[extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out

Sun Nov 27 00:22:47 UTC 2005

> So here's the problem: Since August 05, I have not been able to stop 
> researching specific fields.

> My question:  In June I did something I have never done before, a
> drug.  It 
> was a very
> overwhelming fantastic experience for I thought of things never in my
> wildest dreams could
> I have imagined.
> Could this drug have caused this effect?

If by "this effect" you mean your researching - it's possible, but
unlikely.  Being fascinated by a certain subject is an entirely natural
phenomenom, even to the point of becoming literally addicted to finding
out everything you can about it.  As addictions go, it's one of the
more harmless ones (aside from the effects of spending a lot of time on
any one thing, if it leads to neglecting your normal social duties,
like your job).  Depending on the subject, it can even be a socially
beneficial addiction (for instance, there are some jobs which consist
mostly of researching various topics).

> I was very unaware that by sending a private e-mail that I was giving
> you 
> permission to make my
> e-mails public.

Check your "To:" headers in the material you quoted.  You sent your
email to the list.  I sent my reply to the list.  None of the emails
that I have seen from you so far have been private, including the ones
I am replying to here.  If you want official evidence, the list
archives - available via
http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat - will show
that, indeed, every email you have sent to me on this thread went via
the list.  Or if you want to lodge an official complaint, perhaps this
list's moderators can look at the archives and confirm what I am
saying: I have, in this thread, so far only responded to emails that
you sent to the list.

--- Anna Tylor <femmechakra at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Mr. Tymes
> I was very unaware that by sending a private e-mail that I was giving
> you 
> permission to make my
> e-mails public.  So therefore if you would be so kind to
> refrain from e-mailing anybody else what I write I would ever be
> grateful.
> Thanking you for the last time
> Anna
> 
> 
> 
> >From: Adrian Tymes <wingcat at pacbell.net>
> >Reply-To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> >To: ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> >Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] Re:Just trying to figure it out
> >Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2005 22:21:53 -0800 (PST)
> >
> >--- Anna Tylor <femmechakra at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > >you are absotuly right, I should have written that this is the
> first
> > > time I
> > > >have ever posted anything.  My apologies to everyone.
> >
> >No worries.  Everyone's a newbie to these things at some time.
> >
> > > >Again you are right, inexperience is the problem or better yet
> the
> > > way I
> > > >communicate
> > > >may be the bigger problem but I still thought I understood it.
> >
> >Ah, and there lies one of the biggest problems in communicating
> >complex ideas: the whole point of communication is to get other
> people
> >to understand something.  It does not matter how well you understand
> >it, save that this helps you to find ways to express your ideas to
> >others.  Indeed, while learning hard topics, I have often found it a
> >useful tactic to try to explain the concepts to an imaginary child -
> >mostly to force myself to restate the concept in clear and simple
> terms
> >(literally, in terms that an average child would understand).
> >
> > > Anyhow
> > > >thank you for
> > > >taking the time to respond.  If you do have a few more minutes
> could
> > > you at
> > > >least look
> > > >at what I thought I was reading and tell me if at least some of
> it
> > > makes
> > > >sense, it would be much appreciated.
> >
> >I already commented on your earlier work, but I see you have added
> more
> >comments.  I shall respond to those.
> >
> > > >A model of mind-body is proposed: a potential ideal of
> > > >computational leverage
> > > >>I am proposing that a computer can enhance the mind to such an
> > > extent that
> > > >>it becomes a new mind-body experience
> >
> >Your restatement is clearer.  You should use that instead.
> >
> >I also suspect you would find a lot of agreement, at least among
> those
> >who make extensive use of the Internet, that computers can enhance
> the
> >mind such that it would not be totally inaccurate to call it "a new
> >mind-body experience".  This is an extension of the old concept by
> >vehicle operators, of being so in tune with their machine that they
> are
> >said to become one with it, or that the machine reacts so quickly
> and
> >precisely under their control that it is, at least in practical
> terms,
> >essentially a (removable, and thus temporary) extension of their
> body.
> >
> > > >Mechanisms that are based upon primitive properties of the
> universe
> > > (such
> > > >as space, time, and number of dimensions) derived from modern
> > > physics
> > > >consistency arguments.
> > > >>With the use of primitive tools, simple observation, and
> graphing,
> > > a human
> > > >>with no knowledge of existing theories could probably come up
> with
> > > simple,
> > > >>uncomplicated ideas that may benefit humans that have
> > > >>huge knowledge and expertise.
> >
> >Again your restatement is clearer.  I believe that you are on the
> path
> >to a much clearer document.  Perhaps it would work if you collected
> >your thoughts, rewrote the work, then went away from it for a day or
> >two (to clear your short term memory of thoughts associated with it)
> >then reread it, looking for ways to restate things even more
> clearly.
> >(In this case, any understanding located solely in your short term
> >memory would be lost - but that's a good thing, since it lets you
> >identify many of the confusing points in your wording, and you still
> >understand your thoughts well enough to restate them.)  This only
> works
> >for a few cycles, though, before the understanding filters into your
> >medium and long term memory - and that is when you truly need other
> >people (who, themselves, do not already understand what you are
> trying
> >to say from having read and reread your words) to review your work.
> >
> >That said - I would disagree with the point you are making here. 
> Yes,
> >it is not statistically impossible for an untrained human being to
> >come up with ideas that are of use to humans with lots of training
> and
> >experience.  In practice, while it does happen from time to time, it
> is
> >very unlikely, and most of the time when untrained humans think they
> >have ideas that are of use to the trained, they are not in fact of
> any
> >significant use - to the point that the cost of the time to listen
> to
> >and comprehend the idea dwarfs any potential benefit to the trained
> >individual.  (Trained individuals rarely have lots of time to spare,
> >as their training makes their time valuable.  It is not too
> inaccurate
> >to view their time as a resource, in the same sense as money - at
> least
> >to the point of making cost-benefit decisions as to where they want
> to
> >spend their limited time.)
> >
> >Of course, this only applies when the idea is within the field of
> the
> >trained individual's training.  A typical CFO is usually not very
> well
> >trained in engineering, while a typical CTO is usually not very well
> >trained in finance; the better CFOs and CTOs know to defer to each
> >other when the topic of conversation drifts to the other's
> specialty.
> >Then again, "trained" is a relative term: CFOs and CTOs both tend to
> >understand both engineering and finance better than a typical 10
> year
> >old child (and thus are "trained" in both fields as compared to said
> >child), for example.
> >
> > > >The ideal solution for unlimited intelligence would require a
> > > sparse, high
> > > >dimensional spacetime (unrestricted locality) and a formalized
> > > observer
> > > >mechanism (mobile observer framework based on a superset of
> inertial
> > > frame
> > > >properties).
> > > >>Therefore the ideal solution is that
> > > >>the human with ideas needs to contact people that can
> > > >>help to explain some "Kook" ideas that someone may have
> > > >>(high dimensional spacetime-being the internet) and use
> > > >>some form of communication such as the extropy chat (observer
> > > framework).
> >
> >Again, your restatement is clearer - but again, I disagree.
> >
> >One of the basic findings of those who have extensively used the
> >Internet to aid their mind, is that the Internet - specifically, its
> >automated resources - are often the *first* resource one should turn
> to
> >when trying to validate new ideas.  If you've thought of it, it
> often
> >turns out that other people have thought of it before - and since
> many
> >pre-Internet sources of wisdom have been uploaded to the Internet
> >already, that's 4000+ years of wisdom that are online today even
> though
> >the Internet has been around for barely 1% of that (and been heavily
> >used for even less time).  There are a certain few exceptions, such
> as
> >thoughts on extremely new technology the likes of which were never
> >conceived of before - but for example, the concept of "one with the
> >machine" probably dates back to as far as there have been fast,
> >reliable machines for people to be one with (and the basic concept
> >actually predates what we would today call "machines": "one with his
> >sword" is something that might have been said of certain mideval
> >knights, or at least certain samurai from the same years, and the
> >concept may be older than that), and many documents about this can
> be
> >found online.
> >
> >An example of this in action: going to http://www.google.com/ and
> >searching on "one with his car" brings up over a thousand results
> >(which is actually surprisingly low), the first of which -
> >http://www.kriyayoga.com/love_blog/post.php/269 - is a good poetic
> >description of the concept.
> >
> >And so forth.  Quite a lot of people on this list would take the
> >existence and use of such things as obvious and granted: almost
> >everyone who is reading this knows of and uses such things.  My
> >favorite statement of how basic and fundamental this has become - as
> >has the concept of checking the automated resources (which really do
> >have all the time in the world to give you information, or
> effectively
> >so given how little strain one person's manual searching puts on
> these
> >things, as opposed to the significant time a person would spend
> >listening to and answering a query) - is a certain alias someone
> >created for Google: http://www.stopbeingsuchalazyfuck.com/
> >
> >Note the emotional accusation: by asking people instead of looking
> >things up yourself, you know you're being irresponsible.  This is
> >almost never actually the case - the *answerer* may know of this
> >alternate path, but *you* did not.  However, you know it now - and
> you
> >might want to use it a lot, before you try to describe what it's
> like
> >to use it a lot.  There are enough people who really do use it a
> lot,
> >who will be insulted (or worse) by inaccurate depictions of what
> it's
> >like to use it a lot (and thus to be one with the Internet).
> >
> >A more detailed version of this advice, as applying specifically to
> >technical topics (rather than the metaphoric topic you're writing
> >about, but close enough to be relevant) is at
> >http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
> >
> >A quick skim of the rest of your essay seems to follow similar
> lines.
> >I think I've said enough to set you on the right path - and I've got
> >other things I need to do tonight.
> >_______________________________________________
> >extropy-chat mailing list
> >extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> >http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Powerful Parental Controls Let your child discover the best the
> Internet has 
> to offer.  
>
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
> 
>   Start enjoying all the benefits of MSN® Premium right now and get
> the 
> first two months FREE*.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
> 