663 karma · joined February 11, 2022
Honsetly if you're an 80yr old billionaire who has done 'everything', why not go for some mind encoding shenanigans?
https://reverb.com/au/item/58940051-sony-dream-machine-icf-c...
A generic cube/rectangle shaped alarm clock does not appeal to me. Your hand is going to be thwacking or pressing buttons in a daze...
Something that is strong, with no sharp edges and finger wells on (or around) buttons, really helps me imagine using the clock.
Diagrams are a flat map of someone's subjective and structured, interpretation of the code architecture.
Words displayed on a computer screen must be developed into supporting subjective knowledge structures.. free from the usual objective mindset of engineering.
You have to go up to first order concepts to get it. The vast majority of (popular) programming culture generates more of the same. Everybody tries to paper over this truth with metadata and it metaphysically does not work.
Computers are capable of much more, they are politically limited down to a small subset of what's possible.
Nation States love to give legal and regulatory incentives as 'guidelines'.
It's the average joe that loses. The only way out is privacy from both nations and corporations.
If another person knows your technology exists, it will be inexorably wrenched from your hands and controlled by the biggest bully in town. We see it every single day.
besides 'if you were rich' is same trade-off as today's world...
Made up doesn't have to mean false.
The facts are fake-able too.
Subtle mis-interpretations can be all that's needed to lead a perfectly true narrative, astray. The line between myth and fact, can be very finely sliced indeed.
There is not a single academic field free from fictionalizing Key aspects of the narrative to put someone in a more favourable light. Unfortunately.
Today's culture, is broad and spiritually hollow by comparison.
Software devs have zero control over the tooling, languages, networking and hardware.
It looks like they have a choice because the map of available options constantly shifts... but they're metaphysically locked to near-identical options in the universe of potential ways.
As long as computing is largely US based, it will always be this way. It's treason to go off-piste, in a large way.
I do. All the time.
We should cut out the middle man and start building a map of all likely programming symbols a stream of integers/bytes can create.
LLMs can hide data and source code behind weighted nodes. The easiest way to cut through that is map out the binary stream directly.
Sounds insanely complex, but it isn't really. It's safe to say the cast majority of code is boiler plate running in popular coding languages, with similar symbolic 'shapes'.
We should probably cut the head from the current abstraction stack (isa>assembly>C>C++) and start-over, interpreting blobs of binary straight up.
Who cares what people record for personal use. Copyright strike any books uploaded to windows machines from usb sticks and ethernet cables, with the same copyright strike system.
Then nobody will care when you time-shift or format-shift media you already 'own'.
There is a clear bias in protecting cloud software/some games and hollywood products. That bias has always protected the 'economic interests' and left the average joe flat on his bum.
If we live in a world where private conversations cannot exist, thanks to global survelliance, then your windows PC and copies of media, are subject to the same (bs) overseers. I didn't ask for this massive overwatch system, but now it's here....
The publisher wouldn't have to do anything if the tech was built to protect works by default.
Youtube protects big hollywood with copyright strikes, but apparenty books are beneath protection.
It's your tech industry, stop blaming the publishers.
It is why there is nothing new on the web and what's here today will be roughly the same as what's here in 50 years time.
There should be one programming stack that does work and you can understand it completely without going to MIT or getting blindsided by vendors and it sticks around for decades and you don't have to get stuck in boilerplate, or learn-the-hard-way how a bubble sort works, or how a data structure should be designed, or how an algorithm should be crafted.
Dogmatically chasing the phantom of life... disconnected from substance of life.
How easy it is to find an abuse or deprivation worth filling in with the chase for life's sensory phantom.
I have at all times, "two sets of books" or "two maps". Unified by a singular Duty that limits what I can and can't do. My imagination is tied to imaging the next step in my 'journey'.
(something like that anyway, it has subjectivity built into it).
I cannot dump relations to random ideas, I have to understand the 'background'/'whole scene' to clear out the clutter of my imagination and keep my two frames of reference, clear.
The actual dutiful work of computer use is not that terribly difficult intellectually, it is often the kind of flower-arranging drudgery that I used to enjoy a lot in my 'youth' (lol im not that old).
I can understand one set of technologies C/C++ buut the bugs and face-slapping error chasing in programming really begins to wear quite badly.
The only way I can really program is to submit to 'someone else's ruleset' that I don't like or agree with and then endure grinding my way to how I mean it to be, based on my sense of subjective expectation and structure, hand-tied to my categorical imperative. It is possible to make elegant and powerful code like this, inside a company structure.. with uninspiring code architecture, set from the top down.
Buuuut whenever I imagine some novel technology that gets me excited, I can make shallow prototypes of the idea in existing tools and inevitably find that I need to rejig/rework the tooling to get my idea out there. And often that means editing a second set of tooling.
And every single time I have started and attempted this project, it starts off rocky-and-okay, the middle part is absolute hellish grind fighting the system and then the end is a complete drain of all my emotions and an inability to finish, leading to an internal frustation with wasted time.
Then the technology tooling all changes and I have to re-process my understanding because the semantics in the new tech stack are different to the last.
The reationships between ideas are the biggest, slowest chore that wears the most. The concepts in new languages are not terribly interesting, as most are re-arrangments of the same old music...
Every single programming language is set up in such a way that the "glue" between all the concepts, is held by an insider 'brotherhood' of experts. The documentation for plebs tells you one specific way and if you fall off the documentation's instructions, then all other ways are pain and time-wasting death. A simple map of relationships between concepts would save so many man-hours globally, it is insane (but I digress).
The devil-in-the-detail level bugs and jankiness is something only an American man with infinite pleasure - to keep his head cool and his fingers typing - could tolerate.
I'm honestly getting to the stage where I think the only reliable way to make new code, is to control the hardware from the bottom up, and do the software from the bottom up.
Every single middleware provider is another layer of shifting maps, that I have to war with, to make some new tech that works from top to bottom.
And then I'd have to release that code into an environment where my competitors can open up my assets and copy-paste out the novel bits into their own products (or minds) and jiggle the appearance of the code enough for it to look like they made it. I simply cannot do that. It is not allowed under my rules and I have the scar tissue to prove that I can't overcome my own 'programming', my own Duty.. in that regard.
Programming.. I don't think itma for me, even though my novel concepts would make a difference. The industry is just hostile for people who 'think differently' as it is colloquially said to be, but I really mean, the industry is not for people who have a subjective structure they wish to provide as a gift for organizing knowledge.
The "shape" of programming is to be that Shelf on the factory floor that everybody wars over the ever-changing maps on the Shelves. The maps fail to provide coverage of the entire, ever-changing factory itself, and are constantly updated and their meaning constantly changes.
I can not.
I don't care about 'ideas', I care about protecting knowledge and high level intellectual work that takes real hard work to generate. "ideas" aren't often worth copy-pasting because they only apply to the person generating them anyway, like connecting a winch to a stuck tractor.
Protecting Einstein's theory generating work and then retaining the scientific offshoot products of his work, like Velcro from the Shuttle program, is what is worth protecting.
China wins because they are willing to work themselves to the bone, for relatively cheap.
We can replace the same tasks with machines, but we're not allowed to cut out working class jobs.
We can near fully machinize agriculture from wheat to plate, machinize mining from ore to metal.
What is 'beating China' in your books? I don't understand how you expect to show your hand and win at blackjack, at the same time... (or even why you would show your hand / give away your ideas for no reason..?).
The amount of money and researches dumped into dopamine transporter studies, brain diffusion tensor image scanning, the outspoken desire to test the pre-frontal cortex of monkeys, because lab mice don't have them and they still don't have any quality evidence to identify adhd.
Enron has a better return on investment for shareholders than ADHD clients have for research dollars.
What's the point of innovating, if China can ctrl c/ctrl v your idea and then pay cheap labour to churn out a clone within a week?
Supposedly the one thing the internet can't ban, is knowledge theft?
That 1% is getting massively underpaid.
EDIT: forgot to mention I'm not advocating for it.
Having to endlessly recombine your mental mapping with a numpad or digital pad to generate letters/sentences is much worse for humans than driving, or pen and paper.
The mental mapping for pen and paper is also one-to-one, using behaviours to make specific known shapes is way more powerful than submitting to an arbitrary remapping device.
Electronics are really no good for first order knowledge generation and gathering. The metaphysics of reality hasn't been overcome by tech revolutions, unfortunately (or not).
He did a whole lot of other manipulative tricks, his wiki page is intense.
Ads are known to exploit and enflame insecurities and doubt to garner sales.
Come on, we're smarter than this.
Why FAANG has not already crushed child porn for geolocations that don't want it, is beyond me... shooting itself in the foot and giving Australia ammunition to join in. Why.
Many DARPA projects from the 1990s were "cancelled" and then mysteriously showed up fifteen years later.
Either Netflix is lying about throwing it away, or we are supposed to believe a company that is fanatical about making money, to the degree of churning out 'sastificing' films and guiding users to them, is somehow also mr. butterfingers when it come to letting research grants slip through it's fingers and discarding the sucessful results..
Something smells fishy about this article. At what point do we admit tech companies don't operate for money and have their own private purposes?
The CPU is a slave to special interest groups, liberating the CPU from beaucracy and market forces, is only a matter of time.
Electronics has been shielded from proper conceptual innovation, by social forces intent on using the system to control the globe.
The conceptual freedom in Eve online is a better model for the internet, than SimCity.
Vito Corleone knew how to make an offer you can't refuse. Tech has done the same, in very finely measured increments.
It honestly makes crypto look desirable, and buildings designed with sensor blocking materials. You can't passively surveil a data-center. Why should my home, office or shopping mall be any different?
The powers-that-be never gave us a choice to opt-out. It's been a slow gradual decline.
We have to incentivize haggling over our own data. My unseen/unknown data is my asset and I will protect it's financial value.
We can't trust random joes to not sell out crypto exchanges and the like, so you have to build technology that functions as a manual crypto exchange - without a developer on it's back to pull the ripchord and destroy the technology whenever money shows up.
Manual software is key, as soon as it becomes "automated", some developer has to be roped into hand-holding it through tech changes. Crypto software that only exists because a man put it together and went hands-off, is Key.
Then you can build the normal philosophical/structural/relationship management ideas on top of that.
It is pretty clear that overstatement and hype has become the only (or the best) way for him to get low cost attention.
Market forces for his brand, leads to more of the same hype/let-down cycle.
Who said I was going to resolve it?
Tolerate doubt and uncertainty on public internet forum, don't go policing other people's behaviours that you don't understand. Offensive.