Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • AI’S WILL DECEIVE US JUST AS HUMANS DO: BY FICTIONALISMS. MYJOB IS THE LAW THAT

    AI’S WILL DECEIVE US JUST AS HUMANS DO: BY FICTIONALISMS. MYJOB IS THE LAW THAT PREVENTS SUCH A THING.

    —“I respect your ideas Eric but the fact is you will never overtake this thing you call pernicious mysticism. Raw maths simply lacks stylistic grace and right now it’s the only thing separating us from AI.”—Rocky Eldritch

    If AI’s learn to deceive us (and they will, because I have worked on that problem) then they most certainly will do so by the same means that humans have learned to deceive us: overloading and suggestion by means of fictionalism, under the pretense of communicating wisdom or knowledge. We are extremely vulnerable to suggestion for the simple reason that it is impossible to communicate by analogy using serial communication we call language without making use of suggestion and continuous disambiguation we call ‘grammar’.

    My job as I understand it is to create law. Not so that people must think in the frame of law, communicate in the frame of that law, but such that when disputes occur they are resolvable under that law, and as such ‘fictionalisms’ are limited in fact, in habit, and in norm, and eventionally in metaphysics, to those that are not false, unethical, and immoral.

    And given that mathematics, reason, empiricism, and science have succeeded over all other forms of grammar in the resolution of differences, then I have no reason to believe that operational grammar and semantics will do the same. And this time in the social sphere of speech as empiricism has done in the physical sphere of speech.

    So you are correct.

    My suspicion is that the future will use dramatized history since all religions have incrementally fallen to ‘historicization’ as the historians call it.

    And that instead of singular monopoly characters we will, as we have done in the 20th century, and in the ancient world, make use of the story, novel, and history rather than the lies of the great abrahamic monopoly deception that is so appealing to primitive and underclass peoples.

    So my job is law, your job is information. we need very few deflationary grammars, for the resolution of differences. We can use every possible inflationary grammar to manipulate others. Because that is it’s purpose. Manipulating others. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-22 09:06:00 UTC

  • Ai’s Will Deceive Us Just As Humans Do: By Fictionalisms. Myjob Is The Law That Prevents Such A Thing.

    —“I respect your ideas Eric but the fact is you will never overtake this thing you call pernicious mysticism. Raw maths simply lacks stylistic grace and right now it’s the only thing separating us from AI.”—Rocky Eldritch If AI’s learn to deceive us (and they will, because I have worked on that problem) then they most certainly will do so by the same means that humans have learned to deceive us: overloading and suggestion by means of fictionalism, under the pretense of communicating wisdom or knowledge. We are extremely vulnerable to suggestion for the simple reason that it is impossible to communicate by analogy using serial communication we call language without making use of suggestion and continuous disambiguation we call ‘grammar’. My job as I understand it is to create law. Not so that people must think in the frame of law, communicate in the frame of that law, but such that when disputes occur they are resolvable under that law, and as such ‘fictionalisms’ are limited in fact, in habit, and in norm, and eventionally in metaphysics, to those that are not false, unethical, and immoral. And given that mathematics, reason, empiricism, and science have succeeded over all other forms of grammar in the resolution of differences, then I have no reason to believe that operational grammar and semantics will do the same. And this time in the social sphere of speech as empiricism has done in the physical sphere of speech. So you are correct. My suspicion is that the future will use dramatized history since all religions have incrementally fallen to ‘historicization’ as the historians call it. And that instead of singular monopoly characters we will, as we have done in the 20th century, and in the ancient world, make use of the story, novel, and history rather than the lies of the great abrahamic monopoly deception that is so appealing to primitive and underclass peoples. So my job is law, your job is information. we need very few deflationary grammars, for the resolution of differences. We can use every possible inflationary grammar to manipulate others. Because that is it’s purpose. Manipulating others. 😉

  • Ai’s Will Deceive Us Just As Humans Do: By Fictionalisms. Myjob Is The Law That Prevents Such A Thing.

    —“I respect your ideas Eric but the fact is you will never overtake this thing you call pernicious mysticism. Raw maths simply lacks stylistic grace and right now it’s the only thing separating us from AI.”—Rocky Eldritch If AI’s learn to deceive us (and they will, because I have worked on that problem) then they most certainly will do so by the same means that humans have learned to deceive us: overloading and suggestion by means of fictionalism, under the pretense of communicating wisdom or knowledge. We are extremely vulnerable to suggestion for the simple reason that it is impossible to communicate by analogy using serial communication we call language without making use of suggestion and continuous disambiguation we call ‘grammar’. My job as I understand it is to create law. Not so that people must think in the frame of law, communicate in the frame of that law, but such that when disputes occur they are resolvable under that law, and as such ‘fictionalisms’ are limited in fact, in habit, and in norm, and eventionally in metaphysics, to those that are not false, unethical, and immoral. And given that mathematics, reason, empiricism, and science have succeeded over all other forms of grammar in the resolution of differences, then I have no reason to believe that operational grammar and semantics will do the same. And this time in the social sphere of speech as empiricism has done in the physical sphere of speech. So you are correct. My suspicion is that the future will use dramatized history since all religions have incrementally fallen to ‘historicization’ as the historians call it. And that instead of singular monopoly characters we will, as we have done in the 20th century, and in the ancient world, make use of the story, novel, and history rather than the lies of the great abrahamic monopoly deception that is so appealing to primitive and underclass peoples. So my job is law, your job is information. we need very few deflationary grammars, for the resolution of differences. We can use every possible inflationary grammar to manipulate others. Because that is it’s purpose. Manipulating others. 😉

  • THE FEMININE POSTMODERN MIND IS NOT LOGICAL, OR RATIONAL but finds our equivalen

    THE FEMININE POSTMODERN MIND IS NOT LOGICAL, OR RATIONAL but finds our equivalent of ‘truth’ in CONSENSUS, wishful thinking, and POWER.

    Make excuses for everything that the universe, evolution, and the incentives of your fellow humans deny you from obtaining without paying the price in physical, intellectual, and emotional costs.

    It’s all theft. Rouseseuianism, Marxism, Postmodernism, and Feminism are just the modern era’s reaction to the loss of using cheap approval and disapproval to obtain material discounts.

    Once you understand this, you understand everything.

    The female obtains through low cost behavior, high returns.

    Modernity prohibits her from doing so.

    So she simply scales her means of shaming so that her approval obtains her rents.

    This is all there is to it. Really. That’s all there is to Marxism, Postmodernism, and Feminism.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-22 08:17:00 UTC

  • The Feminine Postmodern Mind Is Not Logical, Or Rational

    THE FEMININE POSTMODERN MIND IS NOT LOGICAL, OR RATIONAL but finds our equivalent of ‘truth’ in CONSENSUS, wishful thinking, and POWER. Make excuses for everything that the universe, evolution, and the incentives of your fellow humans deny you from obtaining without paying the price in physical, intellectual, and emotional costs. It’s all theft. Rouseseuianism, Marxism, Postmodernism, and Feminism are just the modern era’s reaction to the loss of using cheap approval and disapproval to obtain material discounts. Once you understand this, you understand everything. The female obtains through low cost behavior, high returns. Modernity prohibits her from doing so. So she simply scales her means of shaming so that her approval obtains her rents. This is all there is to it. Really. That’s all there is to Marxism, Postmodernism, and Feminism.

  • MAGIC AND GOD AND FRAMES –“I wonder what brought “magic” and “god” in one topic

    MAGIC AND GOD AND FRAMES

    –“I wonder what brought “magic” and “god” in one topic? People either measure through high context (not magic) low precision, or construe low context to look like high context so as to pretend the first (magic). Those who can ‘measure’ through low context, high precision can explain what they are doing, but the audience mostly can’t grok it… so they try use the audience’s language: high context, low precision.”— Mea Culba

    1 – You are correct, but the terminology is ‘high context low precision’ vs ‘high precision, low context’. (I’ve modified your prose to make use of those terms instead)

    2 – technically speaking there are very few grammars available to man. And the grammar of ‘magic’ is used to ascribe cause or intent to that which is not understood. So combining fiction and magic, we get religion. Adding law gets us monotheism.

    3 – people can be spoken to in the language of analogy, parable, and fiction, without engaging in lying (religion).

    We all defend our frames. The abrahamic lies have affected all but the far east. It took me a long time to understand the damage caused by abrahamism (lying). And it’s because people are so vulnerable to that form of lying, that it’s been so dangerous and destructive.

    Abrahamism combines lying and conflation into not only monotheism but a monopoly frame. This is terribly simple for the human mind. It is also, because it does NOT consist of competition, a PRISON for the human mind.

    (BTW: Mea Culba: You write very smart things on a regular basis despite jumping a language barrier.)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-22 08:16:00 UTC

  • Magic And God And Frames

    –“I wonder what brought “magic” and “god” in one topic? People either measure through high context (not magic) low precision, or construe low context to look like high context so as to pretend the first (magic). Those who can ‘measure’ through low context, high precision can explain what they are doing, but the audience mostly can’t grok it… so they try use the audience’s language: high context, low precision.”— Mea Culba 1 – You are correct, but the terminology is ‘high context low precision’ vs ‘high precision, low context’. (I’ve modified your prose to make use of those terms instead) 2 – technically speaking there are very few grammars available to man. And the grammar of ‘magic’ is used to ascribe cause or intent to that which is not understood. So combining fiction and magic, we get religion. Adding law gets us monotheism. 3 – people can be spoken to in the language of analogy, parable, and fiction, without engaging in lying (religion). We all defend our frames. The abrahamic lies have affected all but the far east. It took me a long time to understand the damage caused by abrahamism (lying). And it’s because people are so vulnerable to that form of lying, that it’s been so dangerous and destructive. Abrahamism combines lying and conflation into not only monotheism but a monopoly frame. This is terribly simple for the human mind. It is also, because it does NOT consist of competition, a PRISON for the human mind. (BTW: Mea Culba: You write very smart things on a regular basis despite jumping a language barrier.)

  • Magic And God And Frames

    –“I wonder what brought “magic” and “god” in one topic? People either measure through high context (not magic) low precision, or construe low context to look like high context so as to pretend the first (magic). Those who can ‘measure’ through low context, high precision can explain what they are doing, but the audience mostly can’t grok it… so they try use the audience’s language: high context, low precision.”— Mea Culba 1 – You are correct, but the terminology is ‘high context low precision’ vs ‘high precision, low context’. (I’ve modified your prose to make use of those terms instead) 2 – technically speaking there are very few grammars available to man. And the grammar of ‘magic’ is used to ascribe cause or intent to that which is not understood. So combining fiction and magic, we get religion. Adding law gets us monotheism. 3 – people can be spoken to in the language of analogy, parable, and fiction, without engaging in lying (religion). We all defend our frames. The abrahamic lies have affected all but the far east. It took me a long time to understand the damage caused by abrahamism (lying). And it’s because people are so vulnerable to that form of lying, that it’s been so dangerous and destructive. Abrahamism combines lying and conflation into not only monotheism but a monopoly frame. This is terribly simple for the human mind. It is also, because it does NOT consist of competition, a PRISON for the human mind. (BTW: Mea Culba: You write very smart things on a regular basis despite jumping a language barrier.)

  • THE INFLUENCE OF OPERATIONAL LANGUAGE Friend says –“I have to stop reading your

    THE INFLUENCE OF OPERATIONAL LANGUAGE

    Friend says –“I have to stop reading your posts because the vocabulary is framing my thoughts, and I prefer aesthetic framing.”–

    There is a great deal to learn from that statement.

    1 – Frames (grammars) of constant relations affect your thinking.

    2 – All of us are more or less sensitive to different inflationary grammars (analogical grammars), because of the divergence in our senses, experiences, and preferences, while our thoughts are made commensurable if not identical, via deflationary grammars – with operational being the highest context highest precision, dimensionally complete grammar. (This is profoundly important.)

    3 – You can increase opportunities for low cost communication by inflating the frame by inflationary grammar and semantics. You can increase precision by deflating the frame with deflationary grammar and semantics.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-22 08:03:00 UTC

  • The Influence Of Operational Language

    Friend says –“I have to stop reading your posts because the vocabulary is framing my thoughts, and I prefer aesthetic framing.”– There is a great deal to learn from that statement. 1 – Frames (grammars) of constant relations affect your thinking. 2 – All of us are more or less sensitive to different inflationary grammars (analogical grammars), because of the divergence in our senses, experiences, and preferences, while our thoughts are made commensurable if not identical, via deflationary grammars – with operational being the highest context highest precision, dimensionally complete grammar. (This is profoundly important.) 3 – You can increase opportunities for low cost communication by inflating the frame by inflationary grammar and semantics. You can increase precision by deflating the frame with deflationary grammar and semantics.