 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 (nobody)...and 113 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2613408 Today 0 Topics 127499 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
grows up into a sphere |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
imagine a timeline balling up in your brain. one dimension balled up into three; repeatedly intersecting itself in the second. a bunch of scientists fix it in formaldehyde and use a computer to reconstruct how one thought leads to the next, then publish a paper: how do you feel about this? sarah palin stares at you, dead earnest, from across the mahogany table. pen poised intently over her pad of paper, ready to write down whatever you say |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
sarah palin nods. she has seen "quantum leap" before, but it was too "science-y" for her |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
about a week later, sarah palin and emails them to you |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you email her back regarding one of the ? marks in her notes, explaining that you've managed to pin it down and after all. who knew people other than warhol have made modern art worth a crap? sarah replies that her favorite warhol is his design for the campbell's soup label |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you email sarah a bit later about the other ? -- turns out, yes, you did get that bit wrong. it wasn't gcBr, it was . you had immediately sensed you'd gotten things a bit wrong; told her to ? that bit. you remember being certain it was the wrong acronym. close, but not quite. no idea why this is wrong, sarah, it's just wrong; remind me to check on that later. staring at the scan, you remember that it's an acronym involving the word "cell" twice. you think, "i already knew this, so why the hell did i write it gcBr?" perhaps it has to do with the vertical nature of the <br> tag. perhaps it has to do with the fact that B, P, and C are rhyme-y... perhaps..." in any case, it's funny how you were able to know it was wrong but unable to figure out why, at the time. you were rushing to get various points across to sarah. had you taken a moment to calm down; pace yourself in that moment, you probably could have gotten the acronym correct in the first place, or at least a tad closer (e.g. gcBc). however, it's handy to know you are capable of deferring such things for later. it was hard enough keeping sarah's attention on matters for the full fifteen minutes |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you email sarah back about , in particular, how "it is possible that this was the original condition among vertebrates, and may have allowed bottom-dwelling species to sense threats from above." and speculate that this all makes sense on a primal level you find most satisfying. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you find yourself musing on how these sort of things would seem to be built into language, as well: someone will say, "trumps popularity has skyrockted." it has gone up like a rocket. popularity can be greater or lesser; it doesn't really have a direction. yet, "more popular" is "up" in popularity, while "less popular" is "down." sarah palin replies, "wat's up doc! ha ha" |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Hmm, well, I'm not high and Sarah Palin is not a topic that is fueling my creativity. Uhhh, so, one time I had a dumb idea, like the game of life but red/green/blue, like each pixel instead of being black on/off, it had 3 components: red on/off, green on/off, blue on/off. I thought that would be interesting, but then I was like... oh yeah, that actually just makes the same basic thing on top of itself 3 times, so it wasn't that interesting. But cellular automata is interesting, this book called 'a new kind of science' was horribly written, however the pictures and captions trigger interesting ideas like how seemingly fluid things like moving water etc can be simulated with small digital units. And if a demoscene demo can be only 4k, it sure seems like computation could maybe compute a whole universe itself. The problem is output is mostly a bunch of rgb pixels instead of say, atoms, or whatever. If similar 4k was output to atoms instead of pixels, and maybe many times larger than 4k, maybe you could actually hold your hands out and feel the computated sand sift through your fingers, instead of being such obviously hollow mario 64 polygons with no real internal mass. But since I'm a tard who can barely program, and has never had any pussy, what do I know question mark. A question mark is really weird. I mean you just go around putting these "question marks" around, maybe put one next to a tree, another on a table. What are they asking if there's no question and only a mark? Why do you even need a mark, I mean isn't it apparent that a question is a question without marking it. What is a question, it's like a stupidity publicly expressed, it's like hey world do you know wtf, cuz this particular information is not in my brain. There is only true answers, false answers and questions. There's only true answers actually, we just don't know which ones are true, which is a bit annoying I suppose. You have to navigate a labyrinth of heuristics for being so informationally stupid. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i shall deliniate a sequence of events that seems scripted by joyce himself. perhaps in a python belt 2017-03-09 - mohamed had on one of my autistic-strength jokes in the thread "how are you" working on kanish doesn't work unless you're a sociopath comfortable with manipulating people into buying more crap than they need, but the point gets lost. i wander off into lramblementing about how my jokes are too "deep reference" to "work" and mohamed asks: "work as for what" 2017-03-11 12:42 - he has acquired a copy of godel, escher, bach by the Hof in the thread "mathematics" 2017-03-11 16:21 - to mohamed re: "work as for what". he lols. i reply, "the joke is squarepusher." this becomes a whole huge thing a day or two later, but it's irrelevant to this arc. or is it? 2017-03-11 16:45 - i respond that book but no one's read it. later, i mention flatland in both "mathematics" and "how are you" because it is equally relevant to both. i only get replies in "mathematics," though. 2017-03-11 18:18 - in "mathematics," hyperflake quips, "you know too much esoteric knowledge for your own good you know" 2017-03-11 18:28 - i 2017-03-11 19:07 - in "margaret hamilton" i start rambling about how NASA moved from hand-coding to this is where it gets strange. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
2017-03-11 19:05 -- i google search xltronic for "VxWorks." i remember i've gone on a tear about VxWorks before and i think it's funny to link my ancient months-ago rants, but i can't recall which thread it's in. 2017-03-11 19:06 -- i fully expect to be alone in ranting about VxWorks on xltronic, but google dredges up a , from 2006-10-23 16:38. i am agog, but i put it aside, since this wasn't the VxWorks rant i was looking for. 2017-03-11 19:07 -- having found the link, i post the link to my previous rant. it's in the thread "what is the meaning of life?" 2017-03-11 19:10 -- i skim the rest of the thread, and it's deeply relevant in an ironic way: here i am, rambling about how i get smacked out on wikipedia, so i bump the thread by saying i get on wikipedia. 2017-03-11 19:11 -- the tab with elusive's post and i see he mentions the motorola 68000 architecture. i think: oh! i have a thread for this too! 2017-03-11 19:14 -- i google search xlt for motorola 68k and linking both my VxWorks rant and my 68k rant 2017-03-11 19:20 -- the 68k rant is in thread "star wars weapons" and i without even reading it. i reread the thread after bumping it. it says: |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i'd just like to highlight the conflict in my life: an overpowering urge that i know the thing for this. like, the perfect thing. then, next, a memory good enough that this urge never runs dry, and i'm hunting for the right shitty angelfire page at 12:30am. but, then, shit. that pile of james moorer PDFs. that was actually worth the half-hour i spent, i think. i can't very well go around calling myself dysfunctional if my dysfunctions are functional, can i? i am agog. i've just done the thing i've described and here is a post about it that i don't remember writing about it, what the shit then i start looking at "what is the meaning of life" more closely, and i find , which i posted @ 2016-09-01 01:14: "i more or less suspect i'm a strange rippling loop of information like that douglas chap wrote in the book i haven't read. GEB: everyone has this on their shelf, but no one has read it. it's up there with stephen wolfram's "a new kind of science" i had completely forgotten i'd posted this, and it was hilarious to me, because -- remember? -- i said to mohamed @ 2017-03-11 16:45, as mentioned above: Godel, Escher, Bach is one of those books everyone has on their shelves, but no one has ever read. i have it on my shelf. i haven't read it i forgot "a new kind of science" this round, and here's w M w to tie up the loose end. isn't that hilarious? no? ok. i am squarepusher |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
also, regarding palin -- i imagine sarah palin taking my notes because i imagine she has just as much trouble concentrating on anything for a few minutes, same as me. since i have this difficulty, however, my simulation of sarah palin has it as well, whether or not she has it in reality. saharapusher |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
sqhara pishlin |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
then, of course, the post elusive wrote in 2006 about VxWorks and moto 68k was an all-caps post mocking squarepusher. there's so much crossover i can't keep track of it all. i love it |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the connection between the two "godel, escher, bach" posts would have remained buried if elusive hadn't made a joke about squarepusher and VxWorks and Moto 68k in 2006. think about that, if you can |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
no, wait, that's wrong. the original GEB quote would have had to been in "star wars weapons" for that to be true, and it was in "the meaning of life." bugger. i'm going out for a smoke |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
imagine everything you've ever experienced and thought -- a single, very long line -- jumbled up into a ball. as the line repeatedly intersects itself, it causes one thought to lead to the next. now imagine that a message board operations more or less in the same way, once it's aged enough. like a fine wine this is why i think any board that clears out old posts (coughWATMMcough) is pretty much administered by hitler. now i'm out. yes, i am going to just godwyn peace. the previous sentence is a quote from a post i wrote on the yugo forums a few months ago, and the yugo forums are still broken and i am feeling compelled to have another look at that problem. it's a deep and strange issue involving the handling of lambda functions inside the PHP language and how regular expressions work |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
godwin and peace |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I bought godel escher bach way back and was rather unimpressed. It was pretty much media hyped, maybe from astroturfing. I think douglas is maybe a pseudointellectual, like steven hawking, maybe just memed his way into the whole kurzweil crowd. Actually the multi-direction letter carving on the cover was memorable/interesting, but everything I read inside I had read previously elsewhere or was skippable. I read ' a brief history of time' by hawking and it sure didn't amaze me like he's some super intellectual or anything. Maybe he's just a gatekeeper puppet preventing people from learning real physics, which is locked up so the masses can't use it to obtain freedom or challenge monopolies based on old physics. I stopped reading books when the internets were invented. Knowledge doesn't seem to be power anyway, power is power. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the multi-direction wood carving made a deep impression on me, yes. it's why i bought the books. both were bought back in like 2011 when i had time and ambition instead of stress. i started reading GEB and got interrupted; never got back to it. that cover, though... it strikes to the core of what drives me. i have an unusually good memory for those 2D shadows, and the idea that they're all being cast by something simultaneously accessible and impossible to comprehend. also, it should be painfully clear that i love puns, and i'd never seen a shadow pun before |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
how do you measure consciousness? i think "time scale" may be one way. "on what time scale is this entity conscious?" i am conscious on a human time scale. DNA is conscious on an evolutionary timescale. life is conscious on a geological scale. message boards are conscious at a time scale in between human-timescale and DNA-timescale. language is conscious at a timescale somewhere deep in between DNA-timescale and messageboard-timescale alas, i can't think of a way to stretch this into "cube-timescale" so i'll just stop typing here. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
let's crossover this: that cover, though... it strikes to the core of what drives me. i have an unusually good memory for those 2D shadows, and the idea that they're all being cast by something simultaneously accessible and impossible to comprehend. with this: in any case, it's funny how you were able to know it was wrong but unable to figure out why, at the time. you were rushing to get various points across to sarah. had you taken a moment to calm down; pace yourself in that moment, you probably could have gotten the acronym correct in the first place, or at least a tad closer (e.g. gcBc). however, it's handy to know you are capable of deferring such things for later. it was hard enough keeping sarah's attention on matters for the full fifteen minutes ...and hope it makes things clear when i say: i could tell from the shadows cast that i had the acronym wrong. i knew it was possible for me to sit there; think about it. probably could have gotten it exactly right... but it was a distraction. i was trying to get down a bunch of associations on paper and delving into the nitty-gritty of that acronym had the potential to distract me; pop the bubble. i didn't sit there and decide that; i just kind of new. i knew i should tag it with a ? and let it go or i'd lose the plot. having gotten the more important points down, i could go back and fill in the details later. i am also free to examine the details of the details: to post-process that little moment where i sort of reflexively decided to not persue a conscious branch of thought. it's a bit of a loop, really... if i didn't persue the branch, how did i know where it led, more or less? there's a nebulous sense of copies of myself figuring things out below deck |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the gcBc is this, by the way: However, most of these connections were indistinguishable from parallel fiber connections, suggesting that powerful ascending axon connections are rare. The existence of many very weak synapses would provide a mechanism for Purkinje cells to extract information selectively from the mass provided by parallel fibers. bold mine, pointing out the gold mine: i was examining the structures responsible for how i can be aware of something without fully knowing it. the "lone ascending axon through a data pipe of parallel fibers" thing seems like a fine-shadow casting mechanism. the fact that this little moment has been nagging at me suggests i was actively using the mechanism i was diagramming. in essence, i was using the structure to describe itself, and whenever one does this, it tends to produce exquisite brain farts |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
it axed my whole quote! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
it did it again. trying to paste AGAIN: The cerebellar cortex contains huge numbers of synapses between granule cells and Purkinje cells. These synapses are thought to be a major storage site for information required to execute coordinated movements. To obtain a quantitative description of this connection, we recorded unitary synaptic responses between granule cell and Purkinje cell pairs in adult rat cerebellar slices. Our results are consistent with parallel fiber->Purkinje cell synapses having high release probabilities and modest paired pulse facilitation. However, a wide range of response amplitudes was observed. Indeed, we detected many fewer parallel fiber connections (7% of the granule cells that were screened) than expected (54%), leading us to suggest that up to 85% of parallel fiber->Purkinje cell synapses do not generate detectable electrical responses. We also investigated the possible role of granule cell ascending axons by recording granule cells near the Purkinje cell. A high proportion (up to 50%) of local granule cells generated detectable synaptic responses. However, most of these connections were indistinguishable from parallel fiber connections, suggesting that powerful ascending axon connections are rare. The existence of many very weak synapses would provide a mechanism for Purkinje cells to extract information selectively from the mass provided by parallel fibers. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
But since I'm a tard who can barely program, and has never had any pussy, what do I know question mark. A question mark is really weird. I mean you just go around putting these "question marks" around, maybe put one next to a tree, another on a table. What are they asking if there's no question and only a mark? Why do you even need a mark, I mean isn't it apparent that a question is a question without marking it. What is a question, it's like a stupidity publicly expressed, it's like hey world do you know wtf, cuz this particular information is not in my brain. question mark should now be somewhat clearer: earlier that day, i had computed a hash of the correct acronym (gcPc). later, when i computed the hash of what i had just written down on the page (gcBr) i knew the hashes didn't match. hashes don't work in reverse, though. i simply knew it was wrong. i didn't know why. i didn't know what was correct... but i did know this, somehow: 1) a few moments of thought would have allowed me to dredge up the correct acronym from my brain 2) that few moments of thought would disrupt my active train of thought 3) it was a niggling detail and absolutely not worth abandoning my active train of thought; add a ? and resume the main task i've ranted about branch prediction a few times. i'm getting better and better at it |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i figure next time i have to use a ? in this manner, there'll be a copy of me based on the last few posts down there, sorting fings out... and perhaps i'll get a more proper glimpse of how i know these things without knowing them. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
my name is bold, james bold |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
theres just a conclusion for the path of those who make synapses with xltronic threads. it's madness. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i had my personal path, but i wont link you the threads where im talking my nonsense, since nobody wants to share nonsense, dont we |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
watmm was full of this, wasnt it |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
megatrax still getting roasted? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i acquired a copy of that book a long time ago. never read a word. it means nothing |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
sphere of context sounds like a simply red album title |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
megatrax still getting roasted? i think you mean blazed |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
theres just a conclusion for the path of those who make synapses with xltronic threads. it's madness. it's like gardening for fun. from a certain perspective, i suppose it could be viewed as insane: what? you spend all that time digging around for no constructive gain? if you enjoy gardening, though, then it's a hobby, and having a hobby isn't particularly insane. i like posting here, always have. a bit over a year ago i started to get deep into my own mind, and typing it all up. i enjoyed typing it all up. once i'd gone a bit with it, this thing i'd done for fun began to yield deeper rewards. you have, in this thread, the architecture of my thoughts, frozen, mapped with hyperlinks. i deeply appreciate having it around for my own reference, i'm proud of it, but i don't particularly expect anyone to get it. just know that i'm having fun |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
well theres another explanation then, that when ive gone mad i wasnt really that mad. seriously: glad you're ok, just want to inform that what you display, sometimes, and what other sometimes display, it's an insane dynamic of thought, that is of an insane. i talk by my own experience, man. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you have to be straight like a rectangle |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
example: i used the phrase just now. i was happy with this phrase. i don't recall having used it before. why did i come up with the phrase "strange feedback" now? sometimes, i'll write stuff, and it'll feel spontaneous... out of the blue... but, it all comes from somewhere. here, i've caught my choice of phrasing being essentially guided my subconcious processes. i thought to myself, "i'll reply to welt with a link to [sphere of context] after i reply to mohamed about his psychosis." since i'd thought of [sphere of context] right before replying to mohamed, the contents of [sphere of context] subconsciously influenced my choice of phrasing, even though i did not consciously review [sphere of context]. later -- after replying to both mohamed and welt -- i skimmed through [sphere of context] again, and said: "oh, hey! the phrase came from hofstadter's book 'i am a strange loop,' and 'i am a strange' loop is mentioned in [sphere of context]." thus, i've caught my subconscious mind influencing my conscious mind, after the fact. i'd have had a lot of trouble untangling the threads of causality without this little trail of breadcrumbs to lead me back. does that make sense? no? ok. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
strange feedback (as described above) is an example of strange feedback. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Well fuck me! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yeah, fuck me that was a good read. Seriously cant you just take the fact that reasoning for links is the behaviour of a psychotic into his acute moment. take a moment to think about the awesomeness of it, that we're talking about it here, im telling you yo man i recognize, this is a fact |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
sorry for bullshitting you about the rectangle, what i really wanted to mean is that you have to make yourself this gift and start thinking straight like a line |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
here's a gay picture for you |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
even psychotic behavior comes from somewhere. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i know where it came from ;) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"this sentence is false." --reference paradox "this sentence is not about itself." --contextual paradox |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
fact: everything is a spaceship, because everything is in space. earth is a space-ship. you are a space-ship. my butt is a space-ship. it's a |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
