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.

Messages - Cramulus

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 865
Swan's expressions during that interview need to be given a cabinet position

also, the onion's take:  :lulz:

Aneristic Illusions / Re: Random News Stories
« on: Yesterday at 05:03:14 pm »
This is gonna be FUN!

New York Attorney General Moves To Dissolve The NRA After Fraud Investigation

Attorney General Letitia James claims in a lawsuit filed Thursday that she found financial misconduct in the millions of dollars, and that it contributed to a loss of more than $64 million over a three year period.

The suit alleges that top NRA executives misused charitable funds for personal gain, awarded contracts to friends and family members, and provided contracts to former employees to ensure loyalty.

Seeking to dissolve the NRA is the most aggressive sanction James could have sought against the not-for-profit organization, which James has jurisdiction over because it is registered in New York. James has a wide range of authorities relating to nonprofits in the state, including the authority to force organizations to cease operations or dissolve. The NRA is all but certain to contest it.

Apple Talk / Re: I don't know where the random links thread is
« on: Yesterday at 04:24:01 pm »
NSFW - AI-generated pornograpy

As algorithmic processing becomes more sophisticated and complex, and as more of it is refined and improved upon by the machines themselves, so we lose our ability to fully understand how inputs become outputs and how the ‘black box’ is ‘thinking’ - and where might that lead.

What do the machines see when they look at porn? What are we teaching them? What are they learning? And what does it teach us about what we have taught ourselves?

The Machine Gaze is an exhibition which explores the above questions through cutting edge technology, producing a body of work immediately recognisable and yet utterly alien, which provides a timely critique of what we’re teaching our machines, and how this might play out.

Utilising a number of machine learning techniques, including Generative Adversarial Networks, neural style transfer and Google ‘deep dream’, this collection presents machine re-interpretations of our hidden desires.

Featuring computer-generated artworks based on a corpus of pornography spanning printed magazines from the 1980s to user-generated clips uploaded to PornHub, Shardcore has created reframed Philip K Dick’s question - except rather than Electric Sheep, these 'androids' dreams are much fleshier in nature.

« on: August 05, 2020, 10:00:25 pm »
if you get it, you get it

Aneristic Illusions / Re: General Trump hilarity free-for-all thread
« on: August 05, 2020, 03:50:54 pm »
the axios interview made my brain leak out of my ear a little bit

in the past, we used to celebrate these "emperor's new clothes" moments

the "jared let thousands die to make urban governors look bad" is one of those things that would have erupted into a volcano under any other president, but we're all so exhausted

on some level I'm furious, and on another level I'm like "yeah that checks out"

fucking SHIT
now I have to change my twitter avatar

Apple Talk / Re: Seriously, NOW where is the Youtube thread?
« on: July 29, 2020, 04:03:25 pm »
David Lynch gives us a weather report

Apple Talk / Re: Seriously, NOW where is the Youtube thread?
« on: July 29, 2020, 03:48:20 pm »
Dance to summon the great beast

Apple Talk / Re: Open Bar: Curbside Pickup Only
« on: July 29, 2020, 01:43:51 pm »
congrats on the new job

do you need suggestions for spiritual candle names? Cause we could help with that

-Angel's Laundry
-Musty Old Bible
-St. Gulik's Secret Stash

« on: July 28, 2020, 04:09:37 pm »
if u have anxiety, take deep breaths in sync with this:

Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Thought Sans Language
« on: July 27, 2020, 04:59:50 pm »
I understood & enjoyed the OP. I take issue with sniping people on their first post and throwing a bunch of personal judgments at them because they haven't mastered whatever tone or style you think is required here. Arrogance is demanding that a poster re-write their entire topic for you, so that you can make up your mind about whether or not you're interested.

Discussing personal internal experiences is challenging--there is no universal dictionary for these things. No series of words will precisely communicate things that happen inside of you, just on the edge of conscious awareness. 

I'm sorry if I'm coming off sharp, but this is a continuation of a pattern that seriously annoys me. Like instead of discussing the topic, we're gonna spend the next dozen posts arguing about what language they used and whether or not they're an asshole. It's exhausting.

Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Thought Sans Language
« on: July 27, 2020, 01:46:11 pm »
 I am really not getting an arrogant "I am smartest human" vibe here..  :?   

maybe ease up on those pistols a little, friend

Think for Yourself, Schmuck! / Re: Thought Sans Language
« on: July 26, 2020, 03:18:09 pm »
Hi Légu, welcome to the forum and thank you for the very interesting post!

I like the types of thought experiments you're doing. We've arrived at similar confusions about a few things.

Right now I'm in a school / meditation group where we practice self observation in a variety of ways... we see this as "collecting material" which is required for a higher form of processing. There are some concepts which, early in my practice, I was asked to consider. My self-observation exercises tended to confirm these -- which I take with a grain of salt ("what the thinker thinks, the prover proves" -Robert Anton Wilson, "The Law of 5s is never wrong" -Mal&Omar), but perhaps sharing my own experiences may be useful.

This makes me wonder - what are the implications of differences in thought production? Can one type be better, more efficient?

I think the different kinds of processing have different specialties & different blind spots.

In a horse & carriage, which is most important: the wheels, the horse, or the driver?

none of them, really

The fastest horse in the world is useless, actually problematic, if the other factors are not in line.

I've discovered that without the need for forming sentences and articulating them, thoughts form much quicker. Whereas before the act of thinking was like a stream, without language it becomes more like waves of ideas with pauses between each thought. I do not yet know if this pause can eradicated with more practice. If it can, this could mean thinking can be incredibly quick. For now, unsymbolic thinking is more akin to meditation. Without the extra attention being paid to producing sentences, my focus goes elsewhere - usually my breath.

similar observations here -- language is SLOW, other types of thoughts are much quicker.

Do you feel like you have control over this stream?

What I call meditation is not DOING this kind of thinking, but OBSERVING it, recognizing that it's always happening, it's just coming from me on autopilot. Usually these experiences underpin the verbal/linguistic thoughts I have.

Like for example, somebody says "do you want to go to the beach?", or "Do you think schools will reopen?"

there is a little cascade of mental activity that preceeds my answer. I am not usually aware of this, I'm generally just conscious of my verbal response, and a sort of vague feeling which informs it. If I'm asked to elaborate, I will be concocting explanations of this process -- which might not really capture it, sometimes they are arbitrary.

Another possible implication I considered was whether unsymbolic thought is possibly less biased than dialogue. I use bias fairly loosely, meaning the filters we apply to our thoughts and our judgement of them. It occurs to me that the medium of thought might dictate the logic of thought itself. That is, language is inherently rhetoric. By definition, it is intended to transfer ideas, not necessarily to understand or produce them. By continuously converting thought into language, I found that I'm persuading myself or an imaginary opponent. If this is so, then the ideas no longer are judged (internally) by how correct or logical they are, but rather by how persuasive they are. Hence the bias.

I think that language is made of associations. Therefore, linguistic-logic is biased by them.

Language is necessary, I think, for certain kinds of complex thought. How does a microprocessor work? I can't conceive of a way to understand this in a non-verbal way. Once you have sufficient verbal-mastery, you can develop abstractions, which may operate differently than the thoughts -- for example, there are operations I do at work which are very complicated, but I can do without really thinking about - partly because of familiarity. It's interesting, sometimes I'll notice that I'm doing something very complex on autopilot, and my linguistic-brain isn't really connected to it... if you were to ask me what I was doing at that moment, it would take me a second to index it before I could respond verbally.

But I couldn't have arrived at that level of abstraction without the verbal understanding of the system.

Through some observation, I came to the conclusion that thought is produced subconsciously and that we interpret and process what comes up. Interestingly, it seems to me that this super-consciousness is almost like a separate entity that has little communication with the self. Of course, I cannot distinguish whether it's completely separate or merely a deeper part of my own self.

Can you talk a little bit more about the super-consciousness?

and finally, from the beginning of your post....
I'll be mostly ignoring the other types of thought, only because I use them far less often.

I will share this:
the people who are teaching me these self-observation techniques have warned against putting that mind on a throne.

The verbal-logical [prefrontal cortex] mind is strong, for many of us it's also very loud.

In some ways, this is not a strength, but a weakness.

I view the self as having three "brains", three different types of processing

The Intellectual Brain
The Emotional Brain
The Moving Brain      (this incorporates both physical sensations in the body such as hunger or tiredness as well as spacial logic-- ie how do I get from A to B)

These three processors work independently. SOMETIMES, they share data. OFTEN, they do not.

My verbal-logical-brain is often badly disconnected from my emotional processing.

Frequently, I have an emotion about something, I'm not even really aware of it, but my linguistic-brain becomes slave to that emotion, concoction rationales and explanations which serve it.

Or sometimes I'm just HUNGRY, and that creates a kind of stress in my nervous system that affects my emotions and logic. But I don't know that I'm hungry, because that intellect-brain is not getting data from the body-brain, but my intellect-brain is driving.

I think that being a better thinker is NOT about honing the intellect to its finest, most precise edge, and using it all the time.
I think it's about connecting these systems that we generally exclude.

sorry for the run-on post! you got me thinking!

Apple Talk / Re: Quotes of the Moment II
« on: July 24, 2020, 02:45:51 pm »
Jesus says: "Men indeed think I have come to bring peace to the world. But they do not know that I have come to bring the world discord, fire, sword, war. Indeed, if there are five <people> in a house, they will become three against two and two against three - father against son and son against father - and they will be lifted up, being solitaries."

Gospel Thomas, 16.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 ... 865