From 454de9bfde1806953986de14b636ebcd682f3e79 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Gordon GECOS Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2023 05:20:42 -0500 Subject: human communication: questionable changes; TODO: review --- human-communication.txt | 241 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- 1 file 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 -- cgit v1.2.3