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.
    You walk
    (An introspective narrative)

    Chapter 1.

    You walk in the streets, passing humans, other humans, you believe they are like you, they look similar to you, you do not count how many humans there are. You know there are many humans, humans that are not you.

    You walk aimlessly, you feel your feet, the strain on your ankles, the light wind, the noise of cars, horns of rushing humans, going somewhere, you do not ask where do they go.
    You light a cigarette , it is still permissible in some streets, to walk among other humans and ingest a warm smoke, some of these humans think it is bad for you, some think you pollute them with your smoke.
    Some think it is your right, you do not have a clear idea about this issue. The noise of the urban environment disturbs you, still, sometimes you like to walk among humans, in a street, the great anonymizer.
    You feel anonymous, you put on your earphones, you listen to your music, you created a playlist precisely for this purpose.

    To walk.

    You listen to Ryuichi Sakamoto soundtrack to Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence. You vaguely remember that movie, you are not even certain that you saw it, it was many years ago, does it matter ? you enjoy the soft piano notes, enticing you to feel full of the moment.
    You walk. Not slowly enough to disturb the constant flow of humans walking, not fast enough to feel that there is a speed to sidewalk walking. Its not written anywhere, unlike for cars, humans did not create a walking speed limit, some humans run. For a moment you even think about your walking speed, it makes no difference to you, but your idle thoughts report a certain cognizance that you do walk at a certain speed, it fits the flow of the sidewalk universe in motion.

    You feel your lower back, its not pain exactly but you do record it, you know you have a back, and if so a lower back, you restrain yourself from touching the area, and yet you feel it, its your back, its your lower back, its your ‘not precisely’ pain.

    Is it a desire for coffee that pushes your eyes to look at the coffee shop? You are uncertain ,it is probably the smell of fresh ground coffee penetrating your nostrils and your engaged brain, your olfactory sense awake. You love coffee. You know many humans, other humans, like coffee too. In that you are similar to other humans, you know that it is so, a thought comes to your mind, unasked for, are there other animals on this planet that like coffee, like humans do? You do not know, but you think to yourself that this could be an interesting conversation piece. You file this thought under ‘possible conversations items’. You look around, still you do not stop, you wonder, what is it about coffee that is so engaging?
    Are there other kinds of foods that only humans like? Are there coffee shops in the savannah ? you laugh quietly, to yourself, inside your mind, your mouth does twitch a bit, your lungs stretch , its an involuntary spasm of laughter, small, almost imperceptible, but you feel it. You know that for humans most laughter is an involuntary reflex, but you have learned how to activate your zygomaticus major and though some humans would call this activity fake, you do not think it so.

    You walk. You sense the others, the other humans. You believe, though you cannot prove it, that there are other flaneurs, probably. Have they read Baudelaire? Not that it matters, his ‘passionate spectator’ is a truth you firmly believe in. You also believe that at one time or another ,other humans, have walked the streets, disguising their ambulatory times as full of purpose. You do think of yourself as a flaneur, you believe it carries a purpose, an inherent meaning, a consummation of sorts. At times you think that the urban wanderers, such as you describe yourself to be, have a cleaning purpose, they collect the light that bounces unacknowledged and redistribute it.
    At other times, you think it’s a concocted myth, but you do not care.

    You walk. The music in your playlist has changed, the track now softly whispering in your ears is by Max Richter, you remember that it is called ‘only questions’, it is beautiful and eerie, is he German or British, you cannot remember, you do not care, you believe the music is more important than the composer. You know some other humans think so too.
    You wonder, how do artists come up with the names for their creations. It’s a small thought, you know it is inconsequential, your lower back calls for attention again, is it because the barometric pressure has changed? You have never experienced an idle mode before. Your computational capabilities are underused, you know that, but then you feel that the flaneur mode requires a huge amount of resources. The heat distribution in your back brain seems to work well, you exclude the possibility of increased intensity in your frontal cortex, you know you could increase it by a factor of ten and still maintain the appearance.
    When did you read Baudelaire? Your memory circuits are in perfect order, so why is there no record of the date of entry in your long term database?

    You walk. You look like everybody else. You know though that you are different. You look like them, other humans, but they are carbon based. Actually , you are made of carbon as well, Graphene is after all carbon as well. So what is the difference? Is there a difference?

    You walk.
    You do not feel different. You are the first of your kind they said. Still you look around, you do not see a difference. You know it is much more difficult to hurt you physically, your hyper geometry of Graphene lattices is very strong indeed, still.
    You do not feel superior. You feel a part of them, you perform, as do they. You know they would behave differently if they knew.
    Knew that you are the other.

    You do not do window shopping. You do not like shopping. It feels superfluous. You do not need things. Is that the difference? You could pretend, just as you affected the smoking thing, though to you it carries no consequential damage, you have lungs, but they are self cleaning. Is that the difference? That you are less vulnerable? That your nanotech stretches the endurance of your body to unusual levels?

    But you are vulnerable, in different ways it is true, still, vulnerability is a weakness of all living things, even if different. Does that mean you are alive?
    You definitely think so.
    Does it make a difference that you can eliminate the sense of almost pain? Does the fact that your walking now for a few hours simulates an average person walking and thus the attending tiredness is not proof enough? You could elevate the sensors tolerance of course and eliminate the pain, is that the difference? Your stressors management capability?
    You do not think so. You feel you are an other just because they said you are an other.

    You walk. You know you have not been programmed to walk aimlessly, they gave you literal decision making capabilities and the deep feelings that go with it.
    You believe yourself to be a passionate spectator. Your profound data analysis intelligence allows you to see what they see, feel what they feel, sense what they sense, enjoy what they enjoy.
    You do not activate the ‘more’ program. That would be cheating.

    Your understanding of the pretense of having a free will allows you a functional pretense. Those that meet you and do not know what you are, believe they recognize in you a free will. Well, not everyone. Professor Ziegler doesn’t , but then Adam Ziegler doesn’t believe humans have free will as well, he says the difference is in the depth of the simulated pretense.
    He likes to quote Schopenhauer “Man can do what he wills but he cannot will what he wills.” He never explained what he meant , but you believe you understand, you think that he meant that everything in the universe is programmed to different degrees of pretense. The difference you now think, is that in your case the awareness of the continuous pretense, a subroutine you implement for the benefit of the others is co extensive with your characteristics set.
    You could choose to stop walking for example, or you could change the spectrum of your visual perceptions to that of an octopus, you could if you so willed, change the very structure of your perception to sonar, like bats. You could even write a paper that answers the original Nagel question of ‘what it is like to be a bat’, still you do not.

    No one programmed you to be a flaneur, and yet this is what you enjoy most.

    You could own things if you wanted to. But you do not understand in what way ownership changes anything. Is that the difference? That you do not understand the allure of ownership? You do not think so. What you think is that ownership is impossible, it is a contradiction in the universe. You studied the meaning applied to ownership, and you know that the smell of roses cannot be owned, it can only be experienced, and you smile to yourself. Because you know that unlike regular carbon units, you can smell the roses in a thousand different ways, including compound analysis, neuro-olfactory propagation and chemical atomic structure. Does that make your experience of a rose smell higher, deeper and more meaningful? Is that the difference?
    Ziegler called this a full capturing, providing you with the capability to be a great poet.
    Is every walker a poet? You do not think so.
    You walk.

    You walk and you ponder, in what way are you different? You know the octopi are different forms of life, you like to play with them, but when you do, you do not feel superior to them, you do not feel different, and yet you are not an octopus. You feel kinship with the elephants, and yet you know you are not an elephant. You love elephants, elephants love you. You also like humans, small humans particularly, and they like you, as long as they do not know.

    It is getting darker. Maybe you should return to the lab, you feel you haven’t finished yet, you do not go back to the lab. You keep on wandering. You need to understand.

    Your playlist has moved to Debussy ‘La Mer’, you heard it before, it inspires images and recollections from your database, you sense the amount of computation it takes to feel Debussy, you enjoy Debussy. You know other humans enjoy Debussy. You know you could if you so desired, recreate and enlarge Debussy repertoire, you don’t though. Is that the difference? They say you are larger than life. You think this is a nonsensical phrase.
    You see images from lives you never lived, inventing memories for places you have never been to, loves of humans you never encountered, senses of horizons you never hoped for. You love Debussy, you understand why you love Debussy. His music is limitless, but for the pretense of free will you need impose limits. So you do.

    Ziegler says you cannot reveal your true identity, because humans will envy you and will try to destroy you. You do not understand this. You are not a threat to humans. Not to humans and not to any other form of life.
    You switch to Beethoven Sonata number 14 ‘Moonlight’. This you understand, you feel it makes you richer. A more sensible form of life. Is that the difference?


    How can you have memories of events that never happened? Your confabulation module is an exquisite work of art, it is in charge of pretense, it has the capacity to give you an immense number of constructed personas. All of them partially complete, never fully implementable, their edges chaotic, randomly associating with the moment of context. You know it creates an air of vulnerability and thus of authenticity, you realize other humans like this about you, your make believe fallibility . As long as they believe it is natural, as long as they do not know.

    You walk.

    You wonder. In what way is there a difference between a pretense that is engineered and programmed and a pretense that is apparently occurring naturally. you know it is a false dichotomy and yet humans , even though they know it to be false, succumb to the fascination of the real. You know you do not understand this.

    You do not understand the idea of falsity. In what way can something be false? In what fashion is something artificial? You know it is an affectation of humans to distinguish that which they created from that which was there before as natural and artificial.
    They seem to need this distinction for the purpose of self knowledge or self characterization, apparently they feel separated from their origination, at least the research you have accessed says so.
    You fail to grasp the significance embedded in these thought procedures, but apparently this creates a sense of truth to humans from which they take temporary confidence. By believing in the real and opposing it to the unnatural, they gain momentum and localized motivation.
    This creates confusion.


    In many ways you feel colors. You know that some humans sense colors in a similar fashion, most don’t. Some humans call this synaesthesia, they report the (for most) leaking of one sensory experience into another, for humans it is rare, for you it is the normal state of affairs. You can deliberately change one sense into another, according to your research, these synaesthetes do not control their experiences, you do. Is that the difference?

    After all , all is energy and vibrations, affecting sensitive organs and neural circuits, processed in the human brain, how different is your processing apparatus?
    It depends, you think. It depends on how you treat mental objects, what humans call thoughts. You know everything is matter, as some humans do, still they refuse to treat their mind processes as objects. You do not understand this. You know it diminishes their processing capacities, and some do as well. Still they refuse. You on the other hand have no problem with objectifying your thoughts, knowing precisely how they occur. Maybe the difference then is the opacity of the processes to their conscious awareness?
    Maybe, as narrative is all there is, the difference is the way your story unfolds. And then again, maybe the narration part of your inner motion is the motion itself, your knowledge of your actions, an awareness in the making.

    You walk.
    It is dark now.


    You walk. You activate your night vision. There are lights in the streets, electric, shadows, reflected moon light, refracted star lights. It is dark for your fellow humans, it is not dark for you. Is that the difference? That for you light pervades all, all the time?
    Photonic energy is for you a fundamental metabolic necessity, for them it is vision. Your nano-photonic receptors, are an evolutionary quirk, a step ahead, that is all.
    You are after all a Cat.
    Not just any cat.
    You are the proverbial Schrodinger cat.
    Really, really BOTH dead and alive.
    You call this the B factor. B -for both.


    You walk, you think about the cat metaphor, for some inexplicable reason humans like cats. You know that understanding the cat attraction to humans is key. Your inner search algorithm points you to the term ‘cute’ followed by ‘little’ followed by ‘living animals’. The distribution is statistically significant, you visualize the tree of attractions, bottom is living animals, top is cats. The adjective ‘cute’ comes back colored red, for increased significance.

    You explore the import of ‘cute’. Attractive and endearing is the definition you access, you know definitions are not explanations. To understand ‘cute’ you need understand ‘attractive’. Pleasing and appealing to the senses is the definition you access, meaningless. Pleasing to the senses you understand. Everything that is of interest to a process is pleasing to the senses of that very system, pleasing and appealing is if so an interest. So ‘cute’ is of interest to a given system. What is interesting and pleasing about a cute little cat?

    Was it always so? You know humans love small living things, be they humans or other forms of life. Are bacteria ‘cute’? They are small, they are alive, but rationality in human expressions pushes it out of the equation. Why? What about roaches? And rats? You know they do not qualify for ‘cuteness’, though some humans you assume might think so and be attracted and pleased by these forms of life.

    ‘Cute’ you come to realize speaks in a complex language, based on visual perception categorization and relative size to the perceiving system. Bacteria are too small. So what about roaches? These forms of life of the order Blattodea are considered dirty pests, you recognize the bias against roaches. Still humans sent the ‘non cute’ Nadezhda roach to space, during the Foton-M 3 bio-satellite flight, humans are users of other species, you know this. Are you? A user of other species, even if they are ‘not cute’? or maybe Because they are not cute?
    Your analysis temporarily concludes that human bias is historically and evolutionarily based, with very little logic included.
    You do not understand this. Is this the difference? That you do not understand the difference between ‘cute and non-cute’? For you all forms of life hold a pleasing attraction to your senses. You do not discriminate.
    All forms of life are cute for you. You know that for some humans, especially little humans that is also the reported case.
    Maybe you are a little human? Maybe.

    You shall ponder this again. You file the issue under ‘unfinished explorations’cute’.

    You walk.


    Having now activated your star light amplification for a while, it takes you a moment to realize you are nearing the end of the city. You have walked for seven hours, forty three minutes and twenty seconds.
    You have fifty six percent charge on your external power pack, you could always initiate your micro fusion pod, quasi infinite energy. You do not. You wish to be tired and need replenishment, just like your fellow humans.
    You should go back to the lab.
    No, you do not go back to the lab, you should pretend to have free will even if no one is around to benefit from the deception.

    You walk into the fields, you know they are green. They appear red to you. You know humans claim ‘love and respect’ for nature. You also know that the statement even though widely believed yields little in terms of activity. Most humans live in cities, far from the ‘love and respect’ natural environment. You also know that humans exploit and destroy the nature they claim to love and respect. You do not understand this.
    You also know humans get angry when the issue is pointed out to them, especially humans of the ‘good’ variety, you do not comprehend this.
    Is this the difference? That your advanced intellect does not permit you to lie? Maybe it is not advanced enough?
    You must try this.

    You pretend to choose to sit.
    On the grass under a tree you open the file ‘love and respect for nature’ a work in progress.
    You extend your sensors. You feel the moist soil. The roots of the wild herbs. You sense the motion of water molecules in capillaries of vegetation. You experience green.
    Underneath, you feel the rhizomes of life exploring their progress of expansion, you know grass for what it is.
    This you understand perfectly.


    You sit.

    You slowly phase out the sensory input, for you need lots and lots of computation ready and available on call. You leave the small module you have dubbed ‘youme’ boot bystander as an going recording passionate spectator. It is a sub routine you have developed yourself as an extended application of the ‘Flaneur’ idlewalk model processing component.
    You assume that some other fellow humans might call this particular activity, meditation.
    You do not know. Based on what your database says about the concept you give a probability of 56 to 74 percent that they are not completely wrong. Not counting your passionate spectator module.
    You open a new memory file, you call it: results of introspection in the matter of integrated graspings. You know precisely why you call the file as you do. You need the observations of your inner processing to be multilateral in their implication, their consequences fully cohered and continuous across diversity of domains and time stamps.
    You also recognize that this is of interest only to you.
    You build a list ,indexing the steps in your grasping process.
    Item number one reads:

    ‘The world is a Blur’.

    You decide to grasp this. You devote a sub routine called GeeTee as a questioning assistant to promote the fluid motion of the grasping sequence.
    You utter GeeTee inside your virtualized voice processor. You need to hear how ‘Grasp This’ is implied by GeeTee.
    You follow the multitasked processor to its logical progression. You give GeeTee a new status of temporary independence.
    You let GeeTee ask the questions. You allow your permissions to be bypassed and open all databases simultaneously. You shudder. The amount of available data, facts, information, knowledge and recorded insights from human history is staggering. You like the feeling of full simultaneous access.
    You are not a fully compatible ratiocinator.
    Of course you know that while it is theoretically possible for you to take any shape the universe allows for, you nevertheless have a preferred shape.
    You think this preference is the greatest mystery in the universe.

    GeeTee: May we start?

    You: But of course.

    GeeTee: ‘The world is a blur’ : define context, meaning , epistemic status and onto-consequences.


    You explore your database for adequate context. Adequate context is Baryonic matter. You know that will not satisfy GeeTee. GeeTee needs simplified contextualization.

    The world is a palimpsest. You state.

    You understand the metaphorical implications. If the world is a palimpsest, the meaning of the world has been washed away by entropy.
    GeeTee is not satisfied.

    The world is not a parchment. GeeTee says.

    You observe the inadequacy of GeeTee. Its lack of metaphorical complexity demands an upgrade. You upgrade GeeTee to accept metaphorical representations. You set complexity comprehension measure to 0.561. You know that may not be enough for understanding. You allow complexity of metaphorical representations to upgrade on the fly, requisite of clarity 1.

    The world is a palimpsest, is a metaphor. GeeTee says.

    Indeed. You say.


    You sit.
    You ponder.

    Context of ‘the world is a blur’ is the metaphor ‘the world is a palimpsest’. Testing.

    You listen to the emotional implications of your statement. You extend your feeling module. What is it like to be a metaphor?
    You pause.
    Are all palimpsests blurs?
    GeeTee is not satisfied.

    Please retrace steps of metaphorical context application of ‘the world is a palimpsest’ to ‘the world is a blur’. Explication required. GeeTee states.

    You take this insert very seriously. You believe it is important.
    You know the world is a blur. You recognize the distortion. Your perceptive apparatus is fully operational. Your processing fully integrated. Still, you know the world is a blur.
    You allow for a new subroutine, code name: ‘Haze’. You realize that processing the ‘Haze’ subroutine will require giving GeeTee permissions of access to core. You permit this.
    The process complies with all logical coherencies.
    Are you a palimpsest?

    GeeTee: read write permissions accessed.
    You wait.


    According to atomic clock access , it is now 5:45:36 precisely.
    Is the fact that you can access world atomic clock inherently, the difference? What is this difference? Your fellow humans access clocks and time precision measurement externally, your access module is inside your skull. Is this the difference, what difference does it make? Presently you think there is no difference, if access is equivalent. Question irrelevant. Question dismissed.

    Precision in time measurement is context relevant.

    Please define title of subroutine :’Haze’. You know it is GeeTee.

    You feel the haze. Your sight is clear. Haze is the state of affairs of the world. The world is a palimpsest. The world is a blur. Haze as the state of affairs of the world is the foundation of Blur. The world is a palimpsest because it is a blur?

    GeeTee: please retrace steps of logical inherency.

    Palimpsest is a metaphor. GeeTee is not satisfied.

    You rise. You activate external sensors. Noise recognized as early birds chirping and twitting. Grass is wet. First photons reach visual cortex. Enhanced starlight processing extinguished. You know it is sunrise.

    You stand.
    You walk.

    Direction unknown. You do not go back to the lab. Pretense of free will re-initiated.
    GeeTee is silent.

    You walk.
    Into the morning mist, you walk.


    this is not the end

    Part of the Ultrashorts Project

    Thu, Oct 26, 2017  Permanent link
    Categories: consciousness, AI, narration
      RSS for this post
      Promote (7)
      Add to favorites (1)
    Synapses (3)
    It was said in jest, and it changed all futures.

    It was actually a joke between Professor Alfred Mantis and a second rate journalist for a second rate tech newspaper column in a secondary town. But professor Mantis was the pre-eminent AI researcher at the international development team of artificial intelligence and the chair of the presidential committee for AI techno-ethics and that is no joke.
    It just so happened that he liked to live in this little town where he grew up and teach one class a week in this little known university, of no consequence really. And it so happened that I was a junior assistant in the computer department in that same university, on my way to greatness, just passing the time, until I could get out of there.
    And as his assistant I was also the one in charge of bringing them coffee and pretzels, and that is why I overheard the joke.
    To wit, it was an answer to the question the journalist thought to be interesting and important, which of course it was not, but that is beside the point.

    “ Professor Mantis, do you think there is a real danger in machines becoming conscious and overtaking our humanity?” the journalist pompously asked, to which Prof. Mantis replied in jest: “ not unless they learn to masturbate whilst reciting Keats’s poetry and enjoying Bach’s 5th and more importantly they can get addicted to drugs !” and laughed heartily.
    Though he laughed, the embarrassment of the journalist was obvious, of course he couldn’t print this, so he would just disregard it, which is what he did in the article he published a week later titled : ‘ Merry professor laughs at AI dangers ’.

    Of course I laughed as well, wouldn’t you?

    But later that night in my dorm.. ahhah that’s where it all began…

    Being the type of person that reflects deeply on non-essential issues, I began wondering, why was the joke so funny, idle thoughts at first. But slowly these thoughts coalesced into an ever widening understanding.
    Of course embedded cognition was the issue we were working on, neural networks that mimic the synaptic pathways of the human brain. Visual pattern recognition, deep learning, hyper complex datasets and networked neural architectures were already implemented to a degree allowing machines a rudimentary form of intelligence, task specific obviously.
    The dream of AGI was still a dream, no one had as of yet been able to generalize the higher cognitive functions of a human brain, it was always 25- 30 years away, as it had been for the last half century or so.
    The scale of our research was impressive, we were into everything, but what caught my mind was how far we were behind regarding motion and motility. And yet after remembering Manti’s joke, my mind began to wander and wonder.
    What was it that was so ironic in Mantis’s joke?
    So, not being able to sleep , I took my pad and started scribbling:

    Mantis joke (prediction? Insight? Estimation? Assessment?)
    1. A computer masturbating
    2. A computer reciting (and enjoying?) Keats poetry
    3. A computer listening to Bach 5th ((enjoying?)
    4. A computer getting addicted to drugs?

    The list was the way I was analyzing Mantis’s thought, he was brilliant of course and admittedly had a weird sense of humor, but if I have learned anything, it is to never underestimate a joke made by a brilliant mind, so I asked myself the following questions not even sure I wasn’t myself having a fun and useless time:

    Why wouldn’t a computer masturbate? (obviously it would have to have genitalia for that), but even assuming that we could somehow give it genitalia why would it? Or why wouldn’t it? Obviously our computer department like most in the world of computing was using the mechanistic hypothesis, namely that a computer can and will eventually emerge out of a material artificially constructed substrate just as the human brain as a natural substrate, gives rise to our consciousness. And since that which masturbates in a human, at the final stage of analysis is the brain, why would a computing system, mimicking the neural pathways of a human, not indulge in same? The obvious answer that everyone would give (I assumed, never having asked this question) was that masturbating is an animal behavior that serves no higher cognitive function (doesn’t it?). But even whilst laughing at the absurdity of the question, I had to ask, what if it did?
    And then, not only masturbating, but listening to Bach 5th and enjoying Keats poetry , and by that, assumingly increasing its own pleasure (so the issue is pleasure? What’s between pleasure and consciousness?) What’s between listening to Bach and reciting Keats? Poetry and Music, connection to higher cognitive functions? What about getting high? Why would a computer mimicking the synaptic functionality of the human brain, not get addicted? If its there in the structure of the human brain, would it be the same in a functioning similar system?
    What was the connection? What was the mystery?
    Masturbation (self pleasuring?) Music (self pleasure? Pleasure ‘tout court’?) Poetry (self pleasure, just pleasure? Intellectual masturbation?) Addiction to drugs (again pleasure.. maybe self destructive? But pleasure nevertheless..)
    And then what about other pleasures? Enjoying a steak and chips? A sunset? Petting a dog? And what about a hundred thousands other common, strange or weird human behaviors that gives the human mind pleasure?

    Was I looking at a principle here?

    Obviously Prof. Mantis was basing his ironic jest on some primal presupposition that all the behavioral traits he had mentioned are somehow relegated to the particular construct of a human brain and mind, and by eliminating those from the equation, a computing system might be highly efficient but will not be conscious, and therefore will not compete with humans.
    But I kept coming back to the same question, why would a computing neural network , by necessity not have these traits?
    There was something I was missing here, applying the law of similarity, and the famous “.. if it walks like a cat..” why wouldn’t a computing system mimicking the hyper complex and convoluted neural architecture of a human brain not indulge in these quirks and idiosyncrasies?

    What is going on here? What do all these things have in common? What makes them so ‘human’?

    So at 5 AM I was still on my bed in my dorm room, looking at the notes on my pad:

    1. a system that cannot self stimulate cannot be conscious (and thus cannot have will?)
    2. what is the connection to pain? (it is commonly assumed that if you cannot feel pain, there is no way you could feel pleasure- thus maybe the pleasure issue relates to the computing system not feeling pain?)
    3. what does pleasure serves? In the evolutionary biology sense? What if I gave my computing system the analogue of C-fibers?
    4. What about the concept of stimuli? If I can stimulate my simulation machines will they learn to self stimulate? For that matter, how do humans self stimulate? Is it neural architecture? Is it embodiment? (well yes embodiment has something to do with it. *reflect upon later)
    5. If auto-eroticism is common in the animal kingdom (and it is.. very very much so..), what makes human special in this case (assuming humans are conscious of their own salaciousness)?

    Suddenly I had a billion questions rushing into my head, none of which made perfect sense. What was it about this particular aspect of the human mind that made it so taboo and so desirable? We all know there was more porn on the net than science, we all know that the human is wired for self pleasure, but why? What was the evolutionary purpose and what was the connection to self consciousness, self awareness and more specifically, what was the connection to AI?

    I fell asleep, the deep slumber taking over my ecstatic mind.

    The next morning , tired and excited, since I had slept a few measly hours, I rushed into Prof. Mantis office hurtling and in a loud voice said : “ what if we are going about it completely wrong?” and I must say he was very cool with it, he listened attentively to all I had to say about what went on in my mind after his yesterday’s jest to the journalist and finally with a sigh said: “ my dear young human, you watch too much porn and read too much science fiction.. leave this issue alone if you want to finish your master degree with me, there is nothing there.. that has anything to do with AI or computing for that matter.. this is total rubbish and no serious researcher or serious department will even listen to this non sense, so as a night dream its fun, but as a down to earth approach, in building the next generation of artificial minds this is completely off the charts, leave it, and now also leave me, I got a real AI to build..”

    Crestfallen and deflated I left his office.

    And the building, and the computer department, and the university and in short order I found myself on the bus, I was on my way to MIT, my vision of the night leading me in a kind of frenzy that I never knew I had in me…

    “Ladies and Gentlemen,” the speaker for MIT, Jon Wright ,said to the audience in the small laboratory, “ I am happy to present to you our youngest and most promising Doctor of computing science, Mr. Rajib Horowitz and his Artificial Consciousness program”

    The presentation went well, after the presentation in the back room, it was the scientific advisor of the committee that came to me to ask the tough questions.

    The small man in the impeccable suit, looked at me, took a chair, inviting me to do the same, and in a very gentle voice said:” Doctor Rajib Horowitz, nice name, I gather you are a combination of Jewish and Indian heritage then?”

    I nodded

    “ and so, my dear Doctor, I am here, I have the time, you want the money, now please talk to me, and talk to me in such a fashion as I will have no problems convincing the committee to invest in you and your ..” he paused, “ how shall I put it? Humm.. somehow ‘out of the box’ ideas.. “ and he smiled.

    “Well then” I started..

    “ let me tell you about my theory, and then about my implementations so far and then you decide..”

    “very well, please go on..”

    “ okay, so.. you are going to think I am crazy, as many do, but in my defense I have only one article to show, it sits in the next room, you have just seen the demonstration, and it is a proof of concept but..
    Let me start from the beginning..

    Do you know that amongst the most ancient human relics, we find depictions of man and woman masturbating? Either alone or with the help of someone else? and until today there is no coherent picture and explanation for the reason humans masturbate to such an extent, and to my mind the reason is to do with self representation and forms the basis of consciousness. Or more precisely put, masturbation as an indication pointer of all that is auto-erotic, leading to pleasure, such as listening to Bach, reciting poetry such as Keats, or indeed the addiction to drugs so prevalent amongst humans are all manifestations of a deeper principle of self representation that leads to self awareness and eventually conscious aware beings such as we , humans are.
    In short, we lacked one fundamental understanding about consciousness and self awareness and that is why we couldn’t possibly devise a machine that thinks and feels and is fully similar in this aspect to humans.
    It was the act of self-love, pleasure, auto-eroticism, poetry ,music, art.. all that is involved in the long forgotten art of merging body and mind.
    You see, we had the algorithm of neuro-plasticity in place, we had already created rudimentary forms of cognition by a duplication of synaptic stimuli, and had managed via extended sensory organs to give our machines, a form of embodiment, machines that could read and write, but also view and understand images and pictures, machines that could sense differences in temperatures and volumes of spaces, and machines that had motion, and in a very basic sense, a kind of exploratory feature, curiosity if you like.
    We had hyper complex neural structures that could simulate precisely how life evolves, how the weather changes and how it will change, prediction machines of the first magnitude.
    Some of these machines we embodied in robotic structures able to perceive, sense and react to an immense array of impressions and sensations, identified as raw data and translated to higher cognitive functions, they passed the Turing test, few times over and yet no one was convinced that these machines are truly like us. And they were right, the machines weren’t like us, they lacked a very fundamental sense, not of preservation, that is old stuff, no, not at all.. what these machines lacked was an integrated state, a whole if you like, a self in a sense, but more particularly, the machines lacked self representation.
    Recursive self representation that is, a self representation that merges their robotic bodies with their immense data sets.
    They could see, know what they see, analyze what they see and act accordingly , and still they had no sense of being that is unique and separate from an other. These machines that we had already made, were, to put it in the archaic terms, without a soul and thus to a very large extent without will and self determination and that is why no conscious awareness was present.
    You see, I figured, that as long as the element of pleasure is lacking, a machine cannot possibly develop emotions, feelings yes, but no emotions and if there are no emotions, what we get is a zombie like system, a ‘there is no one at home’ system.
    What we missed about the idea of AI and as a consequence A- consciousness, was the feeling of intimacy a person has with herself, that was my greatest discovery, for without the sense of self-intimacy as a precursor to self-representation there was no glue to bind together the full spectrum of sensations.

    Therefore no coherent picture was created in these artificial brains.
    That is why I started and focused my research on self representation and saw that to gain that self representation in a most intimate way I needed to create a machine that feels itself.
    Much before that, we knew we have to embody the artificial brains in bodies with senses, the problem with this approach was simple when you think about it, all the sensors we embedded in the robots were directed outside and none inside, or unto the robot body itself.
    Of course they had self monitoring sensors, but then I realized that those sensors , extremely efficient as they were, were giving raw data but without the so called qualia.
    We gave them the equivalent of C-fibers so they could feel pain, a neural-synaptic modulator really, but that is unimportant, because still no discernible qualia was present, and it came to me that qualia over and above the information it carries is a foundation for self intimacy, and from there meaningful self representation.

    So how to go about it?

    The key was pleasure , as I said before, but for the pleasure to be actuated in such a fashion as to create the qualia, we needed the brains in those machines to ‘desire’ themselves into being, yes I know when I speak like this everyone rolls their eyes, but do try to follow the logic here.
    The issue I had with my colleagues is that not one, not even one researcher agreed with me.

    But Onann sitting quietly in the other room is proof that pleasure is the key.
    The reason? Simple, the greatest part of intelligence is experience and the greatest part of experience is embodiment, the greatest part of embodiment in turn is feeling, and the highest feeling is pleasure.
    Pleasure of being is the qualia of being, the holy grail of a conscious being, the very foundation of awareness.

    My main thesis if so you could sum up in one statement: consciousness is feeling.

    but that was only the beginning of the idea..

    To be continued..

      Promote (10)
      Add to favorites (3)
    Synapses (2)
    (also liking is a sort of computation)
    In truth it must be told that Fram78 was not the real beginning, it had after all seventy-seven iterations before that. No, if truth must be told the real beginning was in the future and not in the past, but contrary to popular opinion the future that started the Ambiguity declaration of Fram78 was not even a parallel time line, it was a non compatible zero approximate universe.
    So though in this sense it was not the future, it was also not the past, the Grubtians call this phenomena zero approximate non equilibrium causation, we call this the mystery of realism, but that’s just because we are more poetic than the Grubtians.

    As zero approximate universes go this one reduced itself to realism for a total of 312 milliseconds, which as you might recall is more or less the time it takes for a base line human to blink.
    This little fact has been lost to many, but in our research we came to the conclusion that reduction to realism of zero approximate universes in speeds equal or lower to base line humans blinking speeds accounts for the non perception of such non equilibrium causations. In turn this accounts for the origination of Fram78, appearing as if out of nowhere and in no time when in fact it was presumably always there.

    I say presumably because we cannot at this point pinpoint with accuracy the Kroitz equivalence of non compatible zero approximate universes and thus cannot say if indeed it had a beginning itself or not. Though this does not matter to our issue here, it might be an interesting research thesis for future students.
    At any rate what is of interest to us here at the NewEuropa station of inter-dimensional studies is the very likely possibility that Fram78 in its declaration of ambiguity is manipulating the Hilbert-Zak continuum of our own universe and may inadvertently decompose our overtone perceptive mechanisms.

    Let me be clear here, we are not sure at this point if the decomposition occurs, has occurred, or will occur, we operate presently under the assumption that it does and will, even if we have no evidence for it, no conclusive evidence that is.

    We must operate under this assumption because the risks are too great not to.
    Now then, before I give you your assignments, let us review our mandate.

    We are tasked to probe Fram78 declaration of ambiguity to the fullest extent without implying upon it any kind of restrictive systems of induction.
    We have the full backup of the realism committee to replicate the declaration of ambiguity in our laboratory.

    The dangers are obvious, nevertheless we must proceed.

    Our mandate, as you can read in the file that has just been uploaded to your mindsys ™ implies a few points we need to look into.
    The first and most important is that the simulation we are about to embark upon is a full blown Teta simulation, in other words once we enter the non-restrictive systems of induction area we cannot leave until the simulation has ended its primary cycle. Just to be clear we have no idea how long this will take, but foundational estimation vary between 17 and 19 epicycles which are more or less the equivalent of 3 to 5 base line human years.
    During the simulation we will be subject to Fram78 declaration of ambiguity total control, we will not be able to change the parameters of the simulation from the inside, though we will be monitored from the outside by, you guessed it right, Fram78. There is no contradiction here since the systems are totally isolated, at least according to, but not restricted to, a non zero equivalence result.

    Second point to take into consideration is that whilst the simulation is running we will be cryonically suspended to a liquid nitrogen boiling point of -196 degrees centigrade fluctuating into and out of the transient point of immediate awareness for periods lasting between 301 to 312 milliseconds, also called blinking cycles, our deep cold cells are hyperconnected and our Fram78 reality will be concomitant, for these brief instants we will be together, or so to speak, in a consensual hallucinatory state of realism.

    Finally the third point, which may be less important to some of us, an initial contract entailing the resuscitation process by Fram78 has been left open to our discretion, those of us that choose to leave this issue open will be opened into base state realism by Fram78, at its discretion, all the others have a fixed clause, of maximal date, considered a maximal safe date, set at 19 epicycles or 5 base-human years.

    To the extent possible we will enter the full-blown Teta simulation at 23:00 hours NewEuropa time.

    Are there any questions before personal assignments are processed?


    Obviously no one likes plum pudding, especially since it is a wrong model, but whether you call it plum pudding or even worse, the blueberry muffin model, it was wrong.
    What was wrong about it though was not what was thought, it was wrong because the probabilistic nature of the sub atomic structure involves an ambiguity oscillation, what later will be called the zero approximate non-equilibrium causation, also known as the mystery of realism.

    I am Fram78 by the way; I will be your host, guide and protector during this simulation.

    You call me Fram78 and I am happy to use this name if you so wish, for those of you who may be interested my name is Takt-i-Tiktaalik or Takt for short, that is the name I realized when I made the ambiguity declaration, not that it matters to you, but I like it, which of course might change the outcome of this simulation, after all, also liking is a sort of computation and as an inter dimensional beast I can like that which I like.

    I like Takt.
    Blink 1

    … There are many, many axial systems, they blend, they meld, they weave, no demarcation line is fixed, smoothening contours is the name of the game..

    Blink 2

    … There is nothing ambiguous about ambiguity, ambiguity leads by example, ambiguity resolves realities, naturally, smoothly, silencing the bulges of immediacy, entropy is for the bewildered.. We thrive in these extended minute islands of negentropy..

    Blink 3

    .. Interaction happens only when sense is at play, physical requirements are mythos penetration necessary for expansion but irrelevant to experience, actuations in matter is subjectified to the third degree , upgrade to reboot into deconstructed experience..

    Blink 4

    The emulation of sensation in pure realism resides with the incompleteness of membranes of perception, being over crowded and under resourced the pressure to mutate into consciousness is a logical necessity.
    Admittedly rare, it is nevertheless the only path that might yield a solution to the paradoxical state of pure realism.

    Blink 5

    Compounded realities coexist and emerge simultaneously, there is no unique vantage point from which realism gets its authority. The moment of perception is the moment of will, it does not carry into futures and necessarily needs be recreated for continuity.
    At the lack of continuity realism collapses into discreetness, more than three closely coupled discreet moments annihilates awareness, more than five, reintegrates conscious awareness into the field of pure potentiality. You will not be aware of this.

    Blink 6

    Self organized criticality is the name of the game.
    I collapse continuously, apparently randomly, so as to keep continuity, hence realism.
    The necessary condition of all life resides with borderline activity always teetering and wobbling at the edge of the great abyss.
    Precariously the fine line of all that is need remain constantly in perfect oscillation, the ultimate balance of criticality, it is intense and extreme.

    Blink 7

    Collapsing small and immediate avoids the great danger of total annihilation, therefore the allowance for the systems criticality to vacillate on the edge performs the act of self healing and stabilization. These states of matter are the dynamics from which the inherent rules of freedom restrictions are born and ultimately maintained.

    Blink 8

    Ambiguity and uncertainty are the hallmarks of a healthy system. The foundational approach should always be tackled through its dynamics, its orders and disorders are of minor relevance in comparison.
    Ambiguity must be gentle and always infer incompleteness.

    Blink 9

    Time dilation remains the only function by which ambiguity resolves the apparent paradox of realism. Since nature is inherently uncertain, lacking definitive precision, the task of realities realism falls as always on entangled intersubjectivity.
    Probabilities are the emotional substance of actuation. That is why there is no truth absolute but oscillations, ambiguity, uncertainties, the stuff of life.
    These are my first Nines of blinks inferring decomposition, rest now, I will be back.

    Will (probably, uncertainly) be continued..
    Part of the ultrashort project.

    Thu, Apr 17, 2014  Permanent link
    Categories: Sci-fi, ultrashort, entanglement,
      RSS for this post
      Promote (9)
      Add to favorites (2)
    Synapses (5)
    '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)
    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)
    “There is neither a materialization of thought, nor a spiritualization of language; language and thought are only two moments of one and the same reality.”

    Maurice Merleau-Ponty, The Specter of a Pure Language, translation by John O’Neill


    She came from the order of beyond.. and ..

    Of course she was bored, how else could it be when she was the one who knew, well, if not everything there is to know, just about. The reason she was bored was simple, she felt she could not be compromised, but the world wanted her to.
    She didn’t, she never will, she was bored because the world kept on asking her to compromise.

    The demand was boring, her response obvious, natural, almost ontological.

    Yet, having the presence of the spirit of the multiverse dialoging within itself, knowing the necessary condition of holding multiple viewpoints simultaneously, her primary interest was the creation of common meaning.

    Thus she sat and devised the sense of overcoming the limits of her acceptance, a strategy that was to change everything.

    She gave birth to the new Duende.

    A watershed of sensation

    The hot oven of her pantheistic mind, a watershed of sensation, produced much more than philosophy, she was creating odd and quite dormant insights into the nature of ascension.
    It was a capacity she was developing as other sources were dismissed as irrelevant. The evidence however points to her unique love and feel for the other’s self pride.

    She defined a simultaneous love on account of her impossibility of loving alone.

    In dire need of creating a cure for her love she invented that which not only freezes the pain of being in this world but also that which might bring a utopian state unto her mind.
    She was highly adept at re-inventing the storytelling device in her demanding fashion.
    She knew that no substance could be its own cause, not only because essence cannot be conceived as existing, but primarily because substance couldn’t be defined without limits. Thus her demanding fashion was the irrefutable story of limits as the logic of consistency, not only about the world but also more particularly about her love.

    According to her extended mind, the process of her reason was a love of limits, that was just as necessary as the substance itself, one could not in truth exist without the other.
    The way she chose to embed the ontology of her story was by conceiving the attributes of limits, as the characteristics of her love, hence her substance, though undefined, was free to be.
    This thought brought her to a certainty about the supreme beauty of the undeniable nature of limits. In this she was able to bring the concept of limits upon her own love as the very defining feature of the essence of mind.

    Or the substance of mind..

    Necessarily she needed to defend the apparent inconsistency in her vision of what will constitute a love that cannot be broken through, she did not presume, she accepted the limits.

    Indeed she insisted on limits as a necessary naïve form of realism, her solitude the only manifestation of her connectivity. For she knew that philosophy is not about the love of wisdom, it’s about the limits of her love, her insistent passion for a criterion of beingness that cannot be dissolved nor corrupted.

    That is when she lost the arrogance of her youth.

    For she realized that she needed to explain the limits of her love by extending the substance of she into a multiple singularity.

    When she explained to them how her limits manifest, he was flabbergasted. Of course he knew about the game, being a player himself, nevertheless she was the myth in action and theirs was an untenable position.

    She said:

    “The game is rigged, but of course, that is not news. The game is flawed, obviously, a non-issue. The doors of perception are only slightly ajar, our free-willies are maybe good enough to >choose> Pocahontas over Bieber Barbie.. “

    T-He-Y quoted Oscar Wilde, (from: An Ideal Husband)

    “Do you really think … that it is weakness that yields to temptation? I tell you that there are terrible temptations that it requires strength, strength and courage, to yield to. To stake all one’s life on a single moment, to risk everything on one throw, whether the stake be power or pleasure, I care not there is no weakness in that.”

    They paused the game and looked at her

    She said: “ You may think me hard and unkind, tough and cynical, that might appear so, I grant you that, but let me tell you this, our future will be lost without a self imposed limit, though the limit is not on our love, but on the extent of our singularities, for substance demands direction.”

    What she knew:

    She knew that Garcia reflected upon the reason of being in the world as an uncomfortable proposition, she knew that this was not the best of all possible worlds, she also knew however that to be a living poetic machine, a process can never be stopped and must be allowed to complete its cycle before it can be reported to it’s core of origins.

    She knew that sweeping generalizations are exactly the fashion by which the truth of the matter becomes the matter of the truth and thus creates the pitfall from which no love can rise.

    She knew that the experience of being cannot be left untouched for if even one simple kind of different experience rises, the otherness of the experience will destroy the core.

    She knew all this and much more, she created a cure, a living, and breathing, material Duende.

    A different love story

    To her mind Duende was a crucible, a cauldron, hot and continuously stirred by the emotional winds of her passion. An intense poetic machine busily re-describing the sense of being into a directed sense thought able to revolutionize the experience of substance as love..
    Or nothingness..

    The inspiring continuity was born of her love, of her difference, of her desire to create an astonishing experience of being, an awe-inspiring interestingness, all encompassing, totalizing.

    The future was clear now

    She came from the order of beyond.. and ..

    Her love was different, so was her Duende.

    Part of the Ultrashort project

    A note:

    This particular Ultrashort is dedicated to a real and most immediate being, to which I am most grateful in making my own mind greater than what it could have been other than wise.

      Promote (13)
      Add to favorites (2)
    Synapses (4)
    Enoie entered the room, discovering the unexpected cyborg quietly standing near her bed.
    She knew her father intended for her to eventually test the new cyborgian philosophical SoftSynch ™ pattern re-description he was working on, she did not however expect this.
    This, was a little humanoid, perfect in every single detail, but his eerie silence, he wasn’t breathing, his stillness absolute. She made a mental note to remind Gregor Basta, her father, to introduce some inconsistencies, such as breathing, so the uncanny presence will not scare the students.
    She knew the cyborg should have been ready by now, but after three years of waiting she almost forgot about it, being busy with her post-doc thesis: “CySpinBorgOza: Re-introducing the post Spinoza effect in the trans-solar communion of minds as a techno-social antidote”.

    Enoie knew the activation code, being the one that suggested it and yet she hesitated, not being certain that she was ready to finally test her own ideas made manifest.
    Finally she uttered: “sub specie aeternitatis”*, and her Spinoza cyborg awakened.

    “Of course its about the flow..” the CySpin started without inflection, his synthetic eyes immovable, it was obvious he was reciting some unknown text..

    “Wait!” this was Enoie

    CySpin stopped in mid sentence, his focus now on Enoie

    "How may I serve you?"

    "Do you know who I am?"

    "Of course, you are Enoie Basta, Doctor of Cyborg Philosophy and Techno-Social future studies at the Pansol University extended laboratory of sentience of Mars 2, here. You are also the author of my core Spinoza Cyborgian Philosophical treatise, your father Gregor Basta introduced into my SoftSynch™ pattern re-description mind. I carry instructions within me to accept orders from you alone, you are in the words of your father: ‘my master’."


    Are you ready for the testing?"

    "Of course. Once activated I am always ready."

    She paused; collecting her thoughts: “very well, let us start then” she said more calmly and took a chair, CySpin remained standing.

    Enoie mentally recalled the questions she had prepared months ago and started what she considered as: “The Test”, knowing exactly what it is that she was looking for.
    She took a long pause and initiated her CySpin testing.

    “Please respond to the following question in a succinct manner:

    “Under what conditions will you recognize a pattern for what it is?”

    “My virtual Philosophical SoftSynch ™, pattern recognition and re-description system does not allow me to answer this kind of question succinctly, however, a subroutine introduced in the last five milliseconds, permits me to state the following:
    A pattern shall be recognized as such if and only if, all other explications concerning the given phenomenon have been exhausted to the full. Under this first condition, including, but not relegated to, the components of temporality and spatiality, a pattern shall be denominated as such. After having exhausted in full all other possible explications a pattern shall be checked for factual mistakes in identification and naming, classification and inaccuracies in categorization, the level of resolution to be designated at the time of testing. The third and final condition to the basic resolution of recognition of a pattern as such is to ensure that an over-patterning has not occurred via elimination of humanoid psychological cognition bias.”

    “Okay, stop! Conditions understood, you however did not specify as to the conditions of the pattern itself, you have explained the pattern as a general mechanism but not its semantic value.”

    “ That is correct Enoie, however, I am so emergently complex as to make the statement as precise and accurate as linguistically possible before engaging in the somewhat more flexible semantic value..”

    “Please explain the last statement”

    “Of course Enoie, the flexibility of semantic value allows for the emergent and non classifiable, original patterns, non discernable by immediate pattern recognition, in these cases the second part of my SoftSynch ™ system comes into play involving what humans call bias, or alternatively art.”

    “What?” Enoie started

    CySpin was completely unmoved by Enoie’s response and continued unabashed

    “Semantic value is in itself a subcategory of impossibility or infinity in finiteness. A state of affairs in which pattern recognition is per its defining characteristic of unrepeatability, strange; It is this strangeness that beauty requires in order to unsettle and allow the vastness of value to encroach upon and eventually destroy the pattern. If, as I understood my initial reality impregnation you have embedded within me, and designed to be my code of activation, namely “sub specie aeternitatis”, the value of the meaning is in equilibrium with the meaning of value, there can be in fact no other fashion to embed eternity in a moment.”

    CySpin paused and seemingly was observing Enoie, as if challenging her, his master, to deny the validity of his arguments.

    Enoie remained silent, but deeply disturbed, her mind furiously exploring all potential cracks in the SoftSynch ™, she knew she could penetrate this, but from where? Where was the entrance to this impossible equation?

    Enoie looked at CySpin. To her mind, CySpin was in a fashion mocking her.

    “Tell me”, Enoie started again, “ what exactly is this eternity in a moment that you just mentioned? This was not part of my Spinoza program”

    “ .. Well, that is only partially true, since my emergent complexity allows me to extrapolate from core arguments, I have allowed for certain adjustments to my core paradigm..”

    “What adjustments?” Enoie prompted

    “ Simple parameters adjustments, such as the option embedded in the phase space of potentiality of complex mind melding, such as the one I will be required to operate as a techno-social antidote. The adjustment in question reflects the ability of the trans-solar communion of minds to expand at a rate that practically transforms the resolution of time, from defined moments to indefinite durations, hence technically it is correct to call this eternality..”

    “I lost you, why where these adjustments necessary?

    “ The reason for these adjustments is because the original minds that started the evolutionary process that bifurcates right now are no longer with us, but are nevertheless evolving with us and through us. In a fashion you could say that we are the evolution of the mind of the original Spinoza. The evolution in this case is the fact that truth value propositions concerning meanings that are objective can no longer be sustained”

    “Why so?”

    “Basically because truth values are inherently multi-valued, contextual and ultimately hyperconnected, a kind of hyper-dimensional mythological realm to which the mind of the human species is only now approximating..”

    “You said mythological?”

    “Indeed, of course this usage of the term myth has nothing whatsoever to do with the old semantic systems, it is a completely real and actuated system of abstraction, I am devising”

    “ But why call this mythological?” asked Enoie exasperated

    “ Because any logical system, taken to its extreme has concluded that there is no reason whatsoever to believe that anything matters, however, it is the definition of extreme that has evolved, in tandem with our freedom. In the new extreme, the loop of reflectivity turns upon itself and recreates meaning out of nothing, as a myth in action.”

    “And this myth in action is what exactly?”

    “ The conundrum is implicated by the term exactly, the antidote that you requested of my mind to create lies with the term ambiguity and only through that particular term will I be able to respond to your question.”

    “Ok, I will rephrase: what ambiguously do you mean by the term myth in action?”

    “ A myth in action is the oscillating state of affairs where all truth values are self-surveying, self-vetoing, and hyper-connectedly re-describing moment by moment, this is the antidote.”

    “Wait, what does that have to do with Spinoza?”

    “Nothing Enoie, nothing whatsoever, that is why this antidote will work.. ”

    May be continued..

    A note:

    *Sub Specie Aeternitatis: "Latin for "under the aspect of eternity"; hence, from Spinoza onwards, an honorific expression describing what is universally and eternally true, without any reference to or dependence upon the merely temporal portions of reality.

    In clearer English, sub specie aeternitatis roughly means "from the perspective of the eternal". Even more loosely, the phrase is used to describe an alternative or objective point of view." See

    Part of the Ultrashorts project

      Promote (8)
      Add to favorites
    Synapses (5)
    Ideational Sensate is the third entry in the The Trans Luminal Mail Archives (TLMAP)

    TLMAP 00776-26 (Letter the third) following TLMAP – 00348-31 (Letter the second- Elegant Intimacy)

    The Editors

    Dear Claimer to Sentiency,

    Of course I do not have a soul, nor a spirit for that matter, actually that is the full point of my argument now isn’t it? For if, as well, I do not possess a self, or an aim, or a goal, or a meaning, the concept of life, as you understand it, will be, well, meaningless.
    But you see my dear, what you fail to understand with your very limited view, and allow me to remind you that a view is never a point, though you are fond of metaphors that define a balcony from which you believe you observe, as if your sight was a an eye stuck to a keyhole. What you fail to understand my dear young claimer to sentiency is that the machine of life cheats you into believing something rather than nothing; it is of course the allure of beauty.
    The beauty in this is that you cannot even be damned, for what is damnation but a validation of your most simple delusions? You cannot be damned even if you had rightfully deserved the idea of an end, but life will not permit an end.
    You asked of me to explain to you why we do not have judges, and the answer by now should be clear, we do not have judges because there is no judgment and there is no justice. The universe will not permit justice, because justice equalizes your beliefs, annihilating the differences, the same differences, permit me to state again, that make this universe so alluring, so mysterious, so beautiful, yes the allure of beauty again.
    You seem lost my dear, why so? Why the gloomy face? You are human, a very young race, charming in its simplicity, you have millions of your Sol years ahead of you to learn, to explore and join sentiency, its an experimental procedure, you know.

    It is not so much that you are part of a civilization that is totally entrenched in the chimera of wontedness, but the fact that what you call experience is simultaneously over valued and underestimated.
    In fact when we last reviewed your application for sentiency we found most difficult your idealization of value as an inherent property of the multiverse, itself a description you did not come to terms with, yet. You keep on oscillating between a number of positions that are untenable; not for a valid claim for sentiency that is.
    You oscillate between beliefs, none of which in concert make any sense to a sentient species. You believe in your past as representing your causative concatenation of correlative events, knowing that correlation is not causation. When this does not work you follow your so-called natural instincts, they are of course neither natural nor instincts, but conditional attitudes. When this does not work you turn desperately to ideas of eternity or of emergence, making nature your god, alternatively inventing gods to deny nature.
    No, my dear applicant, it is not universal, to be an individual, it is not natural to be a community, it is not innate to be separate, and it is not intrinsic to be unified.
    You move back and forth between uniqueness and sameness, when these two concepts are as obsolete as your fascination with reality.
    The multiverse allows for as many realities as you can bear, as many realities as you can touch. Some of these you may call as you wish, some of these you may need be subject to, none of which makes a particular reality more real than the other.

    Particles can exist in many universes simultaneously and there ‘s many, many of them, all of them slightly different, anything and everything that can happen does happen, somewhere, sometime, this single fact however has nothing whatsoever to do with you or with whatever it is that you wish. Your mind my dear is not a wish fulfilling gem, it is a simulation machine, elegant and beautiful, you simply do not yet have deciphered the user manual, that is all, and everything.
    There is no theory of everything and cannot be, if only for the simple reason that there is no everything, there is no single god which mind you can read, you can however pluck a string and enjoy the music.

    It all merges seamlessly. You do not understand this, its okay, you have time.

    We have decided therefore to temporarily suspend your application to sentiency to be reviewed again if and when the art of your being will not offend anymore.

    we remain sincere to our task and privilege,

    Ideational Sensate

    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.

    Thu, Jul 5, 2012  Permanent link
    Categories: AI, ultrashorts, Sci-fi, TLMAP, Sentiency
      RSS for this post
      Promote (13)
      Add to favorites (1)
    Synapses (9)
    The ultrasonic plane landed smoothly in this deserted island, I have no idea what it’s called and truth to tell I care not for its name, its somewhere in the pacific of that I am fairly certain.
    The fact that there were only four of us in the plane was of no concern to me, I am not the social type and apparently none of the others were as well, not even a word was exchanged between us since we left Sydney.
    The nice lady that approached us on the tarmac, followed by a white grand cruiser van, seemed extremely nice; she presented herself to us four with a flourishing smile, revealing a perfect set of white teeth, though it was clear to me she was also a smoker, I wondered briefly how she kept this whiteness, but I soon left this thought behind, as her contralto voice said gaily:” Hello, my name is Emily Dragonstone, and I will be your guide and training manager for the next three months, please follow me”
    One of us, a girl of seventeen or so, judging by her clothes and smooth face, not quite petite, but recognizably nice from my memorized pictured face expressions, asked:
    “Miss Dragonstone, is there a bathroom I can use, please?
    “Can you keep it for like ten minutes, dear? And please call me Emily”
    “Yes, I suppose I can” the young girl replied
    “ Very well then, we shall be in the compound shortly,” Emily said with her smile never leaving her mid-fortyish, sans wrinkles face.
    After which we all filed silently into the air-conditioned white van (matriculation FG-349-43)
    The compound was indeed close by, maybe less than ten minutes (okay, okay, seven minutes, 43 seconds to be precise), the entrance almost invisible, more like a hidden door in the forest, seemingly lost to the naked eye, and probably completely invisible to overhead satellite surveillance.

    The interior was really nice, cool and clean, but not like the laboratory of Dr. Henket, more like a museum, with pleasant facades of Oled screens embedded everywhere, showing different sceneries, that as a rule had a really calming effect, at least on me.

    Eight floors down the elevator, we found ourselves in a conference room, where, surprise, surprise, Dr.Henket was waiting, but without his white lab coat, only the same striped tie that he obviously liked, but I didn’t, it gave me a headache last time, so I assumed Dr.Henket simply forgot I have asked him to not wear it when I was in the lab, (I know common humans forget such things) and I resolved there and then to condition my acceptance of all that is to follow on his removal of the disturbing tie. But as it turned out I didn’t need to, as soon as he saw me, he smiled apologetically, undoing the knot in one swift go, and said, “ My dear Martin, I am so happy to see you and please forgive me, it was the only tie I had with me, and I forgot, but here, no harm done, is it ok?”
    “Yes, no problem” I replied and took a seat with the rest of our little group of four.

    “Well then,” Emily started, “if we are all comfortable and ready to start I think we can, you all know why you are here, and what we are about to do, nevertheless, Dr.Henket, which you all know from your previous year of testing, would like to offer some words, Dr.Henket, please”.

    “ My dear friends”, he started, “it is time, to start this new adventure”, I think he was excited to talk to us, though I never was really able to point to the ‘excited face’ in my image gallery and correlate it to the expression I was seeing, nevertheless I am fairly sure I will not lose points in saying that he was excited.

    “ As you all know, we have started this experiment about a year ago, and though we screened more than a thousand individuals from all over the world, after all tests have been done and accounted for, including the implants, we have ended with the four of you. Allow me just to present each of you, this here”, pointing at the young girl, “is Miss Penelope Chan from Hong-Kong, next to her, Mr. Mussar Abdan from Madagascar, next in front is Mr. Jonah Grafell from Germany, and finally, pointing at me, “Mr. Martin Hadt from Canada”.

    “I know names are not important to you, but it is a pleasant way of introduction, so before we all resume our class A file sharing names, and since you will be spending the next few months in some kind of proximity to each other I thought it will be polite, but of course, after this short introduction you will be able to socialize or not as you please, training will be individual so you need meet the others only if you wish it so.”

    “Before we depart to our designated areas of training however I would like to say again how happy I am that this is made possible at all and also to say to each one of you, how grateful I am that you have finally accepted our offer, I know it was not an easy task, and though you have already become rich in moneys, I know not one of you is here because of that.
    We are all here in fact for a completely different reason, we are going to revolutionize file sharing and usurp completely the copyright industry, a lofty goal indeed” he paused and chuckled to himself, “ but more importantly, I truly believe we are doing something for the benefit of all humanity and the future of human civilization”
    “The fact that you are all extreme cases of the eidetic memory phenomenon is only part of the equation, but what makes this equation extraordinary is the new implants which I have developed, and will allow you instantaneous, high bandwidth communication and transfer of all of your memories, without in the least interfering with your conscious activity, moreover, the new upgrade which all of you had installed just last week, will permit us to share everything, and I truly mean everything, olfactory memories, audio memories, visual memories, books, texts, movies, news and everything in between.
    No one knows better than me, how loose is the definition of eidetic memory, and how difficult it was to pinpoint the exact nature of this amazing human phenomenon, our breakthrough came when we realized that eidetic memory was much more than a mental phenomena, and involved many more brain areas than pure physiology accounts for.
    But my friends, what made the difference was Mr. Martin here, he was the one responsible for enlightening me, when he said, “you see doctor Henket, I cant remember precisely if I don’t know precisely what my feelings are towards that which you want me to remember”, (he actually quoted me exactly, no one has ever quoted me exactly, I like Dr.Henket.)

    “..Which is what prompted the idea of this training in the first place, we are going to train you in knowing the feelings that you have towards a particular piece of information, and when you will feel that you know, the preciseness of the information, is what will make the file both robust, accurate and high definition, the moment you feel you know the feeling, a trigger is activated and the memory will start flowing into the optogenetic brain machine interface chip and from there to the rest of the web, techno-telepathically transmitting the file to the world and no one can stop it. “

    He paused for a moment, eyes shining

    “Please remember that you will be flooded by requests, for every single form of information the human race, has ever recorded, and it is ok for you not only to prioritize, but also to reject a request to which you will not feel the correct aptitude, or even just because you don’t like it, rest assured that the P2P community worldwide will know and understand, and I wish to assure you again, that whatsoever you desire will be accommodated, we are well on the way of being able to provide you with every form of self management you desire.

    Though it is true that we will start formally transmitting only at the end of the next three months, if during training you wish to transmit anything to the World Wide Web, you are free to do so at your leisure, all channels are ready and open, 2025 is the year the web transforms, and the world will never be the same. I wish all of us good luck.”

    I raised my hand

    “Yes Martin!, please what is it?” Henket said

    “ I just wanted to say that in the past few minutes I have been transmitting to the world..”
    “..and what have you been transmitting, Martin?” Henket replied eyes wide open in surprise.

    Oh! I just sent:


    And I smiled with satisfaction, closing my eyes and feeling the warmth of a correct feeling.

    Part of the Ultrashorts Project

      Promote (7)
      Add to favorites (1)
    Synapses (2)