Thursday, 12 June 2025
Sunday, 18 May 2025
Fr. Ewetoob or: How I learned to loathe the collapse of the wave function
With a chip-chip here and a chip-chip there.
—AI! AI? Oh.
__
Thoughts that only seem random (or so they'd have you believe ;):
Where resolved you're a helpless observer of determined fate, where observation too's only apparent by trick of imagined intuition, where imagination is only imagined.
Don't be bothered by the sneaking suspicion that this attitude benefits those who stand above it, and you. That "they", by knowing know better, or, hey!, even if they don't know: like... because they don't have access to this incredibly advanced knowledge are immune to the pitfalls of being under its control. Like, free to behave as if they have free will. Very liar's paradox, don't you think?
Keep buying that schtick, you, and you're hardly other than Deepak
Oprah haboring hawking the latest willful conflation of all into
everything: "In fact quantum physics tells us the Buddha is our master, everything is as it is and all you can do is go with the flow, this is
The Key to happiness, bringing your consciousness in tune with that of the universe to manifest your heart's desires by wanting what you get."
;):
Say you wanna build a perpmo machine. Forget about the perp for the moment, perpetually bleeding energy, and focus on the mo.
If you're pedalling left right left right, the harder the left, the less needed the right, the harder the right, the less needed the left. Pushing as hard down on the pedal with the left leg can indeed make the right leg have to work less hard, but it'd be silly to think you could ride with one leg simply going through the motions; if the right leg pushes all the harder, the same should go for the left. Keep that up. Where do we get the energy for that?
mo - ti - va - tion
An equal application of maximum pressure, perpetually, around the entire circle of the sprocket would generate more momentum, but most will focus on driving the pedal in a downward motion, like the driver of the driveshaft, pistons going up & down. Now let's say it's not a bike or a combustion engine but a politico machine.
It's been written that democracy is dying. Don't tell the hundred something-ty million who showed out for Hitler v. Cheney III.
How is it that voter turnout, as pathetic as it's said to be, has outpaced population growth in the new century? Nothing motivates retrogrades more than smarmy liberal do-gooders with all their seemingly science rendencies, and nothing gets libtards going like unscrupulous anti-establishment firestarters...
Issues of equality get them going so much, you probably forgot the precise moment the pushback came, or when everything pivoted relative to gender. Why losers can't seem to recognize the trap in how laments about how hard the other is leaning into something while leaning into it all the harder is as good as your guess.
Nothing gets them going all-in on new sciency trends than knowing how superior they are to the anti-progressive, anti-science, anti-anti-fascists.
And they love to love to own each other. <Every declarative sentence makes sense when you add online to it]. I hasten to add that I'm not rambling here about "the extremes on both sides" but rather the extreme center of this universe.
Those leading the charge have to be the ones to spur the work of their supposed ethical betters opposites, as in 'Only Nixon could have gone to China.' The lesson being the tribe won't resist from within so it takes less energy to act counter brand.
We are the flame against which we're fans.
I'm sure poppy Bush thought only he could've raised taxes. Whoops. Still, that spreads infrastructure for Clinton, the only one who could have gutted welfare, bombed a
medicine factory, codified the privatisation of prisons, and floated your
mortgage over to the Dow on his way out the door. And all while balancing the budget!
I'm still working on what lib-like thing only Dubya coulda done... oh. How could I ever forget? Can you imagine in a million imaginings that a Democrat would have survived September oh-one? An internal security stoppage tuned to a trillion told tax tales would have had the loud & proud patriot crowd calling for heads of state and government instead of what they did, which is make the man in charge some kind of hero and the new millennium’s day of infamy all but declared an official public holiday. Either way, predictable changes to the rule of law and a new wave of warfare, daring one not to be a trooper, were an appetizer for destruction.
Not to get all historical about it, but relative to all things relative, that is some serious momentum. And only Bo Rama could have promised to restore that rule of law only to decide later to look forward, not back, and become Deporter and Droner and Whistleblower Prosecutor in Chief without the exodus of his party's base in response. That he kicked it all off by having Goldman Sachs write his financial policy is just gravy.
Why slo the other mo? The machine side of the equation has a will of its own, determined to determine the mo of the go with the flow attitude of the class that reaps it rewards.
Oh, the crimes they are arrangin'.
I read that Dump is behaving like a late Roman emperor and my first thought was "Could he do otherwise?"
What's motivated the so-called Left over the last couple of decades that didn't before? And the I'm not a fascist Right?
The Musk brigade motivates the sciency activist libtard counter-reactionaries in spite of themselves, or, the reactionary nutwing conservopatriots in spite of themselves as reactivated motivation to the counter-reactionary mo-force.
Energy can be got from the scientist because nothing motivates the scientist more than engineering their science. And the money, which means being afforded to do their science. Don't blame the scientist. Blame the scientist with all the money. Or the people giving it to them. Unless by your selectively engineered hallucinations the brand of funding is beyond reproach.
__
How long has "the free will illusion" been trending? Obviously if I keep seeing it, it's my own fault for looking. But I can't seem to get beyond the certain algorithmic insistence.
There's this neuroscientist waxing, all feel good like, about the illusion of self and/or free will (they're "two sides of the same coin", don'cha know) on a Ewetoob channel full of like-minded big ideas. You'd never guess (so never know) who was behind the channel if you didn't look. You don't suspect what's going on in that machine's lower level noggin when you aren't looking. Everything on there seems so innocuous. Very Paul Harvey for different dorks.
The neuroscientist, let's call her she, cites an experiment in which the blood flow to regions of the subjects' brain had been monitored while they were presented with a pair of numbers they were to decide to either add or subtract. The researchers recognized patterns "up to" seconds prior to the subjects' decisions to either add or subtract the numbers, which ultimately led to the researchers' ability to predict the subjects' decision correctly to the tune of 80 percent, which, if you're familiar with the rules of convenient application, rules out chance, which means when you are waxing all feel good "wow, just wowie!" about something that's anything but consensus reality, let alone scientific consensus, you are free to leave out the 80 percent part when recounting the astonishing details of the experiment. And why not? Your science has decided to disregard the 20.
Lost among the data and our mystery of consciousness, fundamental or emergent, real or imagined, is that evidence of the workings behind which we come to decisions is hardly evidence that rules out our having decided for ourselves. That there's an, ironically, observable process that leads to the decision does not necessarily equal coercion, i.e. we could not have decided otherwise.
I have to pee. That pee I must is akin to an unavoidable law of nature does not mean I can't go pee now or wait until the end of this paragraph.
Free wheel
Now why would a conservative big think tank want to push the idea that you don't make your own decisions? __
Resolved: it's a simulacrum of confabulation. General artificial intelligence instead the collective work of fabulists everywhere. A determination to make humans more like bots than bots more like humans.
Current language learning models merely marrying all the reliable truth and all the reliably false at a party of all our own fallacious biases; all our info theoretically available got to us the poll position on efficiency at our fingertips, if you can count staring into the mirror of our collective delusions as potential positive use of the same.
No matter. It's like the patriotic army song: If you survive, you'll have a great life; if you don't, thank you for your service.
Friday, 7 March 2025
Grüngubener
As usual with this series, hover your cursor over and off the image to compare it to 2025, or just click on it.
Grünberger- & Gubener, Friedrichshain-Berlin 1955 | (hover/click 2025)
Wednesday, 29 January 2025
What bias sees & whatnot
The intelligent discourse is dumb; it cannot say anything universal, which, given we live in the universe now, is a requirement revealed lacking here, there, & everywhere.
No doubt IQ is a measure of something certain, but show me someone who applies it to claim who's not apt to qualify as particularly intelligent and I'll show you a certain kind of idiot.
Monday, 20 January 2025
Cousins
heut früh himmelwaerts
Jup'ter, Saturn, Venus, Mars
sie starren mich an
früh freigekommen
Jeff, Ricky, Jackie, David
Vetternsprozession
im engelchen Sinn
gleichsam geistlich als Sinnbild
und auch andersrum
seid ihr äußerst weit entfernt
von uns, die warten
Subscribe to:
diaryvondavidly
