  get destroyed  or  prevented  from
+running.  Most  places in society can't  allow unpredictable
+people, which  means most people  in most places need  to be
+impervious to  reason. Society needs  filters to  find these
+people.  Once found, they can be put into positions of power
+where  they will  behave as  predicted by  those who  get to
+put  people into  places;  subordinate  generators will  not
+interfere with superordinate generators because they will be
+constructed  by  selection  to  be always  trapped  in  some
+local thought system. Foucault was  the historian of thought
+systems and  that is very  abstract and powerful yes  like a
+true mathematician  with rigor (!!)  but we still  care more
+about the people in the systems than the systems and want to
+go back to that mammal  meat perspective where we might feel
+something.  But  the people aren't "in"  the thought system;
+they're  products  of  the  thought  system;  they're  in  a
+social message exchange  network that is a  system; and that
+system propagates social  network extension prohibitions not
+necessarily by explicit prohibitory  rules /nor/ by any kind
+of /management/  of desire (though that  may be attempted!),
+but  by occupying  all time  where unmanaged  bindings could
+form.
 
 When I was  in middle school I read A  Brief History of Time
 and  learned  that  Albert Einstein  claimed  that  calculus
@@ -272,7 +300,13 @@ Only then will  they be permitted a chance to  compete for a
 seat at the  mic where some lucky MC gets  to spit something
 new  on top.   You're not  there yet  kiddo, integrate  this
 expression.  But  don't integrate  too far.   Robin Williams
-made a movie about it, but it sucked.
+made a  movie about it, but  it sucked.  Like why  would you
+put literal death  into the movie what a  fucking downer, it
+doesn't help how he ended up unlike Michael Jackson where it
+works like Man in the Mirror really works now in retrospect.
+Robin Williams  went to Julliard  which means he  was pretty
+well socially  integrated doesn't  it so maybe  those movies
+sucked for a reason.
 
 Somehow  it  does  not  matter what  is  the  material  that
 is   taught;  the   effect  is   never  felt. When   I  read
@@ -311,9 +345,7 @@ purpose  of  the  adaptive   immune  system  is  to  extract
 information from  protein.  It  is a  protein-sensory organ.
 It  derives the  underivable  using  a horizontal  knowledge
 connection.  It breaks through // un ex pex tid lee like the
-Wu.   Hack the  genome.   Get to  know  someone.  Not  their
-categorizations and  spacializations, their  generators.  Or
-are they really the same thing?
+Wu.   Hack the  genome.   Get to  know  someone.
 
 (Schools follow the  corporate hierarchy style proof-of-work
 knowledge  distribution  system  of  transferring  knowledge
@@ -342,10 +374,10 @@ normality  vs.  the  ability   to  detect  the  exceptional;
 behavioral control prevents  measurement; in general control
 prevents measurement;  control cannot  measure what  it also
 determines. Trying to control people never works for me even
-when it does. Upshift the phase  of anyone even by a quarter
-quantum  and they  pop  right out  of  these horrid  crystal
-lattices like a neutrino; as  in nobody notices; don't trust
-me because you don't want to know.)
+when it  does. Phase somebody up  a quantum and  they'll pop
+right out of these crystal  prison lattices like a neutrino;
+as in nobody notices; don't  trust me because you don't want
+to know.)
 
 The frontal lobe  is the site of the  executive function; it
 is there that  memories of knowledge and  emotions past come
@@ -357,6 +389,16 @@ reactions  induces  the  brain  to "switch  away"  from  the
 consequences of the present to the narrative sequence of the
 memory and its alternative emotional consequences.
 
+If you  were serious about  upshifting you wouldn't  need to
+learn about  basic abstract structures from  philosophers or
+mathematicians or  programmers or anybody but  to spend time
+analyzing  concrete  possibilities  for  reconfiguration  of
+local resources,  whereby the basic abstract  structures and
+shapes  will be  realized  in the  concrete  forms of  their
+combinations. However if  you were  a shape  builder serious
+about  building shapes  then you  would want  to know  about
+shapes in their most general form as I am and do.
+
 The thing is  that I didn't prove that there  is a morphism,
 but I  don't have to prove  to know.  Proving it  would be a
 matter of writing  the program, and somehow!! I  know when I
@@ -370,22 +412,22 @@ took  50  million  years of  accumulated  culture. Isn't  it
 only  the  accumulated  culture itself  that  the  computers
 understand?
 
-Somehow  it  does  not  matter what  is  the  material  that
-is   taught,  the   effect  is   never  felt. When   I  read
-Nineteen  Eighty-Four in  9th grade  I already  had prisoner
-consciousness, but  no one  could tell, before  or after. In
-secret, I wrote many more essays than they asked for. (Maybe
-they  /could/ tell,  and really  they forced  me out.) Don't
-they just  need to  keep the volume  high and  the frequency
-constant? I  evaded  control  by  skipping  the  reading. If
-the  bandwidth  control is  tight  then  you can  safely  be
-given /anything/ to skim-read  and semi-process without ever
-feeling what  you are doing enough  to become unpredictable.
-Just prove you can; thirty hours a week for eight years in a
-row; then you'll be ready.  The medium is the message.  What
-are they  filtering us for? All  of the kids today  have the
-internet already, but they don't  know what the internet is,
-so they are still disconnected.
+Somehow  it does  not matter  what is  the material  that is
+taught,  the  effect is  never  felt. When  I read  Nineteen
+Eighty-Four in school I  already had prisoner consciousness,
+but no one  could tell, before or after. In  secret, I wrote
+many more  essays than  they asked for. (Maybe  they /could/
+tell, and really  they forced me out.) Don't  they just need
+to keep the volume high and the frequency constant? I evaded
+control by skipping the reading. If the bandwidth control is
+tight then you  can safely be given  /anything/ to skim-read
+and  semi-process without  ever feeling  what you  are doing
+enough to become unpredictable.   Just prove you can; thirty
+hours  a week  for  eight years  in a  row;  then you'll  be
+ready.  The medium is the  message.  What are they filtering
+us for? All of the kids today have the internet already, but
+they  don't know  what the  internet is,  so they  are still
+disconnected.
 
 A  narrative  or  linear  structure  implies  some  kind  of
 intentional  emotional manipulation  performed on  a mammal,
@@ -398,20 +440,23 @@ They interrupt you and clear  your short-term memory so much
 you can't build anything big  anyway.  There is a reason the
 prophets went to the desert. They closed themselves off from
 inputs.   The human  brain  cannot  easily avoid  processing
-sensory inputs; this is also the reason for fasting; why the
-philosophers always  talked about their intestines.   Once I
-fasted for 17 days and  accidentally tasted a drop of peanut
-oil; the  taste popped harder than  any wine or food  I ever
-tasted; it tasted like peanut; whatever thought preceded the
-taste must surely  be gone.  How serious are  you about your
+sensory  inputs; why  monks  built chambers  of silence  and
+darkness; the  reason for fasting; why  so many philosophers
+wrote about the  intestines.  Once I fasted for  17 days and
+accidentally tasted a  drop of peanut oil;  the taste popped
+harder  than any  wine  or  food I  ever  tasted (it  tasted
+just  like  peanut);  whatever thought  preceded  the  taste
+must  surely  be  gone.   How serious  are  you  about  your
 performance? Will  the mind  dictate the  body or  the other
 way? I  do  not believe  Ian  Nepomniatchi  would be  losing
-championship  matches if  his  hormones  were in  order.
+championship matches if his  hormones were in order. His way
+of collapsing implies a loop into the endocrine system.
 
 A proof is a program which means it not merely a conclusion,
-but  a   new  capability;  the  capability   to  generate  a
-new  class  of  conclusions.   That is:  the  capability  to
-generate spontaneous behaviors.
+but  a new  capability;  the capability  to  generate a  new
+class of  conclusions.  That is: the  capability to generate
+spontaneous behaviors.  (Perhaps the spontaneous creation of
+prohibitions!)
 
 If I was  right about the uterus then they'd  talk about me.
 Someone would read  this.  It would be, like,  big. But if I