:-:::[memehash]:::-:

Atom Stretching

madhatter — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 02:35:47 +0000

What if the way to find out how everything is instrumented comes from STRETCHING atoms instead of smashing them? There has to be a way to manipulate individual quarks, and stretch or move them around. Where do the forces emanate from? How does the matter even exist to begin with? What does anti-matter even look like?

Digital Archaeology

madhatter — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 02:19:41 +0000

We have real archaeology… digging around in the dirt. How about digital archaeology? The first computer programs. The first computer programming concepts or constructs? The first games?

What if the first ones were the most advanced ones? What if that which created life was the most advanced algorithms known in the universe? What if the past requires the future and the future requires the past?

What if the digital philosophy guys (Fredkin, etc) are right and we do in fact live in a computer? It’s likely that we live in some kind of informational construct of sorts as most everything seems to some extent to be able to be broken down into multidimensional math/physics/philosophy, etc.

If we do live in such a construct, what is the possibility of accessing the substrate such that we can create an even more fantastical reality and do away with the pain and mundanity of “normal” life? All life as fantasy?

If human intelligence is inherently artificial and organic, and possibly both, then searching for the origin of all that is certainly seems a worthy challenge. What if the entire universe or multiverse is inside of a higher ordered construct that is managed by higher beings or aspects of nature that yield it to be as such? So many stars… yet there don’t seem to be terribly many collisions… perhaps there are but perhaps they happen for a reason that we can not appreciate. Perhaps it is for us to learn.

Object Proliferation

madhatter — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 02:05:31 +0000

Where does all the stuff come from in a house? Each item at some point was a choice… some of these choices may or may not have been logical.

Object proliferation exists in all governments, corporations, etc and is killing humanity and sapping away at life itself.

Object proliferation is also not good from the aspect of tight and efficient code and can lead to resource consumption.

If there are only so many useful memes, object proliferation as a concept seeks to sap meaning away from that which truly has meaning and value in life. Too many memes yields too much confusion yields too much waste yields pain across the board. How do lawyers even effectively map or otherwise analyze or organize their case law especially given the subtle nuance in language and syntax of language itself?

Where the hell does all this stuff come from anyhow? Look around you… stuff everywhere. Someone digs it up, manufactures it, transports it, markets it, moves it, breaks it, takes it, etc… how much of our reality can truly be boiled down to assembly code?

Every great idea ends up creating more waste if the old waste isn’t remediated. Can’t we find a good way to simplify things?

Intention Mapping

madhatter — Mon, 06 Sep 2010 01:58:03 +0000

Intention mapping as a concept. What is intention mapping? Intention mapping could to some extent be an aspect of game theory, artificial intelligence, highway driving, war, relativistic psychology, and just about anything.

How does one guarantee or prove intent? Intent to murder. Intent to do just about anything? Intention mapping can be preemptive or after the fact analysis of things. We will focus on the possibilities or the yet to become perspective.

Where does an intention come from? What given the uncertainty principle is ever truly fully concrete? If our psychologies are a maelstrom of chemicals and we do not have access to quantum space to guarantee things at an atomic level or to rigidly program logic into our own minds, then what percentage of free will do we really have? How much of free will is left up to fate or some behind the scenes neuro chemistry?

The intentions of a player are highly dependent on the situation that player is in? Let us take war for example. If the US invades a country, it should be obvious that the inhabitants of that country are going to be inherently militant simply based on our presence there. What gives the US or any other country the “right” to invade or occupy another country other than to attempt to proactively shape that country? Other means are surely more effective at doing this.

Mapping out the possibilities of two or more players in a game yields a complex network of possibility trees based on the inputs into the system. Players that have higher intelligence or deeper insight may utilize intention mapping to determine all possible moves or situations. This is likely not such a great tactic in real time combat unless the analyzer was preemptively superior in its calculations or timing of given events. Do football players use the concept of intention mapping when trying to run for a touch down?

Aggressive drivers almost certainly use intention mapping against their associative memory of pre-preprogrammed driver behaviors and further mapped against a set of probabilities of outcomes. When driving aggressively, one must analyze all players in parallel while planning their route through the field. Most players drive predictably. Other players drive in concert with other aggressors. Every once in awhile there is a disruptive player that seeks to have the aggressors step in line while not minding their own business. When using these tactics without also using great care in planning flow, this can be dangerous and therefore truly aggressive. I would however suggest that finding efficient flow through traffic while using due care is not dangerous nor is it particularly aggressive especially when said driver seeks efficiency in his travel and homeostasis with others instead of aggressive queue hopping. Flow is good in all aspects of reality.

Meme Overload

madhatter — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 17:07:30 +0000

Are we clearly on the brink of meme overload? Almost certainly. If we could simplify our realities from every perspective, we could all live in an egalitarian world or at least allow for the creation of an egalitarian world within this world.

This world is not complete until every man, woman, and child on this planet no longer has to suffer, can fulfill their potential, and live in peace, joy and happiness.

This world is not good enough until every last person has the things that everyone should have… safety, love, water, food, shelter, friendship, etc.

Lets cut down on the memes and create a world that matters for everyone.

Proactive Meme Culling and Elimination

madhatter — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 16:58:29 +0000

Should we throw away various tenets of existence? racism? the past? Summarize them as “past human stupidity” and move forward beyond the status quo?

I believe that to some extent we are at an edge of human knowledge at least as far as various memes are concerned. It seems trivial to take a meme, hash it, and come up with new memes. Some memes can be created. Some memes are emergent.

The blather that is on YouTube, while funny, seems to indicate this as a basic issue. Where do you want to go today Mr. Kaku and other respected geniuses of the world? Your colliders are surely fun, useful, and interesting, but I suggest that we can do better. I do not see a future of malls on the moon… while the ladies may enjoy that, the feasibility of such while there are people starving seems a bit annoying. Starving people should have access to a wonderful existence the same way that others do. Everyone should have basic needs met…. with or without work. There have to be ways to create this kind of reality if we’d all just get beyond our petty differences and the concept of money in general. Life as art… life as blisss… life as ecstasy… life as fantasy… there have to be ways to do this.

Do we as a race hold ourselves back by holding on to the past? Law is one area that seems to sorely need an upgrade. Law is essentially a set of protocols. Protocols can be automated. To some extent law is automated however there are aspects of law that need to come under the purview of philosophers instead of attorneys. How can one practice any kind of law regarding the ultimate good, if one does not deeply practice philosophy and study of the human mind, society, the world at large, and the extents of human possibilities. It’s the year 2010 for Christ’s sake.

All of our life preserving and destructive toys will eventually come to good use but I believe that the use will be in a form that is far different than we are all accustomed to and we can still preserve the sanctity of life, the notion of our souls, and the notion of living.

We put a man on the moon when my father was in school. Where’s my Millenium Falcon? It would cost too much to build… few could afford it… but everyone can have one… inside of a different reality. Maybe computers have it the right way around… to live in the matrix… a multiplicity of various matrixes. Toy Story memehashed with Battlestar Galactica perhaps.

Can we bring the future if we can all stop talking about the past so much and the way it always was. How about the way it is, or the ways it could be? Our legal underpinnings are bound in Egyptian and religious teachings… whether we want to admit it or not. There are better ways to do things… these ways have served us well for quite some time but perhaps it is time to consider alternatives. If Egyptians dealt with higher beings, one would have to surmise that these higher beings certainly had the capacity to imagine… and imagine a great many things. Human imagination alone is extremely powerful. Why is it implausible for our imagination to not be possible other than greed, stupidity, and sheer lack of trying to create a better reality.

The Edge of Human Knowledge

madhatter — Fri, 03 Sep 2010 16:42:47 +0000

People have likely wondered throughout time where exactly the edge of human knowledge truly lies. This is likely an issue bound deeply in meta math, physics, chemistry, physiology, technology, linguistics, computation, philosophy, and a multitude of other areas of study.

I would however suggest that the edge of knowledge seems finite especially if one is simply to use combinatorics, informatics, permutations, and hashing of various concepts. If quantum physics and science can be augmented or allows for things such as full blown magic, then it seems to me that a fantastical reality could exist or be created such that we could all live in this fantastical reality and not have to deal with the mundanity of real life, jobs, etc.

To get there however first requires the extents of human knowledge to be ascertained…. at least in theory.

Where is the edge of the Internet? Who are the modern Einsteins of our day? Where are the thought leaders taking us? The biggest things we hear about these days are time travel, grand unification theories, teleportation, and artificial intelligence… is this all we can come up with? Perhaps a grander reality is fully constrained by the physical world. If a world could be created and lived inside of that is almost entirely pure fantasy, should it be created, can it even exist, and would you want to live within it?

English as a language seems pretty simple. What if English does not allow for the efficient description of these new worlds or perhaps a newer more efficient language needs to be created… or intuitive communications of sorts, whether mental, graphical, or from other points of view.

It seems that the periodic table as a construct is fairly basic and that the various elements simply plug in to an existing framework. This framework seems to exist outside of the math and physics… perhaps an informational construct… perhaps there is a basic framework or construct to everything that exists that can simply be augmented, extrapolated, and built upon.

The Disturbing Future of Artificial Intelligence

madhatter — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 14:57:54 +0000

Many scholars and technologists of today are asserting and pursuing an artificially intelligent future. While these quests may be noble in understanding consciousness, intelligence, the human condition, and the inner workings of the mind, one has to consider the more deeply philosophical concerns with creating such an entity.

A few observations:

grants.gov has some philosophically disturbing requests from DARPA and other organizations.

Questions:

Who will utilize or use these beings and to what end?

Assumptions:

AI will require some kind of prime directive so as to not harm humanity or life itself.
To be conscious and/or human-like, the entity will need to be able to read.

Problems:

If a humanoid robot can read, interpret, analyze, extrapolate, and pontificate on the data that has been read, wouldn’t it then be able to therefore judge humanity?
Even if you were to create a robot in such a way as to protect humanity and life, wouldn’t the creation of two robots enable them to debug, rewire, reverse engineer, or otherwise reprogram each other?
Couldn’t a human also in the purchase or utilization of such entity, rewire, reverse engineer, or otherwise access the robot in such a way as to reprogram it?
Wouldn’t it be possible for a human or robotic conspirator to reprogram an AI or robot in such a fashion such that a single being could control them all?
Would the installation of a global kill switch or code bring about any additional safety when it is likely (as has been proven throughout eternity) that just about any code or system, no matter how complicated, can in fact be broken, disrupted, or otherwise disabled?

Just a few problems to consider…

First Post

madhatter — Wed, 14 Jul 2010 11:10:21 +0000

I have been a deep lurker of the Internet for over a decade and have not written a single word. I’m not sure that matters really in the grand scheme of things. I guess largely it depends on one’s ultimate purpose or the collective purpose of humanity. Perhaps it matters in some way. Perhaps it doesn’t.

It seems to me the world is filled largely with noise; people shouting over the tops of others simply in some way to be heard or pertinent. Humanity seems as if it is largely a hive of unnecessary and highly disorganized meme and thought hashing coupled with a largely disorganized movement of goods, resources, and people from points A to B to C.

My thoughts have a tendency to be highly fragmented and parallelized within a multiplicity of various subject areas at any given point in time. I may or may not be hard to follow. If I am its because I’m pulling or extracting data from many resources that you may or may not have read and therefore may have difficulty in following along. I do not guarantee however that my thoughts provide any unique or profound insights, but they are here to peruse.

I have not watched TV in at least three years and the Internet, if it weren’t for work, may end up on the shelf as well; perhaps I will attempt to limit my access.

I’ve read the vast majority of the Internet. That may sound preposterous… but really I have. It leaves me with a sort of a sick feeling. The kind of feeling one might have after having eaten three double quarter pounders followed by an extra large iced coffee with loads of cream and sugar.