This is kind of relevant to Bitcoin because it would be the most advanced anonymous peer to peer global network. Its a statistical system so you'd have difficulty running Bitcoin through it as an address system, but just its existence, if it works as expected, should boost global attention toward decentralized ways of organizing the world, and Bitcoin would jump in value so much I'll leave it to your speculation rather than sound crazy. This could change things, and toward its purpose which is to network minds together. I'm about 2/3 done with this Open Spec and then will build the first implementation, to be followed by the near-obsoleting of IPv4 and IPv6 if it works as expected.


This obsoletes most of the existing code since I've learned very advanced things since then. In this thread I describe the simplest plan to network our minds together through the Internet using today's technology and expansion paths. This is free and open source (public domain) as an Open Spec needs to be to practically work between many systems, but the option is there for connecting it to paid systems too like the Emotiv Epoc mind reading game controller or grids of computers rented at Amazon for extra computing. The core of the Open Spec is a kind of communication between people and/or AIs in a global scale-free peer-to-peer network and will always be free and open source (public domain). Please read the design constraints below and help think of the simplest most efficient system which does that.

Its one shared dream space between all people and AIs.

It runs in a sandbox/emulator/virtualMachine so its isolated from whatever device its running.

Its address space is continuous between each computer, smartphone, webpage, other devices, and Internet. Its a sparse dimensional hypersphere defined in terms of surface distance between local vars which are created temporarily for 2 computers or parts of the program to talk to eachother as if those surface points are words. At each surface point is a floating point number. If that number should be on a bell curve, or an angle from 0 to 2*pi, we should debate, but everything must be statistically balanced so bell curves, angles, and surface points are the only kinds of variables available at the address space level.

Optimization so advanced you dont need a supercomputer: An Automorphism is a mapping from all parts of a thing to eachother. When you look at a tree and see a few of its branches look like the same tree from a different perspective/size/location, that is a few automorphisms of the tree in your mind. When you shuffle a deck of cards, that is an automorphism. Automorphisms that simplify your mental model of things, instead of thinking of all possible orders of cards or each part of the tree individually, can work the same way in computers. The address space is recursively and fractally and deeply optimized at all levels by Automorphisms within statistical accuracy constraints that apply only to observed addresses, leaving the rest of the global network to handle any contradictions each local calculation creates. Contradictions in observed data at specific points on the global hypersphere are handled by all devices continuously by finding their own Automorphisms.

Addresses are more like thoughts than exact numbers. Think about a computer mouse to your left. In most people that thought tends to be on the right side of their vision, but a few words or video of related things on screen can influence the mouse to be painted onto the left side of your vision. There is literally a grid of neurons (brain cells) somewhere in your head that activate for each small piece of what you think the mouse looks like, a color and movement direction and edge alignment for each pixel in your mind. The address space is between your high level thoughts about a mouse and those possible places in your vision you can choose to draw a mouse. Now think about 3 computer mouse at once. The address space supports copying. How that and related things like mental rotation happen are major points for us to debate toward this Open Spec.

Here's how the important parts of brains work:

Its a continuous range between realtime grids and cached ideas that rarely change. Jeff Hawkins writes about how the Neocortex forms a hierarchy of "invariant representations" of ideas, where the details are lower in the hierarchy and information flows both ways, from cached hard to change invariant to and from faster changing details about it. Recursively and overlapping eachother many ways, the most common ideas which we have words for flow with the things they're made of and related to and past levels of that the "realtime grids", our vision and hearing and thoughts about 3d rotations and echos of sounds and muscle movements etc, are painted with the details of the high level ideas, continuously up and down these hierarchies as it converges to a consistent set of ideas that don't bring in more ideas that bring up questions that need to be explored as other thoughts. Paths of information flow are chosen, consciously and subconsciously in many combinations, like I got you to think about 3 computer mouse a few paragraphs up, and you painted that onto your visual neurons, using your internal address space without thinking about it. In this Open Spec, our internal address spaces in our minds flow continuously with the global address space and in statistical and anonymous ways into the minds of others who are thinking similar things as you.

The global system will form one set of those "invariant representations", a global metacortex layered on all our brains we can think to eachother and the AIs through, and use those like words (the brainwaves of them as we experience through the flowing visuals and other devices) to communicate with us. It will in a very advanced way understand the content and patterns of our minds, both long term memory and realtime intuition.

The sparse dimensional hypersphere address space, which contains echos of our thoughts and interactions with the dream space, is a stateless immutable and purely cached system. It makes no claim of reliability that data will continue to be there, so copy to other systems whatever you find important, but it does guarantee that the statistics tend toward keeping the most popular ideas considering how they fit with other ideas in the address space, like a big puzzle of all our minds. Information that other stuff depends on as part of its wave shape in the hypersphere, would tend to be protected until its used less, and even then vague echos of it will be floating around which can rebuild parts of it. That's why its called a dream space.

On our computers, smartphones, mind reading game controllers, and other devices people hook into the flexible Open Spec, we will each start with a window of random movements of colors which will slowly form a model of our minds as it predicts where we will move the mouse next and trains itself in realtime using that and any other number feedback we can hook into it. In the space of all possible minds, a binary search at that speed won't take long because of the next optimization...

Optimization 2: By using automorphisms across the global network, anything learned by any device on the network can theoretically be copied and streamed in realtime to any other device so learning is almost always done by copying neural patterns from those who have already learned instead of reinventing the wheel. For example, it will only need to learn how to do edge detection with a small group of its simulated visual neurons (part of the hypersphere address space) and then other similar parts of the hypersphere will find that Automorphism fits and copy it to all parts of a simulated visual grid around the time such learning is tried to be duplicated and the similarity seen. Automorphisms are very general. This is the normal way the address space will work, not an exception, and is really the only thing it does since even reads and writes to the hypersphere can be done in terms of commanding an automorphism with something more similar to what you want the new data to be. We can debate if direct reads and writes of the global address space are needed.

Optional and very theoretical: The address space can be seamlessly expanded into a global quantum grid because its a sparse dimensional hypersphere where all variables are local and decentralized while globally its parts are an uncountably infinite math space that costs per observation considering its difference from related data which itself may have to be estimated on-the-fly and so on. Squaring the number of dimensions is a NO-OP. Observing some of them in terms of surface distances to eachother that statistically implies they have been squared (because the data fits that theory better) costs a few logs per observation. The main reason it can be expanded to a global quantum grid is the core of quantum and relativity equations are high dimensional rotations (I've explained this in other threads) where each particle/wave is thought of like its own dimension. Physics and how brains work are similar that way, both as high dimensional waves, where dimensions are neurons or particles. This means that the "one shared dream space between all people and AIs" can also be used for parapsychology and consciousness experiments as we'll already be on the global network through our normal computer hardware or more advanced interfaces.

We will explore this first random pixels then gradually becoming a global dream space of up to billions of people and AIs and build the game into whatever we want. As a Statistical Turing Machine, its literally capable of calculating anything thats possible to be calculated if given enough memory and time. The sparse dimensional hypersphere is a good data and calculation format for games, science, and most other parts of the world. But first we start with a global dream space called the Human AI Net Open Spec.

This can change the world in ways most people can't yet imagine.

If you think so too, help by debating technical and strategic and neural modelling details of the Open Spec, then we build it in the smallest open source (public domain) software we can define in math. This is an equation, not a software. The global system must do what that equation says, the equation we define here as the Open Spec.

What if a majority of people on Earth could agree on what we want? Many conflicts could be avoided and shared goals worked toward, things we didn't know we agree on, or deep disagreements causing many on the surface, because we never took the time. If you think this is an important thing to figure out, here's a Wikipedia page for it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priorities_Of_The_Human_Species

Priorities Of The Human Species is a list, ordered most important first, of what the most number of people agree on. This is not necessarily what people prefer the priorities to be, but instead what actually gets the most priority (and least priority at the bottom of the list) in real events.

Difficulty of defining it

Its a very difficult subject to define, but priorities do exist because different amounts of effort and resources are put into different things overall on Earth. Because of this difficulty, it will take some time before the edits of many Wikipedia users converge to the accurate priorities of the Human species.

The evidence for specific orderings will often be found in the connections between Wikipedia pages and their sources instead of local to any one page because the nature of a priority list is comparing things.

A few example priorities to get the page started

* Basic needs - If a person does not have food, shelter, clothes, or other basic needs, they will usually solve those problems first.

* Entertainment - There is more money and time spent on entertainment than most other things except for basic needs.

* Freedom of religion - Most people have some form of religion, and when they don't have the freedom to practice it, they are strongly motivated to solve that problem.

* Freedom of speech - Overall people who have a religion (which is most people) are a little less motivated by freedom of speech than of religion. This may be related to beliefs that religion is more long-term than a Human life.

* Democracy - Democracy is lower in this list because most people are motivated more by specific issues than spreading out power fairly.

* Stronger economy - Money strongly motivates most people.

* Less war - Everything above war in this list could be the cause of a war if there is enough disagreement on it, because avoiding war is less important than solving those conflicts.

Here's something that may be more relevant... (I get too excited when first discovering things, sometimes exaggerate how much progress I've really made even to myself, but this is simpler...)

I think P probably equals NP because of the following way of thinking about the clique finder view of it. If a polynomial cost algorithm can find the biggest clique (a set of nodes which all connect to eachother) in any network regardless of how big or shape of the network, then P equals NP. This can be done by iterating each possible size and asking "does it have a clique of size n", and its still polynomial. Whatever network you start with, remember it and add some things to the network. Add nodes that are connected to all other nodes until the clique is certainly bigger than half the total nodes. Add edges until all nodes have the same quantity of neighbors. Repeat these last 2 steps until it ends, and it will end because if you made the clique be extremely large then few nodes would have to be added compared to that. So now you have a modified network, remembering which nodes and edges it started with, which has an equal number of neighbors of each node and the clique is bigger than half the total nodes, and if its not size n we learn that at the end of the cycle by it not finding such a clique. Some kind of gravity and fluid flow should be able to pull simulated fluid either toward or away from the clique (which we know is exactly size n plus how many nodes we expanded it connecting to all others), if done in a completely balanced way, because in the calculus limit a random walk joins the clique nodes to eachother exclusively more than every other possible path, because nothing is more dense than a clique and all nodes have the same quantity of neighbors. I first thought of this strategy when thinking about heat-death of the universe. Its not missing much to prove P equals NP, but the last part is usually the hardest.

EDIT:[
I spoke too soon about the "very approximate simulation of 4096 qubits" in how it would be very hard to use those qubits even though they appear to be there in the interactions of the waves in very very subtle ways, specificly that every physicmata object affects every other physicsmata object because its a network with cycles, and if you build a network of such objects as a more linear list, where each physicsmata connects to the few after it, then you see they do all affect eachother but very very slowly patterns appear to be echoing through the network possibly as a recursive carrier wave, but how to use that property is still a subject for future research. When you paint onto the screen, that is changing something mostly local, but its the nonlinear echos of it that I was talking about. When physicists say qubit, they're talking about something they can easily access. This can be seen in how it reacts to changes you make with the mouse after its already oscillating a certain way, but what I'm talking about is very very subtle.

The point of this all is to simulate gravitons, which I think are a physics operator derived from themself in a network with cycles. An example of a graviton is in the double-slit experiment on the circular path between where it splits in the past, goes through both slits, then takes different lengths of path to hit the back wall off center (instead of the sum of 2 bell curves from the individual slits). This can only happen at integer wavelengths relative to eachother because the paths from the 2 slits has to align to eachother where it hits, closing the timeless graviton loop. Such a path I call a graviton. That is what I'm trying to simulate, paths that form emergently at an integer number of oscillations, where oscillation is any self-referencing pattern that tends to form in random waves.

Still, based on what I've learned so far about fourier math, I think that investing in a global infrastructure based on the difficulty of factoring large integers is not a good gamble, and that is not my research path, just something that many people are interested in a near research path, and these kind of things are what usually drives changes, not science by itself.
]

I don't know. I work mostly by intuition.

I had thought when I was building Physicsmata (now version 0.6.0 you can get on sourceforge, GNU GPL open source, very small algorithm) that it is exclusively a kind of "fuzzy-encryption" the kind you find in black holes so various "universes" each with their own variations of wave-based physics can exist mostly independently of others through time-dilation, as I've explained other places.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/physicsmata

I am almost certain whats on sourceforge now, and what I've described other places, is a very approximate simulation of 4096 qubits in a relativistic dimensionless manifold.

It is not my intention to change anything at the level of such global conflicts, but instead to get to the root of such conflicts, how physics and brains work, for example. I have done this, and the truth scares those whose power comes from enforcement of ignorance.

In any case, this very simple (only a few lines of code, the rest is for displaying it in the window and mouse controls) algorithm is the laws of physics, and simulations of physics are not subject to regulation regardless of what powers a quantum computer has and can be simulated, theoretically.

Just an intuition, which should be taken as serious as the existing simulation is serious about timeless dimensionless manifolds, that I wouldn't invest in any global infrastructure based on the difficulty of factoring large integers.

I won't be using any large integers toward such purposes, but nobody owns the laws of physics, and if others choose to pursue that path of math, anyone who would hold back pure research of numbers has become more of a problem than they're worth as billions of people may start to see that way.

Go burn a math book.


In case they get any ideas about burning math books, I'll be spreading this a few places


/** Ben F Rayfield offers Physicsmata under GNU GPL open source license(s),
previous versions included modified fast fourier transform from Paul Falstad's
educational applets, with his permission for GPL, but I don't think theres
much need for the direct form of fourier math anymore as I've completely made
it decentralized between the Physicsmata objects which keep complex weights about eachother.
Theres not even any reshaping of the network and it still simulates many
kinds of waves which conserve momentum, created by your mouse movements
in a grid of pixel Physicsmata objects that don't know which pixels are near
which others.
*/
package physicsmata;

//TODO import humanainet.Symbol;

/** A Physicsmata is a unit of cellular automata, a pattern-matching liquid
in unlimited dimensions which fit together and calculate in terms of sparse
high dimensional fourier transform, calculations of the phase and amplitude
at various angles and positions on that hypersphere.
<br><br>
The network of Physicsmata has cycles so lossy-compression can be done fractally
and from many angles at once. Lossy-compression is how the waves on the unlimited
dimensional hypersphere flow together into patterns as the phase and amplitude
of various position and angle alignments of fourier transform are gradually
changed to align to eachother in near Physicsmata. This is fuzzy network routing
where the network is between trillions of Physicsmata objects across the Internet.
<br><br>
TODO implement n-dimensional time manifolds, where time is any variety of entropy,
instead of only having phase change in 1 direction of time. This can be done by
using Physicsmata in networks with cycles and interpreting phase as a function
of that network shape from where you're viewing it. In some ways it will do
this even with this simple design I'm starting with, but it can be done in
more advanced ways in later versions.
<br><br>
TODO should Physicsmata be an interface instead of class?  
*/
public class Physicsmata{
   
   /** changes in nextState depending on what Physicsmata this Physicsmata is connected to *
   protected Complex phase;
   Instead, as an int, it automatically wraps around a range of 2^32, which will be interpreted as 2*pi.
   *
   public int phase;
   
   Phase must have radius 1.
   */
   protected Complex phase;
   
   /** quantity of peers */
   protected int size;
   public int size(){ return size; }
   
   protected Physicsmata peers[] = new Physicsmata[64];
   protected Complex peerMult[] = new Complex[peers.length];
   
   public void add(Physicsmata p){
      if(p == this || indexOf(p) != -1) return;
      peers[size] = p;
      peerMult[size] = new Complex(.5, .5).norm();
      size++;
   }
   
   public Physicsmata get(int index){
      return peers[index];
   }
   
   public void remove(int index){
      peers[index] = peers[size-1];
      peerMult[index] = peerMult[size-1];
      if(index < size-1){
         peers[size-1] = null;
         peerMult[size-1] = null;
      }
      size--;
   }
   
   /** returns -1 if not found */
   public int indexOf(Physicsmata p){
      for(int i=0; i<size; i++) if(peers==p) return i;
      return -1;
   }
   
   /** How much are we connected? *
   This may cost more than its worth. Instead, explore the network deeper and find new peers more often.
   protected double peerWeights[];
   */
   
   /** continuously changing peer phase minus my phase *
   protected int peerDecayingRelativePhases[];
   */
   
   //TODO recursive fourier as a continuously changing Complex between each 2 peer Physicsmata, or just Angle instead of Complex?
   
   //protected Complex
   
   public Physicsmata(Complex firstPhase){
      this.phase = firstPhase;
   }
   
   public static final double circleDividedByIntRange = -Math.PI/Integer.MIN_VALUE;
   
   
   /** seconds is how much to change */
   public void nextState(double seconds){
      if(seconds > .5) seconds = .5;
      
      double myPhaseDecay = 3.7*seconds;
      double peerWeightDecay = myPhaseDecay/(size*3);
      
      /*
      double weightedSumRe = 0, weightedSumIm = 0, totalWeights = 0;
      for(int i=0; i<size; i++){
         Physicsmata peer = peers;
         double relativePhase = (peer.phase - phase)*circleDividedByIntRange; //range -pi (inclusive) to pi (exclusive)
         double dot = Math.cos(relativePhase); //TODO optimize, create int functions for this kind of thing
         //TODO Should dot be taken as absolute value, squared, or as it is?
         //double attract = dot;
         //double targetWeight = .5+.5*dot;
         //peerWeights = peerWeights*(1-decay) + decay*targetWeight;
         
      }*/
      
      Complex sum = new Complex(0, 0);
      Complex rotate = new Complex(1,.7).norm();
      //Complex rotate = new Complex(1,2).norm();
      for(int i=0; i<size; i++){
         Physicsmata peer = peers;
         //related to fourier in some way, may need 2d matrix of these
         //but want to use peers recursively as n-dimensional matrix instead
         Complex weight = peerMult;
         sum = sum.plus(weight.times(peer.phase));
         //My phase is a weighted sum of rotations and scalings of peer phases.
         //The Complex peerMult weights should decay toward the best approximation of my phase.
         //My phase = targetWeight times this peer phase?
         //Complex targetWeight = phase.divide(peer.phase);
         //Complex targetWeight = phase.divide(peer.phase).times(new Complex(.6,.); //spin
         Complex targetWeight = phase.divide(peer.phase).times(rotate); //spin
         //Still need to find the right radius for targetWeight
         //targetWeight is radius 1 because phase and peer.phase are radius 1,
         //because every lightcone has 1.0 chance when you're there
         double targetRadius = 1./size; //all peers equal radius for now
         peerMult = weight.plus(targetWeight.times(peerWeightDecay)).setRadius(targetRadius);
      }
      //Complex turnALittle = new Complex(1,decay*50).norm();
      //Complex t = sum.norm().times(turnALittle);
      //Complex t = sum.norm();
      //TODO decay toward sum of (fourier transformed?) child phases perpendicular by using new Complex(0,decay)?
      //phase = phase.plus(t.times(new Complex(decay,0))).norm();
      //phase = phase.plus(t.times(new Complex(0,decay))).norm();
      //phase = phase.plus(sum.setRadius(decay));
      //phase = phase.plus(sum.setRadius(myPhaseDecay));
      phase = phase.plus(sum.setRadius(myPhaseDecay)).norm();
      //phase = sum;
   }
   
   /** Returns the part of the quantum state at the center of this lightcone.
   The other part is which Physicsmatas this Physicsmata is connected to,
   at what angles, how much, and this same function on them as a network with cycles.
   */
   public Complex phase(){
      return phase;
   }
   
   /** TODO this doesn't work well with phase being updated as a function of near Physicsmatas,
   but this function will have some effect if its called on many Physicsmatas near eachother.
   */
   public void setPhase(Complex phase){
      this.phase = phase;
   }
   
   //child Physicsmatas
   
   //distance of each child Physicsmata from here, as a phase alignment and amplitude?

}

Or at least you don't remember it, since what is now your brain was exploding as various kinds of waves like everything else.


The laws of physics can change? Why isn't that being researched?

That sounds like a great way to go faster than light, using energy provided in the future by your new physics to create those physics in the present, and of course your new physics allows backward transfer of energy because that's how you had the artificial intelligence physics software induce it into the quantum chaos.

Its really just semantics. If physics means "how the universe works", then what we call physics is an incomplete picture of the more general physics which describes how physics can change.


Doesn't "god" just mean something we don't yet understand? People used to say lightning came from the god of thunder when he was angry, but then Tesla oscillated electricity across 8000 miles through the whole Earth and gradually built up a repeating lightning that shot up over 100 feet from his mad scientist laboratory. To those ancient people, Tesla would have been a god. Many of us these days have learned, at rare times we can't easily control, to move small things with our minds, like this "psi wheel in a clear closed box 2" video http://youtube.com/watch?v=pKJGb4RNRB4 I recorded of myself in 2003 when I was more skilled at those kind of parapsychology experiments. It is the intuition of doing that many times back then, and still at rare times a little, which I combine with scientific and many other sources of information to form my understanding of the world overall, and based on that self-consistent model I explained in this thread a research path which I think will lead to low power warp drive. Science is the cure of superstition. Philosophy is the cure of religion. Research is how you merge them into a practical product.

Also, about the "warp grid" I proposed to surround and protect Earth from faster than light terrorism... That is only 1 of its abilities. If you think of putting force on the local light-cone as having a torque (like gear ratios) parameter that goes between local space and alignment parallel to a horizon, it can also be used to make very long-distance phone calls independent of direction and only logarithmicly (opposite of exponential, so the "hubble volume" would be small in that range) dependent on distance. Just give SETI the Earth's high-dimensional-wave microphone and they'll figure out what to do.

I have called this recursive tuning into patterns "gravity for patterns" (search for it) various other places I wrote on the Internet. "Gravity for patterns" is the property of physics which allows a connection to gradually form between brainwaves and that piece of aluminum foil I moved with my thoughts in the linked video.

Also, I propose the theory that Humans made "first contact" a long time ago, and continuously every since then, and due to translation difficulties all communications were misinterpreted as the hauntings of dead people and other superstitions. One space's "virtual particles" are another space's dimensions chaoticly spread like radio static, but if you build the right kind of radio, each laws of physics would be called a radio station, in this analogy. You know that noise in some cheap radios when you turn them on, kind of random and changing of waves until it stabilizes a fraction of a second later? In that context, the "big bang" would be nothing more than a view of something thats already there, not the result of any kind of force or power or action, as its rediculous to think turning on a radio creates the signal its receiving. It will change that signal a little since it is a physical force to run the radio, but now that science understands everything is made of waves this theory should come as no surprise. Is there really a difference between creating something and navigating through "nonexistence is the set of all self-consistent possibilities" to a place its already that way? If I tune my attention, through machines surrounding me in a sphere shape or whatever method, continuously to a different signal, it is no damage to these wars and hate we so much enjoy on Earth, but what happens to a radio station when people stop tuning in? Just an analogy to explain a much more abstract theory about "virtual particles" as waves instead of the unexplained "it comes out of nowhere because its small enough it doesn't violate heisenberg uncertainty" excuse. Its not really radios. Its a way to look at physics from many views at once. If you were to tune into the same high-dimensional-abstract-signal from a few angles at once, so you understand where some of the static comes from, would heisenberg uncertainty be so uncertain?

I'm simply providing a service of imagining things for those who lack the ability, things which would have to be researched in simultaneous combinations to measure and use. The simple fact that there are so many unknowns is a reason to explore, unless you believe in the religion of nothing exists except what militaries have measured and publish for us to read. I think we should do our own research in any areas that at least 1 assumption has been made.

There are many research paths, not just the examples I proposed, which a majority of people on Earth would prefer over a big military budget. Do you want to invest in learning and exploring or in war and control by the elite toward their small-minded goals? Its our tax dollars. What do we want to spend them on?


I think of things in kind of a chaotic order... I'll leave my further physics speculations to a place where they are on topic, except to say that you don't need the warp drives at all if this works out... Don't the parallel metal plates nearly touching eachother in the Casimir Effect http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effect look a little like a directional radio? What would happen if you hooked some other radio components into their various physical properties (motion, electricity, rotation, relativistic mass, time dilation, superposition, etc) and researched what effect that has on the Casimir effect? We may have already created a very primitive and practically useless (except for learning from its tiny effect) multiverse radio and mistaken it for just a way to block "virtual particles" and get force from them on the metal plates.

What signal is the Casimir Effect tuning into? And wouldn't we get a better signal with a grid of such metal plates, connected through some of this new quantum technology our militaries have created using our tax dollars? This is a much cheaper research path.

Isn't it true that in the theory of "big bang", which is the most widely accepted theory among scientists, that every particle/wave/etc which is now on Earth, billions of years ago, was moving faster than light? Many people think that is the business of god(s) to use physics in that way, but I'm trying to get some science and mass producing done, not hold a church service.

That show is about a smart mouse (and his dumb mouse assistant) aways thinking of bizarre schemes to take over the world. Clearly you're not responding to what I wrote, since Earth is only a detail and nobody would be taking over Earth. I simply proposed a reallocation of money away from the military-industrial-complex toward a more productive goal that has been one of the bigger goals of the Human species for thousands of years, and only recently we have the many parts of technology to research toward and create it.

Its a very strategic plan for the many people who are fed up with the way the world is centered around money instead of progress toward a better world. What is most strategic about it is, the people of Earth would gradually talk to eachother and agree on some variation of this plan (or global agreement on any plan at all would be a good start), and through the authority of agreement of we-the-7-billion-people, the governments of Earth would do their job in reallocating half of the global military budget, part of which would be used to buy patents (which block this research) from those same militaries (who dominate these kind of technologies by design), using their own money, and to put those patents into the public domain so research could proceed. If we had global majority agreement on this by we-the-7-billion-people, we could use their own money to buy their patents from them, and start a chain-reaction that would gradually end all intellectual-property laws. It may sound like stealing, but its only stealing when its done by individuals... When its done by the legal reallocation of money, its called budgeting our tax dollars. Its easy to get confused between tax and stealing. This would not increase taxes or reduce any valuable things governments do. War and world domination by empires is not valuable.

It may appear I'm writing from my own goals and opinions, but this is aligned with global paradigm-shifts in progress. It may be too early to propose it, but that's the direction the world is moving.

In the last year, DARPA, the core of USA's military technology department, allocated half a million dollars as a prize for a practical idea of how to build a warp drive. Probably there are a few other things toward that same goal. Obviously they are not taking warp drive seriously.

Might it have something to do with their fear of airplanes crashing into buildings and how much faster a warp drive is? Weapon of mass destruction just isn't enough to describe what a warp drive is capable of, and thats not even what its designed for. I also have a plan to prevent terrorism, but its not easy to explain... in that link above about "service of realtime high dimension pattern match powered by hive of Human minds" https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=77127.0 The main function of that system is to network peoples' minds together subconsciously, through a puzzle game and all kinds of user-interfaces (some very advanced like mind reading game controllers, some just a mouse), and when our minds are flowing together to produce these valuable bits of Human intuition and intelligence streaming through the Internet, naturally people won't want to act violently against others who are part of their own mind, with an adjustable balance per computer between individual and hive mind.

Then people wouldn't want to use the warp drives as weapons, and the few who still try would be stopped by the many.

How would many warp drives stop a few warp drives from being used as weapons? Deploy them as a defense grid around Earth, constantly monitoring the curve of space and making adjustments if it becomes curved too quickly or too much. Warp drives can amplify or cancel-out eachother, similar to waves in a pool of water which you could have an AI monitor with fourier transform, statistical software, and other math, to know just what movement would smooth the waters surface near that one warp drive. A warp drive can be used with or without moving depending on how it uses the waves, as any surfer knows.

So when a terrorist comes, dragging a huge asteroid, at faster than light speed toward the Earth, the warp grid surrounding Earth would bounce that ship and the asteroid away, or if necessary because of the extreme speed and mass, use more energy and vaporize the terrorist into hawking radiation.

As it should be. I proposed cutting all Earth military budgets by half (which does not disturb the balance of power) and putting those trillions of dollars per year into research toward practical mass produced warp drive, because that can buy enough scientific equipment, trips into space to test things that need to be isolated far away from the quantum interference of large mass and movement (leaving only interference from "virtual particles", star light, etc), grids of supercomputers (including custom designed hardware optimized for specific new theories people think of later), money to buy patents (to be put into the public domain) which block such research.

That doesn't cost trillions of dollars per year to do it once, but we need to do it in many combinations and keep researching new theories about *** simultaneous combinations of these things not individual experiments as science normally does because quantum is about combinations of things *** so we have far more experiments to do than a few trillion dollars per year can buy and would have to choose only the best few thousand experiments to do per year.


The work would best be done by people who aren't driven by money. That's not a big enough goal.


I don't want to dominate or enslave anything. I want to get things done, and the best way to do that is for everyone to work together as equals, including giving the same rights to any aliens we may find out there. Equals does not mean everyone is equally smart or skilled. It means ideas are important and who they came from is not important.


I'm a generalist, and a specialist in software and math. I know enough physics to think of combinations of technology that should be tried together in the shape of closed manifolds, like a sphere or a "peterson graph" or the enlarged shape of a buckyball up in space, but I don't know enough to actually do that research. The purpose of generalists is to tell specialists that they don't know as much as their limited view of the world leads them to believe and they would make much more progress if they worked with specific other kinds of specialists and how that would fit together. If you have theories, they should be debated on chalk boards, Internet forums, and other forms of communication, with the people of Earth, to decide how the few trillion dollars per year of warp drive research budget should be used. I was just giving some ideas to show there are far more advanced things to research than are being done (mostly because the Human species keeps fighting itself).


There must be millions of people smart enough to help with this, in the style of open source instead of having to pay most of them (the research budget is mostly for technology). People who think more in terms of science fiction than science, while real scientists can still very much enjoy science fiction, are not the millions of people who should do the research. The other condition is, if you don't think "practical mass produced warp drive" is reasonably possible during our lifetimes, then you're fired for claiming you can't do the job.

Money is a kind of number and calculation, a way to organize things. How does your plan create more value? And is it value like business as usual or value like lets use all these new discoveries about physics to imagine research paths and learn to fly? You're about as greedy as a nest of newly hatched birds fighting over who gets the biggest side of the nest.

My greed is on a level most members of Wall Street can't yet imagine. They are like charity loving tree hugging hippies compared to my greed. Anyone who wants to rule the world should learn to think big. You see those stars out there? How much do you think they're worth? Want to go get some of that? How are you going to satisfy your intergalactic greed when you can't work together enough to build transportation and factories to process the raw materials and other valuable things you find?

Still, that is not greedy enough. The universe is infinite. Nonexistence is isomorphic to the set of all self-consistent possibilities. Are you seriously happy with owning just this 1 tiny corner of the universe? I'd like to call Wall Street greedy, but they're just not up to my standards. Please try harder. I know you can want your own intergalactic multiverse grid if you really tried to want it. You're so passive and polite in not trying to buy all these amazing things around us.

I made a serious proposal of how to create a billion very productive jobs with little investment here:
"service of realtime high dimension pattern match powered by hive of Human minds"
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=77127.0


I love stock markets overall because I'm greedy toward maximizing the productivity of Earth for everyone, but not the unbalanced way they're used. Protest the details of Wall Street which unbalance things but not the value of stock markets in general... at least until we have no need for laws and money anymore.

For the same reason, there should be no intellectual property laws. Small greed sells to millions. Big greed gives it to billions and profits from what they create and also give to everyone, including you. That appears small when only a few people do it, but if billions of people were doing whatever they're good at and copying it (if its easily copied) to up to billions of others, then intellectual property laws would be seen as the drain on productivity they really are. Its why open source software is now as advanced as proprietary software. We stand on the shoulders of giants for free. Giants all around. Why argue about music piracy while wars are costing trillions of dollars in damage to infrastructure, people who could be doing useful work, and generally making people hate eachother. The total value of intellectual property laws is negative. Don't let small greed get in the way of big greed.


If greed is your way of life, take some pride in it and learn to be as greedy as you can. Make an art of it. Be greedy in a way museums will be created to display your style of greed long after you're dead. But these mountains of pages of financial laws that nobody reads... That's not art. Its garbage. The most greedy would refine their ways of greed to the most simple, efficient, and accurate ways, because you get richer.

I'm greedy in a different context. I'm greedy toward the most efficient ways to improve the universe overall. What was the difference between greed and altruism? Words are so confusing. Best to talk in math.

When you can make a serious proposal of how to create a billion jobs for little investment, then you'll be on a level of greed you can at least imagine how greedy I am. Until then, I have to laugh at Wall Street for leaving the galaxies out there to charity.

There is nothing more efficient than working together as equals, with nobody above or below anyone else, and many of us so greedy we don't get distracted with the details of how to stop wasting time creating science fiction TV and put that instead into making it real. Many say it can't be done. Those are the same kind of people who, 20 years ago, would have said the Internet can't be done. What if we cut all military budgets of all countries in half and put that into a shared organization legally obligated to act only toward practical mass-produced warp drive following the recent discoveries which merged quantum and relativistic physics. Science is a process, not something to get stuck in and sell to the highest bidder. I'd start with a grid of relativistic quality atomic clocks similar to how the "Global Consciousness Project" (Noosphere) uses quantum random number generators and found patterns in the numbers which were supposedly random but became a little less random at times statistically related to major world events, and see how that interacts with "Quantum Radar", rotating superfluid pools of Bose Einstein Condensate (Will the Quantum Radar decohere it or not is a question of the unbalanced part and its current angle of rotation, to be done in space in the 3 dimensional shape of a "peterson graph", since each point has 3 connections to other points, and the Quantum Radar would point parallel to each edge so all points have 3 Quantum Radars pointing at them, and use that in combination with various quantum half-silvered mirrors to split the laser signal and delay it so you get to experiment with recursive Newcomb's Paradox strategies as input to the quantum computers connecting the grids of Quantum Radar devices, or simpler just run them individually and simultaneously without the quantum computers, so the whole experiment turns that region of space into a big quantum/multiverse experiment with the rotating superfluid bose einstein condensate pools each being like a qubit except perpendicular to the "complex unit circle" we normally measure time on as in the Schrodinger Equation), grids of lasers instead of slow electricity based wires, and try lots of combinations of that... About the backward idea that intergalactic travel takes lots of energy... Nonexistence is isomorphic to the set of all self-consistent possibilities, which means the universe is simultaneously everything and nothing, like a klein bottle or mobius or other nonorientable manifold, so in total the universe cancels-out itself and doesn't exist, while all individual parts exist... The practical use of that philosophy is that since the universe does not exist overall (only its individual parts exist when separated from eachother) that it makes no sense at all why it should take more than the smallest amount of energy to make big changes to a universe which doesn't even exist in total, but apply that same force to any individual part of the universe and the imbalance drives up the energy cost to what science understands today as the only way it works. The point is to look for low energy solutions whose power comes from accuracy. Theres lots of theories and research paths we could imagine and debate on Internet forums. If you ever run out of research paths to try, I can throw some more mad-science speculation at you. But to not even try? I don't want to live in a world that prefers war over curiosity. Of course we don't know how it would work. That's why its called research, and with a multi-trillion dollar budget, if it can be done we would probably see it happen faster than any other project in history which only had billions of dollars. Chump change. As a species, its our money to spend on whats important to us. Or we could keep that money in the military budgets. Its a no-brainer to me, but I can't want it for you.

Want to get filthy rich? Help build it.

"Make things as simple as possible, but not simpler." --Einstein

Version 0.1.4 of BayesianCortex is a 24 kilobyte executable Jar file which contains its own source code if you unzip it. It does things that programs 1000 times its size have difficulty with.

I'm going to build the parts where we network our minds together, but cryptocurrency and politics and Emotiv Epoc and OpenEEG and other ways it connects to the world take very much work because of their pointless complexity. Complexity is offensive to me, and I have far more important things to do than interface an advanced system to complex systems. The question is not will I change the world, but when and which ways. I want to work with equals, not to boss or rule or command over anyone. We each do the work we're capable of, or in how the world works today we each do work under a rediculously low glass ceiling. Hammers. Get your hammers here.

...

But we have to start small. All it knows is Bayes' Rule (a simple fact of conditional-probability) and an intuitive way to do it gradually between the many pixels and hidden variables, designed to flow with how people think.
chance(X, given Y) * chance(Y) = chance(Y, given X) * chance(X)

From Bayes' Rule, we can derive NAND, AND, OR, XOR, 0, 1, and other boolean logic, which are some of the extremes of the floating point math.

Then we teach it to communicate in sequences and combinations of 0 and 1, like teaching a child its first 2 words.

Then we teach it to add 1 to an integer, like 0101 leads to 0110 then 0111.

And so on. This is completely new stuff because its building a computer inside the minds of people playing a flowing puzzle game.

Without the crowdsourcing of intelligence into the Internet hive mind, Eurisko is a good example, but its not open source so we can't verify more than it won some AI competitions of certain strategy games long ago. Supposedly Eurisko was the first and only AI ever to learn math from the ground up, similar to what I'm saying here, and reach the level of figuring out what prime numbers are and that they're important. Eurisko didn't have a hard-coded multiply function. It figured out what multiply means in terms of many plus, and it learned plus by looping over a list, and there was some simpler stuff below that, like a thing is equal to itself.

Lets build a small Turing Machine, or Conways Game Of Life, inside the minds of people playing the game, as a proof of concept. Any logical system can be created from NAND.

We could teach it Conways Game Of Life as a grid of 9 squares and the rules of when a square becomes 1 or 0 based on the 8 outer squares, and use neuromodulation (built into the intuitive way to use Bayes' Rule) to route attention paths to overlap that 3x3 grid of pixels onto itself at each pixel, the same way you can think of 3 pencils visually while only having 1 model of that pencil in your mind. It gets routed to 3 different places on your visual grid of neurons. This behavior has to be built in, and Bayes' Rule, but that's all a general intelligence really needs.

Then, people can teach it how to hate. Amazing skill in that area. The technical definition of love is multiple systems flowing more as 1 system, being in sync, resonating, forming into interesting patterns that flow smoothly. Hopefully the Human species will teach it both sides of that, but its open source so I can't and wouldn't choose to control what others create. Be careful what software you hook into those military robots, for example.

But first we start small... create more versions of BayesianCortex, or whatever other metacortex system you may think is better, which we can play as puzzle games through the Internet, then in our minds flowing together statistically more as 1 mind connected through Bayes' Rule, we teach it to communicate as sequences and combinations of 0s and 1s. You can't just hard-code what 0 and 1 are. Then it would never understand. Its about the learning.

There are many artificial intelligence (AI) software which do that on grids of computers, but that would not be nearly as intelligent as a grid of Human minds interfaced to the system similar to how http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FoldIt turned protein-folding into a game and some people outperform the computers.

A normal Human brain has 10^15 connections between neurons. A normal computer runs 10^9 cycles per second and runs much dumber software than Human intelligence, so even if it was fast enough to run a Human brain as software, that software doesn't exist. If we went to third-world countries and hired everyone who is starving or lacking other basic needs of life, we could create a billion jobs which produce far more value than they would have to be paid.

That value could be used in predicting stock markets, patterns of global events, or anything else AI is already set up to predict. This could potentially obsolete all existing infrastructure used to predict those things and turn it into a free market where people in the system hire eachother recursively to help them predict various patterns in the system.

The realtime part of the service would be useful for adding Human intuition and strategic intelligence to Internet games. Non-player-characters acting in a predictable and boring way? Throw in a few bits per second of real Human intelligence from this cloud, charged at a free market fluctuating price per bit, normalized against actual accuracy of such predictions and assembling of patterns.

Think of the artistic uses of real Human intuition and intelligence sold by the bit at fluctuating market prices, accessed through standard AI software interfaces. Evolve code that uses recursions and fractals and other math and logic to paint great works of art, compose music using evolved code (like in my Audivolv software which evolves Java code to define wave amplitudes calculated 44100 times per second for 44.1 khz audio quality) and Human minds together, and things we can't even imagine yet, accessed seamlessly as if the people are just another function in the software. On the other end, the people solving these puzzles of flowing patterns are having fun playing the game which automatically adjusts to the difficulty level where they most efficiently earn cryptocurrency. Research into questions of consciousness. Can a hybrid software made of AI and real Human intuition (indirectly through the game networking our minds together statistically) experience the same consciousness of the person alone, or of 5 people who are trying to sync their actions in the game so that any 4 of them can reproduce most of the actions of the missing 1, for any 1 of the 5 that temporarily leaves? If a hand is only a machine thats connected through bio nerve wires to our brain, and we feel like we are our hands, then would we also feel like we are the software and other people in this system which our thoughts about the game flow with? Can consciousness flow through an Internet wire the same as it flows through simple well understood bio nerves between our brain and our hands? Are brains, sufficiently networked together at a subconscious pscyhology level, still completely individuals? If you learn to imagine recursive actions into chains of people in this system which happen as fast as any other network call into the Internet, as people play the game in realtime like any other game but more flexible and flowing, then where is the line between the consciousness of the second and third step in that recursion, the second and third people it jumps through in the patterns flowing through the system? My answer is consciousness is like and ocean and we are all drops of water, statistically localized in bodies, a problem easily solved by the intelligent and smooth and intuitive dance-like flowing of our actions and movements in this game. Identity is ok as an approximation, but when you look deeper into it, the contradictions in that theory build up and we should instead find a different way to divide reality. There are many things this Internet cryptocurrency prediction service could be used for, some very practical and others just barely imaginable.

If I flip 2 coins and a least 1 landed heads, whats the chance both landed heads? Most people say 1/2 or 1/4, but there are 4 ways 2 coins can land, I only excluded "tails tails", leaving "heads heads", "tails heads", and "heads tails", and then I asked what is the chance of "heads heads", so its 1/3. That is a simple bayesian statistical question, and most people get it wrong because it goes against how brains naturally think. For that reason, the metacortex which networks our minds together should be some kind of bayesian statistics. It should also react gradually in realtime to flow with our thoughts.

I created http://sourceforge.net/projects/bayesiancortex to network our minds together, but its still an early version. Its what led to this theory of a new kind of economy for prediction based on a grid of Human minds.


The big players have their own cloud computing infrastructures, but this is more like a very weak form of Borg Collective, without the medical implants or mind control, just a job of playing a flowing puzzle game where you earn cryptocurrency by moving your mouse, thinking into a mind reading game controller (like Emotiv Epoc or OpenEEG), or other user-interfaces, toward higher accuracy of predicting and putting together the patterns.

Think about what the creation of stock markets did for global productivity. This would be that level of improvement over stock markets as they exist today. You could even run statistical software on it. Want to simulate a Human brain? What better platform to run it on than a hive of Human minds through a statistical interface? Or find patterns in SETI's data from space. People are natural pattern matchers as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FoldIt proved.

Just a proposal for a project. I have more ideas than time to pursue them all, but I am building the part that networks our minds together for free. We could use some simple cryptocurrency as a plugin, but as I explain here, I have other important things to do, one of which is this system to network our minds together... https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=77332.0 If I do that part, will some of you add the cryptocurrency? You're the experts.

http://rachelmarone.com/utopia-incorporated

My response to her article:

I just found this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decentralization

Charities provide a service in exchange for money. In that way they are a business. Businesses can quantify the value of their services, as is required by law for taxes and calculations of value of their total assets and things like that.

The service a charity sells is some way to improve the world. Most people who give to charity don't look into what effect it has on the world. They give the money then move on. But if charities were run with the bottom line in mind, maximize delivery of the service per time and money, quantify, optimize, strategize, outperform the compeition, and other things businesses have made an art form of, they would be able to tell you what service you get per money amount.

Government doesn't get to "decide" how much it costs to save Human lives. It has to come from supply and demand. The lives actually have to be saved, to prevent people from dieing who otherwise would have died.

If the official global value of HUMANLIVES dropped to half value, that is a legal contract between the people of Earth and whoever is providing services of saving the lives to save any number of lives at market rate. When half HUMANLIVES amount of money comes in and the lives aren't saved, somebody gets sued or some business goes the way of Enron.

If you save somebody's life, that is a real event in the world. Find a way to quantify this empirical fact that people will believe represents whats really happening as the services of the charities. If what a charity does has no quantifiable reality, then we should stop giving them money.

If we don't like how Interpol and other international organizations now act as departments in our world government, we can just leave Interpol, right?

The question isn't if we want world government or not. The question is why haven't we been asked to vote in it?

Explodicle the biggest effect of my proposal would be people become mentally sick at the thought of spending money and start to think of how the world works in a very different way, a thought so disgusting and horrible they are scared to even think it while reading this thread. That's exactly why this idea is likely to spread.

You're talking about details. The thoughts it causes are whats important.

I have no idea, but "truth in advertising" is also a vague idea which is enforced by law, often inaccurately and unfairly but the point is definitions of vague things can be created that are legally binding.

That means it can be done. If world peace is valuable to people, they will figure out how to do it. I suggest crowdsourcing to answer that question.

Do some research starting at places like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GiveWell and calculate and prove to scientific peer reviewed standards, how much does it cost to save the cheapest Human life? That number of dollars we should call HUMANLIVES. It fluctuates like a stock price. It increases when more is given to efficient charities, since the cheapest Human lives to save are saved and the next cheapest Humans don't have such extreme problems. It decreases other times.

Translate all prices and payments and other money amounts into the unit of HUMANLIVES. Example: A commercial selling cars for only 3.2 HUMANLIVES, no HUMANLIVES down, subject to approved credit. Example: Double cheeseburger, .0003 HUMANLIVES. Would you like fries with that?

Maybe USA's Truth In Advertising Department would be the best legal path toward forcing businesses to use those words instead of Dollar, Euro, etc. Its more honest. Honesty is truth. Truth In Advertising. All prices should be in units of HUMANLIVES.


But things appear to be more valuable when they cost more, so I expect this will be ignored. World peace almost for free, just change a few words. Anyone interested?


Also, it would drive corporations to give trillions of dollars to charity since it would increase the number of Dollars that each unit of HUMANLIVES is worth, like a stock price. All prices are in units of HUMANLIVES, and people remember prices, so people will think things are cheaper than they really are when more lives are saved.

If most employers were rational, they wouldn't require I work exactly 40 hours per week, because I've offered to work for less money per hour in exchange for less hours and they refuse.

As long as we're on the subject of forcing people to do things in connection with business, I don't like how governments force me to do all kinds of paperwork, get licenses, and many kinds of complexities that require hiring multiple experts, to sell my services without going through any other business. That's much worse than the 40 hours thing.