Theme: AI

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/50330795_10156923143907264_542541544

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/50330795_10156923143907264_542541544

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/50330795_10156923143907264_542541544436006912_o_10156923143902264.jpg USER INTERFACE FOR THE INSTITUTE’S APPJohn StoneState capitalism will end taxation. Public banking, public clean nuclear thorium plants, and public ownership of corporate shares will reap in enough profits for the state to make the state largely self-funded ending the needed for state parasitism on the individual to fund public programs like single payer or education.Jan 17, 2019, 2:21 PMJohn StoneAll your bank debt payments, energy bills, and utility bills will replace your tax bill to fund the state.Jan 17, 2019, 2:23 PMCurt DoolittleEven better, white folk are a for profit enterprise in the first place….Jan 17, 2019, 2:27 PMJohn StoneBig corporations that can de-platform you have a case made for us to partially nationalize by having the state own 49% of its stock to keep alternative viewpoints from being suppressed in violation of free speech.Jan 17, 2019, 2:30 PMNeil A. Bucklewwe must realign our concept of profit back in line with family.Jan 17, 2019, 2:50 PMJohn StoneMining should also be a state owned enterprise because it is in the national self-interest to ensure an adequate supply of stockpiled mineral resources to serve the needs of the nation. It’s a national security interest to make sure we have plenty of rare earth elements available to build high tech industry and maintain our position as a leader in science and engineering and bring the best minds to work here. If China and Russia control the world’s supply they dictate whether or not we will make progress scientifically and technologically. Those should be at least 51% state owned so that the drive for individual profits by private shareholders and owners is still in the system but with a corporate agenda more controlled by national security interest.Jan 17, 2019, 2:51 PMNeil A. Bucklewit seems to be lagging. i tried to register about an hour ago and it is still doing the loading screen.Jan 17, 2019, 2:52 PMCurt Doolittlesorry? Um. Possible we were doing some sort of update. but we’re hitting it pretty hard and no problems here. Try again and let me know?Jan 17, 2019, 2:57 PMNeil A. Bucklewno need to apologize, just letting you know about technical details.Jan 17, 2019, 2:57 PMCurt Doolittlethe famliy creates a compromise between the male and the female. End individualism and restore the family as the central unit of social, political organiziton.Jan 17, 2019, 2:58 PMCurt Doolittle;) hugsJan 17, 2019, 2:58 PMCurt DoolittleJohn Stone Um. ownership and management are two different things. The state is SHIT at running anything.Jan 17, 2019, 3:01 PMNeil A. Bucklewi am working on something that relates. part of it is that one cannot be a citizen until after marraige. i define citizen as a couple who have already raised a proven functional adult. once adult hood is reached(and proven). a person is considered a sovereign adult within the society. marraige is the pathway to citizenship, with the “trial” being birthing at least one child and raising it successfully. the citizen in this model is both parents as a complimentary unit. the real vote in life is not he talk, but what is done. if you raise an adult for the next generation, you have already made the most important decision for the future of your society. you have to earn your way to the higher benifits of citizenship over the sovereign individual.Jan 17, 2019, 3:05 PMNeil A. Bucklewnot sure if you have seen what i am writing about the Temple of Destiny.Jan 17, 2019, 3:06 PMCurt Doolittlein other words, you aren’t an adult until you’ve demonstrated it.Jan 17, 2019, 3:10 PMNeil A. Bucklewbasically, with just enough ceremony to force folks to take the time to think about it.Jan 17, 2019, 3:11 PMNeil A. Bucklewbut it is also tied with the idea of a vote being tied to what is actually done, not what is said.Jan 17, 2019, 3:12 PMNeil A. Bucklewif you have a family, you have voted for the future of your people. you have demonstrated interest.Jan 17, 2019, 3:13 PMCurt DoolittleNeil A. Bucklew otherwise you are a consumer and yuo have protection of rule of law, but you have no ability to use the organized violence of politics to impose your will upon others.Jan 17, 2019, 3:14 PMNeil A. Bucklewright! but being a consumer is not inherently wrong, it is just not connected with production correctly. the energy every other animal consumes is ultimately dedicated toward the future generations, a stream of genetic information over time. at the base physics level, we are not consumers, or producers, but transformers. we transform the material around us into the next generation. how we have fucked this up, is simply amazing.Jan 17, 2019, 3:19 PMNeil A. Bucklewwhen you get the time check this out, you will understand what i am trying to do, and may be able to see it as a device as i do, beyond the words.

    https://theemperorofplanetearth.wordpress.com/2018/06/27/the-temple-of-destiny/Jan 17, 2019, 3:20 PMNeil A. Bucklewit is a work in progress…Jan 17, 2019, 3:33 PMJohn StoneI think we should do something similar to the Chinese system where after high school/college you can take the path of the private sector or the public sector. If you take the path of the public sector, you have to go through a meritocratic process that whittles down candidates to find the cream of the crop to eventually run state owned enterprises for the national interest or to gain experience governing municipalities, cities, counties, and states in order to run for office. It’s like an American nationalist civil service league, completely non-partisan only with national self-interest at heart. That would replace having a deep state whose informal role is to maintain vital national interests. So at the polls, you get a choice between someone popular or someone who has experience and in depth knowledge to run the state properly. They can also be hired by elected candidates to fulfill an advisory role due to their training and in-depth knowledge.Jan 17, 2019, 3:42 PMCurt Doolittlecant. state run industries produce terrible returns. and are alwars corrupt and provide bad service.Jan 17, 2019, 4:18 PMCurt Doolittlestate owned is something elseJan 17, 2019, 4:18 PMJohn StoneThat’s not always true. The Bank of North Dakota is a state owned public bank that is managed by someone who ensures that all of the banks investments are sound investments to maximize returns both for management and the state. The state does offer guidance to bank management as to the direction of where investments should be made but ultimately it is up to management to make the call and invest in a specific sector, enterprise, or individual. I personally do not know what drive typically dominates in these interactions in a public bank: what the elected officials want or what management (bank CEO) thinks is best to gain the best returns on their investment. Perhaps a middle ground is reached somehow. Nevertheless, the BND is an example of a state-owned and managed bank that has been successful and is still running after 100 years. How people are selected to manage an industry is also incredibly important. Obviously some selectivity is necessary to find the best candidates.Jan 17, 2019, 4:51 PMJohn John StephensDefinitely not mobile friendly. Just FYI. On Android, cannot get the “Apply” feature to work (see pic), although I was able to register on the site, update my profile, and even upload a photo.Jan 20, 2019, 3:41 AMCurt Doolittlethanks. we’ll work on it.Jan 20, 2019, 5:06 AMUSER INTERFACE FOR THE INSTITUTE’S APP


    Source date (UTC): 2019-01-17 13:13:00 UTC

  • GETTING TIRED OF LITTLE BOYS WITH COMIC BOOK IDEAS RIDING ON THE COATTAILS If an

    GETTING TIRED OF LITTLE BOYS WITH COMIC BOOK IDEAS RIDING ON THE COATTAILS

    If anything is to be said, in furtherance of some set of ideas, it must be said about the totality of the market of ideas, not just me and mine.

    Or it is, as is obviously the case, in this case, just an attempt at drawing attention from that which is successful to that and those who are unsuccessful.

    Little boys have little boy dreams, of little boy complexity.

    Men raise, armies, organize logistics, and write laws, and build institutions, because men understand organization at scale – because they have built organizations at scale.

    Little boys likewise play ‘climb on to the coattails’ of better men. Because they have no experience with constructing ideas, organizations, or solving problems more complicated than those in comic books.

    Proclamations are not arguments. If it is necessary for me to invest time in further humiliation pretenders, I’m loathe to waste my time at it, but happy to do good service.

    But these feeble attempts at getting attention with sophisms are embarrassing. And frankly I consider responding beneath me. Since anyone stupid enough to be so fooled is not someone that is helpful to an intellectual movement, nor safe enough to allow to carry arms.

    Please stop wasting my time with coat-tailing.

    -Curt Doolittle

    — VIA ANONYMOUS —

    (1) Militia “sovereignty” and rule _by_ law are myths. Someone must always rule, someone must decide on the exception. Pushing Middle sovereignty is just continuing the same liberal hysteria against authority, which has led to the HLvM as the logical result. The HLvM won’t stop until we either acquire language better able to validate sovereign authority or war and collapse our tribal structures down low enough where we are able to make such validations, which would represent a massive civilizational regression, all while not possessing those linguistic innovations we would need to scale back up.

    (2) In evaluating reciprocity, the dimensional tests of identity are not actually how humans evaluate a moral context. Human language is not a closed, declarative system, as much as Curt needs it to be. We wouldn’t even have self-consciousness if language was a closed system, recursive as he still will claim it to be. Curt is a computer scientist trying to force a computer paradigm on to humans, and he ironically hasn’t done the due diligence he speaks so much about by widely studying philosophy of language. Chomsky himself wouldn’t support the simple Shannon-Weaver model of language that Curt’s operationalism relies on, and the field of linguistics has gone so much further than Chomsky by now, into cognition and intentionality, not “signals” and identical “operations” (how computers “communicate,” except that they’re not even self-conscious agents, so it’s a projected metaphor by an anti-philosopher).

    I’ve said it before, but I’ll say it, again: what is good in Propertarianism (pragmatist legal theory, i.e. unloading claims into processable ‘chunks’) is unoriginal—jurists have naturally known and done such things since the very beginning. The problem would then lie in why our elites have incentives for a HLvM, and the solution to that isn’t doubling-down on why the elites have incentives for a HLvM (hysteria against pre-declarative authority). What is bad in Propertarianism is loosely ‘original’, but in the sense that it’s the latest iteration of the disease of scientistic liberalism.

    So, we’re left with what you concluded the show with: who watches the watchers, what are the mechanisms of moral accountability? Is it authoritarianism—’absolutism’? Is it rule _by_ law—’nomocracy’? Well, we’d have to drill down on theory of language to answer that question (the short answer is that, yes, there must always be a leader of any size group—someone must always be leading discourse and shaping linguistic frames, but also that there is a moral feedback loop; it’s just not ultimately validated through declarative science), and I think once you do that you’ll see how empty Propertarianism comes up, but it’s okay, because there are plenty enough intelligent people who’ve come before you through his system and have been doing work exploring and filling in gaps that he refused to.

    I don’t mean that reassurance patronizingly. There are many reasons, trivial and dire, moral and practical, why these naive, young men shouldn’t get led astray with a half-baked, anti-human system.

    __________________________________________

    —- VIA MEGAN USUI Megan K. Usui —-

    Are you saying the Curt does not think there should be a ruler for a city and nation state in addition to the law? The ruler should follow the law in most cases but everyone knows about war and other extreme cases?

    — ???? via unknown —

    Oh, he has been known to talk about _constitutional_ monarchy, but it’s the same anti-absolutism, for humoring ‘constitutionally limited’ (he also seems to think absolutism implies completely arbitrary, out-of-nowhere dictates, which is what a tyrant does, not a leader).

    When we can finally get past a naive view of language, absolutism (and everyday experiences inside human groups) makes complete sense. It opens up other areas of inquiry more helpful to resolving modern politics.

    Of course, I’m not going to be going around, trying to ideologically convince people of ‘absolutism’, like it’s some kind of historical aesthetic. We should use the discourse of the day and seek to be harmonizing the culture.

    Sometimes, self-defense will be necessary, but it’s a serious problem if a system only has threats of violence and bribery as motivations. A system with no way of speaking of the sacred is going to be left with only commerce and violence—very modern, very confused.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-31 19:21:00 UTC

  • SHOW PREP: AI. RPL. INITIAL: JF’s THEORY. ai..modification…biology.. PART I. 1

    SHOW PREP: AI. RPL.

    INITIAL:

    JF’s THEORY. ai..modification…biology..

    PART I.

    1. Fear of weapons – they will happen. As soon as the power to weight ratio is solved, Men are no longer much use.

    2. Fear of job displacement – we can compensate for most of it as long as we limit immigration.

    3. Limiting problems are cost/energy/chice-competition

    PART II. What I am unsure about and what I am sure about.

    UNSURE

    1. Unsure about limits of emergence as memory increases. Appears that symbolic recursive performs the same function at cost of state and precision, and increased demand for communication. Appears that consequent layers will produce same functionality without the information loss.

    SURE

    1. Continuous forecasting … of WHAT?

    2. Go, chess, checkers, are ‘simple’ problems.

    Speech recognition, driving, are simple problems.

    Adaptation to continuous problems is HARD.

    3. Decidability => Required => Intent

    Consciousness = Social/Moral

    Comprehensible – Human Action as Language (networks are not open to introspection).

    Property as Moral Calculation

    Hemispheric Competition

    4. Problem of discovery is not intelligence but testing ideas.

    Small number of fundamental innovations in the frame (darwin, einstein, menger, mathiness/probability/operations)

    Small number of fundamental methods of lying.

    5. Liability of human work doesn’t end. Nuclear devices, chemical weapons, hazardous chemicals etc.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-26 09:43:00 UTC

  • 2) … continuously disambiguating symbols (phonemes) is a limit of neural econo

    2) … continuously disambiguating symbols (phonemes) is a limit of neural economy – particularly short term memory. Opponents to generative grammar don’t use AI examples, they use studies out outliers and their answer reflects the AI: that it is simply a product of ….


    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-21 12:01:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1076085169931603968

    Reply addressees: @TrueDilTom @justecar @Imperius__13 @JohnMarkSays @torinmccabe @DataDistribute @MahmoudZaini @Dick71224996

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1075890809357123592


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @TrueDilTom @justecar @Imperius__13 @JohnMarkSays @torinmccabe @DataDistribute @MahmoudZaini @Dick71224996 It’s bad enough we have left wing liars taking advantage of women and the underclass, but it’s hard to understand why there are those of you who want to take advantage of lost, underachieving young man and throw them in the degenerative maelstrom with the women and fools.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1075890809357123592


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @TrueDilTom @justecar @Imperius__13 @JohnMarkSays @torinmccabe @DataDistribute @MahmoudZaini @Dick71224996 It’s bad enough we have left wing liars taking advantage of women and the underclass, but it’s hard to understand why there are those of you who want to take advantage of lost, underachieving young man and throw them in the degenerative maelstrom with the women and fools.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1075890809357123592

  • I dont disagree that mechanical intelligence might provide another form for us.

    I dont disagree that mechanical intelligence might provide another form for us. I suspect that wet tech is more durable than hard tech an…


    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-20 03:26:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1075593225522470915

  • (2/2)intelligence might provide another form for us. I suspect that wet tech is

    (2/2)intelligence might provide another form for us. I suspect that wet tech is more durable than hard tech and far cheaper to run.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-20 03:25:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1075593094161027072

  • (1/2)i don’t disagree with your theory – i disagree with the argument that AI is

    (1/2)i don’t disagree with your theory – i disagree with the argument that AI is necessarily a danger that cannot be managed. I dont disa…


    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-20 03:25:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1075593066117967872

  • I will not attack your book. I will attempt provide some insight on artificial i

    I will not attack your book. I will attempt provide some insight on artificial intelligence. 😉 -hugs.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-20 00:36:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1075550525796556800

    Reply addressees: @JFGariepy @WorMartiN

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1075536533153857537


    IN REPLY TO:

    @JFGariepy

    @WorMartiN Sure I have the highest respect for Curt, would love to see him try to attack my book!

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1075536533153857537

  • THE PARADIGM FOR SOLVING AI IS NOT CALCULATION BUT COMPETITION We try to solve t

    THE PARADIGM FOR SOLVING AI IS NOT CALCULATION BUT COMPETITION

    We try to solve the problem of artificial intelligence using the wrong paradigm – a problem in economics we refer to as ‘mathiness’ – when the solution from bayesian accounting to the evolution of consciousness, is not calculation but competition.

    The other ‘great accident’ is the bilateral revolution, and the competition via necessity of coordination within the nervous system, followed by the division of labor and competition between the functions of our minds as predator and prey.

    We don’t think of neural economy, or bayesian networks as competitions at the neural-path level, nor do we think of consciousness as the result of memory and competition in a division of labor between layers and functions. The problem of an ethical and moral machine is one that must decide a competition from the forecasting of a decision, and the negative reinforcement of decision networks that lead to involuntary transfers (harms).

    I understood this from my work in the early 80’s on AI for military games. But the technology wasn’t available at the time to do anything about it. I don’t find any particular mystery to artificial intelligence other than the volume of memory and the necessity of an internal grammar or language to assist in a hierarchy continuous recursive competition between forecasts(predictions).

    My open questions are the amount of memory required if we want both the benefits of mechanical memory, and the power of reason, without the economy of imprecision. I mean, look at the experiments with chimpanzee image processing vs human.

    Or put differently, in order to FURTHER divide intelligence more efficiently we might very well have sacrificed memory precision for another ‘n-lateral’ revolution using language and the competition between minds using language.

    The problem of continuous recursive disambiguation into serial speech requires not the preservation of state (chimp memory) for internal consideration, but the recursive passing of state (human memory) so that we can serialize state into a continuously recursively disambiguous stream of expressions between individuals. We then evolved the ability to plan from this process.

    It is very hard to try to remember what it’s like to think without language. It’s like trying to measure without numbers. you can do it but only to some rather simple degree. Language is just another form of calculation. Or rather more easily understood, calculation with measurements is just a reductive form of language.

    The consistency throughout the hierarchy is competition (market) between memory and perception, the competition of the neural economy, competition between neural forecasts, competition between reactions or choice of actions, competition between perceptions and minds, and ability to calculate using language (grammars).

    It’s this ‘market competition’ that is the model not only for cognition, but for all of social science that results from that cognition.

    We were fooled by mathiness and justificationism that results from the mathematics – the most simple of logics: the single constant relation provided by the single property of a positional name. Mathematics requires very little difference between construction and deduction. Logics break down rapidly after first or second order. Games do as well. Reason does as well. Markets(competition) doesn’t break down. -Cheers )


    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-18 08:06:00 UTC

  • ( If you get a chance, Mute (2018) on Netflix. Cyberpunk Noir. )

    ( If you get a chance, Mute (2018) on Netflix. Cyberpunk Noir. )


    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-12 01:52:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1072670545274159106