Source: Facebook

  • “the political events of 88-86 B.C.E. changed the course of Western philosophy i

    —“the political events of 88-86 B.C.E. changed the course of Western philosophy in general, and Stoicism in particular, for the remainder of antiquity. At that time, philosophers were politically in charge at Athens, and made the crucial mistake of siding with Mithridates against Rome. The defeat of the King of Pontus, and consequently of Athens, spelled disaster for the latter and led to a diaspora of philosophers throughout the Mediterranean.”—


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-27 07:10:00 UTC

  • THE CORRECT PRACTICE OF PRAYER, RITUAL, AND SACRIFICE –“Roman religion depended

    THE CORRECT PRACTICE OF PRAYER, RITUAL, AND SACRIFICE

    –“Roman religion depended on knowledge and the correct practice of prayer, ritual, and sacrifice (not ‘wisdom’).

    The priesthoods of public religion were held by members of the elite class. During the Roman Republic (509–27 BC), elected public officials might also serve as augurs and pontiffs.

    Priests married, raised families, and led politically active lives. Julius Caesar became pontifex maximus before he was elected consul. The Roman triumph was at its core a religious procession in which the victorious general displayed his piety and his willingness to serve the public good by dedicating a portion of his spoils to the gods, especially Jupiter, who embodied just rule.

    Each home had a household shrine at which prayers and libations to the family’s domestic deities were offered. Neighborhood shrines and sacred places such as springs and groves dotted the city.

    The Roman calendar was structured around religious observances. Women, slaves, and children all participated in a range of religious activities. Some public rituals could be conducted only by women, and women formed what is perhaps Rome’s most famous priesthood, the state-supported Vestals, who tended Rome’s sacred hearth for centuries, until disbanded under Christian domination.”–


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-27 06:50:00 UTC

  • I know what drives the people to the dream state end of the spectrum versus the

    I know what drives the people to the dream state end of the spectrum versus the real state end of the spectrum. And it’s not complimentary.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-27 00:35:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-26 22:52:00 UTC

  • ‘YA

    http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/000312240607100301?utm_content=buffer4d90b&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=bufferTOLD ‘YA.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-26 22:43:00 UTC

  • by Andrew Clarke I’d argue that the monetary system we have based on credit, e.g

    by Andrew Clarke

    I’d argue that the monetary system we have based on credit, e.g.; mortgages, loans, higher-purchase etc, is in part (and possibly in whole to the poor) the abolition of private property. At the macro level, the point at which money is created with a debt attached, does that ‘loan’ allow us to ever truly own anything?


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-26 20:50:00 UTC

  • ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE ORIGIN OF PROPERTY-IN-TOTO When I worked on AI i

    ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE ORIGIN OF PROPERTY-IN-TOTO

    When I worked on AI in the early 1980’s I used fairly simple storage mechanism using vectors consisting of addresses of before, during, and after states. A state consisted of a table(array) symbols (values). symbols, and symbols actions, and … well, I wont’ get into that detail here, but they influenced subsystems (again, arrays), and subsystems influenced emotions, and emotions had a half life. In assembly language this little thing was very fast.

    This effect was a very primitive version of what we think of as 3d collision detection today. (which is the right way of doing it. I just didn’t think of it back then. I have always thought a bit too ‘textually’. ) The point being that most of our brains work by constructing symbols (objects, whatever).

    But there is no reason to merge the hardware and software problems into a single system, if hardware can produce symbols “meaning”. I mean, basically, it was just a search engine that retained emotional context over so many recursions, and took actions if it got excited. (I had I think sixteen emotions at the time?)

    I had a blast with it because I was working on tank AI’s (for games) and trying to give them emotions. To simulate input (I was just building tests not a full simulation) I simply feed in a bitmap. The problem I kept having is that if you make it exciting to kill things …. I sort of got this psychopathic behavior out of the program through iterative positive reinforcement. Which is obvious right? lol Anyway. What I learned was that (a) you needed a lot of expensive hardware which we are finally able to produce today, and (b) you needed a lot of informational density to make a non-deterministic behavior, (c) you needed even more information density to make decisions possible. In other words, decisions are based upon information density (marginal differences between forecasts and perceptions). It’s differences that matter for decidability. (d) there was no way any meaningful AI was going to happen until Moore’s Law did it’s work for a few decades.

    In about 2005 or so (I can’t remember exactly) I had been very ill and working with the Half-Life engine after work again – after using the Quake engine in the late 90’s. I understood that the vector/state problem was solvable with geometry and the processing power of video cards. Someone from MSFT who had been working on the B2 Bomber software talked to me about Manifolds (Topologies) as data stores. Another guy from MSFT talked to me about developing a new form of programming to do all of this. The problem was how to store the data in geometries.

    I was struck immediately by the fact that the reason people can do so many things and store information so efficiently is that ‘man is the measure of all things to man’ – in other words, we store information that we can act upon. So the frame of reference is our actions. And this solves the symbol problem. In other words, symbol tables (meaning) could be constructed from combinations of possible actions. This solves the information density problem.

    This was when I started thinking about what we call ‘property in toto’ today. That is, we attribute value to useful property (objects of utility). And that property is an unlimited means of object definition.

    So aside from creating symbols for actions, and symbols for property (things I can act upon to transform). And this mean that it was possible to use property as a test of morality for all actions of an artificial intelligence. In other words, I understood that the way we create moral AI’s is the same way we create moral human beings: an AI can’t even THINK about an object (form of property) it doesn’t have permission to.

    So you see. That is where all of this work you see in Propertarianism has come from. I think in terms of artificial intelligences that are not conscious. I have understood how consciousness is not necessary, for most of what human’s do.

    And that was how I began to understand that we are mere riders (consciousness) on elephants (intuition), and that our ‘consciousness’ is merely the result of needing to empathize with and negotiate with other riders on behalf of our elephants.

    But the elephant is influenced by a demon called our genes, and the elephant is happy to lie to us to get us to act as its agent even against our will.

    As far as I know this is about as precise an understanding as you need to have.

    I can tell you how fish, reptilian, mammalian, and ‘human’ brains work using very simple processes through the thalamus and short term memory to create what we call ‘experience’ or ‘consciousness’. But it doesn’t matter. For the purposes of understanding human existence, it is very hard to train the rider to control the elephant. Because the rider is pretty dumb really, and easily fooled – and the elephant is an exceptional liar.

    We can do it though. And that is what I am trying to accomplish when I use the words “Truth, Agency, and Transcendence.” Sovereignty is just a means of limiting our actions to the moral.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-26 20:37:00 UTC

  • WON. NOW WE JUST CREATE MERITOCRATIC FASCISM AND WE’RE DONE… 😉

    http://blog.independent.org/2017/07/24/socialism-is-dead-participatory-fascism-has-triumphed/FASCISM WON. NOW WE JUST CREATE MERITOCRATIC FASCISM AND WE’RE DONE… 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-26 19:54:00 UTC

  • THE AI QUESTION AND THE ANSWER There are three different stages of Artificial In

    THE AI QUESTION AND THE ANSWER

    There are three different stages of Artificial Intelligence we have to discuss:

    1) Specific Artificial Intelligence (imitation intelligence)

    SAI can perform routine tasks and do so better than people, and is bound by algorithmic limits.

    Achieved by sufficient hardware and processing speed, algorithms, and existing software and databases.

    vs

    2) General Artificial Intelligence (functional intelligence)

    GAI can solve problems and make decisions, can be bound by limits and act morally.

    Achieved by sufficient hardware, processing speed, algorithms, and I suspect new software and database structures (think video cards and geometry)

    vs

    3) Conscious Artificial Intelligence (creative intelligence)

    CAI can want, hypothesize, identify opportunities, theorize, create, invent, and learn, evolve, transcend, and circumvent limits and morality.

    Achieved by what I suspect will require new hardware and embedded software, with new software and database structures (as above)

    CONSEQUENCES OF FIRST STAGE AI

    There are an awful lot of jobs that are currently done by hand that can be done better and automated.

    Certainly accounting, ar/ap/pr will fall to SAI rapidly and first.

    Certainly circuit board design and development can be automated.

    Certainly assembly of products can be automated and has been.

    Certainly packing and shipping are already being automated.

    Certainly delivery of goods can be automated.

    Certainly food service can be automated.

    Certainly forecasting can be automated

    Certainly hiring can be automated (and firing) (My product will help with this)

    Certainly ad-buying can be automated (easily).

    Certainly on the job training for most functions can be automated (My product is built toward that end).

    Certainly research can be automated.

    Certainly stock purchasing can be automated.

    I don’t see organizing people into communities (businesses) being automated for a while.

    I don’t see strategic planning at the ceo level being automated for a while.

    I don’t see ‘outwitting competition’ as being automated for a while.

    I don’t see ‘selling people’ as being automated.

    I don’t see ‘serving’ people as being automated.

    The growth of the problem will be limited by the cost of financing such equipment versus moving production to cheaper labor than the cost of financing the equipment.

    The primary economic problem is this: you have to produce something for a lot of people in order to pay for yourself but you can only serve so many people at a time.

    There will be too few ways of getting money in people’s hands to spend.

    There will be a ridiculous oversupply of people in the end.

    I have been trying to solve this problem for a while now and I think I understand the solution.

    Most of what we will do is provide each other with entertainment, and others performing research.

    In other words, there will exist a 10% or 20% of the population with employable advantage and the rest of the people will be effectively pets.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-26 19:02:00 UTC

  • ANSWERS TO THREE BOOK QUESTIONS –“Curt, will the book be available for preorder

    ANSWERS TO THREE BOOK QUESTIONS

    –“Curt, will the book be available for preorder?”—

    Um. Of course silly. But not until I feel I know an approximate ship date. It’s still a way off.

    —“Will you sign the books?”—

    Um. Of course, silly. 😉

    —“Is the conference happening in september?”–

    Yes, but Megan is in charge of that. I am just her puppet. lol

    But of course, yes, I’ll bring a work in progress with me to the conference as long as you folk don’t distract me too much. lol I am really easily distracted.

    If I am lucky I will have a lot of it done by then. Most probably.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-26 17:13:00 UTC