The Big Picture via distorting filters onto Big Data?
2013/3/24 andrew vecsey <andrewvecsey@gmail.com>
I do not think that we lie to our self so much as that we only see/hear what we want to see/hear. Also we tend to say what we think the other persons wants to hear or say things to hurt other people.
On Sunday, March 24, 2013 10:46:03 AM UTC+1, rigs wrote:I am more interested in why we lie to ourselves, suppress reality and--
snarl logic in our brains. There are life and death moments of
survival, I suppose, but much of our potential is engineered by family
and culture in order to achieve some sort of control and order. Even
rebels are often little more than a reaction. Pretense and etiquette
are often the same thing.//I must have "lost" my thought re "big
data"/"Big Daddy? as an organizer of human knowledge versus the
present scatterings and specialties.// Yes- I agree most have a gut
reaction- but so do other life forms- it's a survival mechanism. But
it can be distorted.
On Mar 24, 4:12 am, andrew vecsey <andrewvec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Faked enthusiasm is as easy to spot as fake love. It is like a built in
> like a lie detector that god created us with. Sounds like a good way to
> detect lying on the internet. You can call it "god" instead of "big
> brother".
>
> On Saturday, March 23, 2013 6:08:39 PM UTC+1, archytas wrote:
>
> .....................
>
>
>
> > Quite what junk DNA is has raised a big recent controversy - gist at
>
> >http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2013/feb/24/scientists-attacked-ove...
> > I agree with rigs that the term is unfortunate.
>
> > ........but I could feign 'enthusiasm' ..
> > ........' to detect resistance! Even this
> > .....no employees dumb enough to support
> > excellence, ......
> > if we spent out time pointing such devices at
> > each other though rigs! Watch out for the first one minute dating
> > agency providing such! Arghh" .
>
> > On Mar 22, 1:06 pm, rigs <rigs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Junk is an unfortunate adjective- it sounds too random. My guess is
> > > that further selection takes place in this area which selects the
> > > strongest marker- or whatever it's called- such in the color of eyes,
> > > hair, and other characteristics. There are also generational skips in
> > > play. I have noted other strange echoes of a missing parent such as
> > > the style of laughter which is a surprise and so many other
> > > recognitions. At any rate, we are just beginning to sort through the
> > > data in this one area as in others- I think it is called "big data"
> > > which will overcome the religious notion of "sins of the father" stuff
> > > as well as curses and fate and will hopefully allow a more rational
> > > and postive approach/life choices for each unique individual. But it
> > > will also cause mischief.
>
> > > On Mar 22, 5:16 am, andrew vecsey <andrewvec...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > Not all DNA code for protein. We have non coding DNA called "junk DNA"
> > that
> > > > ensure we are all unique. While normal DNA codes for protein to make,
> > for
> > > > example a "nose", junk DNA ensures that we grow a nose that "looks"
> > like a
> > > > mixture of our father`s and our mother`s nose.
>
> > > > On Friday, March 22, 2013 12:36:39 AM UTC+1, Ash wrote:
>
> > > > > My thoughts didn't include "junk DNA", my thinking on such terms are
> > > > > mixed in that some genes may not be useful or represent just another
> > > > > failure point, but also that the supposed junk in one set of
> > > > > circumstances may prove quite beneficial in others like a backup, an
> > > > > alternate development chain or complex interdependencies we haven't
> > > > > observed yet. You may have a connection in mind I haven't gleaned.
>
> > > > > Developing the market sounds similar but I am trying to root out an
> > > > > aspect of this that doesn't require jumping to a premature
> > conclusion,
> > > > > such as in 'intelligent design', materialism, rigid ontologies or
> > > > > realism. Thanks for helping me explore here gabby, lets hope some
> > form
> > > > > emerges in expression. :)
>
> > > > > On 3/21/2013 3:57 AM, gabbydott wrote:
> > > > > > Now that sounds more like you. :)
> > > > > > What you are describing or asking I now understand/interpret/hear
> > in
> > > > > > terms of what I know about what they are trying to find out about
> > > > > > "junk DNA". Its purpose/function/added value. As for what you
> > describe
> > > > > > as another way, I know/experience/see this in what the companies
> > > > > > describe as "developing the market". We are still on topic, aren't
> > we?
>
> > > > > > 2013/3/21 James <ashk...@gmail.com <javascript:> <mailto:
> > > > > ashk...@gmail.com <javascript:>>>
>
> > > > > > I have a feeling you are being charitable with me gabby
> > (cringe).
> > > > > > What you say makes sense, and should add that the intent I
> > refer
> > > > > > to is in excess of that needed for mere gene survival fitness.
> > In
> > > > > > that sense I consider the adaptations as simulations and the
> > > > > > excess as breaking the barriers of meta-simulation, or in
> > another
> > > > > > way, not just running within time but operating on it by
> > taking
> > > > > > advantage of the rules and finding ways to bend them. Now it
> > is my
> > > > > > turn to ask, does that make sense [to anyone]?
>
> > > > > > On 3/20/2013 3:01 AM, gabbydott wrote:
>
> > > > > > I don't know if this is good or bad, but i hear that you
> > > > > > haven't just heard about mirror neurons, that this is a
> > > > > > relatively consciously made up construct, a construct with
> > > > > > intent or purpose. Also it sounds strange when you say
> > that
> > > > > > this neurological mechanism is strange (to you). That's
> > where
> > > > > > my "parallel mirror neurons" come into play, i compare
> > what
> > > > > > you say with what i have heard you saying before and add
> > the
> > > > > > info as well as my judgement on what you say to my
> > internal
> > > > > > "Virtualization" of you. The leap is more of a constant
> > > > > > exercise of differentiating between you and me while
> > operating
> > > > > > on the virtualization of each participant, so to speak.
> > Does
> > > > > > that somehow make sense to you?
>
> > > > > > Of course, I could go back to the group website and search
> > for
> > > > > > the real data on what you have been saying on neurological
> > > > > > mechanisms. But this would be a completely new project.
> > I'd
> > > > > > have to go back and construct a new image with my
> > knowledge of
> > > > > > now.
>
> > > > > > But since you are still alive and still communicating, I
> > find
> > > > > > it much easier and more purposeful to keep on listening to
> > > > > > what you say, to respond to it, and to rely on you saying,
> > if
> > > > > > you disagree. Not a good position for me to be in, more of
> > a
> > > > > > survival strategy. Now that's worth a leap into rethinking
> > > > > > mode. ;)
>
> > > > > > 2013/3/20 James <ashk...@gmail.com <javascript:>
> > > > > > <mailto:ashk...@gmail.com <javascript:>> <mailto:
> > > > > ashk...@gmail.com <javascript:>
> > > > > > <mailto:ashk...@gmail.com <javascript:>>>>
>
> > > > > > My response was mostly a parallel narrative, my
> > thinking on
> > > > > a
> > > > > > personal level is when does a system of components
> > > > > > transcend the
> > > > > > boudaries of automata and begin to engage in the
> > operations
> > > > > of
> > > > > > intent. Where does gene fitness adaptation break loose
> > into
> > > > > > something perceiving, interacting, understanding and
> > > > > > mastering? I
> > > > > > have heard that our ability to reflect and interact on
> > an
> > > > > > intimate
> > > > > > level arises from a strange neurological mechanism
> > called
> > > > > > mirror
> > > > > > neurons. If this is something like the virtualization
> > > > > > technologies
> > > > > > we have been building in technology then with a bit
> > more
> > > > > > scale and
> > > > > > pondering our science may make the leap
> > logarithmically.
>
> > > > > > On 3/18/2013 8:15 PM, James wrote:
>
> > > > > > I see this sometimes too Andrew, and we learn how
> > our
> > > > > > internal
> > > > > > systems and culture drive and shape us, so we can
> > > > > > create. We
> > > > > > model from the simplest sensory stimuli on to
> > > > > > reflections on
> > > > > > the nature of our existence and what could be in a
> > > > > > simultaneous simulation of reality. Our world can
> > be
> > > > > > full of
> > > > > > intent, or I should say we experience it thus due
> > to our
> > > > > > capacity arising from our nature and drawing
> > parables
> > > > > > in the
> > > > > > mist. It makes me wonder how many levels of
> > abstraction,
> > > > > > simulation and foresight are necessary to
> > represent
> > > > > > the human
> > > > > > element. That minds like ours are derived from
> > nature is
> > > > > > astonishing and awe inspiring, that we reach so
> > far
> > > > > > and yet
> > > > > > innocence is so fragile, the experience of
> > awareness
> > > > > > is far
> > > > > > from today's science I think. Our synthetic
> > > > > > counterparts or
> > > > > > robots will have to wait.
>
> > > > > > On 3/13/2013 5:35 AM, andrew vecsey wrote:
>
> > > > > > Perhaps we are born into a world filled with
> > > > > negative
> > > > > > aspects rather than positive aspects so as to
> > give
> > > > > > us a
> > > > > > direction. We are born small so that we can
> > grow.
> > > > > > We are
> > > > > > born ignorant so that we could know. We are
> > born
> > > > > with
> > > > > > negative aspects so that we could acquire
> > positive
> > > > > > ones.
>
> > > > > > On Monday, January 28, 2013 12:11:39 PM UTC+1,
> > > > > andrew
> > > > > > vecsey wrote:
>
> > > > > > Why do so many of us remember negative
> > > > > > feelings easier
> > > > > > than
> > > > > > positive ones. Pain over
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minds-eye+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to minds-eye+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
0 comments:
Post a Comment