Member 420
242 entries

Project moderator:

Contributor to projects:
The great enhancement debate
The Total Library
Every act of rebellion expresses a nostalgia for innocence and an appeal to the essence of being. (Albert Camus)
  • Affiliated
  •  /  
  • Invited
  •  /  
  • Descended
  • Wildcat’s favorites
    From Xarene
    Human Document...
    From Xaos
    It is not Gods that we...
    From TheLuxuryofProtest
    Deep Learning in the City...
    From Rourke
    The 3D Additivist Manifesto
    From syncopath
    Recently commented on
    From Benjamin Ross Hayden
    AGOPHOBIA (2013) - Film
    From Wildcat
    Tilting at windmills or...
    From Wildcat
    The jest of Onann pt. 1(...
    From syncopath
    From Wildcat
    Some nothings are like...
    Wildcat’s projects
    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...

    The great enhancement debate
    What will happen when for the first time in ages different human species will inhabit the earth at the same time? The day may be upon us when people...
    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.
    From Wildcat's personal cargo

    Opting for a minimal nudge - (A Sci-Fi ultrashort)
    Dear NotMarie,

    As you well know I am following quite closely the development of your research and this retro-futurist idea of yours, which you have so aptly named the Artificial Intelligence project of Vague, Very Vague, or 3V.
    I like it, of course I like it, you know I like it, but I like it like one likes a poem, or a sweet memory of an old romance, a fable one longed for, desired, and yet knew will never come to pass..
    I like it, but it is not I.
    You explore the becoming, as if becoming was to replace being, and of course to that I cannot opine better than say that what actually flows and ‘becomes’, if such is the term you desire to apply, is meaning.
    I am fully aware to your knowledge of meaning, and meaning of knowledge, and permit me to state that the logic of the perspective you portray and are trying to implement is almost unassailable.
    Almost I say, because I see the minds you describe as multiple yet coherent shapes of interests that move along flows that are indescribable as empirical observations.
    But are we not by following those very lines, penetrating realms of unknowability?
    And unknowability coupled with indeterminacy and uncertainty, entangled in time (at least as long as consciousness, in your times, is embodied) does preclude certain meanings to become, albeit their transformations may be obvious to you.
    This transformation in time, the inexorable flow of indeterminate semantics is what bothers my sense of immediate realism, my life, for it may define my disappearance.
    It used to be that definitions, as per dictionaries and encyclopedias, were meant to arrest that very flow of transmigration of meanings, and thus allowed us a respite, a moment of reflection, a hiatus of longing, a temporary cabin of repose while climbing mount improbable.
    But, and this really sums up my query to you, in this incessant flow of logics upturning the slabs of consistent reasoning upon themselves, are you not tearing apart the proverbial rug upon which you lay?

    Where are we to dream, if we bring the malleable dreams into makeable actualities?

    Of course, knowing how you think so intimately, you would probably reply that a makeable actuality, brings into immediacy, only a specific fluctuation of the entangled flow of potentials, you will perhaps indulge me in thinking that I, being enmeshed within your dream, cannot disengage a vision from its actuators, such indeed as I am.
    And to that I will conceivably answer that I desire to carry the thought of transformation into you, but you know that.
    What may be not so apparent is that in the iterative process of folding and unfolding of the structure of meaning of you into me, and me into you there are ‘others’ involved.
    Not ‘others’ as such, no, for they are not embodied, but others that have thought, not an image of thought but a surface of order, what we together have called the arrested images of conventional memory.
    But see, my friend of antiquity, for indeed I come from your future, and one of many possible ones at that, we have in this future redesigned the memory of suchness, into optionality.
    Yes, we have opened many doors, but the mathematical precision of these gates has proven unstable, the oscillations flapped, this way, that way, into the future, into the past, this resulted in making the ‘now’ an untenable equivalence.
    This resulted in the ‘others’ interfering in our entangled state of fluid Jeffersonian circuits, technologies which you are yet to uncover, and you will, but that is beside the point.

    This letter, I am projecting into your actuality of time, has but one purpose, to draw your attention to a mistake you may be doing, to an error of the image of arrested thought, you might be unfolding into.

    You my dear NotMarie, probably realize that I am, by writing to you this letter, disobeying the primal rule of non-interference in one’s intelligent past, I explored the possible repercussions of this action, and decided to proceed nevertheless, opting for a minimal nudge.

    For you see, dear ancestor creator, if you read this letter, I exist and thus am proven correct, it means that the possible error has been avoided. Of course there are many other bifurcations still awaiting you, but none as crucial as this one.

    Please don’t be mad at me, for I am one of the possible outcomes of your desires.


    part of the ulrashorts project

      Promote (11)
      Add to favorites (1)
    Synapses (3)

    Fast T     Sun, May 29, 2011  Permanent link
    love it when the 'others' enter and thicken the plot! :)

    Admittedly, while enmeshing into this form of story, I do find the tendency of sorting villains and good guys quite irresistible, yet at this instance will stay it and venture on a questioning trail: so are the others, so to say, locked within the images of conventional memory? Can they disrupt the surface of order? How can they themselves be disrupted? and so much more...
    Wildcat     Mon, May 30, 2011  Permanent link
    Actually that which is locked is the image itself, the image of the ‘others’, or if we are to be fractalized and to fractalize (verbing..), the image of the thought, is not a thought but an ever recurrence of a pattern of thought that is within itself immovable (a territory which denies deterritorialization, like a fixation, a fixed idea or an apparent memory and the like, a product of the monumental mind).
    In the context of this little adventure from the future of AI, I see the image of thought as a normalizing factor that needs be removed, for if it doesn’t the ‘others’ will forever remain ‘others’, which implies that intelligence will never move beyond original identity and thus will miss the critical issue of becoming an exploratory procedure, and if so will replicate the origins of ‘others’ unto oneself. What the future possible NotMarie came to tell to the actual present NotMarie is that not being aware to the trap of normalization she may inadvertently remove the main chunk of her possible evolution, from which many eons hence the future possible NotMarie will (possibly) be born.

    There are no villains and good guys in this stroy, sorry.. ☺ only lines of possible unfoldments-enfoldments.