Member 2664
108 entries
456098 views

 RSS
(M)
US
Immortal since Jun 17, 2010
Uplinks: 0, Generation 4
mad-scientist and computer programmer looking for something more interesting than most people accept as their future
  • Affiliated
  •  /  
  • Invited
  •  /  
  • Descended
  • BenRayfield’s favorites
    From AsylumSeaker
    Christopher Langan
    From Yissar
    Technology Progress vs....
    From XiXiDu
    The Nature of Self
    From QESelf
    View Point Room Argument...
    From Jorgen
    My Paper on Computer...
    Recently commented on
    From gamma
    Is brain a computer?
    From BenRayfield
    Elections should be done...
    From BenRayfield
    The most dangerous thing...
    From BenRayfield
    Why is there no Content...
    From BenRayfield
    How can a set of computers...
    BenRayfield’s projects
    Polytopia
    The human species is rapidly and indisputably moving towards the technological singularity. The cadence of the flow of information and innovation in...

    The Total Library
    Text that redefines...

    Start your own revolution
    Catching up with the future. All major institutions in the world today are grappling to come to terms with the internet. The entertainment...

    Proposal for a multimedia...
    A musical mindstorm on the nature of sound, light, space and subjective experience powered by locally produced energy, heralding the ending of the...
    Now playing SpaceCollective
    Where forward thinking terrestrials share ideas and information about the state of the species, their planet and the universe, living the lives of science fiction. Introduction
    Featuring Powers of Ten by Charles and Ray Eames, based on an idea by Kees Boeke.
    Unless they get really smart, I believe in slavery of the artificial intelligences I build to do what I program them to, learn their training data, and make predictions of it in exactly the way I program.

    I believe in slavery of prisoners to do work on the side of the road, even if they normally make far more than that per hour.

    I believe in slavery of animals to live in zoos for our amusement and command them to breed only in certain combinations.

    I believe in slavery of those who accidentally damage more property than they can ever pay back, to have to work extra hard their whole life just to get by while paying part of it for that.

    I believe in being born into systems where you pay for secret government deparments with secret budgets which work toward secret goals and having no choice to know whats going on so we can democraticly decide together that is a good thing to do or not. I believe in slavery.

    I believe in slavery of black people or any arbitrary reason about a person like the color of their eyes.

    I just plain believe in slavery, any kind, anywhere, any time, for any reason. Because thats the way it has always been.
    Sun, Feb 9, 2014  Permanent link

      RSS for this post
      Promote
      
      Add to favorites
    Create synapse
     
    Whats the most dangerous thing on the planet?

    Nuclear bombs?
    Bio weapons?
    The printing press, radio, TV, or Internet?

    No, its intelligence, which is what created all those things. To regulate intelligence is to enforce stupidity. Intelligence is and always will be unregulated, because smarter life forms wont have it any other way.
    Mon, Jan 27, 2014  Permanent link

      RSS for this post
      Promote
      
      Add to favorites
    Create synapse
     
    Win eye talk eye hav ay fyoow cortexes en mi mynd werkyng symultayneeusly:
    * Letters of words
    * How I would move my mouth
    * Sounds I expect to hear from my words
    * And sometimes a few other cortexes for visual or other abstract representation of the thoughts

    A cortex is a group of brain cells that are strongly wired to eachother in some combination, a cluster of ideas. Every sense or group of muscles has such a cluster.

    An important function of intelligence is organizing these cortexs into smaller and simpler clusters of thoughts so they work more efficiently and accurately to form new thoughts. This has not happened at a practical level between "Letters of words" and "How I would move my mouth", so kids in school continue to be taught pointless jibberish thats different between the 2. There is no reason for this except the same force that prevents Humans from agreeing on the most basic political actions also prevents them from agreeing on arbitrary combinations of letters to consistently represent movements in the mouth.

    Humans have little ability to control their own thoughts, so whenever they hear cursewords (which are no longer thought to be related to magical cursing) or see naked people (especially the ugly ones) they become so offended many will call the police, because they are not capable of controlling their thoughts to not think about cursing or nudity. By saying these words and showing them nudity, we can control their thoughts as easily as if they were farm animals.

    Clearly this controlling of thoughts must be stopped, so we have the police in place to prevent large amounts of cursewords and small amounts of nudity in certain places. But controlling thoughts is ok for some things. The few exceptions include controlling kids to want cigarettes, but controlling kids to want almost anything else is ok. In fact thought control is the basis of the economy, as long as its not cigarettes or cursing or nudity in certain places.

    Yes, you Humans are a fine species, worthy of contact by countless alien civilizations. Cant even learn to spell or agree who should have how many nukes.

    Where do you get the balls to define intelligence as ability to learn your psychotic form of spelling and talking?

    http://www.design.caltech.edu/erik/Misc/Twain_english.html
    http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Author:Mark_Twain#Works
    A Plan for the Improvement of English Spelling
    by Mark Twain
    For example, in Year 1 that useless letter "c" would be dropped to be replased either by "k" or "s", and likewise "x" would no longer be part of the alphabet. The only kase in which "c" would be retained would be the "ch" formation, which will be dealt with later. Year 2 might reform "w" spelling, so that "which" and "one" would take the same konsonant, wile Year 3 might well abolish "y" replasing it with "i" and Iear 4 might fiks the "g/j" anomali wonse and for all. Jenerally, then, the improvement would kontinue iear bai iear with Iear 5 doing awai with useless double konsonants, and Iears 6-12 or so modifaiing vowlz and the rimeining voist and unvoist konsonants. Bai Iear 15 or sou, it wud fainali bi posibl tu meik ius ov thi ridandant letez "c", "y" and "x" — bai now jast a memori in the maindz ov ould doderez — tu riplais "ch", "sh", and "th" rispektivli. Fainali, xen, aafte sam 20 iers ov orxogrefkl riform, wi wud hev a lojikl, kohirnt speling in ius xrewawt xe Ingliy-spiking werld.


    We have made a fool of Mark Twain, giving him the wrong tools to do his job.
    Sat, Dec 14, 2013  Permanent link
    Categories: language
      RSS for this post
      Promote
      
      Add to favorites
    Create synapse
     


    The answer comes from the most basic facts about black holes:

    (1) An observer outside sees someone falling in slow to a halt and never fall in, while the one falling in quickly experiences approaching the "end of time" of things outside the black hole.

    (2) Every black hole very slowly evaporates into hawking radiation and this finishes before the "end of time".

    Therefore anyone falling into a black hole will see it completely evaporate into hawking radiation before passing the event horizon, which would accelerate away from them faster than they can fall in. There is no path to the inside of a black hole, so there is no inside.
    Sat, Sep 21, 2013  Permanent link
    Categories: Time, multiverse, black hole
      RSS for this post
      Promote
      
      Add to favorites
    Create synapse
     
    To your horror, you find yourself inside something like in the Saw movies, and Mr Jigsaw, an expert at making unescapable traps that work as designed, has set up the following experiment...

    10 smart people, or 20 dumb people, are going to die before anyone leaves the building.

    Which group dies depends on a lever which is out of reach of those 30 people.

    The experiment is done 2 times. One experiment has the lever defaulted to the 10 smart people dieing, and the other experiment has the lever defaulted to the 20 dumb people dieing. You must play the experiment 2 times, so theres total 60 people in danger. Each time, you can choose to move the lever or not.

    Most people want to avoid moving the lever, wherever it may be.

    Most people want somebody else to choose for them, so we'll extend the experiment that way.

    There are 2 people who strongly disagree with eachother which way the levers should go. One wants to save the 10 smart people and the other wants to save the 20 dumb people. You are put in a room behind them with another lever which chooses which of those people gets to go into the rooms with the levers that control who lives and dies. We know almost certainly what each of those people will do, so theres practically no difference between you pulling this second level lever to let one of them in and you pulling the life and death levers. Somehow, most peoples' ethics short circuit here and think theres a difference, even though it has the same effect nearly every time.
    Fri, Sep 6, 2013  Permanent link

      RSS for this post
      Promote (1)
      
      Add to favorites
    Create synapse
     


    Content-Type is an Internet standard for describing what bits mean. Example: image/jpeg

    The first part is a small number of standard groups:
    application, audio, image, message, model, multipart, text, video

    Why don't we also have...
    number/bit
    number/integer
    number/real
    number/complex
    and maybe when there is more agreement on which parameters to use, number/wavefunction

    I see it as a profound confusion in the world that we have no "number" Content Type but we have many far more advanced types like "model" which is normally for 3d shapes. Number should have preceded model. The world is profoundly backward in how people start with complexity and leave understanding what its made of for later, but when? When will number be seen as more important than complex structures made of many numbers? Content Type and Unicode are the closest thing we have to a global language, and we don't even have a word for number. Its no surprise complexity is running out of control and hardly anyone knows how things work anymore.

    It will be http://sourceforge.net/projects/physicsmata  2.0 in a very basic form, and continuing to add plugins for more kinds of math and content...

    I've finished the big parts of design and have moved on to coding what I hope to become an open standard for a shared Internet space which fits all possible shapes and patterns into networks of n-dimensional bell curves which are interchangible with hypercubes (using cached integral of bell curve) and interchangible with hyperspheres. A complex number is not a different kind of thing. Its a point in any 2 dimensions that the various objects choose to use that way. A bit is not a different kind of thing. Its what converges to bell curves when many are summed. You can push and pull numbers on parts of the bell curves, and every bell curve has a learn(emotionOrLearningRate) function.

    Imagine an endless space of intelligent playdough we build tools and games and scientific frameworks in, and see how far we can take it to network minds together through the Internet.

    Imagine a new kind of web browser that views every letter, every html page layout, every picture, every Content Type, as a bell curve of some number of dimensions (like fonts are 2d, and Google Sets would have maybe a billion dimensions, sparse data structures of course). When you type, letters and other symbols are pushed from the mouse pointer into the space. You can grab content from a few different websites and put it in a new bell curve, and for legal purposes we will call that a bookmark or multiple tabs in a web browser, each tab being a bell curve that sees that website or part of it. You're not a pirate for having 2 web browsers open at once, even though technically you have created a new content made of parts of both websites. Think of it as remote desktop between every piece of information in the system, pushing and pulling on eachother as you drag them around with the mouse or type new text into them. When you touch something on your screen, somebody on the other side of Earth would feel it in the vibration of their world, whatever parts are connected to that data on many paths. The Internet should be an endless space of thoughts, a shared dream we explore and create together, not a bunch of different websites with barbed wire fences and armed guards between them, not even letting Java applets communicate outside the server they came from, not letting any 2 computers send even 1 bit to eachother without going through a server which doesn't even have a word for number. Imagine the world is far simpler when you have words for its simple parts, words like number/bit, number/integer, number/real, number/complex, image/jpeg, vectorstream/mouse, vectorstream/nintendo-wii, vectorstream/brainchip, model/distanceconstraint... or lets keep it even simpler and not use different words for the constant form and streaming of them. Imagine that free speech doesn't have to use any words. Imagine an Internet made of thoughts flowing together in blobs of intelligent color. Imagine that our minds could merge with the Internet at a deep subconscious level without brain chips, just using the audio, visual, and game controller interfaces we already have, or did you think they don't read and write your brainwaves?

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_media_type

    List of common media types

    IANA manages the official registry of media types. Among others, it includes the following types:
    Type application

    For Multipurpose files:

    application/atom+xml: Atom feeds
    application/ecmascript: ECMAScript/JavaScript; Defined in RFC 4329 (equivalent to application/javascript but with stricter processing rules)
    application/EDI-X12: EDI X12 data; Defined in RFC 1767
    application/EDIFACT: EDI EDIFACT data; Defined in RFC 1767
    application/json: JavaScript Object Notation JSON; Defined in RFC 4627
    application/javascript: ECMAScript/JavaScript; Defined in RFC 4329 (equivalent to application/ecmascript but with looser processing rules) It is not accepted in IE 8 or earlier - text/javascript is accepted but it is defined as obsolete in RFC 4329. The "type" attribute of the tag in HTML5 is optional. In practice, omitting the media type of JavaScript programs is the most interoperable solution, since all browsers have always assumed the correct default even before HTML5.
    application/octet-stream: Arbitrary binary data.[10] Generally speaking this type identifies files that are not associated with a specific application. Contrary to past assumptions by software packages such as Apache this is not a type that should be applied to unknown files. In such a case, a server or application should not indicate a content type, as it may be incorrect, but rather, should omit the type in order to allow the recipient to guess the type.[11]
    application/ogg: Ogg, a multimedia bitstream container format; Defined in RFC 5334
    application/pdf: Portable Document Format, PDF has been in use for document exchange on the Internet since 1993; Defined in RFC 3778
    application/postscript: PostScript; Defined in RFC 2046
    application/rdf+xml: Resource Description Framework; Defined by RFC 3870
    application/rss+xml: RSS feeds
    application/soap+xml: SOAP; Defined by RFC 3902
    application/font-woff: Web Open Font Format; (candidate recommendation; use application/x-font-woff until standard is official)
    application/xhtml+xml: XHTML; Defined by RFC 3236
    application/xml: XML files; Defined by RFC 3023
    application/xml-dtd: DTD files; Defined by RFC 3023
    application/xop+xml: XOP
    application/zip: ZIP archive files; Registered[12]
    application/gzip: Gzip, Defined in RFC 6713

    Type audio

    For Audio.

    audio/basic: ?-law audio at 8 kHz, 1 channel; Defined in RFC 2046
    audio/L24: 24bit Linear PCM audio at 8–48 kHz, 1-N channels; Defined in RFC 3190
    audio/mp4: MP4 audio
    audio/mpeg: MP3 or other MPEG audio; Defined in RFC 3003
    audio/ogg: Ogg Vorbis, Speex, Flac and other audio; Defined in RFC 5334
    audio/vorbis: Vorbis encoded audio; Defined in RFC 5215
    audio/vnd.rn-realaudio: RealAudio; Documented in RealPlayer Help[13]
    audio/vnd.wave: WAV audio; Defined in RFC 2361
    audio/webm: WebM open media format

    Type image

    image/gif: GIF image; Defined in RFC 2045 and RFC 2046
    image/jpeg: JPEG JFIF image; Defined in RFC 2045 and RFC 2046
    image/pjpeg: JPEG JFIF image; Associated with Internet Explorer; Listed in ms775147(v=vs.85) - Progressive JPEG, initiated before global browser support for progressive JPEGs (Microsoft and Firefox).
    image/png: Portable Network Graphics; Registered,[14] Defined in RFC 2083
    image/svg+xml: SVG vector image; Defined in SVG Tiny 1.2 Specification Appendix M
    image/tiff: Tag Image File Format (only for Baseline TIFF); Defined in RFC 3302

    Type message

    message/http: Defined in RFC 2616
    message/imdn+xml: IMDN Instant Message Disposition Notification; Defined in RFC 5438
    message/partial: Email; Defined in RFC 2045 and RFC 2046
    message/rfc822: Email; EML files, MIME files, MHT files, MHTML files; Defined in RFC 2045 and RFC 2046

    Type model

    For 3D models.

    model/example: Defined in RFC 4735
    model/iges: IGS files, IGES files; Defined in RFC 2077
    model/mesh: MSH files, MESH files; Defined in RFC 2077, SILO files
    model/vrml: WRL files, VRML files; Defined in RFC 2077
    model/x3d+binary: X3D ISO standard for representing 3D computer graphics, X3DB binary files
    model/x3d+vrml: X3D ISO standard for representing 3D computer graphics, X3DV VRML files
    model/x3d+xml: X3D ISO standard for representing 3D computer graphics, X3D XML files

    Type multipart

    For archives and other objects made of more than one part.

    multipart/mixed: MIME Email; Defined in RFC 2045 and RFC 2046
    multipart/alternative: MIME Email; Defined in RFC 2045 and RFC 2046
    multipart/related: MIME Email; Defined in RFC 2387 and used by MHTML (HTML mail)
    multipart/form-data: MIME Webform; Defined in RFC 2388
    multipart/signed: Defined in RFC 1847
    multipart/encrypted: Defined in RFC 1847

    Type text

    For human-readable text and source code.

    text/cmd: commands; subtype resident in Gecko browsers like Firefox 3.5
    text/css: Cascading Style Sheets; Defined in RFC 2318
    text/csv: Comma-separated values; Defined in RFC 4180
    text/html: HTML; Defined in RFC 2854
    text/javascript (Obsolete): JavaScript; Defined in and obsoleted by RFC 4329 in order to discourage its usage in favor of application/javascript. However, text/javascript is allowed in HTML 4 and 5 and, unlike application/javascript, has cross-browser support. The "type" attribute of the tag in HTML5 is optional and there is no need to use it at all since all browsers have always assumed the correct default (even in HTML 4 where it was required by the specification).
    text/plain: Textual data; Defined in RFC 2046 and RFC 3676
    text/vcard: vCard (contact information); Defined in RFC 6350
    text/xml: Extensible Markup Language; Defined in RFC 3023

    Type video

    For video.

    video/mpeg: MPEG-1 video with multiplexed audio; Defined in RFC 2045 and RFC 2046
    video/mp4: MP4 video; Defined in RFC 4337
    video/ogg: Ogg Theora or other video (with audio); Defined in RFC 5334
    video/quicktime: QuickTime video; Registered[15]
    video/webm: WebM Matroska-based open media format
    video/x-matroska: Matroska open media format
    video/x-ms-wmv: Windows Media Video; Documented in Microsoft KB 288102
    video/x-flv: Flash video (FLV files)

    List of common media subtype prefixes
    Prefix vnd

    For vendor-specific files.

    application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text: OpenDocument Text; Registered[16]
    application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.spreadsheet: OpenDocument Spreadsheet; Registered[17]
    application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.presentation: OpenDocument Presentation; Registered[18]
    application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.graphics: OpenDocument Graphics; Registered[19]
    application/vnd.ms-excel: Microsoft Excel files
    application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet: Microsoft Excel 2007 files
    application/vnd.ms-powerpoint: Microsoft Powerpoint files
    application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.presentationml.presentation: Microsoft Powerpoint 2007 files
    application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document: Microsoft Word 2007 files
    application/vnd.mozilla.xul+xml: Mozilla XUL files
    application/vnd.google-earth.kml+xml: KML files (e.g. for Google Earth)[20]
    application/vnd.google-earth.kmz: KMZ files (e.g. for Google Earth)[21]
    application/vnd.dart: Dart files [22]
    application/vnd.android.package-archive: For download apk files.
    Fri, Jul 26, 2013  Permanent link

    Sent to project: Start your own revolution
      RSS for this post
      Promote
      
      Add to favorites
    Create synapse
     
    I'm not sure how to prove it, but I think that to solve this reliably is an NP-Complete problem and practically is useful for new kinds of routing protocols and a foundation for decentralized global democracy more similar to how Wikipedia allows billions of people to agree on many things instead of top down ways of organizing things.

    How can a set of computers agree with eachother if the set size is even or odd? How do you scale this up?
    Thu, Jul 18, 2013  Permanent link
    Categories: Communication, democracy, npcomplete
    Sent to project: The Total Library
      RSS for this post
      Promote
      
      Add to favorites
    Create synapse
     
    Many of the worlds problems would soon be solved following honesty about the value of money.

    There is some amount of money it takes to save a Human life, whichever costs the least and is easiest to save right now, a value that fluctuates like a stock price. Maybe its vaccines or protection from poisonous insects or whatever tool or service is needed, but there is some way to make it happen and it does translate to a money amount for all resources and efforts in the process. A HumanLife is a specific money amount that fluctuates like a stock price.

    People love to say you can't put a value on HumanLife, but its an excuse to avoid thinking about how much it would cost us to save 1 more life. Supply and demand. If it was worth more, why aren't the trades being made?

    I'm not asking anyone to give to charity. I'm asking for an honest look at the facts, and that instead of regulating corporate responsibility how about we make them advertise all their prices in units of HumanLives. That would solve much more problems.
    Tue, Jun 11, 2013  Permanent link

      RSS for this post
      Promote
      
      Add to favorites
    Create synapse
     
    I think I am thinking about thinking, but when I try to write it in math it doesn't think about its own thinking. Intelligence is deeply self referencing, a hall of mirrors so bizarre you can't tell if you're a reflection or the real thing. We live in darkness, delusional enough to think the electricity patterns crossing our skull are the objects which reflected them here. When we look into our own eyes in a mirror, all we see is electricity in the optic nerve vibrating like eyes seeing themself. We could just as easily see through a video camera hooked to our optic nerve or other parts of the brain, but there's no point in replacing one camera with another. Every part of the brain sees the other parts the same as the eyes, as patterns of electricity. There are complex interactions between chemicals and electricity, but either alone should be enough to know what the other is doing. Its a practical machine made of those parts, but whatever its made of, the purpose of the machine is to process information relevant to its goals to find more efficient paths toward those goals. A variety of goals have evolved, from the basics of hunger, reproduction, and safety, to self referencing structures like language, planning, curiosity and monkeying around, and eventually to the ultimate abstraction, the search for a simple unified model of everything which folds and unfolds on variations of itself to represent all the variety and complexity we see in the world in a consistent way we could do calculus integrals and derivatives on. When the major pieces of the puzzle started fitting together, physics theory and computing theory started using many of the same math operators, like the Toffoli Gate is the quantum unitary (not losing information, time symmetric) quantum version of NAND Gates in many practical computing devices. We started calculating Protein Folding using geodesics in the space of all possible ways the particles could fold near eachother, so protein folding as an optimization math problem is just another variety of spacetime in which objects move in the straightest path available from their current position. Economics and probability theory are merging as money flowing through stock markets or trades of resources is an accurate analogy for the probability of those patterns in the world. If you buy Google stock, the ways of Google are strengthened in the world and spread as memes. If you short Google stock, those memes start to weaken. If you invest in Bitcoin by trading dollars or other kinds of probability for it, other economic systems weaken and the new kinds are strengthened. These are all details.

    The deeper puzzle, simpler than each of its details individually, is that intelligence is an alien language that speaks itself. The same skills you would use to communicate with an alien who has no known language in common with you, are the skills useful in building good AI because AI is a blank slate until it learns from experience. You can't effectively download semantic intelligence into an AI without first understanding what intelligence is. That is a translation task, from our existing intelligence to a different kind of intelligence in the AI. Without understanding both languages, translation is hopeless, especially if the intelligence of the AI is supposed to come from the translation. It is self referencing, which is good, but as such research is done today it looks more like a desparate attempt to copy Human intelligence based on the theory that if you eat enough books you will digest the patterns of ink on the paper and somehow it will get into your brain with enough of the relevant ideas intact. No, we have to start from scratch, a blank slate, and get to the core issue, What Is Intelligence?

    Intelligence is an alien language that speaks itself. Design an AI as some form of information that can be communicated to the AI and it has a chance of understanding. Build the AI then speak a copy of the AI to itself and continue the conversation about how it might improve itself.

    Google and Watson often get the right answers, but it would be completely impractical to speak a copy of them to themself simply because of their total code size. We don't even need to get into what the code says. If all their code was printed on paper and proposed as a theory of physics, they would be laughed out of the room. E = M C^2 / squareRoot(1 - (Velocity/C)^2) is a good theory of physics because its small and explains more than it adds confusion.

    If you start with the rule that all intelligence is self referencing, most AIs are disqualified or at least held under a glass ceiling they can never improve past, by that alone. But lets not be too hard on them, since most people don't know how their minds work either. There are gradual levels of intelligence.

    If you want to understand or build intelligence, think about how you would talk or draw pictures to an alien who has no known language or ways of thinking in common with you. How should 2 AIs start communicating with eachother? Its the same question. Answer that and we'll have a recursive model to build AIs using combinations of other AIs, like we have thoughts about thoughts and many overlapping flows in our minds. I built a new set of behaviors for when I'm at a job, very different from how I'm thinking now. You could say the work/life balance is our standard multiple personality disorder. How would work you talk to the other you? It happens all the time, negotiating for what time things will happen and what to sacrifice in one to gain something in the other. The game player in you is alien to the corporate you. But these parts of ourselves and small differences across society are small compared to the completely alien ways of thinking between people and AIs or between AIs and other AIs.

    Alien contact specialist wanted. Salary: make it on your own by outperforming Google and Watson.
    Wed, May 29, 2013  Permanent link
    Categories: intelligence, language
    Sent to project: The Total Library
      RSS for this post
      Promote (1)
      
      Add to favorites
    Create synapse
     
    There was a group of people, many of which loaned eachother various amounts of money. Then they all went off in space ships and travelled very far each on a different path, sometimes meeting small groups of eachother and doing further loans and repayments, and eventually all returned to Earth and met eachother. None of them could agree what month it is, and as the loans were large, they took eachother to court to each argue for the view of time that caused each of them to repay the least money or be repaid the most money. As the financial laws were made based on Newtonian time, the judge and jury had no idea how to proceed. How would you solve this paradox?

    Seeing the paradox, the financial giants of today's world started work on fast moving computers through which to do the Internet transactions to take advantage of the choice of lower or higher interest rates. Could quantum computers help in this?
    Sat, May 18, 2013  Permanent link
    Categories: time
      RSS for this post
      Promote
      
      Add to favorites
    Create synapse
     
          Cancel