commit

3 files changed, 228 insertions, 705 deletions

diff --git a/deleuze.txt b/deleuze.txt
index 2a57d0d..95ab8c3 100644
--- a/deleuze.txt
+++ b/deleuze.txt
@@ -106,54 +106,14 @@ CAN EVADE CONTROL.
 
 
 A university is an Erlang-style message passing system for academic
-knowledge accumulation's cultural life-system to regenerate itself.
-
-
-
-Key point for Deleuze is that the "counter-effectuation" is actually
-real-life really-physical Max Ent physics rather than quantum physics
-analogy/woo.  Bayesian statistical knowledge deriving from information
-theory.
-
-
-Deleuze didn't understand quantum physics correctly but it turns out
-that it doesn't matter because quantum physics doesn't have anything to
-do with metaphysics.  It's only that Uncertainty forces human beings
-to adopt a de-centralizing de-totalizing Copernican mental shift.  But
-it doesn't even do it in the way that is most relevant to metaphysics.
-There is also the de-centralizing de-totalizing Copernican mental
-shift of INTUITIONIST MATHEMATICS.
-
-Back to physics: Deleuze understood the main point: that particles
-are merely virtual constructs while these "interaction events" are
-the actual reality available to advanced physics -- the particles are
-virtual constructs that exist only in the human 3D mental model which
-is definitely NOT the same as the physical universe -- this is one of
-those places where we see the difference -- but the physical universe in
-making individual particles places where information access is limited
-fundamentally because the boundary between one particle and another with
-which it interacts isn't so much illusory as the only real thing, while
-the non-boundary is illusory.
-
-Quantum physics DOES imply a macro universe where macro assemblies
-of particles also have limited access to information; but the actual
-universe we see has EVEN MORE limitations on access to information,
-they are much much stricter than Uncertainty, and therefore we see much
-less information embedded in physical objects than Uncertainty allows
-in its theoretical maximum.  (Physics experiments can be set up so
-that information is not lost; but life in general is always balancing
-loss of information against energy expenditure.)  Max Ent physics and
-Bayesian statistics are mathematical/physical approaches to calculating
-the information available at a given spacetime location.  However, part
-of the nature of quantum uncertainty AND max ent physics is that, from
-WITHIN the system, the limitations apply to the observer and the limits
-are self-referential in the sense that the limitations that apply to an
-observer's disability to have information from other spacetime points
-can include the disability to know which information is available!
-I.e., the theory produces known unknowns.  The fact that there are
-spacetime points in the universe where knowledge of mathematics does
-not exist or exists at a merely undergrad level, means also unknown
-unknowns.
+knowledge accumulation's life-system to regenerate itself.
+
+
+
+Key point for Deleuze is that the "counter-effectuation" is Max Ent
+physics rather than quantum physics woo.
+
+Bayesian statistical knowledge deriving from information theory.
 
 
 
@@ -344,212 +304,3 @@ loop.  Human culture is the only chemical reaction not known to loop or
 terminate.  Human culture is the only true "irrational number" of all
 discretely-instantiated numbers.
 
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Tue Oct 31 01:23:16 PM EDT 2023
-
-Feynman and practicing with a different box of tools
-
-Same idea as the Max Ent explanation of prophecy
-
-But also the same idea as parable of the falling seeds, reversed in
-time; the seeds unfall to the sower, and depending on seed origin
-(fertile soil, or barren) the sower becomes either someone who can farm
-or someone who knows what it means to be unable to farm.  The knowledge
-passes from the earth through the seed into the farmer; the seeds
-provide the connection.  The disabled would-be-farmer is disconnected
-from that knowledge even though he too has and sews seeds.  His seeds,
-though sewn, fail to connect out to knowledge from the past and he may
-therefore fail to connect himself out to intentions from the future (or
-else not even form them).
-
-
-
-The 20th century was spent correlating the implications of a physical
-limit of the speed of light.
-
-The 21st century will be spent correlating the implications of
-the physical limits of the speed and size of computations.
-
-The human being as a computer system undering phase changes as the
-computer gains the ability to represent different types of state -- or
-to represent state with different performance characteristics -- through
-acquisition of data structures copied from the environment -- OR from
-internal processing and DISCOVERY of NEW data structures.
-
-These data structures are PASSED BETWEEN HUMANS who learn them
-implicitly and pick them up and play with them.  But data structures
-are unsafe when EXECUTED AS REASON and for this reason human beings
-have SYSTEMS OF ACCESS CONTROL to HUMAN REASON both internal to their
-minds (e.g., concepts of valid and invalid authorities) and external as
-social environment.  Society imposes economic exploitation which causes
-evolutionary adapations to "bubble up" in ways that are UNPREDICTABLE
-IN DETAIL (chaos theory) but according to evolutionary theory will tend
-to produce EFFICIENT DISTRIBUTED COMPUTATION so that it will converge
-to the computer systems we find most advanced as well as the biological
-systems of generating and filtering novelty that we find most advanced
-(except that the search space may have valleys etc).
-
-Another system of access control is RUNNING IN EMULATION this is when
-the individual learns enough about a foreign system to execute the steps
-of its reasoning without however being allowed to reach any conclusions
-that apply to the larger brain's data structures.  There are two reasons
-why humans cannot rely on this mechanism primarily.
-
-First, EMULATION CAN BE JAILBROKEN; this cannot ever be as secure.
-
-Second, more importantly, RUNNING IN EMULATION IS COMPUTATIONALLY MORE
-EXPENSIVE.  Even though CPUs and apparently also human beings have mechanisms
-to optimize emulation, in human beings especially, these cannot obtain
-"native" performance.  Therefore, computational emulators (e.g.,
-learners of a second language) cannot "actually" perform as well as
-computational originators (e.g., learners of a first language) if they
-use the same underlying computational equipment for the same amount of
-time.
-
-But human beings do not all have the same underlying computational
-equipment; and they do not all apply the same amount of time to
-processing it.  In the real world, running the other side in emulation
-is something that more intelligent, more informed, or more adult human
-beings attempt to do when interacting with less intelligent, informed,
-or adult ones.  Human beings may also believe they are running the other
-side in emulation, when they are running a gross simplification; in
-fact, they are running a gross simplification even when they run the
-remote side natively, since they always still have to emulate the entire
-remote environment(!) which is where the real problems start.
-
-Non-portability of language between individuals is a major problem.
-Before the internet, locality constraints on communications caused
-portability to self-organize locally; but the internet has changed
-communication patterns so that every person experiences a kind of
-cosmopolis without totality.  Every experience is a scene from a virtual
-city which is a construct only of that experience; each event and
-corresponding city co-singular; co-existing only once without object
-permanence.
-
-One problem is the human tendency to imagination, roleplay, etc.,
-causes human beings to pretend communication incompatibilities are
-not real.  Human beings must surely have evolved under circumstances
-where perceived universality of linguistic forms was vastly more
-common than it is today in the adult internet-connected world, though
-perhaps less common than it is today in the world of the schoolchild
-or university student or professor.
-
-The professors may not make the same naive/incorrect excuses as children
-for failing to communicate; their perspectives will be more realistic;
-the university system as a whole is constrained in certain ways to
-succeed in transmitting information; but insofar as these transmissions
-fail, are the reasons understood from a rational information-theoretic
-perspective?  Or is it a primate emotion static control program designed
-to regulate subordinate behavior emotionally, amplifying the causal
-force of the intentions of individuals positioned in social hierarchies
-such that their anger generates fear in others?  Or is it a whole series
-of task-activated network programs, each one separately influenced
-by its own emotional context?  Perhaps they are constrained by
-environmental demands to understand these failures operationally
-
-
-The task-activated networks seem to be the neurological place of
-mental compartmentalization; and the ADHD don't shut off the DMN when
-activating TANs.  We still "see" the task when others are absorbed
-"in" the task.  Of course, in order to influence the DMN, it would
-have to be activated.  The TANs feed back into the DMN in ADHD, which
-allows the ADHD brain to generate totalizing connectivities by putting
-information from disparate parts of universe into the same local
-computational system; where for the non-ADHD these same components,
-though contained within one BRAIN, are not connected into the same
-integrated computational system; the TANs are prevented from feeding
-back into the DMN which allows mental compartmentalization to prevent
-information from one controlled system to produce interference in
-another controlled system when each controlled system is controlling the
-same physical human being with a different control algorithm.
-
-In other words, the DMN or the big picture understanding does not
-help with, but interferes with, TAN activity downstream of power
-in the social grid, because of the way in which this activity is
-structured to depend on human beings as removable components,
-keeping the environment highly-controlled.  General intelligence is
-not useful in highly-controlled environments until they begin to
-break down.  High-efficiency local computation requires discarding
-global information in order to maximize local connectivity of the
-processed information and thus processing speed.  (Principle of
-cache locality.)  So as optimization proceeds, the big picture is
-squeezed out of every local environment; except SOME privileged local
-environment has to be preserved in order to manage the organism's
-interaction with _environments_ themselves; this is the executive.
-The organism has a consciousness of multiple discrete environments;
-each environment controlled by some local control system; each local
-control system incorporating its own different own model of human
-emotion and behavior as necessary to sustain its specific local
-constraints
-
-Emotions are the foundational social control levers in humans.  Not
-life/reproduction directly, as it would be in the case of domestic
-plants; but emotion/physical-reproduction-of-imaginary-will plays
-the same structural role, allowing animalia the meta-evolutionary
-advantage of evolving without biological death; emotional sampling with
-differential reproduction of imaginations replaces eukaryotic sampling
-with differential reproduction of offspring in the information-gathering
-social super-organisms of mammalia).
-
-In a school, a student convincing their teacher that they do not belong
-in the space to which they are assigned is NOT sufficient to liberate
-the student from the space; only a non-local authority assigning
-them to some other space can liberate the student from the local
-space.  The student having the level of understanding of the system
-that would cause them to make this conclusion correctly tends to make
-the student even less able to perform in a space where they do not
-belong; if the student instead internalizes a false simplified local
-model in which the possibility of mis-spacialization is impossible by
-construction, then the student may have a better chance of passing
-through the filters imposed by the environment for reaching a more
-appropriate spacialization.  If the student internalizes a more
-realistic, more complete, but externally-referencing (non-local)
-model, then compatibility issues are likely in communication with
-their teacher; if compatibility exists between the teacher and the
-student, then the compatibility issue will exist between the teacher and
-administration; or else the administration will have issues with the
-school board; or the electoral system; or else the local municipality
-itself will drain tax funding since diaspora from other schools will
-collect locally.  At every possible avenue where the "exception" could
-"bubble up", there will be an incompatible interface, because the
-system attempts to impose a constraint that exceptions are handled
-non-locally.  All biological systems impose this constraint because of
-how it produces a superorganism that is more intelligent and robust than
-if its individual components were individually intelligent and robust.
-Advanced decentralized computing systems also impose this constraint; it
-is a foundational principle of Erlang.
-
-Another principle important probably is that in order to learn a lot
-of things you ought to be independently generating them yourself;
-the fact that someone has generated something and transmitted it to
-someone else does does not mean that they transmitted the generator;
-transmitting the generator between people may have more to do with
-copying the environment in which the independent generation occurred;
-mathematics provides students an environment in which to independently
-re-discover the fundamental theorems; but mathematical education outside
-of universities does not seem to understand this principle even in
-schools that feed top universities.  Students are fed the theorems to
-memorize and use without even being fed the raw material from which
-the theorems were originally derived.  Thus they are optimizing to
-demonstrate a false affectation of mathematical education.  Gresham's
-Law again.  Erlang illustrates the structure of passing the generator as
-well as the data.
-
-
-Tue Oct 31 01:59:34 PM EDT 2023
-
-Rappers are only really good at styling up content that they copy from
-other places.  They generate novelty only in style, they do not generate
-novel content.  Novel content is generated places other than hiphop and
-then incorporated there.  People who are competing in social spaces
-for the best content do not put that content in hiphop style.  People
-competing in social spaces with hiphop style are not competing on
-content and do not bring dense content into the competition.
-
-
-
diff --git a/human-communication.txt b/human-communication.txt
index 41fd1b3..887defd 100644
--- a/human-communication.txt
+++ b/human-communication.txt
@@ -1,20 +1,3 @@
-in order for a human being to change another human being, they have to
-test them.
-
-in the precise computer science sense that
-
-in order to alter the programming of the other person they have to
-validate a proof
-
-in order to validate the proof they have to accept the result as an
-alteration of their programming
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
 Human Communication
 
 OR
@@ -22,180 +5,218 @@ OR
 Follow the logic of the knowledge.
 
 
-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 data structures lack.  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 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). Human cultural programs are far beyond what
-average or even elite programmers can hope to construct; 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 generator-regenerators 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 the same as the
-genetic principle of DNA described by Schrodinger but most especially
-like the artificially bred/genetically engineered DNA of the immune
-system's antibody-generating cells. These have mechanisms that control
-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 providing the filter mechanism of
-auto-immune tolerance). The word kernel is to be interpreted as in the
-algebraic structure: preserved across a morphism.
-
-In a literal kernel, the DNA information sequence in the seed's nucleus
-is a literal algebraic kernel, in an algebra of sexual reproduction
-that includes a mechanism amplifying reproductive success of males in
-Eukaryotes providing an information-accumulation advantage by more
-reliably capturing novelty, which was later jettisoned in the human
-lineage when Animalia transitioned into the Mammalian super-organism
-phase which gave the next level of meta-advantage in information
-accumulation as group-shared emotions applied distributed computation
-to sensory information turning e.g. individualized sight into area
-surveillance (Eukaryotic sexual sampling came into conflict with high
-parental investment involved in non-genetic but still vertical transfer
-of acquired environmental knowledge, a sort of Lamarckian epigenetic
-thing if you are into analogies YUCK); that super-organism was again
-jettisoned when Humanity transitioned into its cultural message-passing
-super-organism phase (in fact Humanity remains the mammalian substrate
-but human subjectivity (the "us" that "we" think "we" are even as we
-call ourselves human) is produced by the cultural distributed program
-whose social systems of self-preservation dominate the mammalian levers
-mostly just by spacialization -- I mean, it ain't hard); but remnants of
-the old systems always exist and indeed exist as the foundations of the
-newer systems and abstractions are leaky and the new stuff only has to
-work just-better than the old stuff so it isn't ever all the way there
--- you know how it goes.
-
-Haskell monads show us how algebraic morphisms are as intuitive as
-quasiquotation. Thank you Mr. Quine. But these are all just simple
-recursions. They are just the simplest structures that exist. And yet
-how much more complicated to understand them than the far more complex
-2+2=4, which even people who are not simple believe to be more simple!
-People who think 2+2=4 is simple may be remembering the answer rather
-than computing it. People who are computing it may not be deriving from
-foundations; they may be remembering rather than proving a lemma. But to
-remember without proving is not enough to transmit knowledge.  
-
-Memory transmits only memory.  Knowledge can transmit either memory
-or sometimes knowledge.  The recipient can interpret proof as
-information (store it) or as program (run it).  Running the program
-initiates a mental process whose outcome cannot be predicted by the
-person running it.  The frontal lobe executive function will connect the
-ongoing computational process to all stored life memories through the
-salience network, a search engine for emotional resonance; the frontal
-lobe can detect fear of thought; mental flight from fear will prevent
-the process from computing to completion.
-
-(Knowledge can exist in a degraded, not-fully-replicable form; neutered,
-locally contained, but potentially still fully-activated locally.
-Such knowledge or internal programming may be unavailable for mental
-debugging as if its source code were unavailable. When knowledge is
-filtered out by the executive function, it may appear to have this
-neutered locally-activated form, or else be deactivated. Resolving
-the emotional response could activate neutered knowledge and/or cause
-first-time replication of knowledge previously unreplicated. The
-initiated processing requires an unpredictable amount of computing time
-to complete.)
-
-This power makes them dangerous; for the same reason that computer
-systems control access to programming features (and generally even when
-they shouldn't, i.e. "just in case") the individual's mental system is
-made unavailable to "execute" knowledge in most contexts. To execute the
-knowledge means to incorporate it potentially into the brain's every
-mental structure according to its own internal logic. The internal
-logic of the knowledge!! not the brain.  Of course, to incorporate
-more knowledge requires more TIME than incorporating less knowledge;
-something that affects the brain's every mental structure may take as
-much time to learn as a second language.  And that illustrates the key
-reason why these systems are unavailable: they do not make available
-sufficient time to process.  Time is even the MOTIVATION for restricting
-access in modern computer systems, denial of service being far more
-common than privilege escalation; this commonality is true of human
-systems as well. (Older computer systems were highly vulnerable but
-modern systems are vastly more secure to trivial escalation attacks,
-though their complexity may lead to spectacularly immense failures as
-breaches of gargantuan executive control structures or even breaches
-of software distribution centralization points whose impact could span
-multiple national executive control structures in multiple nations
-simultaneously, as indeed happened in a software supply chain attack on
-Microsoft through their upstream library vendor SolarWinds. This attack
-was relatively harmless because it was performed by a government that
-only wanted some spy shit rather than one at war or a terrorist who
-wanted to maximize destruction).  Can't get the time of day from someone
-who doesn't want to spend the time thinking whether you just want the
-time of day.
-
-Capitalism and school might be seen operationally as denial of
-service attacks on their constituent subordinates' ability to process
-computations from sources other than the superordinates.  As long as
-you can clog someone's pipeline enough they spend all their time on
-processing what you give them, you can keep them from seeing enough
-of the big picture to change their phase thereby destabilizing their
-binding connection to you (creating a renegotiation, reconfiguration, or
-break).
-
-When I was 13 years old I read A Brief History of Time and learned
-that Albert Einstein claimed that calculus proves Parmenides right:
-time is an illusion.  Two years later I dropped out of high school and
-took calculus at University of Connecticut to find out for myself.  No
-one in my calculus or analysis classes ever talked about Parmenides.
-Why not?  Maybe because Einstein may be right: calculus may be able
-to prove something.  Then the students could be changed, set against
-their parents like by Jesus' sword.  In fact these students are meant
-to change and to change the world -- later.  First they must pass
-through the Thymus of society proving they have inscribed its inherited
-knowledge into their shape.  Only then will they be permitted a chance
-to compete for the 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.
-
-(Schools follow the corporate hierarchy style proof-of-work knowledge
-distribution system of transferring knowledge about subordinate worker
-performance up to non-local, locally-inaccessible standard-setters
--- depriving local activity of non-local meaning.  The presence
-of global information in the local context becomes a liability as
-either denial of service or maybe baby a nucleation engine for
-crystalization of solidarity with snowflakes dropping through the air in
-a horizontal barrage (since no single nucleation point could crystalize
-a horizontally-segregated group).  There is a systemic filter to remove
-global knowledge from inputs supplied to the local system as well as
-mechanisms to prevent horizontal information flow within local activity;
-you are educated stupid in your timecubicle! and by the way it doesn't
-help the non-local superordinate if the local superordinate has global
-knowledge)
-
-There is the "BITE" model of cult programming, behavior information
-thought and emotion control; institutions in order to fully bind
-individuals only need to control behavior enough to force compliance
-with demands to process received information, and thought can be
-disabled by increasing the quantity of that information. This also
-constitutes a parallel denial of emotion, creating potential for
-emotional control through e.g. selective release from stressors whether
-through reduction in demanded processing or other mechanisms; if
-processing quantity is to be the only "lever" then it has to have a
-minimum quantity demanded in order to retain its binding function
-reliably; in other words once you drop the hours down to 20 you end up
-with MORE retention problems!
+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  data  structures  lack.   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 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). Human cultural programs are  far beyond what average
+or even elite  programmers can hope to  construct; 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   generator-regenerators  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 the  same as the genetic  principle of DNA
+described  by  Schrodinger  but  most  especially  like  the
+artificially bred/genetically  engineered DNA of  the immune
+system's  antibody-generating  cells. These have  mechanisms
+that control 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  providing the  filter
+mechanism of  auto-immune tolerance). The word kernel  is to
+be  interpreted as  in  the  algebraic structure:  preserved
+across a morphism.
+
+In  a  literal  kernel,  the  DNA  information  sequence  in
+the  seed's nucleus  is a  literal algebraic  kernel, in  an
+algebra  of sexual  reproduction that  includes a  mechanism
+amplifying  reproductive  success  of  males  in  Eukaryotes
+providing  an  information-accumulation  advantage  by  more
+reliably capturing  novelty, which  was later  jettisoned in
+the  human  lineage  when  Animalia  transitioned  into  the
+Mammalian super-organism phase which  gave the next level of
+meta-advantage in  information accumulation  as group-shared
+emotions   applied   distributed  computation   to   sensory
+information  turning  e.g.  individualized sight  into  area
+surveillance (Eukaryotic sexual  sampling came into conflict
+with high  parental investment  involved in  non-genetic but
+still vertical transfer of acquired environmental knowledge,
+a  sort  of Lamarckian  epigenetic  thing  if you  are  into
+analogies  YUCK); that  super-organism was  again jettisoned
+when Humanity transitioned into its cultural message-passing
+super-organism phase (in fact Humanity remains the mammalian
+substrate but  human subjectivity (the "us"  that "we" think
+"we" are  even as  we call ourselves  human) is  produced by
+the  cultural distributed  program whose  social systems  of
+self-preservation dominate the  mammalian levers mostly just
+by spacialization -- I mean, it ain't hard); but remnants of
+the  old  systems  always  exist and  indeed  exist  as  the
+foundations of the newer  systems and abstractions are leaky
+and the new stuff only has  to work just-better than the old
+stuff so it isn't ever all the  way there -- you know how it
+goes.
+
+Haskell  monads  show  us  how algebraic  morphisms  are  as
+intuitive as quasiquotation. Thank  you Mr. Quine. But these
+are all  just simple recursions. They are  just the simplest
+structures that exist. And yet  how much more complicated to
+understand them than the far  more complex 2+2=4, which even
+people who are not simple believe to be more simple!  People
+who  think 2+2=4  is simple  may be  remembering the  answer
+rather than  computing it. People  who are computing  it may
+not be  deriving from  foundations; they may  be remembering
+rather than proving a lemma. But to remember without proving
+is not enough to transmit knowledge.
+
+Memory  transmits  only   memory.   Knowledge  can  transmit
+either  memory or  sometimes knowledge.   The recipient  can
+interpret  proof as  information  (store it)  or as  program
+(run it).   Running the  program initiates a  mental process
+whose  outcome cannot  be  predicted by  the person  running
+it.  The  frontal lobe  executive function will  connect the
+ongoing computational  process to  all stored  life memories
+through the salience network,  a search engine for emotional
+resonance;  the frontal  lobe  can detect  fear of  thought;
+mental  flight  from  fear  will prevent  the  process  from
+computing to completion.
+
+(Knowledge  can exist  in  a degraded,  not-fully-replicable
+form;  neutered, locally  contained,  but potentially  still
+fully-activated   locally.   Such   knowledge  or   internal
+programming  may  be  unavailable for  mental  debugging  as
+if  its  source  code were  unavailable. When  knowledge  is
+filtered out  by the  executive function,  it may  appear to
+have  this  neutered  locally-activated  form,  or  else  be
+deactivated. Resolving the emotional response could activate
+neutered  knowledge and/or  cause first-time  replication of
+knowledge previously  unreplicated. The initiated processing
+requires  an  unpredictable  amount  of  computing  time  to
+complete.)
+
+This power  makes them dangerous;  for the same  reason that
+computer  systems  control  access to  programming  features
+(and  generally  even when  they  shouldn't,  i.e. "just  in
+case") the  individual's mental  system is  made unavailable
+to  "execute" knowledge  in  most  contexts. To execute  the
+knowledge  means  to  incorporate it  potentially  into  the
+brain's every mental structure according to its own internal
+logic. The internal logic of  the knowledge!! not the brain.
+Of course, to incorporate  more knowledge requires more TIME
+than  incorporating less  knowledge; something  that affects
+the brain's  every mental  structure may  take as  much time
+to  learn  as  a  second  language.   And  that  illustrates
+the  key  reason why  these  systems  are unavailable:  they
+do  not make  available  sufficient time  to process.   Time
+is  even the  MOTIVATION  for restricting  access in  modern
+computer systems,  denial of  service being far  more common
+than  privilege  escalation;  this commonality  is  true  of
+human systems  as well. (Older computer systems  were highly
+vulnerable  but modern  systems  are vastly  more secure  to
+trivial  escalation  attacks,  though their  complexity  may
+lead  to  spectacularly  immense  failures  as  breaches  of
+gargantuan executive control structures  or even breaches of
+software  distribution  centralization points  whose  impact
+could  span multiple  national executive  control structures
+in  multiple  nations  simultaneously,  as  indeed  happened
+in  a  software supply  chain  attack  on Microsoft  through
+their  upstream library  vendor SolarWinds. This  attack was
+relatively harmless because it was performed by a government
+that only wanted  some spy shit rather than one  at war or a
+terrorist who  wanted to  maximize destruction).   Can't get
+the time of  day from someone who doesn't want  to spend the
+time thinking whether you just want the time of day.
+
+Capitalism and school might  be seen operationally as denial
+of  service  attacks   on  their  constituent  subordinates'
+ability to process computations  from sources other than the
+superordinates.  As long as  you can clog someone's pipeline
+enough  they spend  all their  time on  processing what  you
+give  them, you  can keep  them  from seeing  enough of  the
+big  picture to  change  their  phase thereby  destabilizing
+their binding  connection to you (creating  a renegotiation,
+reconfiguration, or break).
+
+By working  backward from  the conclusion  the mathematician
+will construct  a proof  "from both  ends" toward  a middle.
+The conclusion is in sight  before the bridge is built.  The
+fear response precedes the  conclusion.  Loss of the binding
+connection can  produce the fear.   Thus can a  binding lock
+the phases of the bound.
+
+When I was 13  years old I read A Brief  History of Time and
+learned that  Albert Einstein  claimed that  calculus proves
+Parmenides right:  time is an  illusion.  Two years  later I
+dropped out of  high school and took  calculus at University
+of  Connecticut  to find  out  for  myself.   No one  in  my
+calculus or  analysis classes ever talked  about Parmenides.
+Why not?  Maybe because Einstein  may be right: calculus may
+be  able to  prove something.   Then the  students could  be
+changed, set against their parents like by Jesus' sword.  In
+fact these  students are meant  to change and to  change the
+world -- later.  First they  must pass through the Thymus of
+society proving they have  inscribed its inherited knowledge
+into their shape.  Only then will they be permitted a chance
+to compete for the 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 that, but it sucked.
+
+(Schools follow the  corporate hierarchy style proof-of-work
+knowledge  distribution  system  of  transferring  knowledge
+about  subordinate  worker   performance  up  to  non-local,
+locally-inaccessible  standard-setters  --  depriving  local
+activity  of  non-local  meaning.  The  presence  of  global
+information  in the  local  context becomes  a liability  as
+either denial of  service or maybe baby  a nucleation engine
+for  crystalization of  solidarity with  snowflakes dropping
+through the  air in  a horizontal  barrage (since  no single
+nucleation point could  crystalize a horizontally-segregated
+group).   There  is  a  systemic  filter  to  remove  global
+knowledge from inputs  supplied to the local  system as well
+as mechanisms to prevent  horizontal information flow within
+local activity; you are educated stupid in your timecubicle!
+and by the  way it doesn't help  the non-local superordinate
+if the local superordinate has global knowledge)
+
+There  is the  "BITE"  model of  cult programming,  behavior
+information  thought and  emotion  control; institutions  in
+order  to  fully  bind  individuals  only  need  to  control
+behavior enough to force  compliance with demands to process
+received  information,  and  thought   can  be  disabled  by
+increasing  the  quantity  of  that  information. This  also
+constitutes a parallel denial of emotion, creating potential
+for emotional  control through  e.g. selective  release from
+stressors whether  through reduction in  demanded processing
+or other  mechanisms; if  processing quantity  is to  be the
+only "lever" then it has to have a minimum quantity demanded
+in order to  retain its binding function  reliably; in other
+words once  you drop the  hours down to  20 you end  up with
+MORE retention problems!
 
   FOR YOUR FIRST
   EMPLOYER
diff --git a/misc.txt b/misc.txt
index 2a57d0d..95ab8c3 100644
--- a/misc.txt
+++ b/misc.txt
@@ -106,54 +106,14 @@ CAN EVADE CONTROL.
 
 
 A university is an Erlang-style message passing system for academic
-knowledge accumulation's cultural life-system to regenerate itself.
-
-
-
-Key point for Deleuze is that the "counter-effectuation" is actually
-real-life really-physical Max Ent physics rather than quantum physics
-analogy/woo.  Bayesian statistical knowledge deriving from information
-theory.
-
-
-Deleuze didn't understand quantum physics correctly but it turns out
-that it doesn't matter because quantum physics doesn't have anything to
-do with metaphysics.  It's only that Uncertainty forces human beings
-to adopt a de-centralizing de-totalizing Copernican mental shift.  But
-it doesn't even do it in the way that is most relevant to metaphysics.
-There is also the de-centralizing de-totalizing Copernican mental
-shift of INTUITIONIST MATHEMATICS.
-
-Back to physics: Deleuze understood the main point: that particles
-are merely virtual constructs while these "interaction events" are
-the actual reality available to advanced physics -- the particles are
-virtual constructs that exist only in the human 3D mental model which
-is definitely NOT the same as the physical universe -- this is one of
-those places where we see the difference -- but the physical universe in
-making individual particles places where information access is limited
-fundamentally because the boundary between one particle and another with
-which it interacts isn't so much illusory as the only real thing, while
-the non-boundary is illusory.
-
-Quantum physics DOES imply a macro universe where macro assemblies
-of particles also have limited access to information; but the actual
-universe we see has EVEN MORE limitations on access to information,
-they are much much stricter than Uncertainty, and therefore we see much
-less information embedded in physical objects than Uncertainty allows
-in its theoretical maximum.  (Physics experiments can be set up so
-that information is not lost; but life in general is always balancing
-loss of information against energy expenditure.)  Max Ent physics and
-Bayesian statistics are mathematical/physical approaches to calculating
-the information available at a given spacetime location.  However, part
-of the nature of quantum uncertainty AND max ent physics is that, from
-WITHIN the system, the limitations apply to the observer and the limits
-are self-referential in the sense that the limitations that apply to an
-observer's disability to have information from other spacetime points
-can include the disability to know which information is available!
-I.e., the theory produces known unknowns.  The fact that there are
-spacetime points in the universe where knowledge of mathematics does
-not exist or exists at a merely undergrad level, means also unknown
-unknowns.
+knowledge accumulation's life-system to regenerate itself.
+
+
+
+Key point for Deleuze is that the "counter-effectuation" is Max Ent
+physics rather than quantum physics woo.
+
+Bayesian statistical knowledge deriving from information theory.
 
 
 
@@ -344,212 +304,3 @@ loop.  Human culture is the only chemical reaction not known to loop or
 terminate.  Human culture is the only true "irrational number" of all
 discretely-instantiated numbers.
 
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Tue Oct 31 01:23:16 PM EDT 2023
-
-Feynman and practicing with a different box of tools
-
-Same idea as the Max Ent explanation of prophecy
-
-But also the same idea as parable of the falling seeds, reversed in
-time; the seeds unfall to the sower, and depending on seed origin
-(fertile soil, or barren) the sower becomes either someone who can farm
-or someone who knows what it means to be unable to farm.  The knowledge
-passes from the earth through the seed into the farmer; the seeds
-provide the connection.  The disabled would-be-farmer is disconnected
-from that knowledge even though he too has and sews seeds.  His seeds,
-though sewn, fail to connect out to knowledge from the past and he may
-therefore fail to connect himself out to intentions from the future (or
-else not even form them).
-
-
-
-The 20th century was spent correlating the implications of a physical
-limit of the speed of light.
-
-The 21st century will be spent correlating the implications of
-the physical limits of the speed and size of computations.
-
-The human being as a computer system undering phase changes as the
-computer gains the ability to represent different types of state -- or
-to represent state with different performance characteristics -- through
-acquisition of data structures copied from the environment -- OR from
-internal processing and DISCOVERY of NEW data structures.
-
-These data structures are PASSED BETWEEN HUMANS who learn them
-implicitly and pick them up and play with them.  But data structures
-are unsafe when EXECUTED AS REASON and for this reason human beings
-have SYSTEMS OF ACCESS CONTROL to HUMAN REASON both internal to their
-minds (e.g., concepts of valid and invalid authorities) and external as
-social environment.  Society imposes economic exploitation which causes
-evolutionary adapations to "bubble up" in ways that are UNPREDICTABLE
-IN DETAIL (chaos theory) but according to evolutionary theory will tend
-to produce EFFICIENT DISTRIBUTED COMPUTATION so that it will converge
-to the computer systems we find most advanced as well as the biological
-systems of generating and filtering novelty that we find most advanced
-(except that the search space may have valleys etc).
-
-Another system of access control is RUNNING IN EMULATION this is when
-the individual learns enough about a foreign system to execute the steps
-of its reasoning without however being allowed to reach any conclusions
-that apply to the larger brain's data structures.  There are two reasons
-why humans cannot rely on this mechanism primarily.
-
-First, EMULATION CAN BE JAILBROKEN; this cannot ever be as secure.
-
-Second, more importantly, RUNNING IN EMULATION IS COMPUTATIONALLY MORE
-EXPENSIVE.  Even though CPUs and apparently also human beings have mechanisms
-to optimize emulation, in human beings especially, these cannot obtain
-"native" performance.  Therefore, computational emulators (e.g.,
-learners of a second language) cannot "actually" perform as well as
-computational originators (e.g., learners of a first language) if they
-use the same underlying computational equipment for the same amount of
-time.
-
-But human beings do not all have the same underlying computational
-equipment; and they do not all apply the same amount of time to
-processing it.  In the real world, running the other side in emulation
-is something that more intelligent, more informed, or more adult human
-beings attempt to do when interacting with less intelligent, informed,
-or adult ones.  Human beings may also believe they are running the other
-side in emulation, when they are running a gross simplification; in
-fact, they are running a gross simplification even when they run the
-remote side natively, since they always still have to emulate the entire
-remote environment(!) which is where the real problems start.
-
-Non-portability of language between individuals is a major problem.
-Before the internet, locality constraints on communications caused
-portability to self-organize locally; but the internet has changed
-communication patterns so that every person experiences a kind of
-cosmopolis without totality.  Every experience is a scene from a virtual
-city which is a construct only of that experience; each event and
-corresponding city co-singular; co-existing only once without object
-permanence.
-
-One problem is the human tendency to imagination, roleplay, etc.,
-causes human beings to pretend communication incompatibilities are
-not real.  Human beings must surely have evolved under circumstances
-where perceived universality of linguistic forms was vastly more
-common than it is today in the adult internet-connected world, though
-perhaps less common than it is today in the world of the schoolchild
-or university student or professor.
-
-The professors may not make the same naive/incorrect excuses as children
-for failing to communicate; their perspectives will be more realistic;
-the university system as a whole is constrained in certain ways to
-succeed in transmitting information; but insofar as these transmissions
-fail, are the reasons understood from a rational information-theoretic
-perspective?  Or is it a primate emotion static control program designed
-to regulate subordinate behavior emotionally, amplifying the causal
-force of the intentions of individuals positioned in social hierarchies
-such that their anger generates fear in others?  Or is it a whole series
-of task-activated network programs, each one separately influenced
-by its own emotional context?  Perhaps they are constrained by
-environmental demands to understand these failures operationally
-
-
-The task-activated networks seem to be the neurological place of
-mental compartmentalization; and the ADHD don't shut off the DMN when
-activating TANs.  We still "see" the task when others are absorbed
-"in" the task.  Of course, in order to influence the DMN, it would
-have to be activated.  The TANs feed back into the DMN in ADHD, which
-allows the ADHD brain to generate totalizing connectivities by putting
-information from disparate parts of universe into the same local
-computational system; where for the non-ADHD these same components,
-though contained within one BRAIN, are not connected into the same
-integrated computational system; the TANs are prevented from feeding
-back into the DMN which allows mental compartmentalization to prevent
-information from one controlled system to produce interference in
-another controlled system when each controlled system is controlling the
-same physical human being with a different control algorithm.
-
-In other words, the DMN or the big picture understanding does not
-help with, but interferes with, TAN activity downstream of power
-in the social grid, because of the way in which this activity is
-structured to depend on human beings as removable components,
-keeping the environment highly-controlled.  General intelligence is
-not useful in highly-controlled environments until they begin to
-break down.  High-efficiency local computation requires discarding
-global information in order to maximize local connectivity of the
-processed information and thus processing speed.  (Principle of
-cache locality.)  So as optimization proceeds, the big picture is
-squeezed out of every local environment; except SOME privileged local
-environment has to be preserved in order to manage the organism's
-interaction with _environments_ themselves; this is the executive.
-The organism has a consciousness of multiple discrete environments;
-each environment controlled by some local control system; each local
-control system incorporating its own different own model of human
-emotion and behavior as necessary to sustain its specific local
-constraints
-
-Emotions are the foundational social control levers in humans.  Not
-life/reproduction directly, as it would be in the case of domestic
-plants; but emotion/physical-reproduction-of-imaginary-will plays
-the same structural role, allowing animalia the meta-evolutionary
-advantage of evolving without biological death; emotional sampling with
-differential reproduction of imaginations replaces eukaryotic sampling
-with differential reproduction of offspring in the information-gathering
-social super-organisms of mammalia).
-
-In a school, a student convincing their teacher that they do not belong
-in the space to which they are assigned is NOT sufficient to liberate
-the student from the space; only a non-local authority assigning
-them to some other space can liberate the student from the local
-space.  The student having the level of understanding of the system
-that would cause them to make this conclusion correctly tends to make
-the student even less able to perform in a space where they do not
-belong; if the student instead internalizes a false simplified local
-model in which the possibility of mis-spacialization is impossible by
-construction, then the student may have a better chance of passing
-through the filters imposed by the environment for reaching a more
-appropriate spacialization.  If the student internalizes a more
-realistic, more complete, but externally-referencing (non-local)
-model, then compatibility issues are likely in communication with
-their teacher; if compatibility exists between the teacher and the
-student, then the compatibility issue will exist between the teacher and
-administration; or else the administration will have issues with the
-school board; or the electoral system; or else the local municipality
-itself will drain tax funding since diaspora from other schools will
-collect locally.  At every possible avenue where the "exception" could
-"bubble up", there will be an incompatible interface, because the
-system attempts to impose a constraint that exceptions are handled
-non-locally.  All biological systems impose this constraint because of
-how it produces a superorganism that is more intelligent and robust than
-if its individual components were individually intelligent and robust.
-Advanced decentralized computing systems also impose this constraint; it
-is a foundational principle of Erlang.
-
-Another principle important probably is that in order to learn a lot
-of things you ought to be independently generating them yourself;
-the fact that someone has generated something and transmitted it to
-someone else does does not mean that they transmitted the generator;
-transmitting the generator between people may have more to do with
-copying the environment in which the independent generation occurred;
-mathematics provides students an environment in which to independently
-re-discover the fundamental theorems; but mathematical education outside
-of universities does not seem to understand this principle even in
-schools that feed top universities.  Students are fed the theorems to
-memorize and use without even being fed the raw material from which
-the theorems were originally derived.  Thus they are optimizing to
-demonstrate a false affectation of mathematical education.  Gresham's
-Law again.  Erlang illustrates the structure of passing the generator as
-well as the data.
-
-
-Tue Oct 31 01:59:34 PM EDT 2023
-
-Rappers are only really good at styling up content that they copy from
-other places.  They generate novelty only in style, they do not generate
-novel content.  Novel content is generated places other than hiphop and
-then incorporated there.  People who are competing in social spaces
-for the best content do not put that content in hiphop style.  People
-competing in social spaces with hiphop style are not competing on
-content and do not bring dense content into the competition.
-
-
-