Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - POFP

Pages: [1] 2 3
Literate Chaotic / Humanity's Last Folly
« on: March 04, 2022, 05:57:17 pm »
If, by the dawn, my homeland and I have been laid to fiery waste
by a madman pursuing False Glories, post-haste,

my only hope is that my homeland's chief
has done the impossible despite what's to come - an unsalvageable grief.

I beg, that in spite of what's left of my People: their pain and their loathing,
my chief, in casting aside all notions of an apocalyptic foreboding,

has mustered an unfathomable courage
that will weigh on them beyond reason - a Holy baggage,

and has chosen not to fire back a world-ending volley,
because they know in their Heart: Today's War should not be Humanity's Last Folly

~ [Attribute to 'Anonymous']

Resources: ~ G. William Domhoff's website - Combines the research and materials of several historical and modern Power Structure Researchers, and provides excellent analyses of their methodologies and principles, and how right or wrong they were based on the most recent studies. ~ Simple Sabotage Manual - Mostly outdated and deprecated by bureaucratic regulation, but contains some interesting points to reference for examples of Power Structure mechanics. ~ "Images of Organization" by Gareth Morgan ~ "The Power Elite" by C. Wright Mills

This is a placeholder for a thread in which I hope that we, as a community, will systematically design a Framework, and consequently, a reference manual, for understanding and dismantling Dominant and Coercive Power Structures at the Local, State, and National levels. Ideally, the results of this work should be universally applicable, and acknowledging of (But not limiting from) regional, historical, and socioeconomic contexts. In other words, with enough information as input, we should be able to apply the Framework to any past, present, and future event, and identify with certainty, those responsible for how those events occurred through direct or indirect influence by all involved Organizations and Institutions. Setting the precedent of systematically assigning responsibility should improve accountability, or at least make it easier to inform the Public of clear wrong-doing and who they could attempt to hold accountable. I want any Activist to be able to, with reasonable analytical effort, describe in excruciating (To the Powers that Be) detail, through direct observation, how a given Corporate, Political, or Military Power Structure has extracted wealth and freedom from a given group of people through various intentional and unintentional consequences from deliberate action or inaction.

I envision this overall development process, but expect (Read "demand"  :evil:) Discordian intervention to prevent anything from getting boring (Also, feel free to suggest alternative direction/steps - I want this to be a Group Project):

  • Consume as much modern literature on Power Structure Research as one can (C. Wright Mills, Floyd Hunter, Marx, G. William Domhoff, Hegel, etc.), jotting down ideas, thoughts, observations, and concepts for analysis by the group.
  • Build an intuitive and systems-oriented linguistic structure and vocabulary for studying Power in a Scientific, almost even mechanical way.
  • Build on old and new methodologies for studying Power Structures to establish standardized processes for doing so, incorporating, as others like Domhoff have, accessible online/library-based tools and sources that one can use to supplement for remote research.
  • Create Reference Materials for Power Structure data points, like Types, inputs, outputs, and how they may relate with external systems, Power Structures/Power Structure Components, and other societal processes.
  • Combine core concepts from these Reference Materials into a Manual that enumerates, in detail, the steps for the analysis, deconstruction, and dismantling of any Power Structure by Type.
  • Consume as much literature on the consequences of Power Structure collapse in various scenarios (Fallen governments, corporations, militaries, etc.)
  • Incorporate into the Reference Manual what steps must be taken by a responsible, Organized People to healthily manage the resolution of the immediate and long-term consequences of the collapse of a given Power Structure by Type.
  • Establish a clear and detailed precedent for the Historical recording of both, intentionally dismantled Power Structures, as well as what the consequences of their collapse were, and how they were managed (Or in poor circumstances, NOT managed.). Subsequently, the process of dealing with the consequences should be improved over time as we learn more.
  • Begin implementing what we've learned in practice at the Work Place, and in Local and State Elections and make amendments/corrections to the Materials.

My background in Software and Solutions Engineering/Architecture and experience in climbing Corporate Power Structures, combined with more recent study of Power Structures and Social Ecology, have led me to believe that Sociological processes, like the creation of Power Structures, are both almost mechanically/systematically driven by observable, predictable, human-made processes in the real world, and also composed of smaller interdependent parts, while still having net-new emergent properties not inherited from those parts. I want to realize this view in a way that is both informative and useful in both the study and regulation/eradication of Power Structures. At the same time, I want to make sure that this knowledge is not monopolized and abused in a way that harms the public.

I'll begin jotting down my thoughts and information obtained from step 1 over the next month or so, likely starting later today or tomorrow. However, feel free to throw in any and all knowledge you have on the subjects at hand whenever it comes to you, and definitely make recommendations for reading materials to the group if you've already done your homework. Even if it becomes slightly unrelated, we can always create spin-off threads for related topics that we can link to/reference here for further explanation.

I'm also aware that talking about things like this can be considered taboo. If, for personal reasons, you'd like to keep distance from the Project, that's completely fine. I can also take this elsewhere if the Group would prefer that as well.

By the way, everything I write is KopyLeft. Distribute and edit as you like.

Elmer Season

"It's a 'dog-eat-dog' world out Here"
The Executive said, running his hands over the Veneer
Of his Father's Desk, that he held Dear

He uses it the same way his Father Did
A platform on which to amass Power before his Monopoly is Ended

It sits in the Tower of his Mansion
Filled with enough Security to stop an Invasion

"And WE take all the Risk"

He said, gesturing to his team of Investors
Who have Mansions of their own of equal Splendor
"WE are responsible for every Expenditure-"

"Except for the most important of them All"
The little Girl interrupted, with about as much Gall

"Your ability to move numbers from Account to Project"
"Is nil compared to the Lives you refuse to Protect"

"Your claim to Risk is only Theoretical"
The Girl said, casually brushing her hand against a shifting Mantle

"You act as though you are a Wolf - a Dog among the rest"
"But it's those who you employ who take all Shots aimed at your Chest"

"You don't know what it's like to Fight in the Pit"
"Because it was your Father, and all of his friends, who dedicated their fortunes to building It"

"It was made for you as a Tool"
"Whose sole purpose: Facilitating your Rule"

The Girl grasped the Mantle Tightly
"It's about time you've learned the true Cost of preaching competition so Lightly"

The Girl ripped the Mantle Away
Revealing the town's ravenous Hounds who've Hungered for many a Day

The Girl gave an awful Grin
The kind that constricts the Subject's Oxygen

"This is the Era of the Workers; the Builders; the True Creators of the Progress you've Stunted"
"The Season when the Hunters will become the Hunted"

The Executive was right in a kind of Way
With no Leash and Fence keeping the Dogs at Bay
Consumed and barren his Bones and Palace will forever Lay

Snippets With Less Context (Would like to add to this list using other suggestions - They inspire things like what I wrote above)

"It's a competitive, 'dog-eat-dog' world out here", he said, tightening the leash and re-adjusting his layers of bite-resistant padding.

"You have to know how to swim with the Sharks", he said, his voice muffled by his Diver's Mask, hands bracing his protective cage.

Just some Lefty Propaganda for those interested. Inspired by some JacobinMag literature and some writings by G. William Domhoff. Highly recommend him for high-level views of American Power Structures.

Historical Genesis of Hierarchical Power Structures

Humans have always created Hierarchical Power Structures in a 3-Step process known as Circumscription (Binding People to a place):

  • Organization of Innovation of Production and/or Consumption on a given piece of land to increase its value to its locals and foreigners alike (Irrigation agriculture/trade monopolies did this before governments existed), and distribution of its resources to those a leader wishes to control

  • With that control, establishment of a Military to enforce a Leader's Ownership of that Land

  • And establishment of a Religion that legitimizes that Leader's position in the Hierarchy

The difficulties you face in trying to walk away from Local Growth Coalitions and Capitalist Monopolies, as well as the profitable, private Infrastructure and conveniences they provide, are intentional consequences set to increase Population Density, and therefore Profit per square foot of Land, not the result of natural Market Influences.

I'm trying to grasp, connect/disconnect, and generally become an expert on:

- Russia and their connections to the 2016 elections (And possibly 2020 elections?)
- Cambridge Analytica + Breitbart + Facebook + Steve Bannon
- The Trump Administration
- Increased FPS presence in Portland
- COVID Deception
- Etc.

But I feel like no matter how many articles I read, I can never know enough to understand what's going on. And now, more than ever (Maybe a few years too late, but...), I feel like it's important to understand what's going on so that I can predict (In a very rudimentary way - Nothing special. More of a "This entity may try something like this, next" kind of thing.) what will happen so I know how to prepare and signal properly. I attribute this inability to understand the situation to the fact that there is likely a much larger story taking place here that, while political, is largely a Military/Cyber-Security-style operation that is closely tied to 5th Generation Warfare, although I don't know exactly what entity/ies are truly at play, nor do I understand how to frame the situation because I don't quite have a background in this field. I do have a very technical background, and can guess fairly well on what's possible from a technical standpoint. But beyond that, I feel dumb as bricks.

I was thinking about all this stuff that's going on in America and the UK, and happened to re-read Cain's "Time to Switch Sides" post and noticed the 4GW/5GW references and started Googling. Half an hour later, I happened upon the handbooks.

So, I'm going through 4GW and 5GW Handbooks (Lind S and Daniel Abbott) to get a better idea of the topic at hand. But, I feel like I'm going in blind, in a way. It's all incredibly interesting, and connections are being made to today's events, but I feel like I could target concepts in a certain order to make the learning more robust and effective.

So Cain and others:

Without "Doing my Research for me", are there any Articles, Essays, Documents, and Books that you'd recommend in any given order, beyond what I'm reading now, that might allow me to see the bigger picture, as well as narrow in on the details without sounding like a moron when I talk about it? Materials that would allow me to frame my thoughts in the context of the hidden "reality" behind what the Partisan Media presents?

I even delved a bit into Marxism to find another context or lens with which to analyse Capitalism, in case a large portion of this was based in Capitalistic corruption, and even that's helped understand some other issues. So if you have anything on economics and how it plays in, that would be helpful too.

Again, no need to do the research for me. Even hints at topics would be helpful. I'll take anything really.

Thank everyone in advance!

The US economy, especially during the start of Industrialization, was formatted/reformatted based on the assumption that we would need to increase efficiency of Production to meet an ever-growing domestic and foreign Demand (Supply-side economics). It's no accident that this unsustainable ideology is almost identical to the basis of the relationship between drugs and addiction.

The cycle of addiction is based on the idea that Demand is equal to Supply. In other words, you use whatever you have access to.

However, in most cases, due to the fundamental nature of our brain's Reward System, people reach a point where their Supply can't feed their Demand. So, the Suppliers use cheaper substances to make more out of less and meet the growing Demand. Sometimes, that means they use other substances as filler that are less pure because they're easier to find or cheaper to buy. Almost like how most of our food nowadays is rarely pure or untainted by cheap and/or toxic fillers. It's fairly obvious at this point, to anyone paying attention, that we've seriously over-shot our goal of allowing Supply to meet Demand, meaning we've reached, and far surpassed the point of addiction.

In hindsight, it seems like it was inevitable. But why?

Because it was intentional:

It's not that surprising that the US economy's Supply/Demand dynamics run parallel to the fundamental nature of addiction. It was designed before addiction science and treatment was invented, and during a time when drugs were traded openly without any level of regulation or constraint (And were often the most popular trade commodities). It was also during a time when the wealthy were allowed to grow their wealth unrestricted using the profit that came from being the Suppliers (Or the "Suppliers of Suppliers," and so on. I'll explain this concept more a bit later.).

So, what happens when Suppliers become dependent on their excess wealth? They become addicted to it, and so become addicted to the Demand that creates it.

The Demand becomes their Supply.

So, the Suppliers, in need of Demand, began studying and taking advantage of man's vulnerability to desire. Thus, Toxic Marketing and Advertising was born, which has now fully integrated itself into literally every single aspect of our lives. And when Supplying cheap, worthless shit became too personal and real, the wealthiest Suppliers decided to add layers of abstraction between them and their customers to avoid their discomfort. And thus Corporatism was born to integrate Beaurocracy into Supplier organizations and make Supplier markets more complex. It added processes between the Suppliers and the Consumers to blur the lines and fuel plausible deniability and willful ignorance.

How did we get to this point? We were already there. The system was designed based on:

Supply = Demand

It's really that simple. The system assumes Supply is equal to (or infinitely approaching) Demand. Mathematically, and logically, they are one in the same - Two sides of the same coin: An unsustainable system of trade in which neither side is capable of winning because the point of satisfaction for either side is an infinitely moving target. The goal of those with Demand is to be a Supplier. And the goal of the Supplier is to create (not feed, because that's more expensive) Demand and be Demanded.

But if they're the same thing, and we obviously need some things to survive, meaning someone has to Supply the basics for life to meet a basic Demand, does that mean we were doomed to become unsustainable?

Not at all. We've only ever entertained this equation in one direction: Up.

We've been ignoring the fact that the equation can be read the other way:

(-1)Demand = (-1)Supply

More to come some other time.

Feel free to rip apart and put back together again, or add to it. Part of me is very certain that someone's come up with this analogy before, but I have no idea where I would have read it other than here.

My company does Point of Sale Software Development, Consulting, and Managed Services for Retail and Hospitality (Restaurants/Hotels) chains, both large and small-scale, and everything in between. Part of this involves the design and implementation of a slimmed-down Linux or Windows OS Image that has our POS Application and its dependencies baked in so that it can be deployed to hundreds-thousands of Tills easily via PXE Boot, or by some unlucky prick they talked into driving to every store to deploy the image via Flash Drive (We, once, had a customer convince one of their employees to do this to 1.) Retrieve logs and 2.) Deploy patches to our application - Totally ignoring the Central Management Server they paid hundreds of thousands of dollars for that has functions for these tasks built in to allow remote access at the touch of a button.).

I've only been exposed to the OS Creation and implementation aspect recently (Within the last 4 months or so), and have since learned of several fundamental security flaws in both our Application itself, as well as the original design of our POS OS Image.

For example, we cache all Product, Customer, and Transaction data locally on each machine in an Oracle, DB2, or MySQL database (Depending on customer requirements) to allow Lanes to be up even if the Central Server goes down. Once the server's back up, all Tills will send up their transaction data and the Central Server will send down any updates it received once coming back online. The credentials for this database are stored in plaintext properties files, which are readable and accessible by the default user (The one that auto-runs the Desktop on startup.) at any time.

But don't worry, they encrypted the credentials in the properties file with DES (Notice I didn't say Triple), and left the DES Encryption Module Class (Which contains a Main() Method, so it can be run at any time by the default user) in a directory 1 level down from the root directory called "encryption". In 3 commands, you can have the Database's credentials and all customer information, and you wouldn't have had to enter a single password that wasn't provided.

And let's not forget that our application is based on Java Applets, which are deprecated and vulnerable as fuck - And we don't Checksum or otherwise validate ANY Classes before they're loaded at startup, so you can tell the application to load whatever custom-compiled classes you want it to and it will without a single complaint.

But what disgusts me the most is that our customers will run a Pentest AFTER they've taken our systems into Production, AND ALL THEY COMPLAIN ABOUT IS THE GODDAMN SSH CONFIGURATION AND JAVA VERSION BEING 2 UPDATES BEHIND? And our own, internal security specialists have the nerve to complain that the customer "ran a Pentest against our system without my involvement or permission." THEY'RE MAKING OUR SYSTEMS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR CUSTOMERS' TRANSACTION DATA - OF COURSE THEY'RE PENTESTING IT YOU FUCKING MORON.

I mean, do they just pick security specialists up off the fucking streets? I don't even have a background in Security, and these issues are glaringly obvious to me.

So anyways, I'll be Black-Boxing the entire goddamn application using some Linux-specific tricks of the sudoers file and some other trickery. If I can remove read and write access to all of our application files by adding a new default Desktop user, and only giving them the ability to start our application indirectly via sudo by using sudoer file modifications and black-boxed deployment scripts, I should be able to prevent a System-wide security breach or unintended analysis of our application (Technical details below). Hopefully, we don't end up on the cover of Wired Magazine for the most severe Retail security breach in history before then.

Problem: You have User A and User B. You want User A to run a script owned by User B, but not be able to read the contents of that script for security reasons. Maybe it contains a hardcoded password, or otherwise confidential information that User A should not have access to.

Solution: Remove non-owning Read/Execute from your confidential script (chmod 700). Create a script in /usr/bin that calls the confidential script that you intended to run. Remove write permissions from this Calling script, and make it owned by Root (chmod 755). You can configure the sudoers file (defines restrictions for the use of sudo command) to allow User A to run the calling script as User B (Or root), which triggers the confidential script.

Solution extra steps: A this point, someone could use a Process Analyzer to view the contents of confidential script as you're running it, since by default, users have access to processes owned by other users. In order to prevent this, you'll need to remount the /proc directory with hidepid level=2.

This solution will be extended for my purposes by having the POS Application user made to be anything but the default Desktop user. A new default user will be created, who will be granted permissions to run a script via sudo that calls the POS Application start script as the POS Application user. And then read access will be removed from virtually everything on the machine for the default user, making them only capable of executing the Graphical Display and the POS Application indirectly.

Cain, or anyone else: Do you have any other recommendations for securing our Image and Application? Or do you think a Black Box designed like above with a LUKS-encrypted harddrive would suffice?

Techmology and Scientism / YEAH! Take that, cancer, YOU FUCKING FUCK!
« on: February 07, 2018, 04:38:11 pm »
Great news coming out of the field of medicine recently: We, as a species, have found foolproof ways to cure cancer.

As it turns out, the most effective cancer killer is actually the body's immune system. The body's main microbe-killing cells are called killer T-Cells, which attach to foreign cells and threats once they've been binded with that threat's corresponding antibody. Antibodies are created by recognition and verification of the antigen structure of a foreign body by the T Helper Cells, and subsequent release by B-Cells. The interactions between antigens, antibodies, and the two types of T-Cells are the main focus of current cancer-cure research.

For those with a subset of blood cancers, they were able to narrow down a specific protein/antigen structure associated with the cancer cells and re-program killer T Cells to attack cells that contained this protein/antigen structure using gene modification therapy. They extract your T Cells from your blood using a transfusion machine, modify the genes, and plug them back into your bloodstream for immediate reactivation. Once the T Cells are released back into the body, they begin relentlessly attacking every single cancerous cell they find. This includes malignant cancer cells and benign tumors. This method has been tested on people, and the results were overwhelmingly positive. Almost every single patient treated went into PERMANENT REMISSION after the FIRST TREATMENT.

In a recent experiment with Mice, they tested a new method of immunotherapy involving training of killer T Cells, instead of just genetic reprogramming. Training a killer T Cell involves presenting them with a pre-constructed antibody that corresponds with the antigen structure of the cancer cells being targeted. They made a slight genetic alteration using a small DNA sequence added to the T Cells to make them more receptive to the specified antibody at their receptor sites (Areas where signaling proteins like antibodies bind to), and then shoved them both into a vial together. Then, they were injected into the tumors of the mice, allowing the T Cells to immediately begin attacking tumor cells and activating other T Cells within the tumor to boost the attack. As with the last experiment, almost every single organism tested went into permanent remission after the first treatment. The three mice that didn't get cured on the first treatment were completely cured after the second treatment.

While this is a HUGE breakthrough in medicine, there are a few risks you take when undergoing procedures like this. The first thing you have to worry about, which applies mostly to the first experimental treatment, is making sure that no other native cells in your body have the same antigen structure as the one the killer T Cells are looking for. When other native cells have the same antigen structure as the ones the T Cells are looking for, the T Cells will attack them along with the cancerous cells. This was the reality for at least one patient who received this treatment. She had a cancer of the colon/small intestines, which they reprogrammed some of her T cells to attack. Unfortunately, they didn't know that a type of cell in her lungs presented with the same antigen structure as the cancer cells in her gut. She died because the T Cells did irreparable damage to her lungs before they realized what was happening. T Cells work very fast.

The speed of T Cell work leads us to our next worry when receiving treatments like this: Cytotoxic Protein Storm.

When all cells die (Especially Tumor cells), they release a small amount of toxic material into the blood stream that is usually capable of being picked up by your immune system and filtered out. These toxic proteins and dead cell materials are capable of causing minor troubles in controlled amounts. In fact, some of the symptoms of Chemotherapy and Radiation therapy can be attributed to the death of cancer cells. But since chemo and radiation kill cancer cells at a moderate rate, the body is usually capable of withstanding this minor toxicity. But the rate at which the T Cells kill cancer cells is so high that it actually floods your body with large amounts of toxic, dead cell material that can cause severe problems in those who are immunologically compromised, or who simply have a weakener immune system.

That being said, I'd argue that these caveats are a small price to pay for the cure to cancer. The second method, which is far safer than the first, is bound for human trials over the coming months/years.

Bring and Brag / I Fall
« on: February 01, 2018, 10:14:51 pm »
I Fall ~ P.D. Fernando

The irony of my strife
As I Fall through life:
I become petrified
That I will have died
Tumbling from a height
I could never rite.

As I Fall I see the dichotomous reality
Splitting and multiplying to display its duality.
I reach for its branches voraciously consuming
All of that which fades into view - looming.
I tear and rip through the branches that grow
To strive and to understand their ebb and flow,
The meaning behind them that shines - A lowe...

These were inspired by Vex's recent post on the reasons why we're fucked. Reason 1, in particular.

Initial Post:

"Our right to free speech is under attack. Not by our government, or by some other government pulling strings. Our free speech isn't in danger by the hands of "Commie" liberals or "Fascist" right-wingers. It's under attack by YOU.

Every single one of you have been contributing to the production and development of a communications network that is based on the expression of smaller and smaller pieces of information, which are incapable of encapsulating the true, complex nature of society's problems. Social media has become a "holier than thou" pissing contest, and the language is limited to memetics and one-liners. As you avoid production, expression, and transmission of complex ideas, the attention-span of the average social media user shrinks. Eventually, we'll be summing up ALL of our interpersonal problems and ideas with vines and memes, because they're more easily rewarded in the short-term and easy to blow off when faced with criticism. As our communications simplify themselves to nothing but partial-sentence reactions, our communications infrastructure will change to support only simpler and simpler ideas.

Eventually, we won't be able to communicate about our problems - and therefore, solve them - because we won't have access to large and complex enough mediums for communication to do so.

Wanna do something about it? Come up with an idea that involves multiple layers of complexity and criticize it. Express it in many words on social media for the world to see. Let it be analyzed, picked apart, and rebuilt again. Come back with a new idea if that one doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Respond to others' simple ideas with complex, and idealistic criticisms that force people to think for more than a few seconds. As people become used to dealing with complex language again, our ideas will be more complex. Eventually, they may even be complex enough to solve some of society's issues through idealistic compromise.

But until then, we're doing nothing but poisoning the future of our language, and limiting it to the point of simplistic semantic imprisonment. You're digging your right to free speech's grave, and further generations will be dumber and less free for it."

Part of a response to someone labeling it a "typical good old days fallacy.":

Note: This is also a general summary of the concepts I was throwing around in my head at the time, and I gave it some vocabulary to make the concept more palatable. Although, you guys will likely see most of this as old news with new words.

" We have two kinds of length limits when it comes to social media, or communications in general:

Hard Limits - These are limitations on characters set by the application or communication medium's administrative department. An example would be Twitter's 140 character limit (Yes, I know it just recently increased, but we haven't reached the threshold for semantic imprisonment I'm proposing yet).

Soft Limits - These are word count limitations set by societal pressures that include average attention span. Soft limits are statistically derived by marketing firms in order to determine the point at which readers move on to the next post/message.

Currently, hard limits are barely relevant for most forms of Social Media. The hard limit is mainly a factor for Twitter at the moment, but the theory behind my post implies that this will likely change in the future as the Soft Limit gets smaller and smaller.

Soft limits have been investigated thoroughly across social media and are expressed in detail, here, with different vocabulary:

The main idea behind my post is that there is a relationship between an idea's complexity, and the number of words used to describe it. When the Hard Limit decreases, relative to the Soft limit, society's dictionary (Or common vocabulary) must get larger, so that any given idea's complexity can stay the same. This is usually caused by an increased need for efficiency in communication. This rarely happens except for in low-population communication mediums which are based on increasing Productivity. An example would be like the Skype/Lync Chat used in companies around the world by internal employees.

When the soft limit decreases, relative to the hard limit, we actually start to see a reduction in size of the common vocabulary, as society (Or the population of a specific communication medium) is craving simpler and more generalized ideas that require simpler words.

Our language determines how we describe and understand our world. If this process continues, eventually academics and intellectuals won't be able to fully understand the problems society has and solve them because they aren't being expressed in their entirety and complexity by the general population. Where people get their news, and the number of people discussing the news doesn't matter if all of the discussions consist of only memes and fleeting reactionism. In fact, more people expressing less complex ideas makes it even harder to understand any given situation because it's more useless data to sift through to find the meaningful snippets. And while it's damn-near impossible to find actual Facebook stats on post length, etc, due to monetization of that information for marketing wanks, the overall preference for shorter and shorter posts/messages has been confirmed and described by private organizations (The ones who bought those Facebook Stats) as a real trend. And they have no reason to lie about such information, since they actually benefit from the concepts described.

But I suspect, shortly before it gets to that point, our Hard Limits will start to decrease with the Soft Limits, which will limit our ability, as individuals, to speak on sociopolitical topics in the most populated areas of Social Media, which is a de facto reduction of free speech."

Response to ~ Noam Chomsky on Concision in US Media:

" I think he hit on something I was mostly reluctant to talk about because it seems conspiratorial to the degree that most would find extreme (Noam Chomsky kinda has that tendency, regardless of how correct he is a lot of the time). I've often thought that the brevity of speaking time for a given topic in the US media was intentional for the exact reasoning he provided: It gives you no time to provide evidence. Or, it requires that your evidence be simple and generalized enough that any attempts at refuting it would take more time than is allowed in whatever media segment it was brought up in. It makes specially crafted, fallacious arguments tough to combat in social media networks as well, especially as our Soft limit for word count decreases. And social media networks like Twitter, which have low bars for hard limits, make it even easier to use such tactics. I mean, this is literally the basis of Donald Trump's Twitter account. It has no other purpose.

I would even argue that this is one of the characteristics of social media that a large portion of the rich have used to their advantage to put Trump's administration in power. Most of the Alt-right is a collection of edgy twenty and thirty-somethings who have been gaining experience in the politics of the internet over the last decade or two. If they know anything, it's how to shut down debate with charlatanry and emphasis on brevity/concision/memetics.

I don't necessarily think that there is no place for memetics. With today's communication systems, the small, simple snippets of information are faster and further reaching than ever. Sometimes pictures or other forms of art are excellent communication methods for complicated concepts. But like any other linguistic tool, it is capable of being misused and abused. This is why I always make it a point to rip fallacious memes and snippets a new asshole every time I see them. The disadvantage of abusing memetics on social media that has very high hard limits on word count (Like Facebook, and their several thousand character limit) is that when a few people put in the time to destroy the arguments you post, it requires you to put more energy in to defend an argument you already know isn't worth the time. But the advantage is that you can easily share a new, nearly thoughtless and careless meme in minutes and force the attacker to have to put in more energy than it's worth. The key, as an attacker, is to have a far enough reach that your response can go viral, or you have to be able to output more frequent and effective arguments than the page you're attacking. Low soft limits make this whole thing even harder on the attacker, since they allow the meme abuser to increase their information output and reach with little effort. It's disguised victory by verbosity, on a large scale. Larger than most thought possible. And that's how we got to today."


I wanted to bring this stuff up here because I figured you guys would have things to add and remove, since many of you have much more knowledge on the subject of memetics, etc. than I do.

As someone with ADHD, it's quite common for me to put off work of all kinds until the last minute. I procrastinate work multiple times a day. In fact, I will usually put off almost all work that has to be done until the exact time it needs to be completed. Others with ADHD likely have the same problem, and the frequency may vary. To be quite honest, I'm procrastinating loads of minor work while writing this piece.

For those who don't understand why this happens, see below. If you do understand, skip the below section.

When you have ADHD, it takes more intense stimuli than usual to trigger reward-based activity in the Decision-making and consequence-filtering area of the brain known as the Prefrontal cortex. If the work you're intending to do by a certain deadline isn't that interesting to you, or stimulating in any way, it is less likely to engage you enough to do it on time, or long before the deadline. This is connected to Reward Deficiency and imbalances in the reward neurotransmitters known as Dopamine and Norepinephrine in the Prefrontal Cortex.

Now, some people without ADHD have this problem occasionally as well, as somewhat frequent procrastination isn't a problem that guarantees an ADHD diagnosis. So don't stop reading this if you don't have ADHD, as this may apply to you as well.

Putting off work is considered an attempt, by the reward center of your brain, to reduce stress, or even non-stimulating activities. Yet, many people consider procrastination to be a very stressful problem. The difference lies in how we deal with procrastination, and how we personally assess our capabilities.

Personally, I find that procrastination is quite effective at reducing stress. I put off important shit all the time, and yet, everyone who knows me would define me as the least stressed person they've ever met. Whereas almost every person I know who procrastinates as much as I do seems to be miserable at all times. Procrastination is usually stressful to the people who, from the moment they decide to put off their work, are planning how they're going to complete the work, or are considering cancelling other plans or even other work in order to make their deadline. This is usually because they lack an accurate self assessment of what they're capable of.

I would argue that most people are capable of getting a lot of work done in a very short period of time if under the right pressure. I found out how quickly I could complete tasks in school when I would consistently put off every single assignment I ever got until bedtime, and stay up however long I needed to to get the work done. Knowing how much work I could complete in a short time wasn't possible at that time until I put off a massive project in the 7th grade until the night before it was due. I realized that the project was such a huge part of my grade that I couldn't accept failure as a possibility. So I didn't. I completed the project in record time and got the grade I needed.

Ever since that project, procrastination has never stressed me out. In fact, getting to that point before the deadline is the most stress-reducing thing I've ever done, besides smoke weed. That moment when you accept that failure isn't an option, and that you have to complete the set goal right then, is one of the most motivating and empowering moments you can exist in. The Prefrontal Cortex turns that shit to 11 and shit gets done.

Those who procrastinate daily and are consistently stressed likely don't have an accurate view of their own ability. They either assume they won't get something done after a certain point due to previous failures, or they don't see themselves as fast or smart enough to be able to accomplish all that they need to accomplish in the time that they have. In almost all cases, they are wrong. I've seen this with every stressed procrastinator around me. They assume they are incapable due to past failures, and then choose to skip the deadline or goal and use that decision to reaffirm their invalid self-view. Because they don't judge their ability accurately, they are also more likely to stress themselves out by anticipating the work they will do later. Specifically, they will over-anticipate the effort that'll be required to complete the task, even though everyone knows that actually doing the work is hardly ever as bad as the feeling you get when you think about doing the work in the future.

I'm not defending procrastination as a valid way to deal with work. But if you have issues with stress on top of the procrastination, testing and assessing your abilities after being put into a position where failure isn't an option is a good way to prepare yourself for inevitable procrastination. It's also makes ending the procrastination cycle easier by reducing your urge to reduce stress by procrastinating in the first place. If you're confident in your ability to get the work done, you're more likely to complete it before putting it off in the first place.

If you tend to put stuff off for the same reason I do (Boredom while doing/thinking about said stuff), then you may at least be able to curb the stress. However, I still don't have a solution for the procrastination itself.

For quite awhile now, I'd been seeing the abortion debate as a fight that shouldn't involve me. I was under the understanding that abortion was simply not a topic a male should be able to comment on. Any time the topic was brought up, I opted out because I thought that I had no right to talk about it because I couldn't carry a baby inside me.

Nowadays, I'm very pro abortion. But only because I developed a better understanding of the arguments made by people who aren't. I've recently realized that the "Abortion is the killing of babies" argument is a valid argument that should be confronted. That does not mean, in any way, that I think that that argument is correct. I just think it's something that shouldn't be blown off as a non-argument.

I think one of the reasons why the left fails in many aspects is due to laziness in the development and presentation of their arguments and I see this specifically in the abortion debate. And I want you to let me know if you all see the problem I see here:

>Women have legal, early term abortions for valid reasons.
>Conservatives accuse these women of having their babies killed.
>Women claim that it is their body, and their right to have an abortion, and it doesn't involve anyone else.

This argument is an automatic loss for the women. Not because they're incorrect, but because they've made the wrong argument. This sounds like women are defending the killing of babies because it's their body that the pregnancy is affecting. The problem is that they've not made the argument that it's not a baby that's being removed. I mean, last I checked, "Muh women's rights" is not a valid reason to kill babies. So, before you can make the argument that it's a women's rights issue, you must first make the argument that babies aren't being killed. And yet, in every single abortion debate that I see, that fact is completely skipped. We'll get into the science of why a fetus is not a baby, later. It seems like most of the people that explain do so lazily, and leave out a considerable amount of important, and religiously convincing information.

Not only is the debate being fought wrong, but the debate is blown off completely quite often. We have to consider the importance that a rather large portion of the population thinks that the left is committing mass genocide of infants. And if I thought that people were killing massive numbers of infants, I would be up in arms, too. That's not an immoral position to be in, simply an uneducated one. And yet, because the left often jumps to the "Rights" argument, it often paints that position as immoral. This is another reason why the left constantly loses in these fights.

One of the other things that made me jump into the debate was the complete understanding of why a fetus is not considered living. This understanding was developed in part due to my recent study of Autocatalysis. Now, I understand that when all you have in your hand is a hammer at the time, everything else starts to look like a nail. But it just so happens that Autocatalysis has been connected to the basis of life in previous scientific literature.

A chemical reaction is considered autocatalytic when one or more of the chemical reaction's products, make up one or more of that same reaction's reactants. In a sense, the reaction "Catalyses" itself. This chemical property and possibility is what makes life possible.

All life forms are what you'd call "collectively autocatalytic systems." This means that as long as food molecules, in the form of required reactants, and energy are provided to the life form, it can sustain itself by sustaining its complexly intertwined autocatalytic reactions. Autocatalytic systems, in order to reach the equilibrium that all systems pursue, require very orderly transportation and communication. If you were religious, you could say that autocatalysis is method by which God created us. Everything in our bodies, from our digestive system, to our DNA replication is somehow autocatalytic.

Here is where we define the difference between a baby, and a fetus. A baby, being a living organism, is collectively autocatalytic. Even if one is realistically, prematurely born, its internal systems are still developed enough to maintain the autocatalytic equilibrium that extends its growth and development. Before that point (And this is why we have the legal cutoff for late term abortions) of internal system development, we have a fetus. Its systems are incapable of maintaining themselves with food molecules and energy because not all of the organs and systems that make up the fetus are developed enough to be autocatalytic. They are very complex, and require a lot of time to be built.

During the time that the fetus is still developing, information in the form of chemical triggers and nutrients necessary for that infrastructure of autocatalysis is being transferred directly by the mother. During this time, the fetus is simply a project, a creation, an extension of the mother's body.

At this, one may argue that the increase in order inside of the fetus is exemplary of the autocatalysis that makes life. And it is, in a way. But not in the way that makes it living.

Technically, each of the organs, or sections of tissue within the body are autocatalytic. Each of them may require different amounts of energy and different types of food molecules, but as long as those food molecules and energy are provided, even if they are removed from the body and given some other vessel from which to retrieve that energy and in which to maintain its chemical equilibrium, they can still survive for a time (Hence, we grow ass tissue for burn victims, or liver chunks for liver transplants). What needs to be understood here, however, is that all life forms are autocatalytic, whereas not all autocatalytic systems are living. A living system is made up of many autocatalytic systems. You can't call one single autocatalytic system living unless it fits with all the other aspects of a living organism.

In other words, a fetus is like an organ, since it cannot sustain its autocatalytic subsystems with energy and food on its own. It requires a vessel.

Now that we've scientifically described why legal, early term abortions are not killing babies, we can make the argument that it's a women's rights issue, since the fetus is an extension of the mother.

I understand that most of you knew part or all of this information already. I understand that you guys in particular are pro abortion for the right reasons. But I think this was mostly aimed at those who ignore the importance and instability of this issue, and who are not pro abortion for the right reasons. I think we need to focus on the arguments we're making and who we're making them to if we want to win in the end. This topic is not necessarily the most pressing, by any means, but it is a good starting point for reconciliation with the other half of the population. I understand that there will be those that will reject abortion regardless, and that's expected. But I feel like many people are anti-abortion now that weren't before, and that many people who would normally be pro abortion are against it due to witnessing only awful arguments in its support.

We can't win by making sure only the best, most morally upstanding people are on our side. That's not how Democracy/Republic works. We do need the support of people we don't like. And the only way to gain that support sometimes is to make sure our arguments make sense to us, and them.

Literate Chaotic / Show Me Everything
« on: February 14, 2017, 07:04:48 pm »
I want to know the world as it was, from centuries ago, to 20 years ago. I wanna know what events helped form the modern civilizations we see today, and what decisions they made that led to our current situation.

The thing is, I want this information described with as little bias as possible. Now, obviously, unbiased history literature is a bit of an oxymoron considering history is mostly written by the victor. But if anyone's gone over the history books from both sides, and written, extensively, their objective analysis of the collective history, I wanna know what books or essays or pieces they've done so in.

And something else, which seems to be ignored by history classes in intermediate/primary school: I want socioeconomic perspectives of history. I wanna know about the wars, and also the way the wars affected the populations and the way they lived.

PD, give me a list of pieces that will give me the ability to develop an understanding of the world as it is and as it has been. Every conflict. every peaceful resolution, every betrayal, and every assassination that helped turn the world into what it is now.

I'm gonna be doing my own research on this literature as well. But since most of you are very well read on the topic, I figured your input would be invaluable.

I wasn't sure if this would be considered a project for OMF, or an "Original Idea." I figured since I didn't consider it to be a prank, it was more likely to be in this Section.

From what I can tell, it appears that there are plenty of people who are willing to fight for Justice. Everything from social equality, to Community Organizations based on helping the poor. It also appears that there are plenty of people with money who are willing to donate to charities that support the aforementioned organizations. What seems to be lacking is organization of these people and resources.

I suspect that massive strides can be made in terms of Socioeconomic Justice if people with the Will to fight were given a direction to send their Will. I see massive rallies and protests all around the country, but almost nothing actually getting done. I see organizations lacking resources to enforce change, and resources without an organization to put them to use.

I wanna know if it's possible to network these organizations and resources in a way that makes it easy for new people looking for ways to make a difference to find a way in. I don't wanna see an organization with a good idea sitting on the connections necessary to make change, only being held back by the fact that no one knows a damned thing about them, or that they have no way of putting themselves out there.

Don't even mention Facebook. It gives people the opportunity, not the actual push to join anything.

In theory, the following steps can lead to a successful campaign:

Step 1) Set a Clear and Achievable Goal

Step 2) Gather the Will™
 - This means that you make a list of all the people and groups of people that clearly support your Goal.

Step 3) Gather the Way™
 - This means that you make a list of all of the Organizations that require people, or Charities with plenty of money and no direction or application. Any organization that lacks people, money, or resources in general. Keep in mind that the goals of the organizations or charities must match, or at least coincide with your own.

Step 4) Bridge the Will™ and the Way™
 - This means that you put each organization or charity within linguistic proximity of people/resources that it requires. Maybe you find a hopeless romantic within the organization, and write a piece that gives them both inspiration, and a direction to look for support that you've found for them.
 - Get the Will™ and the Way™ in contact with each other by any means you can think of. Create a line of communication and their inspiration will take over and build their relationship.
 - Most importantly, make sure you're a part of the communications without them knowing it. Weasel your way into the line of communication by posing as someone within either the organization or group of people/supporters. This ensures that you have the ability to direct them away from each other in the event that one of the parties is corrupt, or simply counterproductive.
 - Make sure that all communications between you and either or both parties is completely anonymous. They shouldn't be able to point at any single person as the cause of their union.

I would kick this idea into high gear if I had the time and means, but I'm simply too busy. I want my idea to make things happen, but I don't know if I'll be the one to implement it.

If someone wants to take this in another direction that seems more effective, please do. Any details that should be added should be discussed, as it is a simplified idea with little in the way of methodology, at least in the way that I've presented it.

Apple Talk / Considering Going to Medical School
« on: February 07, 2017, 11:40:43 pm »
Finally found out what the fuck has been wrong with me the last few years.

Low stomach acid led to malabsorption of plenty of proteins. The most important in this scenario was Choline, which is used by the body to synthesize Acetylcholine. This neurotransmitter is connected to many many things. Due to the low Acetylcholine ingredients, any times where the body is supposed to increase acetylcholine levels, it either ran out, or conserved it for more important bodily functions.

First thing to go was the sphincter muscle at the top of the stomach and bottom of the esophagus. Hello Acid reflux.

Next thing to go was my willingness to do anything. Low motivation can be caused by low acetylcholine levels.

When the brain is low on Acetylcholine, Dopamine levels become unusually high. Over time, this builds a resistance to Dopamine. Couple that with genetic predisposition to the D2A1 Allele for low Dopamine Receptors,  and you have yourself extreme Reward deficiency and ADHD. Hello substance addiction.

Next thing to go was the Sympathoadrenal response (Fight or flight response.). Low Acetylcholine levels leave you with hardly even a bump in heart rate, adrenaline, or excitement during anything from a car accident, or being pushed over to fall on the ground.

Addictive behavior led to an addiction to nicotine, naturally. Turns out Acetylcholine receptors have two types. And the nicotinic ones bind with nicotine in the system, and keep Acetylcholine from being absorbed by those receptors. This means that the small amounts of Acetylcholine I would get from my poor digestion end up not being absorbed anyways. Hello insta-nicotine poisoning and almost-diagnosis of Narcolepsy (Extremely low Acetylcholine levels and absorption leads to constant and severe fatigue, leading to falling asleep during conversations and driving).

Next thing to go was dreaming during REM sleep. Acetylcholine levels are supposed to increase during REM sleep, and assist in triggering dreaming (Or sustaining them, or whatever part of the brain is involved in dreaming. I can't tell.).

Low Acetylcholine levels also explain why drinking 3 Mtn Dews, a Monster, and Red Bull within a 30 minute period just made my heart pump loudly, instead of quickly. It felt like I was going to die in my sleep. Which would normally excite you or make you nervous. But low acetylcholine levels make it nearly impossible to stay awake.

Pages: [1] 2 3