Source: Original Site Post

  • Hierarchy of Needs for Artificial General Intelligence.

    Apr 1, 2020, 2:55 PM

    —Curt, can you clarify on what you mean by making logical computers instead of numerical? what would that look like vs a numerical one?”—Caesar Nguyen

    Undecidable, true, false – not 0,1. Logical operations – not arithmetic operations. Build arithmetic from logical. HIERARCHY OF NEEDS FOR ART. GENERAL INTELLIGENCE. Analog (world) … Logical (circuits) … … Arithmetic (current computers) … … … Geometric (current video cards) … … … … N-Dimensional Manifolds (future computers) … … … … … Competitive Recursive iterations of N-dimensional Manifolds (intelligence) … … … … … … Symbolic-Grammatic Competitive Recursive Iterations of References to N-Dimensional Manifolds (General Intelligence) … … … … … … … Cooperative symbolic Symbolic-Grammatic Competitive Recursive Iterations of References to marginal indifferences in N-Dimensional Manifolds. The weak point in our architecture is the central processing unit.

  • The Funnel

    Apr 1, 2020, 2:55 PM

    Any movement works from the fringe to the center of the movement’s maximum reach. People on the fringe are novelty seekers. People in the middle are solution seekers. It’s a marketing funnel. There is no difference between a movement and any other product, service, or information.

  • The Funnel

    Apr 1, 2020, 2:55 PM

    Any movement works from the fringe to the center of the movement’s maximum reach. People on the fringe are novelty seekers. People in the middle are solution seekers. It’s a marketing funnel. There is no difference between a movement and any other product, service, or information.

  • Artificial Intelligence: “You Can’t Get There from Here”

    Apr 1, 2020, 2:56 PM

    —“We can’t approach anything like intelligence with artificial neural networks … not in their current form.”— Hawkins —“All the trickly things we have done over the past seventy years hasn’t mattered – we’ve just taken advantage of moore’s law … it’s all short term gains.”— Rich Sutton (“Bitter Lesson”) —“If we scale up the current technology it won’t make any difference.”— —“You can’t mathematically model anything as complex as the brain, only mathematically explain why the biology does what it does, but it can’t be analyzed completely… it’s out of the realm of possibility. (we can build )”– —“Sparse Representations”– The neural networks of excitatory and inhibitory neurons, and preparatory dendrites, compete over time to ‘announce’ a winner that’s passed forward for integration into the current hierarchy of models. Very hard to fool, very robust networks. —“Machine learning… the next step has to be orthogonal to what we’re doing, because we’re at its limit.”— —“and ANN needs a lot of data. The human brain doesn’t. It’s extremely efficient.”—

    WHY I MOVED ON FROM AI This is why I stopped working on AI in the 80’s. Intelligence requires completely different computer architectures. It’s interesting that I got so close with the “before(state) during(change) after(state)” data structure: sequences; and with a hierarchy of geometric representations. But at <5mhz and 64k, even working in assembly language, I could already tell that it couldn’t be done with existing computers. We would need to invert the entire architecture to millions of tiny cores with local durable memory, at low power. If I had instead written and published a paper at the time rather than ‘moving on’ I would have bragging rights today. lol. If we had followed turing’s advice and made logical computers rather than numerical, we would be closer. but our emphasis on mathematics (the math trap again!!!) pushed engineering of computers in the wrong direction.

  • Artificial Intelligence: “You Can’t Get There from Here”

    Apr 1, 2020, 2:56 PM

    —“We can’t approach anything like intelligence with artificial neural networks … not in their current form.”— Hawkins —“All the trickly things we have done over the past seventy years hasn’t mattered – we’ve just taken advantage of moore’s law … it’s all short term gains.”— Rich Sutton (“Bitter Lesson”) —“If we scale up the current technology it won’t make any difference.”— —“You can’t mathematically model anything as complex as the brain, only mathematically explain why the biology does what it does, but it can’t be analyzed completely… it’s out of the realm of possibility. (we can build )”– —“Sparse Representations”– The neural networks of excitatory and inhibitory neurons, and preparatory dendrites, compete over time to ‘announce’ a winner that’s passed forward for integration into the current hierarchy of models. Very hard to fool, very robust networks. —“Machine learning… the next step has to be orthogonal to what we’re doing, because we’re at its limit.”— —“and ANN needs a lot of data. The human brain doesn’t. It’s extremely efficient.”—

    WHY I MOVED ON FROM AI This is why I stopped working on AI in the 80’s. Intelligence requires completely different computer architectures. It’s interesting that I got so close with the “before(state) during(change) after(state)” data structure: sequences; and with a hierarchy of geometric representations. But at <5mhz and 64k, even working in assembly language, I could already tell that it couldn’t be done with existing computers. We would need to invert the entire architecture to millions of tiny cores with local durable memory, at low power. If I had instead written and published a paper at the time rather than ‘moving on’ I would have bragging rights today. lol. If we had followed turing’s advice and made logical computers rather than numerical, we would be closer. but our emphasis on mathematics (the math trap again!!!) pushed engineering of computers in the wrong direction.

  • Predators and Parasites

    Apr 1, 2020, 2:57 PM

    We’re apex predators. The problem is they’re apex parasites. Parasites are the most effective weapon against apex predators.

    That’s the narrative.

    How does one obtain restitution from the parasite?

    😉

  • Predators and Parasites

    Apr 1, 2020, 2:57 PM

    We’re apex predators. The problem is they’re apex parasites. Parasites are the most effective weapon against apex predators.

    That’s the narrative.

    How does one obtain restitution from the parasite?

    😉

  • Summary of JFG/Doolittle on The Molyneux Debate

    Apr 1, 2020, 2:57 PM SUMMARY OF JFG/DOOLITTLE ON THE MOLYNEUX DEBATE That was fun. I always enjoy JF. The public isn’t used to seeing how philosophy, law, science and math are done between practitioners – tediously precisely. I realize this kind of thing is difficult for the audience. And JF has to keep the audience engaged. Between my long expositions and jf’s audience representation it required a little cat herding on my part. That said, I think we got there. SUMMARY: (a) we are born with a distribution of moral preferences (Demand for treatment from others, and resistance to demands from other)s, (b) we exercise our moral preferences in a market competition for cooperation wherein we discover cooperation (sexual, social, economic, political, military) with people that satisfy our moral preferences, (c) groups of people increase in a division of labor and as they do so converge on moral norms (requirements for cooperation) that allow them to cooperatively succeed in their geographic, demographic, economic, institutional, and military conditions – and some of these they institute as laws (punishments for violations) (d) across human groups we converge on the same underlying rule within each of those different markets (e) that rule is reciprocity that preserves cooperation and prevents retaliation, within the limits of proportionality that cause members to defect. (e) but moral rules are only useful in creating and preserving cooperation and the outsized returns on cooperation, (f) and cooperation must be more beneficial than parasitism(free riding, black markets, rent seeking, corruption etc), and predation (conquest). (g) all human organizations of all kinds seek the minimum morality, maximum free riding, rent seeking, and corruption until there is insufficient free capital to incentivize adjustment to shocks, and the civilization collapses (h) so there is no moral rule outside of the utility of cooperation because ‘moral’ can only mean ‘within the limits of reciprocity and proportionality among those of us cooperating’. There is no morality in war. (i) the only universal moral rule is reciprocity – do not impose costs, including risks, directly or indirectly upon the demonstrated interests of others in your group. (j) there are no possible via positiva universal moral statements. Anything that is not immoral (reciprocal) is moral. People who claim otherwise are engaging in an act of fraud by claiming their preference must be paid for by others irreciprocally. They claim debts or injustice when there is none. CLOSING As such, JF was correct at the personal level in that all individuals demonstrate variation in moral demand of others;; And SM was half right at the socio-political level, and half right at the universal level, but stated the via positiva preference for a good instead of via negativa prohibition on the bad. In this sense both parties, adopting ideal types, rather than the use of series, talked past each other. P-law makes use of disambiguation through “operationalism, competition, and serialization’, and relies on the logic of incentives, supply and demand. We convert psychological , social, legal and political concepts into economic terms to take advantage of the minimization of error that results, at the expense of more reasoning and less intuiting. -Cheers LEARN SOMETHING: DOOLITTLE on the JFG/MOLYNEUX Debate

    from 0:00 to 1:12:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GRzHdA3lio& ( Stefan Molyneux ) NOTES PRIOR TO SHOW: WHY IS CURT DOOLITTLE SO HOSTILE IN REFORMING LIBERTARIANISM INTO SOVEREIGNTARIANISM? https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle.personal/posts/242127430518751 NOTES FOR GOING ON JFG’S SHOW https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle.personal/posts/241938667204294 (against gariepy) 1 – STEFAN MOLYNEUX AND AND J F GARIEPY DEBATE WAS FKING EMBARASSING https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=594803234449904&id=100017606988153 2 – JFG CLEARLY DOESN’T UNDERSTAND SUPERPOSITION https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=594829684447259&id=100017606988153 (against molyneux) 3 – MORE MOLYNEUX VS JFG AND A SHORT CRITICISM OF UPB https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=594894601107434&id=100017606988153 (against libertarian and right in general) 4 – THE REST OF THE RIGHT IS INTELLECTUALLY EMBARASSING https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=594817174448510&id=100017606988153
  • Summary of JFG/Doolittle on The Molyneux Debate

    Apr 1, 2020, 2:57 PM SUMMARY OF JFG/DOOLITTLE ON THE MOLYNEUX DEBATE That was fun. I always enjoy JF. The public isn’t used to seeing how philosophy, law, science and math are done between practitioners – tediously precisely. I realize this kind of thing is difficult for the audience. And JF has to keep the audience engaged. Between my long expositions and jf’s audience representation it required a little cat herding on my part. That said, I think we got there. SUMMARY: (a) we are born with a distribution of moral preferences (Demand for treatment from others, and resistance to demands from other)s, (b) we exercise our moral preferences in a market competition for cooperation wherein we discover cooperation (sexual, social, economic, political, military) with people that satisfy our moral preferences, (c) groups of people increase in a division of labor and as they do so converge on moral norms (requirements for cooperation) that allow them to cooperatively succeed in their geographic, demographic, economic, institutional, and military conditions – and some of these they institute as laws (punishments for violations) (d) across human groups we converge on the same underlying rule within each of those different markets (e) that rule is reciprocity that preserves cooperation and prevents retaliation, within the limits of proportionality that cause members to defect. (e) but moral rules are only useful in creating and preserving cooperation and the outsized returns on cooperation, (f) and cooperation must be more beneficial than parasitism(free riding, black markets, rent seeking, corruption etc), and predation (conquest). (g) all human organizations of all kinds seek the minimum morality, maximum free riding, rent seeking, and corruption until there is insufficient free capital to incentivize adjustment to shocks, and the civilization collapses (h) so there is no moral rule outside of the utility of cooperation because ‘moral’ can only mean ‘within the limits of reciprocity and proportionality among those of us cooperating’. There is no morality in war. (i) the only universal moral rule is reciprocity – do not impose costs, including risks, directly or indirectly upon the demonstrated interests of others in your group. (j) there are no possible via positiva universal moral statements. Anything that is not immoral (reciprocal) is moral. People who claim otherwise are engaging in an act of fraud by claiming their preference must be paid for by others irreciprocally. They claim debts or injustice when there is none. CLOSING As such, JF was correct at the personal level in that all individuals demonstrate variation in moral demand of others;; And SM was half right at the socio-political level, and half right at the universal level, but stated the via positiva preference for a good instead of via negativa prohibition on the bad. In this sense both parties, adopting ideal types, rather than the use of series, talked past each other. P-law makes use of disambiguation through “operationalism, competition, and serialization’, and relies on the logic of incentives, supply and demand. We convert psychological , social, legal and political concepts into economic terms to take advantage of the minimization of error that results, at the expense of more reasoning and less intuiting. -Cheers LEARN SOMETHING: DOOLITTLE on the JFG/MOLYNEUX Debate

    from 0:00 to 1:12:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GRzHdA3lio& ( Stefan Molyneux ) NOTES PRIOR TO SHOW: WHY IS CURT DOOLITTLE SO HOSTILE IN REFORMING LIBERTARIANISM INTO SOVEREIGNTARIANISM? https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle.personal/posts/242127430518751 NOTES FOR GOING ON JFG’S SHOW https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle.personal/posts/241938667204294 (against gariepy) 1 – STEFAN MOLYNEUX AND AND J F GARIEPY DEBATE WAS FKING EMBARASSING https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=594803234449904&id=100017606988153 2 – JFG CLEARLY DOESN’T UNDERSTAND SUPERPOSITION https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=594829684447259&id=100017606988153 (against molyneux) 3 – MORE MOLYNEUX VS JFG AND A SHORT CRITICISM OF UPB https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=594894601107434&id=100017606988153 (against libertarian and right in general) 4 – THE REST OF THE RIGHT IS INTELLECTUALLY EMBARASSING https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=594817174448510&id=100017606988153
  • We only Need Enough Knowledge and Skill to Serve One Another -And Enough Courage to Defend One Another.

    Apr 1, 2020, 3:00 PM

    The Great Trade

    “Whether we understand, by reason, trust, or feeling doesn’t matter. We must only trade loyalty, duty, truth, and reciprocity – and that is enough.”

    THE THREE DEGREES OF AGREEMENT: THINK, TRUST, FEEL – AND THE VIRTUES, VICES, AND COMMANDMENTS

    We all satisfy our need for understanding differently:

    1. Autists need to think it, (Rational) 2. Normies need to trust it, (Reasonable) and 3. Empaths need to feel it. (Empathic)

    We Satisfy Our Limits of Agency given the status quo, differently:

    1. Achievement (Excellence) Or; 2. Action (Competitive Engagement) 3. Accomodation (Neutral Engagement) Or; 4. Withdrawal 5. Escape Or; 6. Resistance 7. Undermining

    All that matters is we do not deny:

    1. the physical law of the universe, 2. the evolutionary law of evolution and transcendence, 3. the natural law of man, the extension of natural law to the love of man, 4. the debt we owe to nature and our ancestors.

    After that we only need enough knowledge and skill to serve one another -and enough courage to defend one another.

    Whether we understand it, trust it, or feel it doesn’t matter. We must trade loyalty, duty, truth, and reciprocity – and that is enough

    The Via-Positiva

    FOR CHILDREN:

    DO UNTO OTHERS

    It’s not complicated.

    “do not unto others as they would not have done unto them. do only unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

    For Women:

    THE FOUR AGREEMENTS

    For women, neither are the four agreements difficult.

    Agreement 1: Be Impeccable With Your Word Agreement 2: Don’t Take Anything Personally Agreement 3: Don’t Make Assumptions Agreement 4: Always Do Your Best

    THE CHRISTIAN VIRTUES

    For women, the Christian virtues are not difficult.

    1. chastity 2. temperance 3. charity 4. diligence 5. patience 6. kindness 7. humilityFor Men

    THE FOUR GREEK VIRTUES

    For Men, the Greek Virtues are not difficult.

    The term “virtue” itself is derived from the Latin “virtus” (the personification of which was the deity Virtus), and had connotations of “manliness”, “honour”, worthiness of deferential respect, and civic duty as both citizen and soldier.

    1. Wisdom (vs cunning) 2. Courage (vs victimhood) 3. Moderation (epicureanism vs hedonism or asceticism) 4. Justice (vs compassion)

    DOOLITTLE’S NECESSITIES

    Every man: 1. A craftsman (so he is not a scoundrel), 2. A soldier (so he does his duty to his people), 3. A warrior (so he is not a coward), 4. A Sheriff (so he defends the commons), 5. A Judge (so he metes justice when he must), legislature (so he chooses his own path), and; 6. A Sovereign (so he takes responsibility for his actions).

    The Via-Reciprocity

    RECIPROCITY (SCIENTIFIC, LEGAL, OR NECESSARY ETHICS)

    “The only moral actions are those that consist exclusively of productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer, free of imposition of costs by externality upon the demonstrated investments of others.”

    The via Negativa

    THE VICES

    1. Pride 2. Envy 3. Gluttony 4. Lust 5. Wrath 6. Greed 7. Sloth

    THE CRIMES: TEN COMMANDMENTS IN P-LAW TERMS (In response to James Dmitro Makienko and John Mark.)

    1 – God/Nature has given us the many laws of nature, the one natural law of man: reciprocity, and the one choice: transcendence into gods ourselves by those laws, or the end of our existence for failing. 2 – You shall not use reciprocity falsely, or criticize reciprocity, and spread irreciprocity – this is to criticize god, god’s law, and doom mankind to failure of transcendence. 4 – You shall return your parent’s investment in you with reciprocity of obedience, respect, and care. 5 – You shalt not commit murder – reciprocity of life cannot be restored, reciprocity of revenge cannot be unmade, and reciprocity in trust forever lost. 6 – You shalt not commit adultery – reciprocity of the marriage promise cannot be restored. 7 – You shalt not steal – reciprocity of goods may be restored, but reciprocity of trust cannot be restored. 8 – You shalt not lie – reciprocity of deceit may be restored, reciprocity of harm may not be, and reciprocity of trust cannot be restored. 9 – You shalt not contemplate lust of another’s wife or husband – lest in anger, weakness or folly you violate the reciprocity of a marriage. 10 – You shalt not contemplate lust of another’s property, lest in anger, weakness or folly you violate the reciprocity of property. 3 – One day a week you shall spend contemplating your reciprocity irreciprocity, to past, present and future kin and kith, and seek means of restitution.

    The Competition

    The competitors in antiquity were: Excellence

    (0) Aryanism: Excellence (Dominance)  ( … )Action

    (1) Stoicism:  ( … )Accomodation

    Confucianism: ( … )

    Hinduism: ( … )Withdrawal

    (2) Epicureanism, with its doctrine of a life of withdrawal in contemplation and escape from worldly affairs and its belief that pleasure, as the absence of pain, is the goal of humans;

    (3) Buddhism ( … )Escape

    (3) Skepticism, which rejected certain knowledge in favour of local beliefs and customs, in the expectation that those guides would provide the quietude and serenity that the dogmatic philosopher (e.g., the Stoic) could not hope to achieve; and

    (4) Christianity, with its hope of personal salvation provided by an appeal to faith as an immanent aid to human understanding and by the beneficent intervention of a merciful God.Resistance

    (5) Rebellion: Jewish Rebellion, Undermining, and Devolution ( … )

    (6) Rebellion: Islamic Rebellion, Undermining, and Destruction ( … )ARISTOTLE’S ETHICS As Aristotle says in the Nicomachean Ethics

    “The golden mean between the extremes, at the right times (when), about the right things (what), towards the right people (who), for the right end (why), and in the right way (how).”STOIC ETHICS (DUTY)

    In urging participation in human affairs, Stoics have always believed that the goal of all inquiry is to provide a mode of conduct characterized by tranquillity of mind and certainty of moral worth.

    If, as with Socrates, to know is to know oneself, rationality as the sole means by which something outside of the self might be achieved may be said to be the hallmark of Stoic belief. As a Hellenistic philosophy, Stoicism presented an ars vitae, a way of accommodation for people to whom the human condition no longer appeared as the mirror of a uniform, calm, and ordered cosmos. Reason alone could reveal the constancy of cosmic order and the originative source of unyielding value; thus, reason became the true model for human existence. To the Stoic, virtue is an inherent feature of the world, no less inexorable in relation to humans than are the laws of nature.

    The Stoics believed that perception is the basis of true knowledge. In logic, their comprehensive presentation of the topic is derived from perception, yielding not only the judgment that knowledge is possible but also that certainty is possible, on the analogy of the incorrigibility of perceptual experience. To them, the world is composed of material things, with some few exceptions (e.g., meaning), and the irreducible element in all things is right reason, which pervades the world as divine fire. Things, such as material, or corporeal, bodies, are governed by this reason or fate, in which virtue is inherent. The world in its awesome entirety is so ruled as to exhibit a grandeur of orderly arrangement that can only serve as a standard for humankind in the regulation and ordering of life. Thus, the goal of humans is to live according to nature, in agreement with the world design.

    Stoic moral theory is also based on the view that the world, as one great city, is a unity. Humans, as world citizens, have an obligation and loyalty to all things in that city. They must play an active role in world affairs, remembering that the world exemplifies virtue and right action. Thus, moral worth, duty, and justice are singularly Stoic emphases, together with a certain sternness of mind. For the moral person neither is merciful nor shows pity, because each suggests a deviation from duty and from the fated necessity that rules the world. Nonetheless—with its loftiness of spirit and its emphasis on the individual’s essential worth—the themes of universal brotherhood and the benevolence of divine nature make Stoicism one of the most appealing of philosophies.-Source: Britannica

    EPICURIAN ETHICS (LIVING WITHIN ONE’S MEANS)

    (Mindfulness) The greatest good is to seek modest pleasures in order to attain a state of tranquillity, freedom from fear (“ataraxia”) and absence from bodily pain (“aponia”).

    In physics, these are atomism, a mechanical conception of causality, limited, however, by the idea of a spontaneous motion, or “swerve,” of the atoms, which interrupts the necessary effect of a cause; the infinity of the universe and the equilibrium of all forces that circularly enclose its phenomena; and the existence of gods conceived as beatified and immortal natures completely extraneous to happenings in the world.

    In ethics, the basic concepts are the identification of good with pleasure and of the supreme good and ultimate end with the absence of pain from the body and the soul—a limit beyond which pleasure does not grow but changes; the reduction of every human relation to the principle of utility, which finds its highest expression in friendship, in which it is at the same time surmounted; and, in accordance with this end, the limitation of all desire and the practice of the virtues, from which pleasure is inseparable, and a withdrawn and quiet life.

    In principle, Epicurus’s ethic of pleasure is the exact opposite of the Stoic’s ethic of duty. The consequences, however, are the same: in the end, the Epicurean is forced to live with the same temperance and justice as the Stoic. Of utmost importance, however, is one point of divergence: the walls of the Stoic’s city are those of the world, and its law is that of reason; the limits of the Epicurean’s city are those of a garden, and the law is that of friendship. Though this garden can also reach the boundaries of earth, its centre is always an individual.

    — “The Garden”-Source: Britannica

    ( … ) stoicism’s pseudoscience and  universalism versus and epicureanism’s science and particularism.