Monday, January 23, 2017

What Is the Missing Option?

As you can imagine, I had to stop reading the blog I got this from, because it suddenly turned political (and stupid).

Obviously, the missing option is truth.

People like Lakoff have limited value- these hacks have been out for a while, and people are becoming immune to them.

Now it literally looks like self-delusion. If the left can't accept true statements coming from the President, then they will have to create false narratives in order to account for truth.

Also, as the wars end (hopefully) and local business starts to thrive, and the community sort of things start happening, what's going to happen?
Will the hard left come protest the farmer's market?

Wednesday, January 18, 2017

A Good Comment Should Not Go Unnoticed

I wrote something pretty good in Coyote's comments:

To normal humans, the point of black lives matter should be to reduce black deaths and improve black lives. But no. This is a leftist organization- they want black lives to matter so that when they are SACRIFICED the SACRIFICE will be regarded as VALID. They are out to kill more for the sake of politics. You should always remember these people laud out-right murderers- Che, Fidel, etc...

It will probably fall on deaf ears. But it is truth.

Friday, January 13, 2017

Hypothesis: Russian Hacking Now Has Same Neuro-Linguistic Intent As Climate Change

It wasn't always climate change; it used to be global warming, and the proposed mechanism for the warming was carbon dioxide. Now, under normal scientific circumstances, as predictions based on carbon dioxide levels consistently failed to predict warming, researchers would put this non-functional hypothesis to rest. Unfortunately, the billions of dollars in climate research came with the requirement that you keep this stupid hypothesis. And then, of course, there are those who have made a political career out of this nonsense.

So, instead of admitting this was bad science, they simply abstracted, to climate change. The implication, of course, is that we still need to do whatever it is that they say, but now they don't have to check their work- now any change is supposed to support their position.

But, the seemingly trite response- climate is always changing- is true, and is, of course a thinking man's response.

Now, let's consider that hackers are always hacking. There's legal hacking- so much so that legit people who like to hack prefer you call the illegal sort crackers- and there is illegal hacking. There's also state sponsored hacking. There's corporate sponsor hacking. Hacking is always happening.

Since hacking is always happening, and there are many smart Russians, it is statistically possible that a Russian or two is always hacking.

Probably true that there are Americans, Chinese, etc... always hacking too.

What is obvious, is that Putin can't know about all of the hacking.

Additionally, we've got Seth Rich as a possible source (he died under suspicious circumstances), and this Guccifer 2.0.

Of course, those continually employing the term, 'Russian hacking' don't talk about Seth Rich, and like to pretend that underneath the Guccifer handle there lurks a Russian paid by the Russian government.

This is probably bullshit, and wouldn't matter a bit if it were true.

Because the outcome of these leaks is simply that more people know more of the truth.

Meanwhile, we have this fake news story on Trump that is so stupid, it's laughable- and, apparently this is something CIA/FBI has been, at various points, involved in trying to create since Trump started his campaign. They were looking for angles. Frankly, they were kind of stupid on this one- there are much more plausible stories. Why use the Russians as to boogeyman? You can get more traction with organized crime in N.Y. and or deals with nations Trump has actually done business in. I suspect they picked Russia because they are desperately trying to continue this failed narrative in Syria, but we know the U.S.G.'s rebels are actually terrorists, and that Assad and the Russians have been liberating Aleppo.

Someone is always hacking. It is statistically possible, especially with the help of bots, that a Russian is always hacking. But, just like climate change, what they want us to do seems to be deeply at odds with what would actually improve the situation.

Tuesday, January 10, 2017

Moderate Risk Business Idea

The norm for steroid using body builder is a six week cycle, though it seems people are getting crazier and staying on all the time. Certainly doing a lot more than necessary. The recreational user though, happens to be a guy like me- I am not using steroids, mind you, but I happen to be aware that I am part of the demographic for whom they are most attractive.

And then there is the reality that a lot of people are under-muscled, and that despite the obvious health benefits from muscle, the anti-male campaigns have encouraged less muscle.

The flip side, of course, is that those who get into the muscle game often go for too much. Why would I say that? Well, I am 6'3. A reasonable top weight for me is 200lbs. I am currently 190lb and prone to lose weight if I don't pay attention- unless I am not paying attention and eating a lot of sweets, which means I would gain the wrong sort of weight.

So, although there's clearly a market, and somewhat of a need for increased muscle, there's also a need for realistic targets. We don't want to have to go through heroic amounts of food just for maintenance. Additionally, there's this thing called status, and some circumstantial evidence that 'too much' muscle marks people as low status. I tend to view the modern status game as folly, with people who are not authentically capable of much being awarded status because they are credentialed, or can mimic the right narrative- but unfortunately the status game exists, and we need to factor it in.

So, it seems to me there could be a vacation length solution, at least with regard to pharmaceutical help not currently legal in particular jurisdictions. They are legal elsewhere, and who knows what you can get up to international waters?

What would the intervention be? This would require research- although it is very likely various militaries of the world have done some of the preliminaries. It is not much of a problem to create an intervention into the hormonal milieu that would far outlast a normal vacation; it is, however, a bit of a struggle to make it comfortable. Additionally, the after-effects would preferably be minimal and predictable, so that supplements, dietary advice, etc- can be provided.

I continue to believe that, for a variety of modern ills, additional muscle can help ameliorate them. Long ago I wrote that I prefer honest losers to those currently popping psychiatric medications:
So, the honest losers are at least getting a decent high out of their regime. And I suspect some folks aren't even losers- we probably could provide ourselves with a host of benefits with very little risk with an intelligent course of steroids. Testosterone would make these people feel better, and the resulting change in body composition would provide the patient with a lasting improved biological environment. Yes, they'd have to learn to eat right and keep themselves running properly, but they'd be in a far better place.

The reason I believe this is because muscle is alive and contributes to the process that is you. If there were an intervention resulting in more muscle, then, long after the intervention, the muscle would be there. Sure, some activity is necessary to maintain it, but that activity is more likely when it is there because the mountain doesn't seem as high when you have more of the stuff it takes to climb it.

Friday, January 6, 2017

Hypothesis: The Bipartisan Anti-Russia Push As Cover for Criminality.

I expected, metaphorically at least, the sounds of millions of shredders shredding evidence as it slowly dawned on D.C. how many of them have wittingly or unwittingly committed crimes in the last few decades.

And that may or may not be happening in secret, but in public, it seems like their vulnerability isn't being acknowledged. One would assume they'd note it tacitly and perhaps behave a little better in the hopes of staying out of prison.

But when John McCain and his friend, the Republican Fairy Queen, are pushing anti-Russian propaganda along with the Democrats despite the incoming administration not being on board, well, this may just be the way those in denial play. These guys think they own the place. Perhaps they are too old to realize they are vulnerable. Perhaps they don't realize how much they say on video, in Congress or otherwise, and how often it violates reality.

Few people believe this Russian hacker story. Every time I hear something mainstream, I find it hard to believe anyone is still on this story. Surely even those pushing it know it isn't true?

The media has an incentive to push it, and anything else that sounds like imminent doom, because they need our attention to sell advertising. I do think, however, that the media would move on, to other areas of concern- where they might be able to appear to be honestly reporting something.

Various people in the government, though, seem to be regularly pushing this back in front of the media. I think it has become more than just a narrative- they redirect to the meme whenever their own poor behavior is mentioned, just like the D.N.C. did with the leaks.

When anything is mentioned about 'cyber' these idiots talk, when they do talk about encryption, like it is a bad thing that makes it hard for them to find terrorists. But if they (the government) encrypted all their data, then the Chinese wouldn't have the personal details of practically everybody working for the federal government. Actual hacking threats can be handled. Break-ins can be greatly reduced.

So it's quite possible this story keeps getting pushed long after almost everything has been accounted for simply because it is the designated narrative/alibi for conspirators. They may even have the audacity to say any evidence gathered against them is tainted because the Russians could have made stuff up- as Podesta and other have insinuated with the emails.

This stuff makes me think about Robert Hanssen. I suspect he wanted to encrypt everything, and his colleagues didn't because creating and using secure systems- especially at that time, took a lot of time. They valued convenience more than security.

Tuesday, January 3, 2017

There Is No Objectivist A.I.

...but there are still objectivists.

Ann Rand was a narcissist sociopath, bent on creating acolytes. To that end she destroyed logic and language in order to isolate people from their family and friends, and confuse their minds.

A good example of this is her idea that selfishness is good. The first problem with this is that most people already have the idea in their head that selfishness is bad, and that it goes hand in hand with self-destructiveness. The only way to make meaning out of this is to assume she meant enlightened self-interest. However she meant it, she had an affair with a married man, and didn't have a single care for what the wife wanted. Rand's selfishness, it seems, takes primacy over everyone elses, and since Randians are saying the opposite of what everyone else is saying when they say this word, they now have a mostly non-functional word.

Additionally, it is necessary to have an understanding of self in order to obtain enlightened self-interest. A baby, crawling around on the floor, putting all sorts of things in his mouth, is learning where he begins and the rest of the world ends. He learns he is not the wall by banging up against it and getting constant feedback. He's also getting feedback from human beings and learning in the same fashion- he doesn't learn who he is, but he slowly learns who he is not.

When we achieve some proficiency in language we can make giant leaps in our understanding. There are also false models that can really mess us up.

A standard syllogism:

All men are mortal

Socrates is a man

Therefore, Socrates is mortal

Socrates fits into the set (man) and therefore the condition that applies to the set applies to Socrates.

A Randian, however, will do something like this:

The Virgin Birth (which is specifically defined as not a normal human birth) fits in the set (of normal human births). Therefore it didn't happen. Or it's not true. Or it's just a normal birth.

And since the person who argues like this doesn't believe, he tends not to care or even realize what he is doing.

But, even if you don't believe, the story of Jesus' birth has been handed down to us in a particular way. The story itself is a reality. A perfectly reasonable atheist supposition would be to suppose this was written down whenever it was decided that Jesus was God. There are good reasons to believe this wasn't something that happened until after- the phrase 'Son of God' and the word Messiah are Jewish terms for people with normal human births. So an atheist could believe that there was a normal human birth, but he couldn't define the Virgin birth as a normal human birth. If that atheist were also curious about the world at all, he should also wonder why people would write such a thing novel to their culture.

The Virgin Birth is a story. It is either a true story or a fictional story. It is not a normal human birth, and the Randian has not created a syllogism.

The other annoying idea is that Jesus can't be both God and man due to the law of identity. Again- poor form ignoring definitions, and one should understand of the limitations of aristotelian logic. Essences are unseen, and probably unknowable. If you are hoping to know an essence, you'd better be hoping for an afterlife and extra upgrades for your senses so you can see in essence-vision. Seems quite strange to me people fussing about God would be putting faith in all these essences everywhere.

But I digress: in thinking about this idea, I realized the person conveying this idea doesn't believe in God. So, he isn't really taking this thing seriously. But let me plug that in for you:

I was nonexistent once. I am now existent. I also now have two terms, already, to add to that other concept- God, which appear to be able to handle other identities with aplomb. Indeed, existence and nonexistence appear able to handle billions of entities with identities flitting in and out of them without any incongruity at all.

And this is why Rand's plan here is much like the plan of the big government in 1984. She creates incongruities at the concept level. She destroys one's ability to talk to other people. She doesn't deserve to be considered a libertarian- she didn't want anyone free, she just didn't want competition.

There is a third level of self-knowledge, one Rand definitely didn't want anyone to have- and that is detachment from ideas. Practices to help us detach tend to come from religions. Meditative practices are found in religions. These practices helped people to obtain detachment both from passions and ideas, which has the odd result of making it easier for us to think about ideas. Consider: if you believe an idea is yours or that it somehow defines you, then you tend to attach emotion to it. You might even defend it at the cost of your actual self. If, however, you are more detached, you can find which ideas help you improve your life. The modern trend towards a 'belief/unbelief' dialectic with high emotion attached is very damaging.

And the reason I point out in the title that there's no Objectivist artificial intelligence is that, obviously, the entire field is indicative that objectivist philosophy is no good. When you've got to teach machines to learn about the real world, what works works, and is more indicative of true objectivity.

Thursday, December 8, 2016

Filled With Imagination, They Could Not Serve The Lord

I've been noticing a similarity to stories.

Someone has an emotional experience, which seems to initiate a conversion. I say initiate a conversion, because I don't feel the conversion is completed due to subsequent events.

Anyway, the emotional experience leads them to decide God matters.

Wherever they end up, they are in the modern, western world, where there is no end of 'teaching', and no end of entertainment.

From a spiritual perspective, it is not long until they reach a particular point. There is waiting to be done, but this clashes with American ideals. Surely something can be done. Even from a personal perspective, I sometimes feel this way. I could at least be waiting in better style.

This is where the 'teachings' come in. They provide the Christian with the illusion of progress. And, if you play Christian rock songs loud enough, you might be able to temporarily ignore the lack of Theophany.

Along with our modern entertainment complex, the never ending 'teachings' provide our imaginations with fodder to churn away.

I am thinking that, for many, the imagination becomes what dwells within.