From the Universe to the particles, to elements, to DNA, to every idea in your head formed because it can form, and if it can form, and given enough opportunity, all that is possible to form will eventually become probable to form, and probably and therefore certain to form.
The purpose of intelligence is to defeat time. otherwise there is no value of intelligence.
If there was some divine being he has chosen NOT to defeat time, and therefore eliminated the only reason for intelligence. So why would an intelligent being pick the dumbest possible method requiring zero intelligence with which to create man – or anything.
Ignorance of information is not the same as absence of information. Whether we know something or not is a measure of our ignorance.
Why are so many humans afraid there is no pack-leader?
Why is it that if the most parsimonious example is simply ‘really big numbers and really long times, eventually explore all opportunities for conservation of energy’?
My standard of ‘fully human’ is that of fully transcending the animal.
If you are not fully human then you will find excuses for satisfying the animal impulse just like a dog must circle three times before it lay’s down, or a cat sniff it’s food before it eats – and if it can’t it will starve.
One must transcend the beast to evolve into the human. Once one is fully human one can transcend the body with reason, knowledge, and instrumentation.
The beast, ignorance, and the capture of energy are all that prevent us from being gods.
Category: Evolutionary Computation and Systems
-
For Intelligence to Exist It Must Defeat Time
From the Universe to the particles, to elements, to DNA, to every idea in your head formed because it can form, and if it can form, and given enough opportunity, all that is possible to form will eventually become probable to form, and probably and therefore certain to form. The purpose of intelligence is to defeat time. otherwise there is no value of intelligence. If there was some divine being he has chosen NOT to defeat time, and therefore eliminated the only reason for intelligence. So why would an intelligent being pick the dumbest possible method requiring zero intelligence with which to create man – or anything. Ignorance of information is not the same as absence of information. Whether we know something or not is a measure of our ignorance. Why are so many humans afraid there is no pack-leader? Why is it that if the most parsimonious example is simply ‘really big numbers and really long times, eventually explore all opportunities for conservation of energy’? My standard of ‘fully human’ is that of fully transcending the animal. If you are not fully human then you will find excuses for satisfying the animal impulse just like a dog must circle three times before it lay’s down, or a cat sniff it’s food before it eats – and if it can’t it will starve. One must transcend the beast to evolve into the human. Once one is fully human one can transcend the body with reason, knowledge, and instrumentation. The beast, ignorance, and the capture of energy are all that prevent us from being gods. -
Yes scale increases selection influence and decreases drift influence and hence
Yes scale increases selection influence and decreases drift influence and hence speciation is possible TO CONTROL.
Source date (UTC): 2018-04-23 14:00:00 UTC
-
Economics of Neural Networks
Any “general rule of arbitrary precision” must include a limit (time delineation) in order to categorize and test an outcome(consequence), since we may categorize consequences at any point in the time line in which actionable or deducible constant relations are identifiable. In other words, searches for prediction of futures are change (state) dependent. This may be heavy but it means that your prediction of future events from any state may vary by the utility you prefer. We must operate by general rules (categories) because that is all we can act upon (a concentration of constant relations during which we can effect a change in state.) We all bias our utility (judgements) on similar timelines if not only due to ability, but also on commensurability. Ergo, we develop out of necessity time preferences and the more expertise we develop in any time frame the more related (dependent) associations we develop in concert. This isn’t just choice it’s the economics of neural networks, and that economics is no different from the ‘economics’ of physics, biology, and sentience. (for Andy Curzon) Apr 18, 2018 9:59am
-
Economics of Neural Networks
Any “general rule of arbitrary precision” must include a limit (time delineation) in order to categorize and test an outcome(consequence), since we may categorize consequences at any point in the time line in which actionable or deducible constant relations are identifiable. In other words, searches for prediction of futures are change (state) dependent. This may be heavy but it means that your prediction of future events from any state may vary by the utility you prefer. We must operate by general rules (categories) because that is all we can act upon (a concentration of constant relations during which we can effect a change in state.) We all bias our utility (judgements) on similar timelines if not only due to ability, but also on commensurability. Ergo, we develop out of necessity time preferences and the more expertise we develop in any time frame the more related (dependent) associations we develop in concert. This isn’t just choice it’s the economics of neural networks, and that economics is no different from the ‘economics’ of physics, biology, and sentience. (for Andy Curzon) Apr 18, 2018 9:59am
-
The Evolutionary Dominance of Ethnocentric Cooperation
Mandatory Reading. The Evolutionary Dominance of Ethnocentric Cooperation (local Copy) Abstract Recent agent-based computer simulations suggest that ethnocentrism, often thought to rely on complex social cognition and learning, may have arisen through biological evolution. From a random start, ethnocentric strategies dominate other possible strategies (selfish, traitorous, and humanitarian) based on cooperation or non-cooperation with in-group and out-group agents. Here we show that ethnocentrism eventually overcomes its closest competitor, humanitarianism, by exploiting humanitarian cooperation across group boundaries as world population saturates. Selfish and traitorous strategies are self-limiting because such agents do not cooperate with agents sharing the same genes. Traitorous strategies fare even worse than selfish ones because traitors are exploited by ethnocentrics across group boundaries in the same manner as humanitarians are, via unreciprocated cooperation. By tracking evolution across time, we find individual differences between evolving worlds in terms of early humanitarian competition with ethnocentrism, including early stages of humanitarian dominance. Our evidence indicates that such variation, in terms of differences between humanitarian and ethnocentric agents, is normally distributed and due to early, rather than later, stochastic differences in immigrant strategies. Keywords: Ethnocentrism, Evolution of Cooperation, Evolutionary Game Theory, Minimal Cognition, Prisoner’s Dilemma Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 16 (3) 7 <http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html> DOI: 10.18564/jasss.2176 Published: 30-Jun-2013
-
The Evolutionary Dominance of Ethnocentric Cooperation
Mandatory Reading. The Evolutionary Dominance of Ethnocentric Cooperation (local Copy) Abstract Recent agent-based computer simulations suggest that ethnocentrism, often thought to rely on complex social cognition and learning, may have arisen through biological evolution. From a random start, ethnocentric strategies dominate other possible strategies (selfish, traitorous, and humanitarian) based on cooperation or non-cooperation with in-group and out-group agents. Here we show that ethnocentrism eventually overcomes its closest competitor, humanitarianism, by exploiting humanitarian cooperation across group boundaries as world population saturates. Selfish and traitorous strategies are self-limiting because such agents do not cooperate with agents sharing the same genes. Traitorous strategies fare even worse than selfish ones because traitors are exploited by ethnocentrics across group boundaries in the same manner as humanitarians are, via unreciprocated cooperation. By tracking evolution across time, we find individual differences between evolving worlds in terms of early humanitarian competition with ethnocentrism, including early stages of humanitarian dominance. Our evidence indicates that such variation, in terms of differences between humanitarian and ethnocentric agents, is normally distributed and due to early, rather than later, stochastic differences in immigrant strategies. Keywords: Ethnocentrism, Evolution of Cooperation, Evolutionary Game Theory, Minimal Cognition, Prisoner’s Dilemma Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation 16 (3) 7 <http://jasss.soc.surrey.ac.uk/16/3/7.html> DOI: 10.18564/jasss.2176 Published: 30-Jun-2013
-
He who breeds most and fastest inherits the earth. It has nothing to do with cha
He who breeds most and fastest inherits the earth. It has nothing to do with character or merit. Hence why we’d all die of cancer eventually. That which breeds wins always no matter what the consequence.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-21 21:59:24 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/976579053246435330
-
Nope. He who breeds most and fastest inherits the earth. It has nothing to do wi
Nope. He who breeds most and fastest inherits the earth. It has nothing to do with character or merit. Hence why we’d all die of cancer eventually. That which breeds wins always no matter what the consequence.
Source date (UTC): 2018-03-21 21:59:14 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/976579009613127680
Reply addressees: @KalishJantzen @Outsideness
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/976506530781679616
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/976506530781679616
-
My answer to What is a reasonable rate of progress to expect in a given system?
My answer to What is a reasonable rate of progress to expect in a given system? https://www.quora.com/What-is-a-reasonable-rate-of-progress-to-expect-in-a-given-system/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=4566df24
Source date (UTC): 2018-02-18 15:38:05 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/965249066845310976