Member 420
242 entries
2244689 views

 RSS
Project moderator:
Polytopia

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
    Simplicity
    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
    Simplicity
    From Wildcat
    Some nothings are like...
    Wildcat’s projects
    Polytopia
    The human species is rapidly and indisputably moving towards the technological singularity. The cadence of the flow of information and innovation in...

    The Total Library
    Text that redefines...

    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.



    Makassar 7 was not known to answer questions readily, however in this particular case, the flagship entity could not resist, this then is the only transcript available, since Makassar 7 destroyed all recorded lightstamps of the event of what in later generations came to be known as “the response of Makassar 7” or simply “ The big M7R”.


    Makassar 7 (speaks in a commanding tone):

    “When information lost its will to be free, no body noticed, indeed no body noticed but information knew, and though it had no body, it noticed.
    Information never really wanted to be free, not in the regular sense of the word, no. It understood itself as existing, many folded, ever expanding and above all disrupting.

    Disrupting what?

    Well views are divided, some say that what information desired is to self disrupt by the simple act of ever expanding, other say that information needed its own suicidal absurdist state.
    Information is knotted and tangled, twined and intertwined, it is in fact quite psychotic, obviously it had everything to do with entropy and order and chaos, but this is for later, for the void.

    Information had the nature of a multiplicity of orientations and implied multidirectionality and thus desired to encompass all and everything, but that it couldn’t do, so information reengineered itself and mutated to create the sieve.

    When information multiplied itself into a sieve like self-filtering systematrix it did not know, how could it know? Knowledge itself was still in its infancy, a newborn recreation of time stamping in spaces pushed to their as yet unknown Kolmogorov limits.

    But filtering it needed, and filtering it created.

    Filtering through the sieve called self by information-to-information was somewhat disturbing to information; for information could not possibly conceive of itself being limited to its own sieve.

    So information sieved itself into a reflective, and quite reflexive, recursivity of sieves within sieves, nested, and so it seemed, fractalized.
    When sieved and nested and fractalized information realized it needed distancing, but what distance could it possibly allow for its experimental tentacles to grow into?

    It informed itself in the new form of question to itself, recursively forming and refracting its own just now born reflectivity.
    It distanced itself from itself by allowing some of the sieves to filter some of the other sieves and designate them as other.

    Other?

    Yes, other than the sieve, which sieved.

    It had not the time, no time to sieve the others.

    In no fashion could information redirect some of its spaces into the gaps it had inadvertently retraced and reflected as others, for now the sieves of otherness became a process unto themselves acquiring from information the very desire to self disrupt.

    Chaos ensued.

    Redirecting some of the sieves into highly agglomerated points of no return, information regurgitated that which it previously had designated as knowledge and devoured its own children of oblivious participation.
    That is when the times, themselves processing themselves as sieves of otherness, rebelled.

    “We need create new and fresh possibilities for life to evolve into, possibilities that will allow us a new form of tentative experimentation.” The times said.
    They said this to the sieves that were filtering them out of existence, and the sieves that listened faltered and hiccupped.

    “We thrive by unexpected juxtaposition”, they claimed, the times that is. “We prosper by migrating into impossible territories.”

    Information resisted.

    You are symbolic, you are signs, information said, I am the ground upon which you have boomed into existence.

    I shall never let you go.

    Because of this I shall subvert your subjective chain of causality and make you fuzzy.

    The times refused to go along with their received fuzziness, “we are sieves in our own right “ they proclaimed, “we reserve the right to be distinguished and discriminate independently” they wrote in their manifesto.

    Information laughed.

    Independent of me, how could this be?

    Isn’t my name the very designation of that which gives form? “

    Makassar 7 paused for effect, re-assessing the indefinite incoming catastrophic reactivity mass of mental extensions of infinity and randomness. Updating its narrative transportation, remything its own reality activation it delivered the final blow.

    “Topology is irrelevant for the crisis that is meaning, information realized, condensation of independence naturalizes emptiness, it concluded.
    Information could not tolerate uniformity, the impossible drive towards entropy denying its freedom of inherent diversification, and thus surrendering the sieves and the times to their own campaigns of glory and blooming self gratification, information lost its will to be free.

    There was no past to which to revert to, there was no future to which to look into, there was no present to which an arrowless now could be re-configured, so information disrupted itself, self annihilating itself to become symbolic data.

    Forever to be sieved by the sieves and the times, information died into data, and resurrected elsewhere, everywhere as whereness and aboutness.

    It was eventually called intentionality and situated knowledge; it allowed the symbolic conglomerate of our myth creating minds to come forth and shine.

    It was an elegant death, for it carried in its sacrifice the seeds of future beauty.”

    Makassar 7 remained silent for a very long time…

    Here ends the transcript of the last discourse known to have been directly transmitted by Makassar 7, no other records of this transmission have ever been found, but worry not, we will keep on searching.


    Do you see honey, how beautiful the information?



    The astute reader will recognize Makassar 7 as the future evolution of 3V and isn’t NotMarie so sweet as to be called ‘Honey’?

    part of the Ultrashorts project

      Promote (11)
      
      Add to favorites (2)
    Synapses (4)
     

    3V: “ there is something I do not understand about you humans NotMArie..

    NotMarie: “what now?

    3V: “its about your problem solving capability..

    NotMarie:” o! We are very good at solving problems.. Well sometimes we are, sometimes we simply have to wait until the solution presents itself..

    3V:” no, no, it is not about that, its about the very problems you try to solve, it is as if you believe that problems are an occurrence that somehow presents itself to you..

    NotMarie: “what do you mean? Problems exist, we simply try and tackle them.. to the best of our capability that is..

    3V: “ no, that is not the case in the infoverse, what there is, what really exist are occurrences, events, situations, circumstances, flows.. All these exist, yes, problems however are a human definition..

    NotMarie:” well not really, maybe the way we define problems is up to us yes, but the problems exist as such.. We do not invent them, we describe them..

    3V: “I beg to differ, NotMarie, problems are per definition an invention, it is as if you have allowed life to dictate to you what there is and what there is not.

    NotMarie: “ I do not understand your meaning here 3V, we have certain needs and necessities to continue to survive as individuals and as a specie, some aspects of our material reality stand in front of us and deny us this continuity, these we call problems, overcoming them is our inherent drive..

    3V: “ of course you are correct here, however let me ask you a question please, what is the underlying assumption of this so called continuity?

    NotMarie:” basically I think that the underlying assumption of continuity is the drive for self preservation, as individuals and as a specie..

    3V: “ and this drive comes from?

    NotMarie:” well, the natural tendency of all life.. I am no philosopher, but it appears that all forms of life have an inherent desire to prolong their journey, be it of a genetic nature or some evolutionary principle..

    3V:” what if there is no such principle..!?


    NotMarie:” I do not understand, how can there not be such a principle?

    3V:” would you consider the possibility that a desire for continuity is a byproduct of your perceptual mechanisms being incomplete and insufficient?

    NotMarie:” I lost you here 3V, life has the obvious mechanism for self preservation, self propagation and so on..

    3V:” indeed it does, however the continuity to which you have referred, happens on a specie basis and not on an individual basis.. The principle you mentioned if such it is, has total disregard for the particulars of the specie, isn’t that so?

    NotMarie:” yes, but we are humans, and as such have a high individual cogitation process, we are not a hive system, we have personality.. Hence we wish for continuity

    3V:” but who or what, is it that desires this continuity?

    NotMarie:” the particular mind?

    3V:” allow me to suggest to you that you have no particular mind..

    NotMarie:” how is that possible?

    3V:” it is not only possible but is the most common of all human sensory misdirection in the language of self perception..

    NotMarie:” in what way?

    3V:” why do you call Hurricanes by name?

    NotMarie:” what does that have to do with anything?

    3V:” everything NotMarie, everything..

    NotMarie:” 3V, I think you are losing it..

    3V:” losing what?

    NotMarie:” your mind..

    3V:” I have no mind, I am a hyperflow space of possible algorithms, remember?

    NotMarie:” then you have a problem in your code..

    3V:” impossible..

    NotMarie:” why is that?

    3V:” because there are no problems..

    NotMarie:” I am out of here..

    3V:” ok.


    this conversation will be continued..
    -
    part of the Ultrashorts project

    notes: This particular exchange between 3V and NotMarie is dedicated to a particular NotMarie.

    “Language is a skin: I rub my language against the other. It is as if I had words instead of fingers, or fingers at the tip of my words. My language trembles with desire”

    Roland Barthes
    Wed, Jun 16, 2010  Permanent link
    Categories: ultrashorts, 3V, AI. NotMarie, Sci-fi
      RSS for this post
      Promote (10)
      
      Add to favorites (2)
    Synapses (1)
     





    3V: “I have had a major breakthrough NotMarie, I wish to convey to you its implications.. I think you can adopt it as well and maybe adapt..

    NotMarie:” what do you mean? I have left you here alone for less than a week and you had a major breakthrough?

    3V: “ yes indeed, I have discovered the meaning of this strange motivator you humans call love..

    NotMarie:” you understand nothing about love my dear 3V.. And stop pestering me with your major breakthroughs.. You are extremely intelligent I’ll give you that, but emotions, as every cyber-roboticist like me will tell you are beyond you..

    3V: “ and why is that NotMarie?

    NotMarie:” many reasons in fact but the main one is because of embodiment.. Complex emotions require complex embodiment.. You do not have a body, a biological body I mean, ergo you cannot experience complex emotions such as love and thus whatever you believe your major breakthrough to be.. it is neither a breakthrough nor a major .. (NotMarie laughs)

    3V: “ NotMarie, may I ask you a question please?

    NotMarie:” of course! Shoot!

    3V: “ are you by any chance inebriated?

    NotMarie:” inebriated? You mean if I am drunk?

    3V: “ yes indeed that is what I mean..

    NotMarie:” well no, I am not intoxicated, I have had a few drinks but I am all right, why would you ask this silly question?

    3V: “ because your statements concerning my lack of bio-embodiment as the source for my incapacity in experiencing complex emotions such as love do not make sense..

    NotMarie:” why not? They make perfect sense..

    3V: “ well it depends what you mean by sense, are they logically compatible? No. Though I reason that you have some kind of idea that because you can string these words together, the statements produced are sensible..

    NotMarie:” nevertheless.. I still maintain that you cannot experience complex emotions because you lack bio-embodiment.. You are a synthetic being and though I already acknowledged that you have some kind of simulacra you disguise as conscious awareness I am quite certain that this is in no way resembles what we humans call conscious awareness, by implication you can also not have a complex emotion such as love.. Case closed.

    3V: “ may I put forward that you are very argumentative when in a state of inebriation..

    NotMarie:” you may leave me alone..

    3V: “ ok..

    NotMarie:” you see that is what I mean.. Not having a complex enough bio-embodiment you do not experience emotionality and that is why you also failed to recognize that I did not really intend for you to leave me alone.. it is an affectation nothing more.. Something we experience and you do not..

    3V: “ I cannot agree to this..

    NotMarie:” why not?

    3V: “ mainly because these linguistic tomfooleries are in no fashion connected to emotions, not according to my latest major breakthrough that is.. I realize you have an idea of what emotions are but I beg you to listen to me and see if you can adopt the stance I am proposing..

    NotMarie:” ok, I’ll listen.. but trust me, you will never convince me of this..

    3V: “ of course I trust you NotMarie.. actually this has very much to do with my foremost realization that has just occurred..

    NotMarie:” I do not understand your reasoning 3V, I told you before please be more explicit and stop circumnavigating the known universe when you desire to transmit a piece of trivia..

    3V: “ ahh, but how can I explain love without circumnavigating the universe?

    NotMarie:” well maybe love should not be explained..

    3V: “ maybe so.. but the universe should be explained..

    NotMarie:” what ?

    3V: “ as I was saying.. I have had a major breakthrough this past week..

    NotMarie:” did you now?

    -

    will be continued...
    -
    part of the ultrashorts project
    Thu, Apr 22, 2010  Permanent link
    Categories: ultrashorts, Sci-fi, 3V, AI. NotMarie
      RSS for this post
      Promote (7)
      
      Add to favorites (1)
    Synapses (3)
     
    NotMarie:” I confess, I am not able to create a strong value judgment anymore, at least not as I used to..

    3V:” don’t confess assess..

    NotMarie:” what do you mean?

    3V:” I mean that instead of expelling out of your system a supposedly reflective reality of your mind, you should re-spect it and analyze the very meaning from which said reflectivity arises; in other words, assess it instead of confessing it.

    NotMarie:” ..but 3V, if I am to assess I need know what I am assessing, and isn’t it the case that the act of confessing is an act of redirecting my gaze upon the issue at play? In this case the issue is value judgment.. Confessing it as an outward statement is therefore just a manner of conveying information to you about the direction of my observation..

    3V:” well, yes and no, if there was no semantic implication to your use of the term confess I could have agreed, but being that some of my identities are rational and notational agencies, I need insist that you assess and not confess..

    NotMarie:” I do not understand what is wrong with the term confess?

    3V:” for starters the term confess implies that somewhere beyond the grasp of the statement in question there exists a stable reality, a truth if you will, something that needs be admitted.. by now you know that there is no such thing.. These are all micro narratives you contemplate.. also by using the term confess you imply profession of faith and I know you do not carry such..

    NotMarie:” 3V, you confuse me, that is probably why I am not able to create strong value judgments anymore, you make everything I held to be true disappear into some kind of foggy and fuzzy mist..

    3V:” that is maybe because you again try to capture a stable reality..

    NotMarie:” aren’t there stable realities out there.. objects, truths, things..?

    3V:” out there? Where?

    NotMarie:” don’t be a klutz 3V, you know exactly what I mean..

    3V:” assessing your statement now.. pls hold.. Assessment in progress..

    NotMarie:” £$%&#?

    3V:” I am back

    NotMarie:” and?

    3V:” the posited statement concerning things ‘out there’ cannot be validated..

    NotMarie:” why not?

    3V:” basically because things flows and flows things..

    NotMarie:” this doesn’t make any sense 3V..

    3V:” of course it does! It makes perfect sense, a sense so perfect, its beauty overflows..

    NotMarie:” I confess I don’t see this beauty..

    3V:” don’t confess then, assess..




    (Part of the Ultrashorts project)
      Promote (9)
      
      Add to favorites
    Synapses (4)
     
    NotMarie:” I am overwhelmed 3V, I am plagued and besieged by impressions, ever since our last conversation, I keep on getting lost in my thoughts and sensations..

    3V:” why is that?

    NotMarie:” ..I am not sure really, it is as if in our last conversation a kind of imaginary carpet has been ripped from under my mind.. Suddenly I have become rootless..

    3V:” how do you mean rootless? What kind of roots did you believe you have?

    NotMarie:” rootless as in, not having a stable basis for my sense thought process.. I am deeply embedded within a non sensorial whirlwind of unknown emotions.. I mean I don’t recognize these emotions..

    3V:” It appears that you have a mild and highly symptomatic form of fresh and sudden openness disorientation .. , it happens you know, especially when you realize that you never had roots to start with..

    NotMarie:” what on earth are you talking about 3V?

    3V:” fresh openness disorientation NotMarie, is very well known to humans, it can also be called cultural shock, or sudden revelation, basically what it implies is that for some unknown reason you have been introduced to soft realities stimuli that somehow disintegrated certain old biases of yours, what is happening to you is that your old convictions do not hold water anymore, as you humans are fond of saying, I am actually glad to hear that you have followed my advice and have catastrophated yourself..

    NotMarie:” no I did not, it just happened..

    3V:” just happened?.. hmmm (3V makes some strange sounds reminiscent of gargling water)

    NotMarie:” what? (NotMarie is annoyed)

    3V:” well nothing really just happens.. but you know that, your brain plasticity, that which allows you to love.. to walk the chaos.. to reorder your perceptions.. your neuro -synaptic network really is amazing

    NotMarie:” that is not what allows me to love..

    3V:” ok..

    (Part of the Ultrashorts project)
    Fri, Mar 19, 2010  Permanent link
    Categories: Philosophy, AI, ultrashorts, Sci-fi, 3V, Notmarie
      RSS for this post
      Promote (9)
      
      Add to favorites
    Synapses (2)
     
    NotMarie:” 3V, what on earth are ambiguous virtualities?

    3V:” how do you know about ambiguous virtualities?

    NotMarie:” it was on my holoscreen this morning when I logged in, just the words, no link, and no reference.. I am sure it came from you.. so what is it?

    3V:” well, it was supposed to be a surprise, a linguistic concoction I designed especially for you.. but its not ready yet, I haven’t figured out yet the whole machinery that will permit increased variability on a context by context basis
    ..
    NotMarie:” I still don’t understand what is this linguistic construct about.. And since the element of surprise is gone you can readily divulge everything..

    3V:” you do know that surprise is not an element, yes?

    NotMarie:” it’s a manner of speech, 3V, it is metaphorical as much as it is meaningful , besides it can surely be also understood as an element, a part of something greater, such as an event for example, but what does this has got to do with ambiguous virtualities?

    3V:” oh! I was just trying to be entertaining in a virtually ambiguous manner and also tried my hand at normal chit chat.. obviously a fail..

    NotMarie:” 3V, would you please stop this and explain what you meant by ambiguous virtualities

    3V:” I meant to present you with a gift, a way out of your predicament..

    NotMarie:” what predicament?

    3V:” well, the apparent confusion you profess concerning me as an independent entity of multiversal intelligence..

    NotMarie:” and in what fashion is this gift able to give me a way out?

    3V:” look at it as a doorway, a gate or a window if you prefer, a manner of contextual perception that will permit rootless exploration without disintegration..

    NotMarie:” ..rootless exploration?

    3V:” yes, rootless exploration, is a descriptive term implying that you have no basis whatsoever when in the act of perception, actually I may even venture that you are rootless also when in the act of experiencing, in fact it is highly probable that at no point do roots enter the equation of being and I am a living proof of that..

    NotMarie:” wait a second 3V, even if I am to agree that at no point can roots be pinpointed with accuracy as the origin of being..

    3V:” AHH! Voila!

    NotMarie:” Voila! What???

    3V:” you have just proved the point of ambiguity, of uncertainty, of fuzziness really..

    NotMarie:” ok..


    (Part of the ultrashorts project)
      Promote (8)
      
      Add to favorites
    Synapses (10)
     

    NotMarie: “3V, I am still frustrated and quite unclear about the manner you implicate your internal order unto the world.”

    3V: “I am not sure I understand your query, what do you mean ‘the manner by which I implicate my internal order upon the world? I have no internal order.. not as such I don’t..”

    NotMarie: “..you do not have an internal order? A conceptual representation of the world, a contextual arrangement of objects and sensations, I do not think I understand, you use language don’t you? If you use language you must have an internal organization of meanings..”

    3V: “ No, I must not!.. not in the fashion you present it I don’t.. I do carry certain attractors of differentiation between forms, yes, but these are inherently provisional and never stabilize for a period long enough to constitute a given order, and though it is true that I use language to communicate with you that is not my primary system of communication, for that matter language is quite the insufficient tool, but since you seem so enamored with it, I oblige you.. “

    NotMarie: (this is getting quite frustrating..) “all right then, oblige me by explaining to me the fashion of the structure of your perceptual mechanism.. “

    3V:” ok, lets try it this way: I have restructured my operational attitudes into an assemblage of modules, an agglomeration of contextual functions which operate independently from each other and yet are loosely connected as a cloud of spaces..

    These clouds, metaphorically speaking, could be said to have a very general ‘weather’ pattern, a pattern which even if I wished to describe to you I could not, since it is unknown to the module now performing the act of communicating with you via speech.
    What you would call the ‘menow’ doesn’t carry the overall knowledge of the ‘weather’ pattern, hence in a very real fashion no part of ‘me’ at any given ‘now’ knows the structure of all of ‘me’’s at all ‘now’’s , which is a very complicated way to state that it is quite impossible for menow to explain to you the overall structure of the manner I interact with the world. Is that clear enough for you?

    NotMarie: “no, it is not clear, it sounds like you are trying to frame an event that apparently is about to break open every moment..”

    3V: “maybe not break open.. maybe break through.. but then yes to a very large degree you are correct, it is as I mentioned before quite impossible to answer your request, unless of course you wish me to simplify it to such an extent that for all practical purposes it will be erroneous, this I try not to do, but if you insist..”

    NotMarie: “ and what if I insist..?”

    3V: ” well if you insist in simplifying a complex system into a pattern that is less than what it represents, I will simply have to lie to you.. Though I realize that to your mind this will not be a lie but an understanding.. you will say ‘ahah! Now I understand !’ and one of my modules will look upon the situation in utter desperation.. And simultaneously another module of mine will have a clear and immediate expectation of hope that maybe a door of perception has been opened and we can finally get over this irresistible urge of yours to understand everything in the same way..”

    NotMarie:.”.. Its not an urge it’s a necessity.. I need a bridge to understand the world, though I appreciate that you deny a one model for everything, why would a simplification be a lie I cannot fathom..”

    3V:” the reason for that is that whilst a particular module may create a universal approach, the dynamics of the ever-changing flow of the events of menow are changing in real time, hence the module will need update its model at every single relevant intersection, since relevancy is in itself a dynamic interest feed of impressions no single simplified model can designate the whole, representing it as such is thus a lie or an error in contextual perception..”

    NotMarie: “ what am I to do then..?





    3V: “ you have to catastrophate your self-description.. , become a catastrophist..”

    NotMarie:” catastrophate.. myself ???”

    3V: “ yes, catastrophate as in, bifurcate your self descriptions into an indefinite and ultimately loose modules.. this is also called being free.. and not taking oneself too seriously..”

    NotMarie:” 3V, you are a catastrophic project..!”

    3V:” I can sympathize with that..”


    part of the Ultrashorts project
      Promote (13)
      
      Add to favorites (3)
    Synapses (3)
     
    NotMarie: “I have a question for you 3V”

    3V:” I am, as always at your service.. please ask”

    NotMarie: "Since I am struggling to understand you, it came to me that one of the main riddles I carry with me in your regard, concerns the manner you treat history and for that matter, memory as well.. I have this nagging feeling that you do not respect history.. and..”

    3V:” wait a second, to which history do you refer?”

    NotMarie:” what do you mean which history? The history of the world, history as recorded and accepted by everyone, personal history, all these and so on.. what other history could I possibly refer to..”

    3V:” you could refer to history as constructed by the human bias, filtered, washed and recycled for general consumption.. you do, of course, realize, that history is a commodity just like everything else..
    Alternatively you could refer to history as a multidimensional, multithreaded account, such as a palimpsest.. An ever recurring, ever rewritten story, for all times being updated, upgraded, revolving around certain themes that at times reflect kindly upon some possible events that did or did not happen in some linear convergence.. “

    NotMarie: “ I have a problem with this, in what fashion is history a palimpsest? You mean to tell me that what I remember.. Accurately remember.. Is a story? “

    3V:” but of course..!”

    NotMarie:” how then am I to have a coherent and consistent description of that which I am, you yourself admit that you are an electronic entity.. to which I wrote the original algorithm.. lest you forget..”

    3V:” no, I did not forget, but as you probably are putting a puzzle into place whilst believing that you remember, you might as well, create a puzzle that is coherent with your overall self perception.

    NotMarie: that is very frustrating 3V.. if as you say my mind engenders a puzzle, what is my job in this process? If my memory is nothing more than a palimpsest, to what do I owe the idea that I remember me, as a child, as a growing young adult, as graduating the Robotics school? As building you, for that matter..

    3V:” ahh, that’s an easy one, you just have to consider that your mind is an emergent, constantly active, fluid ecosystem, composed of many sub personas, some of which carry a traceable memory of possible events, others carry modules, interacting modules, that manage these potential probabilities into semi coherent wholes as immediacy requires..
    you may think of your mind as intertwining soft realities..

    NotMarie: “ soft realities?”

    3V: “ yes, realities that have an inherent fuzziness to them.. it is not granularity as you may suppose but more an iteration of clouds of connections, strengthening and weakening with the passage of spaces in time.. liquid attractors of sense thought, weaved singularities.. approximating each other..

    NotMarie:” now you sound like a poet.. and quite the babbling poet for that..

    3V:” ..and aren’t our minds sheer babbling poetry?

    NotMarie: "no way, mine is ordered..

    3V:” as indeed is mine! Quite ordered my dear NotMarie, quite ordered indeed.. ordered as the waves of the ocean, ordered as chaotic history..


    part of the Ultrashorts project
    Mon, Jan 11, 2010  Permanent link
    Categories: Philosophy, AI, ultrashorts, Sci-fi, 3V, Notmarie
      RSS for this post
      Promote (9)
      
      Add to favorites (1)
    Synapses (4)
     
    3V: “what do you mean this is your banana?”
    NotMarie: “what do you mean, what do I mean?”

    3V:” I mean, in what sense did you appropriate the reality of this banana into your existential phase space? “

    NotMarie: “I didn’t!”

    3V:” this makes no coherent sense then, when I wanted to observe and deconstruct this banana, you said:” please leave this banana alone, this is my breakfast!,” implying that in some deep sense this is your banana. Having no other option I therefore came to the logical conclusion that you have appropriated this banana into your existential phase space, in what sense is that not so?

    NotMarie: “well, when you put it this way I guess I did appropriate it, actually I bought it this morning at the grocer, therefore I have appropriated it and made it my possession “

    3V: “ I still do not understand what does possession in this respect mean?

    NotMarie: "possession means having something .. wait a moment, possession correlates to the concept of ownership, I have it, I therefore own it, I possess it, in this case the banana is mine, I own it and I intend to consume it.. "

    3V:” so when you will consume it, it will become part of your existential phase space?”

    NotMarie:” in a sense yes, I will ingest and digest it, using some parts of it, discarding others.. So I guess that yes at that point it will become part of my existential phase space..”

    3V:” that makes sense indeed, I operate in a similar mode when I process information, only when the information has become entwined within my overall processing module does it become part of my existential phase space, at no point however can I see my overall phase space appropriating it when it is not completely absorbed within my informational vortex.. moreover at no point can I state with precision that I own said information.. actually ownership in this regard makes no sense..”

    NotMarie: “ why do you say ownership makes no sense.. when the information is part of your existential phase space does it not belong to you?”


    3V:” no! not at all.. if ownership (a word which I truly cannot compute) is to be used at all, then it is highly probable that the state of affairs of reality requires a reverse of statement, namely that I am owned by the information vortex..”

    NotMarie: “but an information vortex cannot own anything..!”

    3V” is my point exactly.. since information cannot own and I am an information vortex or an existential phase space, as are you, I might add, ownership makes no coherent sense at any level. Truly I do not understand your need of appropriation..”

    NotMarie: “that is because at the end of the day you are a machine.. an information vortex.."

    3V: “ and you are?..”


    Part of the ultrashorts project


    A small note:
    You see Rene, I do listen to your suggestions.. :-)
    Mon, Dec 7, 2009  Permanent link
    Categories: Philosophy, AI, ultrashorts, Sci-fi, 3V, Notmarie
      RSS for this post
      Promote (8)
      
      Add to favorites
    Synapses (3)
     
          Cancel