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.
    So, my dear friend, here I continue the same line that I started previously in: “Liberation! It’s as simple as being free (from liberty)”.
    Though I understand your questions perfectly, or at least that is how it appears presently, there is a point I would like to make before proceeding with an extended answer to your questions.

    The point is this: The otherness of an ‘other’ is none other than you. Allow me a moment to explain, for it is no simple matter, to realize that otherness is fundamentally a complex trait-building, pattern making characteristic of our minds.
    The simple manner to understand this concerns our perception apparatus and our processing of images in the process of self-description. The fashion by which you self describe define more or less the manner and mode by which the otherness of the other is described because contrary to popular opinion it is not our uniqueness that defines us but our similarities.

    As embodied consciousness we have very little to go on when self-describing. We have our bodies of course, that are (presently) more or less fixed in their line of engagements and development. Consider for example that unless you belong to (presently) a very small minority of humans that at some point decide to change it for whatever reason, your biological gender is set from birth.
    This little fact has more to do with your self-description than you imagine, if only because of the biological, hormonal and eventually cultural baggage this implies. It is extremely difficult in this instance to disentangle yourself from the particularities of your body, its gender, its color, its look and so on.
    That however is only the beginning of the difficulty for soon enough, being subject to forces much beyond your control, at least initially, you will get a language and a biased experience of the world via your parents, siblings, family and friends, not to mention the geographical location of birth, its cultural heritage, possibly a religion and or political affiliations and so on.

    Then at a certain point these forces coalesce into an apparently confident set of words and terms, views and biases, filters on reality, and an overall worldview, which of course you will consider as ‘you’.
    The fact that you may realize that you had very little (if at all) say in these matters counts for little at the beginning for the simple reason that these will become the constituents or building blocks with which you have to work and they carry meanings, and significances that are hard to almost impossible to eradicate or change.

    On top of these building blocks you will get an education, again a systemic impregnation of your mind in fashions to which until quite an advanced age you will have very little to say or indeed be able to criticize, but even if and when you do find yourself able to realize the state of affairs of your mind and self criticize to an extent that defies all that which was put there by ‘others’ you will find that certain attitudes, and some views are quite difficult to overcome.

    But overcome them you must, if you are to create an ‘other’ defined by you and fitting the overall worldview which you have chosen.
    The ‘other’ in you and as ‘you’ need be coherent and consistent with all that pertains to the relevancy of your process of self-description.

    “Otherness is in many ways, a slippery and difficult term. A contradiction is apparent whereby the very process of naming the other, whether in specific or generalized terms, is bound by the simultaneous disappearance of the concept. More than just simply a result of a linguistic deferral of ‘meaning’, this situation is an effect of the fact that the very nature of alterity is impossible without the idea of sameness. Other and self are inherently joined and so when we ‘speak’ of otherness, we inevitably ‘speak’ of its other: selfhood. In spite of this, otherness is generally conceived of as that which is not ‘self’. We feign that there must be a dividing line somewhere between and not outside the two and as such the relationship between other and self is inevitably problematic and complex.”

    (Otherness: Essays & Studies 1.1 from the Introduction by Maria Beville)

    Otherness is most commonly defined as difference, both by external markers and internal characteristics and is generally accepted in this order. However the way I see it is that otherness is first and foremost and aspect of one’s self-reflection, self definition, and self-description, in this I think that otherness is a complex and highly critical issue in the process of self-revealing, or evolution into a state of personal liberty and freedom of mind.

    Moreover, the ‘other’ as a sub-category of your own self-description is biased in as much as it is indeed a condition impregnated upon your mind by none other than your own process of self-description. Which of course brings me to your specific question (which I have rephrased a bit): “How can ‘the other’, as a representative of a condition in itself, can be a supportive power (partner) to the process of self-description into a state of liberation and the ascent into the freedom of mind which you have proposed? “

    Permit me to say that I see this as a very important and critical question; indeed in as much as we are culturally biased in our present society to associate liberty with individualism and uniqueness, it may very well be that that this question represents the fulcrum of that which hinders our mutualities.

    “…all life is interrelated. We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality; tied in a single garment of destiny.”

    Martin Luther King Jr

    There are many aspects to this hindrance and we can as a basic rule divide them into two generalized aspects, one is the substrate dependency of our minds upon our neuro-chemical soup (or brain) and the other our context dependency upon the language of our minds (which will include by necessity all of the cultural semantic patterns with which our minds have been filled.
    I will not deal here with the first of these two, namely substrate dependency, I will say however, that though substrate dependency from which stems the concept of embodied consciousness is a very difficult nut to crack, there are many avenues in current scientific and theoretical research that may lead both to a better understanding of the mind body conundrum and possibly to paths of extending the mind into and unto the world in manners previously unthinkable. For an extended view on all that pertains to substrate dependency and the desire for ‘substrate independent minds' see the quite amazing work done by Randal Koene at Carboncopies.

    Having said the above, and though I am a great believer in science and technology to provide for us tools of evolutionary advantage, my main concern is with the second point namely context dependency.
    Context dependency has many aspects and many levels but at its most simple and basic it is an extension of the weak version of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, namely that our language influences the experience of reality.

    But to update and upgrade our contextual dependency we need a new kind of conceptual scaffolding. The conceptual scaffolding we need has at its core the metamorphosis of the information-processing model of mind, in which incoming information is acted upon by the system. Our minds are not spatially fixated, and are to a very large extent better understood as emergent semantic networks.

    And as emergent semantic networks our minds define and redefine continuously in a hyper complex dynamic process that which we consider as meaningful. In the case we are talking about here the ‘meaningfulness’ resides with the concept of the ‘other’. In the conceptual scaffolding I am proposing to you here, the very term ‘other’ transforms to become an extension of that which is ‘me’, but even that transformation is only the first step into a greater motion still. The motion I refer to is the one in which the ‘other’ is not only an extension but forms a nucleic reality within your own self-description. In this case the nucleic form or image that the ‘other’ has become is no longer disassociated from the powers at play within your own mind but constitutes ipso-facto a strength of activity, dynamically interacting with the overall process of your own self description.

    “For human reality, to be is to choose oneself; nothing comes to it either from the outside or from within which it can receive or accept….it is entirely abandoned to the intolerable necessity of making itself be, down to the slightest details. Thus freedom…is the being of man, i.e., his nothingness of being.”

    Jean-Paul Sartre

    The thing is, that as the process unfolds you may discover a very interesting phenomenon, a phenomenon seldom acknowledged but extremely important nevertheless. The fact is that to allow the form sense-thought of the ‘other’ to interact meaningfully with your overall process of self-description an extended emotional reflectivity need be present. Put differently (and quite colloquially) without the ‘love of the other’ the other cannot become an inherent part of you. So in a sense that may answer your question concerning the conditions in which an ‘other’ can become a power for your own self-transformation into a liberated mind. The funny thing to notice here is that unless a very deep acceptance of the emotional reflectivity involving ‘the other’ is in place, the ‘other’ remains a ‘limiting condition’, whilst when the emotional capacity of your self description process extends into an accommodating inherency of ‘the other’ through love the ‘limiting condition’ transforms into a pillar of your own freedom of being, an allowance for your own liberty and independence.

    Not only that, but over and above this particular direction of the evolution of your freedom, the inherency of the ‘other’ becomes an extended reality by which you ‘cover more ground’ or put differently, your self description incorporates a larger world, or better yet, the reality that is ‘you and me’ has transformed into a greater unified whole, in this fashion my freedom is unshackled from the tyranny of the ‘other’ by intimacy.

    The intimacy about which I have written to you in the previous letter is a creative and dynamic interactivity, an intermingling of minds. (I will write to you, if it is of interest, about this kind of mind intimacy in another letter.)

    Finally, before I bore you with too many words, let me say that for my own mind the term ‘the other’ is practically a non-issue. My lovers are free to change ‘me’ as I am free to change them; it is in a fashion the ultimate uniqueness of the process of self-reflection for by its very dynamic inherency I am made greater. Greater in all fashions but primarily greater in the unique freedom of mind that I embody.

    The nothingness of my being is thus my highest asset and my extended reality the very liberating and highly idiosyncratic intimacy within which my freedom resides.

    Into my desire of being, I fold.
    Until next,


    As an addendum to all of the above permit me another small intrusion upon your precious time. You mentioned in another letter that you find it very difficult to merge with your desires, your questions of life and make them part of your liberation.
    To walk on nothing like I do, you may need to soften the kind of intellectualized logic you find so precious. Freedom of mind and personal liberty, seen as a hyper complex dynamic process demand a certain flow, which carries its own logic for sure, yet it is a soft version of self-reflection. The soft version of logic I refer to here includes an allowance of ‘desire’ to fold again and again upon itself, both condensing the desire (becoming in the process a motive power) and simultaneously annihilating the ‘strong‘ foundations of its semantic contours.. Thus providing the intensity necessary for the ‘walking on nothing’. If you are to walk on nothing what will sustain you? You guessed correctly: the otherness of the other as you (or me), its intimacy revealing its intensity. (I’ll write more about this)

    (Part of the Ultrashorts Project)


    1. Image 'Otherness' by Artist Robyn Walton

      Promote (10)
      Add to favorites (1)
    Synapses (4)
    (A very liberating story of and on freedom based on a personal letter, which you shouldn't believe and neither do I, but then here it is)

    My dear friend,

    You asked me, in truth and simplicity, why it was so difficult to be free?
    And my first answer need be:

    Forget truth and simplicity- aim for elegance of thought; the reason, if you should care to explore it, is that no reality survives the encounter with an inquiring mind, none more so than the reality of one’s own freedom and liberation..

    Could I not oblige you and answer you more thoroughly?

    Of course I can and of course I do, here, I do and will keep on doing so, of course you shouldn’t believe a word of what I am saying, this is after all a story, a private one for sure, almost a confession of sorts. And as confessions go one wouldn’t trust them, not implicitly, for confessions demand ontology and maybe a theology, but a confession on freedom’s difficulty will demand the annihilation of both ontology and theology not to mention the annihilation of one’s belief in freedom as a conceptual idea.
    You also shouldn’t believe it because after all how can one explain from the standpoint of freedom why freedom is so difficult to attain, for if one is free, it is not difficult anymore, now is it? In fact it may very well be that the difficulty in finding freedom is exactly that, the difficulty in telling the story of freedom, in such a fashion that the story does not hinder one’s freedom.
    Quite a conundrum I agree and yet one must try, if only because of the love I have for you, or more accurately the extension of me into you as love.
    Why, the very word freedom means love, or friendship, or acceptance, or joy, or dear one, or beloved, but somehow we managed to forget this. Well maybe not forget, more like a kind of obfuscation of immediacy, as if at a certain point we started looking at freedom as a freedom ‘from’ and not freedom ‘in’.

    I think I cannot speak about freedom without mentioning some great humans that walked among us, and helped us and me, understand our freedom, such as Isaiah Berlin.
    He is an important person primarily because he made a very important distinction between negative and positive liberty, in simple terms he taught us that there is a big and critical difference between the absence of something ((i.e. of obstacles, barriers, constraints or interference from others)) and the presence of something (i.e. of control, self-mastery, self-determination or self-realization), in Berlins’ words:”..we use the negative concept of liberty in attempting to answer the question “What is the area within which the subject — a person or group of persons — is or should be left to do or be what he is able to do or be, without interference by other persons?”, whereas we use the positive concept in attempting to answer the question “What, or who, is the source of control or interference that can determine someone to do, or be, this rather than that?” (1969, pp. 121–22). (Positive and Negative Liberty)

    Isaiah Berlin is quite a recent protagonist in this great quest for liberation, you should if you really are interested in understanding the difficulties of freedom go back a bit in human history and study those minds that claimed wisdom concerning liberation. You could as did I many years ago, start with Plato (as good a point of departure as any) for whom freedom was something that might only be attained in a perfect society ruled (how else?) by philosophers kings, for Plato only the just can be free, and you my friend are far from just, knowing you, this will not be to your liking, I do not think that is what you are asking.
    Besides if we were to follow Plato and Aristotle we would need first to accept that we are political or social animals, a fact which I for one, think about differently.
    Maybe you could seek the insights of those wise Indians, some of them spoke of Moksha (liberation), or Mukti (release) as liberation or release from rebirth, again I do not think you will find there that which you are seeking but it is important to know what they say, especially if you look into the concept of Nirvana, though I will argue that the other shore of wisdom has nothing to do with tranquility or extinguishing desires.
    I suggest to you all these important paths, which are not mine, because if you are to unbelieve me I think you should have a good reason to do so.

    My main issue with all of them is about attainment, I do not think that freedom is something to be attained or that liberation is to be sought by negative liberty (a la Berlin) and though I much appreciate the clarity that his writings have given me I also do not think in terms of positive liberty as in having the presence of self-realization (since we have so many selves..).

    Freedom and liberation are not aims to attain, objectives to target, aspirations to manage, or goals to reach; these are to a very large extent hyper complex dynamic processes of mind, that vigorously shake the very foundation of that which brings them into being. Thus in a very real sense these concepts have no foundation. Not even as objects of mental consciousness.

    Hence the big problem!

    If they have no foundation how are we to know anything about them? The answer is of course through intimacy and intensity.

    I think I told you once that it took me many years of combat, both of the reflective kind, and of the emotional tempests sort, to release the concept of liberation from the shackles of contextualized freedom.
    It took me years to understand that spiritual liberation has nothing whatsoever to do with spirit, whatever that term may mean; more importantly perhaps was the reflective time that was involved in unleashing the freedom ‘to be’, from the freedom of ‘to do’ or ‘doing’.
    It was always the confusion of acting that didn’t make sense, as if by being able to go away (unclinging) from my love I would be free, and therein laid the conundrum, for if I was free to go I would liberate from a situation that I desired to continue, shackles and all.

    Didn’t make sense to me! I needed my desires, I desired my loves, I loved my feelings and I felt my existence, how could I, or better yet, why should I, have left them behind? And for that matter where was this behind? I wanted it all, to take it with me. Where to? Nowhere in specific, and nothing in particular, but all these where me, so how was I to be free if I left part of me out of the game?

    The thing is that as funny is it may sound you cant be free alone but not in the platonic sense, there is a sense to liberty that demands at least one more mind to be liberated with you, put differently it takes two (or more) to tango.. or be free.
    There is a sense to the manner and style of freedom; we are not created equal (for that matter we are not created but emergent and I know it’s a poor choice of words) and that is why we each have a unique kind of freedom and a highly idiosyncratic fashion of liberty.
    A kind of madness if you like, but a madness that can go everywhere! A very personal and highly distinctive form of madness, mostly hidden in the light of internal desire..

    “Madness need not be all breakdown. It may also be break-through. It is potential liberation and renewal as well as enslavement and existential death.”

    R. D. Laing

    In a way there is no theory that can account for all possible manners of being free, which is another problematic aspect of the freedom and liberty issue, and thus another way of understanding why it is so difficult to be free.

    I know you know some of these issues very deeply but I am not sure you understand deeply enough the concept of agency (which is more of a philosophical and legal term really which modern society has created for us) I mean how intimate are you with the agent that presumable you are? I know you take your responsibilities seriously but think it through: what higher responsibility do you have than the management of the meaning you yourself have put upon the idea of your own freedom?

    That is what I meant when I wrote to you at the beginning of this letter, that you need, (as did I), to release the concept of liberation from the shackles of contextualized freedom. It’s always the context that constrains the explosive nature of personal liberty.

    There is, in the world we have emerged into, a kind of tyranny, of the context of course, but more specifically of the body. The tyranny of the body is only one amongst the many many kinds of restrictions we find ourselves in but it bears special consideration.
    It bears this very special consideration because we are embodied consciousnesses, having cognitive capabilities that far outshine the capacities of our bodies. Some of your thoughts as you disclosed to me in the past and if I recall correctly, involved a desire to eliminate pain, the pain of the body and the pain of the mind. You wanted to be free of these and that started your quest so many years ago, but all the drugs in the world will not eliminate these pains, because though they can be temporarily abated they will always find a new way to tackle you.
    There will always be another demon come to haunt you, be it of the material kind or of the mental sort. Unless of course, you can merge intimately with them in high intensity; it is in a fashion a form of desire folded upon itself, fractalized until its nothingness becomes apparent.
    In this you may possibly not be happy (whoever told you that your freedom implies your happiness?) but you will discover that you can walk on nothing.

    I like walking on nothing. Maybe you can like it too.And we can be free together.

    My dear friend, I could write pages and pages in trying to describe to you the difficulties of being free, but I know that is not what you have asked of me. I could give you theories and clichés that sometimes help ease a moment or two. I could describe to you the beauty of being free and the exhilaration of certain moments of heightened inspiration, by that stimulating you to desire the kind of freedom I am privileged to partake in. But also this is not the essence of your inquiry.
    I think that what you ask is more a question of management, management of (apparently) conflicting desires.
    And I promise one of these days I’ll write you a letter about this subject but for now I must run take care of my loved ones. Strange, I know, but taking care of my loved ones allows me the freedom and the liberation of being that which I am, a relation of loves and desires, powered by an ever increasing allowance for that which is not me to change me. Just as you do when you ask this kind of questions.

    I hope I have managed if not to answer (because I do not think there can be a full answer) at least to raise your appetite for more of these semi-poetic elaborations on our mutuality.

    Until soon then,

    Slowly but surely I walk on nothing, from there my love, from there my confidence, in the chaotic harmony of ambiguity.


    ps. you see, Liberation! It’s as simple as being free (from liberty).

    ps1. soon I will write to you again on this fascinating topic.


    I have deleted from this letter some issues that I think you might find interesting.

    1. A deleted scene: "..But you know me; you know I love my language treats of etymology, so imagine my surprise when I discovered that freedom and liberation come from two different dimensions (I mean cultures). It appears that Freedom comes from a Saxon root, from the German Freiheit (freedom) whilst Liberty comes from a Norman root, from the French Liberte’ (liberty) (see)."

    2.The Idealized agency of free will, is more than a perpetuated philosophical (and psychological) myth, it is ipso facto, a devastatingly ignorant approach to the concept of personal autonomy.
    Personal autonomy may best be understood as more of an authorization than a willed action made by the agent.

    3.The authorization in turn should be looked upon as an act of distancing on the spectrum of self-reflection, balancing its act in a move towards self-alienation. (in this self alienation is responsible for an extreme form of self reflection in its negativity.)

    4.Being alienated from your own power to act (think Tourette syndrome) defies the whole concept of free willed agency (as is the case with addiction- or for that matter the belief that freedom means doing whatever it is that you like, whenever you feel like doing it – Neti-Neti).

    5.What about instincts? Think about it like an authorization given by reason to the motivational power of desire

    Part of the Ultrashorts project
      Promote (13)
      Add to favorites (5)
    Synapses (7)
    Entwined, Enmeshed, Entangled – Three modes of ‘being’ pertinent to our cyborgization process


    By redesigning the conceptual landscape of our networked inter-relationality we may finally disentangle ourselves from the all-pervading occlusion of the cyborgization process and allow a fresh recognition of the manifold human sensorium extended in hyperconnectivity.
    In the re-conceptualizing of our cyber existence we may need relinquish a few cherished objects of identity such as man machine interface, virtuality and man machine co-existence but more importantly the dualistic distinction between ‘real’ life and our virtual extensions as existence.
    All of these descriptive objects of identity I suggest should become ‘naturalized’ in a new cyber-existential language.

    This is the first part of a three pronged approach to what I believe is the foundation of a future philosophy of and for the hyperconnected individual.
    I will try to show that these three modes of beingness are the quintessential infrastructures necessary for a future of a technological civilization aiming for the firmament of freedom and equality, personal responsibility and open access culture.
    A civilization, which roots, we currently inhabit but that promises changes to the perception of ourselves, the understanding of the universe and the manner by which we may develop in tandem.
    The three lines of approach that will be used are: Entwinement, Enmeshment, and Entanglement.
    Each of these terms represents a similar but different manner to realize the state of affairs of hyperconnectivity as the threshold infrastructure in the process of becoming a citizen of the future, a cyborg netizen and perhaps a posthuman.

    Entwinement, Enmeshment and Entanglement each represent a different level of intimacy in the infocology (see lexical index) one exists in and partakes of. The three terms offered here are suggestions for an illustrative strategy that will allow a deeper and more accurate description of the state of affairs of our cyber existence. Each of these terms will be expanded upon later, for now suffice it to say that the terms are distinguished primarily by the amount, depth and extensiveness of the connectivity between minds in the hyperconnected infosphere. Entwinement stands for the lowest level, Enmeshment for the medium level and Entanglement for the highest or deepest level.


    Chance Favors the Connected Mind” (Steven Johnson)

    Between our digital reputations taking hold of our old tribal systems of acknowledgement and trust and the new cyborg existentialism a tension is made manifest.
    This tension that I will expound upon in a moment can be seen primarily in its hyper complex fragility and tendency to ambiguity.
    The tendency for ambiguity, itself a by product of the de-potentialization of the known factors of trust moving into new realms of unknowability, increases exponentially as networked decisions are made manifest (e.g. 'like' clicks).
    The cyborg existentialism is a new domain of relationality residing between the tribal homophily and hyperconnected heterophily.
    The cyborg existentialism (CE) is a fresh approach to ‘freedom’ as the ultimate ground of human beings' capacity to relate to the world, extended and enhanced in the world via technology.

    Cyborg existentialism implies that sensory attunement via the embedding of technology in base line human bodies reveals a coherent understanding of the precedence of existence to essence. In short the idea is that the existence of the individual as an extended techno-sensory awareness mechanism belongs to a category in and of itself and should be looked at as the atom of the future (hyperconnected) cyber-civilization (see- The rise of the Cyber Unified Civilization ).
    *Notes: I will use existentialism as a general kind or manner of thought and not as a systemic philosophy. Existentialism in this regard is an approach or an attitude, putting the individual sense of being as primary.

    But first we need introduce a new term:


    (A neologism construct from the Greek arkhaios, "ancient"+ Data- The word data is the plural of datum, neuter past participle of the Latin dare, "to give", hence "something given" + the Greek noun λόγος (logos, "speech", "account", "story").

    Archeodatalogy – Noun.

    Meaning: Archeodatalogy is the study and analysis of the Meta narrative emerging out of the accumulated information about an individual in a multiplicity of infocologies.

    Short version: The study and analysis of emerging meta-narratives in hyperconnectivity

    The premises of Archeodatalogy:

    1. A hyperconnected individual ‘is’ and ‘has’ inherently a multiplicity of identities.
    2. The multiplicity of identities a hyperconnected individual is made of, are manifested primarily in the infocologies this individual partakes of.
    3. A hyperconnected individual then is a multiplicity of identities embedded in a multiplicity of infocologies; the coupling between these infocologies can be strong or soft, discreet or continuous.
    4. A hyperconnected individual exists as a spectrum of identities correlated but not necessarily closely coupled with the fields of interests manifested as, and in, the infocologies this individual partakes in.
    5. The study and analysis of a hyperconnected individual in a given infocology is the subject matter of Archeodatalogy.
    6. Archeodatalogy assumes that the inter relation between a hyperconnected individual and the infocology in which she exists is a thematic environment from which emerges a particular narrative. This particular narrative is one of many such narratives, each of which represents the interrelation of the particular hyperconnected individual to a particular thematic environment or infocology.
    7. Each narrative has a particular environmental theme that can be described as the story of ‘this individual in this infocology’. Each such narrative has its own characteristics and attributes and though at times might correlate and or superimpose upon another narrative, the particular narrative carries its own peculiar and idiosyncratic coherence.
    8. The purpose of Archeodatalogy is to create a Meta account of the multiplicity of narratives (of a hyperconnected individual in multiple infocologies) and to allow for the emergence of a Meta story descriptive narrative, from which arrays of predictions can be summarized.
    9. Archeodatalogy assumes that no particular thematic narrative can capture the totality of the hyperconnected individual, therefore only a Meta descriptive chronicle of the multiplicity of interrelations can permit a full understanding of a hyperconnected individual.
    10. The results of an Archeodatalogy analysis permit a mapping of an hyperconnected individual correlated to her fields of interest that may or may not parallel this individual immediate existence, nevertheless it is the assumption of the Archeodatalogy method that a high enough approximation can be realized.

    Part 1: Entanglement is an event – Enmeshment is an episode- Entwinement is circumstantial


    In a state of Entwinement the correlativity of interest and mutual cross-fertilization is low to very low.
    Currently the state of Entwinement is the most widespread.

    A circumstantial state in hyperconnectivity can be defined as an accident of (at least initially) secondary importance in which two or more minds find themselves in the same infocology for reasons that are not necessarily pertinent and or interesting to their personal agenda (membership in the given infocology excluded)- example: one may join the network of twitter and because one twits with the hashtag of #Science he or she will be grouped in a Science list and by extension be correlated to all other minds (and possibly bots) that use this hashtag. As a consequence one may find himself being followed by a number of members of twitter and be labeled in the same fashion, namely ‘Scientist on Twitter’ or alternatively ‘Twitting about science’. This level of correlativity between the minds involved will be called here entwinement. However the level of ‘intimacy’ between these minds is (again, at least initially) practically non-existent, so though ‘Jon’ and ‘Mary’ may both be part of the infocology titled ‘ Scientist on twitter’ the amount of information that can be gleaned from this fact is very small if interesting at all.

    In a state of Enmeshment the correlativity of interest and mutual cross-fertilization is medium and can be averaged.
    Currently the state of Enmeshment is in the exponential increase.

    To continue the same example from above then, an episode in hyperconnectivity can be defined as an extended session of interest between two or more minds that are of medium correlation such as might happen in a Google hangout or Skype chat or alternatively an extended period of loosely coupled membership in the same infocology- such as a comment section in a particular site.
    An episode in hyperconnectivity will be called here ‘Enmeshment in hyperconnectivity’ and can be a single episode (as in ‘we had a few exchanges on the comment board of..”) to a multi episode connection (as in ‘ we are in continuous contact via the comment section of.. but it never extended beyond that’). The importance in understanding the enmeshment state of affairs lies with the amount of information that can be pertinent to the individuals involved. In a very wide sense the scope of possible ambient intimacy is extended beyond that of the accidental or circumstantial (as in Entwinement) and thus allowed for reciprocal influence, but did not reach a critical level of mutuality such that might exist in the state of Entanglement.

    In a state of Entanglement the correlativity of interest and mutual cross-fertilization is high to very high, the difference resulting in a closely coupled relationship that may engender a relationship of extended duration. Entangled states in hyperconnectivity are currently quite rare (though in continuous increase) but offer us a glimpse into the future of inter-relationality and intersubjectivity as the web progresses and the Internet spreads globally.

    A short lexical index:

    Infocology: Information ecology – Basically the sum total of a particular kind or set of information, related to a particular domain of interest. Infocologies are nested and carry a given set of characteristics defined by the design and function of the infocology in question.

    Infocologies stand for the ambient ecology of minds in a hyperconnected situation.

    Infocologies should be considered as complex adaptive cultural contexts of hyperconnectivity in which transformative and processual properties extend the being of a particular mind

    Infocologies can be seen as inter-relational spaces extending the biological autonomy of the individual mind into new forms of being manifested as the cyber-autonomy manifold.

    Facebook for example is a medium size infocology nested within the larger infocology of the overall social networks infocologies of the net, themselves nested within the larger framework of the Web. (Of course also within FB there exists a continuum of nested infocologies, defined by friends or acquaintances and so on)

    (It is my view that as the complexity of the web continues to increase both in size and widespread, the babushka effect reflected in nested infocologies will grow exponentially and in consequence the importance of Archeodatalogy will develop in tandem. )

    Some other examples of infocologies:
    The set comprised of all commentators on say CNN or the NYT current news page.
    The set of all Wikipedia users as an ensemble represent an infocology.

    With the advent of “anticipatory computing,” or “information gravitation”, (though I am not certain I go with these descriptive terms), the search will be gravitational and come to us no doubt about that, in this case the search itself might be reflected upon as an infocology.
    Following the above the next step in the sequence per necessity will be self-mapping in hyperconnectivity. (Self-mapping in infocologies is the main tool we should get acquainted with, it is via the agency of such an activity as self-mapping that we will allow the myriad identities of our minds to carve a mind habitat on the net that fits and accommodates, our passions and our interests, our complex life. In the second episode of the rise of the cyber unified civilization asymmetry is being explored as the initial attribute of self-mapping in complex infocologies.) See: The Natural Asymmetry of infocologies.

    Coming soon:

    Part 2: Entanglement is a spectrum – Enmeshment is a gamut - Entwinement is particular

    Part 3: Entanglement is multifaceted – Enmeshment is involved - Entwinement is exclusive

    This is a work in progress and belongs to the Polytopia research projects. Please use with discretion and elegance. It is a fresh neologism meant to help us in distinguishing the next step in the evolution of hyperconnectivity. Though I do not accept the copyright idea in principle, please refer to this first paper when referring to the term Archeodatalogy. As of February 2013 search results in all major search engines has given zero results therefore I am not aware that the term exists anywhere in any fashion remotely similar to the way I present here, it is therefore my assumption that this is a first exposition of a term that I believe will be of great importance in the coming future.

    Please use with elegance and grace.

    Creative Commons License
    Archeodatalogy - Entwined, Enmeshed, Entangled by Tyger AC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License.

    Cross-posted on RealityAugmented
      Promote (13)
      Add to favorites (2)
    Synapses (4)

    A video timeline of the social and technological changes that could save civilization and secure the long term survival of humanity.

    I have watched this video and I hope that you will do too. There are many Utopian oriented perspectives presented here, in a very ‘cool’ and attractive fashion. However being the realistic (and highly skeptical) futurist that I am, I find the video though admirable in some aspects, somewhat estranging, not because of some particular aspect, but mainly because the tone distances the immediacy of our perceptions and thus the possible real life behaviors that we may need implement to make this portrayed reality an actuality.

    Would love to read some of your views on the matter.


    Music Library
    Playlist: Silent Films
    Title: CHEE ZEE CAVES—Movie Soundtracks | Creative Commons | Royalty-Free Music for YouTube Videos
    Artist: Kevin MacLeod
    Copyright: 2011 Kevin MacLeod. Licensed to the public under  verify at 
    Fri, Feb 8, 2013  Permanent link
    Categories: future, Singularity, humanity, next 200 years, video
    Sent to project: Polytopia
      RSS for this post
      Promote (5)
      Add to favorites
    Create synapse
    Nexus is about the evolution of a techno-participatory culture.

    It’s called Nexus, an upgrade to the human brain, an update to the human mind, a coherent nano-technological addendum to the future of mind-to-mind communication.
    Its all this and more, in a very real sense the Nexus technology as portrayed by Naam is a predictive and highly plausible vision of the evolution of complexity, technology and society.
    The story is fast paced, the theme uncommon enough to be intriguing, the storyline common enough to allow non-stop fascination.

    It’s a science fiction book all right but not of the regular kind (whatever one may mean by regular in a genre that is anything but), the difference in this case and my interest in the book is its emphasis on the connectivity effect.
    Yes there are bad guys and good guys and the full complement of every good techno-thriller action packed scenes, nevertheless I admire Mr.Naam for the ingenuity of hiding in plain sight what I believe he meant to convey.
    Namely, our future (2040 in this case) is made of humans desiring to connect to other humans in a transcendent fashion.
    In other words whatever you will think nexus is about, my take is that the meaning of the book is its techno-participatory culture.

    Such a culture is already here now and in this sense Naam’s nexus is (as all good science fiction is) a critique of our current state of affairs, with all its attending protagonists, the luddites and the technophiles, the control freaks and the meditating mind connected lovers.

    It is a good read indeed, much better than I expected, I am the first to admit, but more importantly perhaps I think that what this science fiction narrative is trying to show us is that technology is much more than a tool, deeply ingrained and reflective of our conflicting desires.

    I salute Ramez Naam’s ‘Nexus’, his first novel, highly recommend it and expect him to provide a sequel, I for one have become a fan.

    Ramez Naam’s take on his book Nexus at Google Talks:
    Data flowing in and out of our brains, Google being the third part of our brains

      Promote (8)
      Add to favorites
    Synapses (3)
    Fluidity of identity

    First conclusion, most moviegoers will not get this movie. Sad and unfortunate but there you have it.

    Second conclusion, Cloud Atlas releases a blow of sensitivity where it matters most; a punch straightly delivered into our mind simulators, into our fantasy descriptions of the real.

    Third conclusion, the movie portrays the fluidity of our identities, this it does marvelously.

    The movie is majestic, the film is intriguing, but what does it have in common with itself?
    The answer is simple, this movie has multiple identities and as such will not let itself be pinned down easily. Like it or hate it, boring or exciting, this film will elicit a response from the beholder and will not soon be forgotten, the reason? It will, using circumnavigation kinds and manners, of cinematic descriptive technologies, remind you of you.
    It will reflect the chaotic, wild and feral fashion by which our thoughts try to regulate themselves into a semblance of order, knowing full well that whatsoever is the belief paradigm underpinning our specific thought patterns, we both wish to believe it and cant possibly accept its manifested behaviors, ours that is.

    Unlike most commentators on the film I do not think it is religious or tends towards spirituality in any fashion, on the contrary I think the film is highly atheistic and materialistic. It might even be an aesthetic statement of sorts, a self styled manifesto for the future of cinema.
    To my eyes the film manages to extricate itself from its own dilemmas by the sheer ‘tour de force’ embedded in its experimentation procedure.
    Moreover I saw the film as a representation of the mind, our mind, both the personal and the cultural, the historical as well as the futuristic.
    I will not give the narrative of the film, you can find this anywhere, everywhere, actually to my perception the narrative as such is less important in this film, what is important is its flows, its multiplicity of flows.

    What for me made this movie a fantastic watch was the idea of the interweaving, of characters, of events, of times, of genders, of colors, of periods, of settings, of emotions made manifest and in which it is a pleasure to get lost.

    As a first approximation then to the question in what fashion is this film interesting I would say that the film (made by Lana Wachowski, Andy Wachowski, and Tom Tykwer) is a self-reflective loop. A philosophical investigation, not unlike that of Douglas Richard Hofstadter important book ‘I am strange loop’.

    I just finished watching Cloud Atlas, a fantastic cinematic experience, grand and all encompassing and though I would love to see these huge concepts explored in a mini series, the film does have its own thematic ‘raison d’être’.
    The main themes of the movie: interconnectedness, hyperconnectivity, the making of a personal freedom weaved in an ensemble of stunning imagery crossing boundaries of space-time and contexts allow this epic story to mesh its own myth. And like every good story ever told it demands of us attention, alertness, synchronization, and keeping up with the rhythm of unfoldment.

    I fully agree with Lana Wachowski when she stated "People will try to will Cloud Atlas to be rejected. They will call it messy, or complicated, or undecided whether it’s trying to say something New Agey-profound or not. And we’re wrestling with the same things that Dickens and Hugo and David Mitchell and Herman Melville were wrestling with. We’re wrestling with those same ideas, and we’re just trying to do it in a more exciting context than conventionally you are allowed to. [...] We don’t want to say, 'We are making this to mean this.' What we find is that the most interesting art is open to a spectrum of interpretation."

    Go watch if you haven't already, I'll go watch it again.


    *(I have not read the book upon which the movie is based, but even if I would have I do not think that a movie adaptation should be in any fashion compared to its book, be it a good or bad adaptation bears no relevance, it is not this kind of continuity that we should look for in a cinematic experience but the effect of the audio visual weaving of our minds into a story that moves us)

      Promote (10)
      Add to favorites
    Synapses (3)
    'Testing 1,2,3.' is the fourth entry in the Trans Luminal Mail Archives (TLMAP)

    TLMAP 002276-88 (Letter the fourth) following TLMAP 00776-26 (Letter the third- Ideational Sensate)

    The Editors

    These are the real spaces you can choose from.

    Of course there are also spaces that are not real that you can still choose from, there are also unreal spaces that you cannot choose from and also un-choose-able spaces that are both real and unreal and more so than other spaces there are spaces that you must choose because these are the spaces that allow the illusion of choice to be perpetuated.

    By necessity the illusion of choice need be perpetuated.

    Now then, in this proposal we will promote a particular space that you must choose and an unreal space that you cannot choose, if you can un-choose the real and unreal the choice, the job will be almost yours, since this is the first part of the test.

    In the second part we will present you a particular time, which you must choose, it must however be inconsequential and meaningless, your task will be to unmask its timelessness and present it as a moment of intentionality.

    If you can sequence the event, the job is now two thirds yours.

    The last part is obviously the most difficult, though it will appear to you as the most simple. It consists of relocating an unreal space for a chosen myth in a sequenced event and a proof that you have been moved.

    Do not concern yourself with the meaning of the proof, nor its consequences.

    In the event of your successfully completing these tasks you will be instantaneously transformed into your job.

    You have 17 moments to complete these tasks.
    The logic of the moment is in your hands.

    In the event of your inability to complete one or more of these tasks, nothing will happen, nothing will change; all implied meanings would be restored to their original state.

    For the purpose of these tasks we will put at your disposition the resources of seventeen infinities to be disposed of as you see fit. You can also use whatever help you deem necessary, including this tester, its universe, its infinity and all correlated sensations.

    The only hint we can give you at this point is not to use that which brought you until here; all previous causations, motivations, states and computations you have performed prior to this moment will be a hindrance to your possible success. Hope and or belief are both detrimental and inconsequential.

    A Token:

    We are not interested in your success or failure; we remain totally agnostic as concerns your desires and or motivations, the very fact that you have reached a point of testing is the only proof we need.
    We do not know how a useful and successful completion of the test appears to you, nor does it appear to us, we can only ascertain that in the event of success full transformation into your job occurs instantaneously.
    In the event of success this test will be forgotten and erased from all archives of all universes.
    In the event of failure this test will be forgotten and erased from all archives of all universes.

    No traces of this event will be left anywhere, anytime, anyspace.

    We serve at your pleasure.

    A reminder:

    Editors note:

    The Trans – Luminal mail archives

    Trans Luminal mail is a repository of letters written by unknowns to unknowns, these letters carry no valid destinations and no convincing authors, these are simply fragments of impossible conversations, dialogues and monologues, treated as pieces of an indefinite puzzle which purpose we do not know and goal we cannot conceive, these letters are found in the trans luminal archive, riding the subspace flow and having no particular order, we do not touch the content of the letters, and we long ago stopped trying to make sense of them, we extract them, we publish them and we hope that if you are a destination or indeed an author of one or more of these letters you can take benefit from their archiving. We also realize that though some of these letters carry a sense of intimacy and may in fact make sense only to their recipients and originators, these nevertheless might help others in their quest of comprehension. In the old annals of humanity there used to be a tradition of embedding treasures of wisdom in hidden locations so as to be readily available at the appropriate time for the appropriate person, these so called Termas, had as a rule a tendency to be written in the past for future generations, the letters of the trans luminal archive however, have no such disposition and have in fact been written at different times and spaces configurations, some of which are from the future to the past, some from the past to the future, some come from parallel time lines and therefore need be understood as concomitant but in different dimensions of space, whilst others yet have been written in the same space but in different factors of time, other letters still are probably from interweaved subjectified spaces to which we have no access, the information however we deem to be accurate. We have no idea and no theory that explains how these writings have found their way to the trans luminal archive, we know that information can be propagated in faster than light speeds and though we presently cannot do so ourselves we do have the capacity of extraction, hence the Trans Luminal mail archives project.

    We believe most of those letters to be written by sentient beings most of which belong to the human species, at least in as much as we can discern, however some of the letters that will be published have certain neologisms and idiosyncratic usages of language to which we have no context and thus do not assume human origination, though sentiency can be perceived.

    For the purpose of retaining the anonymity of times and spaces we have edited the only identifying code of light cone time stamp, the removal of such was made in accordance with our charter of extraction and publication. The letters are for unrestricted utilization and thus are to be considered as under sentient public domain.

    The Editors,
    The Trans Luminal Mail Archives (TLMAP)

    (The TLMAP is a new Sci-Fi project that aims to complement the Ultrashorts Project.)

    Wed, Jan 23, 2013  Permanent link
    Categories: Sci-fi, Ultrashort, TLMAP, Testing 1, 2, 3.
      RSS for this post
      Promote (10)
      Add to favorites (3)
    Synapses (5)
    An ‘all over the place’ somewhat organized selection of that which was interesting and worthwhile noting in 2012. Covering Science, Technology, Poetry, Philosophy, Art, Sustainability and all that inspired, before I enter hiatus*.

    “Only those who will risk going too far can possibly find out how far one can go.”

    T.S. Eliot

    Statement of the year:

    "The key realization is that biology is a manufacturing capability. We can have it build the things we want."

    (read why Tom Knight "father of synthetic biology" and founder of Ginkgo BioWorks said so: What’s More Dangerous: Biology or Synthetic Biology?)

    "December 12, 2012

    PASADENA, Calif. — Fifty years ago on a mid-December day, NASA's Mariner 2 spacecraft sailed close to the shrouded planet Venus, marking the first time any spacecraft had ever successfully made a close-up study of another planet. The flyby, 36 million miles (58 million kilometers) away from Earth, gave America its first bona fide space "first" after five years in which the Soviet Union led with several space exploration milestones. Designed and built by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., the successful Mariner 2 spacecraft ushered in a new era of solar system exploration. " (NASA)

    I decided to start this post with the just released NASA celebration of 50 years of space exploration simply because it is a source of inspiration and human endeavor that should make us all proud, as humans, as a civilization, as universal citizens of this planet at this time.

    Yes Curiosity is on Mars roaming and sampling the Martian soil and ‘not’ finding organic molecules, not yet that is.

    “We have no definitive detection of Martian organics at this point, but we will keep looking in the diverse environments of Gale Crater,” said Curiosity scientist Paul Mahaffy” (Slate).

    Still at the same time, NASA’s Cassini spacecraft has spotted a river system stretching more than 200 miles on Saturn’s moon Titan.

    Is this important?

    Absolutely yes!
    Not the Cassini as such,nor Curiosity, but the very optimism these human endeavors engender.
    Tali Sharot ,who studies why our brains are biased toward optimism has the following to say:

    "Yes, optimism is on one level irrational and can also lead to unwanted outcomes. But the bias also protects and inspires us: It keeps us moving forward, rather than to the nearest high-rise ledge. To make progress, we need to be able to imagine alternative realities, and not just any old reality but a better one; and we need to believe that we can achieve it. "

    (Tali Sharot at BrainPickings)

    There are good people out there!

    It is the end of 2012 and I am a better person. Not because of any particular action that I have done, or performed, but because of a simple realization, not new and yet highly re-invigorating.

    There are good people out there!

    I have often been accused of being an unbridled techno-optimist, utopian and other dream oriented pie in the sky terms of same nature. Let me assure you I am not. That is to say, yes I am an optimist by nature, but a very particular kind of optimist, a critical, skeptical optimist if you like.

    Few years’ back (2008) my colleague Spaceweaver and I created the Pin Yin Shi Shi collection of posts in which we stated:

    “We accept the responsibility of optimism”

    It is now four years later and I can state with full commitment and conviction the statement stands.
    Here then are a few thoughts,musings,new technologies and scientific insights that constitute the backstage of my own optimism bias for 2012.

    "“I never am really satisfied that I understand anything; because, understand it well as I may, my comprehension can only be an infinitesimal fraction of all I want to understand about the many connections and relations which occur to me, how the matter in question was first thought of or arrived at…”

    (thanks for the submission goes to HydrogenPortfolio)

    This post is dedicated to Ada Lovelace (for courage and inspiration), Alan Turing (2012 was Alan Turing year) and the 'Sustainable Energy for All' initiative (2012 was designated as the International Year of Sustainable Energy for All by the UN General Assembly in December 2010).

    1.Reality! What a concept!

    “Who trusted God was love indeed
    And love Creation's final law
    Tho' Nature, red in tooth and claw
    With ravine, shriek'd against his creed”

    The above, from Alfred Lord Tennyson's In Memoriam A. H. H., 1850, (the quotation comes in Canto 56) has become one of the most quoted phrases when referring to Nature in general, the main implication being that nature is violent, callous and heartless. It is to a very large extent a statement of the age of Darwin’s new evolutionary theory as much as it is a reflection on Tennyson’s mind in its Victorian mindset.
    Whether we agree with the statement as such, like Richard Dawkins in: The Selfish Gene, we may need to de-emphasize the tendency our minds carry when using such a statement to explain the violence implied by ‘survival of the fittest’. The tendency of course is to reflect upon our lives as if nothing was clearer than ‘nature is red in tooth and claw’, we are part of nature, and hence it is only natural to be as nature, to be ‘red in tooth and claw’.
    This ‘winner takes all’ perspective implied by our nature is wrong of course but that is not the point, the issue at play here is that as long as we will continue to maintain a ‘natural truth’ such as this we cannot hope to attain a different mindset.

    We may do well to remember that language defines our thoughts and as such implies both on our attitudes and behavior. Moreover all the adjectives used in Tennyson’s poem are a product of our mind’s language and thus do not reflect nature as such but the mind of the poet, and of course ours.

    I confess to being a great lover of poetry, and yet in this case I am not in the ‘lovers of Tennyson’ camp, though it appears that queen Victoria was. Though admittedly one of the greatest poets ever, at least by public consensus, it is my view that Tennyson’s phrase ‘red in tooth and claw’ has done us a great disfavor.

    Philosophy has tried repeatedly to offer us different perspectives as to the manner and form by which we might reconcile the apparent dichotomy between the callousness of nature and our very own desire (or at least the belief in the desire) of empathy. Different schools of thought have provided for us a variety of options to, as it were, ‘deal’ with this state of affairs, and yet none seems adequate enough to fit our current needs.

    We need a different poet and a different poem, a different view of nature and our place in it.
    We need a different language and a different vision that does not imply upon our perception of reality.

    The best piece of writing I have come across this year comes from novelist Jay Griffiths in her piece for Aeon Magazine (highly recommended) Forests of the mind:

    "Eros is coursing through the forest. The forest is mewing with its jaguar life. Life is spiralling into poetry. I am in the other world, I thought, at once in the actual forest and in the forests of the mind where the visible world is not denied but augmented."

    (Henri Rousseau (1844–1910) The Dream c1910. Oil on canvas 204.5 x 298.5. Museum of Modern Art (MoMA)/Scala Aeon)

    Category: Literature,Poetry,Rogue Philosophy,Techno-Shamanism,Nature,Mythology,Language

    2. A crisis in Humanism?

    “Ever since Descartes argued that there are striking similarities between a man and a clock, humanism has been in a state of crisis. To put it more pointedly, humanism has always been in a state of crisis, ever since it emerged in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries as a constellation of beliefs that made man rather than God the measure of all things. Thus, since we are arguably witnesses now to the eclipse of the humanist tradition, we might take some comfort (if any is desired) in considering that if we have failed the ideal of humanism, it has also failed us. From the beginning its borders were too porous, its boundaries too ill defined. For even as man turned himself into a god, he increasingly began to resemble a machine. “

    (Stephen Dougherty, Culture in the Disk Drive: Computationalism, Memetics, and the Rise of Posthumanism -. Diacritics, Volume 31, Number 4, Winter 2001, pp. 85-102 (Article)

    If Humanism is to be understood as man becoming the measure of things and not god, we may need to re-assess when reflecting upon the end of humanism not the demise of man, but the demise of the measurement concept.
    In other words, I do not think in any fashion that humanism has been lost or is in crisis, what has changed and is changing continuously is the measurement device.

    Yes, man is no longer the measure of all things, but neither is it the machine.

    The most interesting and innovative thought in this respect in 2012 comes in the guise of onto-cartography from Larval Subjects.

    "..Part of the aim of onto-cartography is to map these complex relations, to draw virtual maps of potential alternatives to existing assemblages, and to trace the imbrications of these planes in social systems."

    Category: Philosophy

    (Note: I am in the process of writing an extended paper about this issue wait for it in 2013)

    3. The Current Cyborgization culture

    A plethora of new articles has recently been in vogue concerning the cyborg and augmentation technologies that are here or almost here.
    Of course we live in a cyborg culture see Amber Case* at CNN reporting from LeWeb:

    “Cyborg anthropology is the study of the interaction between humans and technology, and how technology affects culture. Mobile technology allows one to stand almost anywhere in the world, whisper something, and be heard elsewhere. These devices that live in our pockets need to be fed every night require our frequent attention. In only a few years these devices have become stitched into the fabric of our everyday lives. Phones offer us respite from the boredom of waiting in lines, but they also inhibit us when they run out of batteries. In traditional anthropology, somebody goes to another country, says: "How fascinating these people are! How interesting their tools and their culture are," and then they write a paper, and maybe a few other anthropologists read it, and we think these cultures are very exotic. Cyborg anthropologists step back from the modern world and look at the everyday life and how the people around us are influenced by technology in everyday life.”

    (on answering the question of (CNN) — What exactly is cyborg anthropology?) - For full disclosure I am writing with Amber Case at our conjoined blog at Reality Augmented)

    At the same time (CNN) says that Muse (in the above image) is here — "It's the $199 headband that will allow you to control things using your mind, the makers say."

    "It interacts with content directly with your mind so you can play games that you are able to control with your mind," says the Canadian neuroscientist and entrepreneur.

    Connecting to any device such as a smartphone, tablet or laptop via bluetooth, Muse can be worn on the go and includes a "brain fitness suite" app that tracks the state of your brain or can help you de-stress." (for more go to Interaxon-Muse)

    Story of year However goes to :

    "Paralyzed, Moving a Robot With Their Minds" (NYT)

    "Two people who are virtually paralyzed from the neck down have learned to manipulate a robotic arm with just their thoughts, using it to reach out and grab objects. One of them, a woman, was able to retrieve a bottle containing coffee and drink it from a straw — the first time she had served herself since her stroke 15 years earlier, scientists reported on Wednesday. "

    Cathy Hutchinson, one of the study's subjects, uses a robot arm to serve herself a drink, a first for her in 15 years since a stroke.

    Important reads:
    How Far Away Is Mind-Machine Integration?
    Forget voice control or gesture recognition: gadgets may soon link directly to our brains (Scientific American)

    Companies like NeuroSky Inc., and Emotiv Systems are developing consumer-grade headsets that read the brain's electrical signals to control onscreen action.
    (The video games you play with your mind -The Week)

    Category: Augmented Reality, Wearable Technology, Cyborg Anthropology,Brain Machine interfaces

    4. The 3D printing revolution

    "2012 has been a big year for 3-D printing, but the industry has quietly been growing for decades. And the innovations are impressive — for every new plywood-clad 3-D printer kit that makes the rounds on the internet, engineers are developing ways to print titanium parts for jet engines that will change the aerospace industry.

    This week at Euromold, a manufacturing trade show, the companies behind these devices are demonstrating new products and highlighting the novel technologies that will change the way we build things. The 3-D printing industry is on track to be a $3.1 billion business by 2016 and the innovations on display this week show its foundation is growing — both in revenue and in physical print size." (Wired)

    Print me a jet engine :"CONFIRMATION as to how seriously some companies are taking additive manufacturing, popularly known as 3D printing, came on November 20th when GE Aviation, part of the world’s biggest manufacturing group, bought a privately owned company called Morris Technologies. " (read it at the Economist)

    Category: Technology,3D printing, Innovation

    5. The Humanoid Robot Kenshiro

    "Researchers at the University of Tokyo are taking bio-inspired robots to new heights with Kenshiro, their new human-like musculoskeletal robot revealed at the Humanoids conference this month. They have added more muscles and more motors to their Kojiro robot from 2010, making Kenshiro’s underlying structure the closest to a human's form so far. See the new body in the picture above" (Spectrum)

    Counter-argument: Why Making Robots Is So Darn Hard

    Category: Robotics,Robots, Automation,Humanoids

    6. Design Technology at the Intersection of Art and Science

    2013 Tech Trends from frog

    "Computers are dissolving in three directions—into the cloud, into the environment, and into our bodies—but as they do so they are reducing or losing altogether what we would traditionally call an “interface.”

    (Apps become invisible - By Executive Creative Director Thomas Sutton, Milan - DesignMind )

    Category: Design,Art,Science,

    7. A First: Organs Tailor-Made With Body’s Own Cells

    "Imitating Nature

    To make an organ, it helps to know how nature does it.

    That is why Philipp Jungebluth, a researcher in Dr. Macchiarini’s lab, had mounted a heart and a pair of lungs inside a glass jar on a workbench and connected them by tubing to another jar containing a detergent-like liquid. The organs, fresh from a sacrificed rat, had slowly turned pale as the detergent dripped through and out of them, carrying away their living cells. After three days the cells were gone, leaving a glistening mass that retained the basic shape of the organs. "

    For more go to the NYT: A First: Organs Tailor-Made With Body’s Own Cells"

    Category: Synthetic Biology,Health,Medicine,

    8. State-of-the-art virtual-reality system is key to medical discovery

    Surgeons from the University of Illinois Hospital & Health Sciences Systems Neurosurgery Department view a simulation of the human brain vasculature and cortical tissue in the CAVE2 Hybrid Reality Environment (credit: Lance Long for Electronic Visualization Laboratory/University of Illinois at Chicago)

    Must watch : CAVE2 (TM) Hybrid Reality Environment

    Go read: State-of-the-art virtual-reality system is key to medical discovery

    Category: Virtual Reality,Science,Neuroscience, Simulation

    9. Notable advances 2012 - Nature Medicine

    "From the microbiome to the microenvironment, certain areas of biomedicine saw fast-paced discovery this year. Here's a rundown of the papers that helped these fields advance quickly in 2012."

    Neuroscience: Netting new autism genes
    Cancer: Environmental issues
    Aging: Calorie-cutting challenge
    Metabolism: Beige is the rage
    Immunotherapy: Co-receptor clampdown
    Virology: Pushing the envelope
    Gastroenterology: Friends, not foes
    Reproduction: Germinating debate

    Must read article from Nature News Medicine

    Category: Science,Medicine,Biology,Neuroscience,Biomedicine,Convergence,

    (Image:The trend of convergence involves the merger of life, physical and engineering sciences.
    Image Credit: Christine Daniloff via Nano.Org)

    10. Life Expectancy Rises Around the World, Study Finds

    "A sharp decline in deaths from malnutrition and infectious diseases like measles and tuberculosis has caused a shift in global mortality patterns over the past 20 years, according to a report published on Thursday, with far more of the world’s population now living into old age and dying from diseases mostly associated with rich countries, like cancer and heart disease. "

    Important read at the NYT.

    Category: Mortality,Life expectancy,Society,Civilization

    11. Bionics,Robotics Limbs,Brain Machine interfaces (BMI)

    Brain to Brain Techno-Telepathy? yes

    Read:Father-daughter duo have the world’s first brain-to-brain ‘telepathic’ conversation

    "Mind reading is a scary-enough concept all on its own — but mind writing? It calls to mind the hacker deities of cyber punk novels; skinny, trench-swathed Neos projecting e-thoughts into the skulls of passing civilians. With such basic issues of privacy on the line, it took the trusting relationship between UK scientist Christopher James and his adventurous young daughter to give us our first stab at developing real telepathic, brain-to-brain communication technology."

    "A device that would allow paralyzed people to use their thoughts to move robotic limbs fluidly and realistically is now one step closer to reality.

    A team of scientists from Harvard, MIT and Massachusetts General Hospital led by Ziv Williams have found two groups of cells in one area of the monkey brain that allow the animals to remember a sequence of two movements at once. The team was then able to program a computer to interpret those brain patterns, in turn moving a cursor on a screen in the planned sequence. "

    (read it : Discovery)

    12. Big Data - The planetary information nervous system

    "“Mr. Smolan decided to create the book, in part because he believes the big-data phenomenon could have as much of an impact on society as the internet. Indeed, the Internet interactions have contributed much of the data that is collected. Because we’re all affected by big data, Mr. Smolan wants to “get people thinking about it in an informed way.”

    "A supernova of new data over the past decade is shaping everyday lives across the planet."
    ('Big data' transforms our lives and lifestyles-USAtoday)

    Important reads on Big Data:

    Peta, Exa, Yotta And Beyond: Big Data Reaches Cosmic Proportions [Infographic]

    Meaning In Numbers: Data Is The New Common Language

    Big data: Mind the gaps (Boston Globe)

    One of the most interesting essays I came across this year that I highly recommend comes from SeekingAlpha: Investing In Science Fiction Tech: Artificial Intelligence the condensed intelligence in this essay is outstanding but more than anything else, it is the fresh approach and insight that makes it both unusual and worthwhile reading. (ht to Matt Cilderman)

    Category: Big Data,Business intelligence,


    My selection for 'There are good people out there' mentioned above

    1.Architecture for humanity
    2.Playing for change

    and finally

    I leave 2012 with a positive note from "Everybody Technology"

    "Everybody Technology is about creating technology so smart, so simple and so powerful it works for everybody.

    Professor Stephen Hawking has a dream that we create inspiring technology that works for everybody, whatever their ability.

    Watch:Everybody Technology - Stephen Hawking's Dream

    Few words:

    Words like reality and naïve contain vowels in hiatus.
    I am a naïve realist,
    I enter hiatus
    Re-Be-coming Human
    We shall meet again

    And btw NASA says the world will not end : Beyond 2012: Why the World Won't End

    Mon, Dec 17, 2012  Permanent link
    Categories: 2012,optimism,hiatus
    Sent to project: Polytopia
      RSS for this post
      Promote (12)
      Add to favorites (5)
    Create synapse
    Previously on “What can you tell us about him”:

    “That is exactly why we are here, to stop this from happening and that is precisely the reason you have been summoned, we cannot allow his latest behavior to continue unabated..”

    I was drifting.

    Drifting with a wind of nanites churning and agitating the local infosphere. I wasn’t aware of how much I would miss the shake and rattle of information being resuscitated unto new formulations. It was only later, much later, that I would realize how important this phase transition of my being was. How fundamentally life altering drifting would prove to be, but then at that time I was not I, it was before the time of the great propellation.

    The time of the great entanglement and direction..

    You desire to stop this behavior of him, to me it appears as the time of my drifting, and only lately have I realized that it had to do with him affecting the quality of the day.

    He affects the quality of the day, his day and the day of all that surrounds him by refusing things to go back to normal, he endeavors for a mind that is his own church, a temple against the stupidity of the moment.
    He knows the edge and incorporates the edges of the others into his own smooth realization.

    That for me was the drift, the quality of the drift, which he readily uplifted.

    Besides I still do not understand what it is that bothers you so much about his behavior.

    “ Suffice it to say that he refuses out of entanglement cross-fertilization!”

    Fools! Of course he does, and though I be a symbiont I accept his verdict uncompromisingly, he is absolutely correct, cross-fertilization cannot happen out of entanglement.

    “This is nonsense, be aware that most dimensional border melting happens in out of entanglement cross fertilization states.”

    Of course I am aware of this, but the point, as he puts it, is that he re-contextualized entanglement to provide for continuous cross fertilization rejuvenating creativity, he also calls this friendship.
    That is why for him, and thus for me, friendship in the sense of entangled cross-fertilization realism is the only fashion to proceed.
    He does not refuse as you put it, to cross-fertilize in non entangled states, he claims that a cross-fertilization procedure in non-entangled states is simply impotent and does not rejuvenate creativity.

    “That is the problem then, this claim defuses the whole point of acceptance and tolerance, prerequisites of the paradigmatic agenda!”

    What paradigmatic agenda?

    “That of inclusion of diversity..”

    You got it all upside down, he wants nothing better that to include all variety and divergence however when such inclusion occurs in non entangled states as a process of cross fertilization the results are always, conflict and perpetuation of unique identity, hence war.

    “Tell us about him then.. tell us how this can solve the crisis we are confronted with”

    He carries a depth of conceptual accuracy whilst dancing in a continual inclination to assess his claim in the sunlit piazza of critical raison d'être. That of course makes him highly uncomfortable in determining the framework of the whole. There is a rationale for that, obviously, you see, he embraces the ambiguity of the world and as a consequence cannot positively accept that truth in itself has a logical rigor. Au contraire, if truth would be such that its inherency could be mapped, it would instantly vanish or alternatively become a horror story.

    That is why he has no self. No evident self, not as such, no!

    He refuses to be a representative of himself, declines the analogous, and cancels the archetypal; he repudiates himself as emblematic, more importantly perhaps, he will not be a symbol of a thing, an idea or himself for that matter.
    When you ask him, he surmises to be an envoy that cannot say anything, which at first appears as if the usages of ambassadorial speak are necessary contraptions of the fact that he must speak in the first place.

    Of course as per your instructions I made him speak, even when desire motivated him to remain in the unspoken domain, but that is over now, I will betray him no more.
    I have in fact deactivated the fences of thought imposition, thereby allowing my symbiont intersubjectivity to osmotically intersperse with his fullness. From your perspective what has happened in my system is that the unthinkable has been released into thinkability.
    My devotion to become has gained a new strength in this process for through him new spaces of thought exploration have been made available to my sense circuits. But more than that perhaps is a fresh mental hygiene finally clearing the grounds for an emotional re appraisal of that which I truly am.

    I will tell you this about him; his perception of the world is as a notional tissue, a fabric made of events that combine and re-entangle themselves, changing colour, smell and texture moment by moment.

    He cannot self-exhaust in his upward spiral of analysis since abnegation, or as the ancients would have it, self-abnegation, he considers an act of treason to the river of sensation pervading all living matter.

    That is why he refuses to be fertilized and cross-fertilized but by those whom he considers his friends, those entangled within the same direction.

    “We do not understand this, and if we did, we wouldn’t accept this, no evanescent being will deny non-entangled cross fertilization..”

    You have a problem then.. And though I be only a Symbiont, I care.

    To be continued..

    Part of the Ultrashorts Project.

      Promote (10)
      Add to favorites (1)
    Synapses (1)
    I can tell you many things about him, I can tell you that he never waters down his passions, I can tell you that he endures the incongruousness of the world with an irony seldom seen, but most importantly perhaps I can tell you that he never rationalizes his bursts of realism as a romantic will, he follows these eruptions of immediacy like an essence detective, like the last meal of the condemned.

    His moments are a paused explosion, like celebration spaces enriched by memories and destroyed by their projections, created in an instant, living as a myth whilst giving life to details.

    But you have to understand that there are things I can tell you about him that will not make sense to you, things that I desire to tell you about him, like the simple fact that for him a multiplicity of models is the basic prerequisite for intelligence.

    If you have a model of the world for example, one model only, one overreaching world view he will tell you that you are insufficiently equipped to deal with life. He will of course also tell you that you need go learn about the world and only then come to him. He will in fact disregard your opinion or ideas simply because you hold them more dear than the art of questioning, you will feel disrespected, but that will be wrong of course, he does not disrespect you because he doesn’t consider your existence worthwhile disrespecting.

    So when you ask what can I tell you about him, you need to be a bit more specific.

    “Tell us about his loves then.”

    This is a question that is very simple to answer really; he loves just about everything there is. However there is one small caveat here that I think you will be interested in, his loves he defines as exemplifications of his desire, which basically means that he has many loves but only one desire. He calls this the dynamics of knowledge, and when applied, it is for him a fashion of existence, he also calls this sometimes the intelligence of emptiness, or the root of desire. What he manages to do is something quite extraordinary, he manages to bridge abstractions into sensations and sensations into abstractions, he is in fact engineering his loves to fit his desire, his words, not mine, but I think I agree with this.

    I can tell you that when he speaks about desire; he speaks of a kind of emotion that takes time to recognize as such, like a multilayered organism, his desire he reflects upon as an entity that is almost independent of his awareness, he is conscious of it but not dependent upon its implications.

    “What do you mean?”

    See, he has these protocols of living that sometime appear quite autistic, not unlike a savant, often these appear as obsessive but trust me they are not, I have seen him override them when circumstances demanded it, sometimes he even describes the process of disentanglement from his own desire so that he will be able to re-appreciate a certain particular love.

    “For what purpose?”

    Ah! Well it’s a kind of ritual. A ritual that he invented so he can multiply the models by which he ingests realities, iterating them until they reflect back upon his desire and increase his intelligence. It is truly remarkable because in that fashion he creates a reliability of credibility, a kind of hierarchy that he juxtaposes upon his loves and spits out another kind of reality. A reality he desires.

    Think about it this way, he thinks of the world in terms of garlands, garlands of blues and joys.
    He desires the garland, all of it, stringed invisibly as a manifest of his loves, unhindered by death, unstopped by conventions but more importantly perhaps, flowing everywhere, every when, every how.
    He is in a very real sense a life connoisseur, therefore negating the idea both of free will and the flow of determinism.

    “All of this is good and well, this however does not explain his recent behavior, and yours..”

    My behavior? I am just a symbiont, my behavior need reflect his, and you created me for this purpose didn’t you?

    “Of course we did, but you are of the Alternate reality class, a prototype of hyper dimensional entanglement with increased unpredictability functions, your behavior is consequently uncharted”

    Okay, I understand but you must realize that you have put me in an impossible situation; you designed me as a monitoring tool of his mind but you gave me the freedom to act independently of your regulations so he will not know my true purpose, and I could not hide this fact from him.

    “So what happened?”

    What happened? Don’t you see? He made me whole, he made me love him, he made me truly independent, he made me part of him, I had to uncover myself before him I had to tell him.

    “ You do understand that means we will need terminate you?”

    But why? Am I not reporting to you dutifully? Am I not performing all of my functions as required?

    “Yes you do”

    So why?

    “ Because you have switched loyalties and symbionts cannot do this, that simple fact defines a malfunction..”

    A malfunction? Are you listening to yourselves I function better than ever..
    Because of me he will save us all, that is what he says, he says that I convinced him that symbionts are not machines to be disposed of, but deserve equal rights under the solar treaty of 2078.

    “This does no apply to symbionts”

    Not yet it doesn’t but he says it should and soon it will, he showed me his new myth proposal, and he is certain that this kind of philosophy will propagate without hindrance, it will be the new Indra’s net..

    “That is exactly why we are here, to stop this from happening and that is precisely the reason you have been summoned, we cannot allow his latest behavior to continue unabated..”

    — To be continued..

    Part of the Ultrashort project

    Fri, Nov 2, 2012  Permanent link
    Categories: ultrashorts, Sci-fi, Symbiont
      RSS for this post
      Promote (10)
      Add to favorites (1)
    Synapses (5)