Bitcoin Forum
November 01, 2024, 08:50:19 AM *
News: Bitcoin Pumpkin Carving Contest
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: No Money Exists Without the Majority  (Read 10239 times)
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
June 05, 2013, 11:41:34 AM
 #1

No Money Exists Without the Majority

At the conclusion, I will offer a solution.

Society requires money to be maximally fungible, as this maximizes the division-of-labor which increases efficiency, productivity and prosperity.

Every possible form of fungible money is backed by the trust that it will maintain a healthy balance between the desirable qualities of wide acceptance (medium-of-exchange), liquid, and a store-of-value.

During a financial crisis, neither fiat nor gold maintains all of these qualities. For example, gold is a better store-of-value as fiat is destroyed by sovereign debt collapse, but the majority can't widely accept gold's value because it entails fiat collapse and pestilence. During the collapse to the destitution (often including wars and megadeath) at the bottom, the majority will steal gold's value via the (currently escalating) threat of confiscation of wealth which can force gold into hiding, thus killing liquidity and wide acceptance.

Only agreement of the majority for a shared partial default of the value of all money and bonds as Julius Caesar did, will restore trust in money, entice gold out of hiding, and usher in a new period of growth and prosperity. For as long as there is a standoff between the insistence of monetary capital (regardless of the type of money or investment it is stored in, including gold) to not allow even partial losses and the insistence of the masses for socialism funded with debt to avoid temporary reduction in their standard-of-living, then the financial system will further self-destruct towards a Mad Max Dark Age.

Side note, Martin Armstrong's 78 year (i.e. 3 x 26 year human maturity generations) real estate cycle predicts that bottom in 2033. I wrote that the 26 year downhill portion of this cycle appears to repeatably correspond with massive unemployment (and a major war) due to a new technological paradigm, e.g. the early 1900s destruction of cottage industry by mass production and now the destruction of menial labor by the personal computer automation and robotics. In the 1700s, it was agricultural technology disruption of employment. The masses delay their adjustment to the new skills with debt and socialism, which thus causes the resultant financial crisis to drag on longer and be more severe.

We technologists have looked deeply for an alternative to Bitcoin, that would eliminate its 51% attack vulnerability, and have concluded with the 51% Rule of Decentralized Agreement, which implies that no decentralized digital currency will ever be able to (sustain an) escape from the desires of the majority of society.

There will never exist a form of highly fungible money (not gold, fiat, nor digital currencies) that will escape from the desires of the majority of society.

The desires of the majority of society will always migrate towards boom and bust socialism.

We elect leaders because we can't agree on everything we individually want (including controlling what others individually do and want), because these leaders are able to employ the top-down power of the majority to give all of us something we want by funding with debt and then take it away from us again at the resultant financial collapse. The leader who promises the most wins, because we don't agree on the tradeoffs between wants and available resources. Thus leaders are forced to promise nearly everything. The only way to fund everything is widespread debt and unfunded future promises, i.e. funding by obfuscating mutual self-destruction in debt and misallocation (causing destruction) of human capital.

This insoluble political power vacuum exists in all facets of individual freedom where technology does not exist to empower the individuals to route around top-down control.

The insoluble socialism would destroy all production if it were not for technology to escape from top-down control. Thus all increased prosperity and standard-of-living throughout human history is due to personal empowerment technology, e.g. portable energy-dense compact carbon fuels, the automobile, telephone, personal computer, internet, the open source software model, and coming 3D printers.

Even mass production (i.e. automation) empowered individual freedom away from top-down control by eliminating human menial labor, because a (e.g. prison ward) manager can measure in real-time if one is producing menial labor and thus force one to work productively because nearly every human can do the task, but it is not possible that every human can do every knowledge task thus the individual can feign inability or otherwise only produce when he/she chooses to do so. Humans are fungible w.r.t. to menial labor but not w.r.t. knowledge production

Thus what gold standard proponents don't understand is that the insoluble political power vacuum that gives rise to booms and busts does not exist nor derive from the form of money used, but rather exists naturally in every society as explained above. The malfeasance of the leaders is not the source of the problem either, rather exist as a manifestation of the insoluble political power vacuum described above. So changing the form of money used or regulating or removing the corrupt leaders won't fix the fundamental driver of the phenomenon, and the insoluble outcome will occur again as exhibited over and over again throughout human history. The power elite are not even in control.

It must be the case that savings in fungible money can not be a perfect perpetual claim on future human productivity, because otherwise past innovation eventually owns all future innovation. Because new knowledge is not fungibly created by any human, and thus can't be financed by savers (the material needs of a knowledge producer are growing ever smaller relative to value of knowledge produced). That fungible money is dependent on the majority is a feature which allows old money to be destroyed in favor of future growth and innovation. A strict gold standard is equivalent to Marxism as both require innovation to stop (Byzantine and the USA were never on strict gold standards, due to private banks fractional reserve debt and proxy debasement via international immigration of capital). Martin Armstrong explained this as a relative value issue as follows.

Quote
Converting money into some savings account will not work. The medium of exchange has no mythical perpetual value while everything else floats including wages and investments. Yet if everything else floats, how is it possible that only money remains fixed? If everything else can rise in value, it is measured in MONEY and thus the purchasing power of money MUST decline. You cannot have it both ways.

Money and socialism are intertwined and this will never change. To survive the near total wipeout of fungible money in a Mad Max Dark Age, store production in non-fungible knowledge or technologies that continue to generate revenue during or at least after the crisis.

I am proposing a more modular paradigm for open source software to enable storing knowledge value in revenue producing long-lived modules.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
bitdwarf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406
Merit: 250


The cryptocoin watcher


View Profile
June 05, 2013, 11:57:50 AM
 #2

Cool story bro.

𝖄𝖆𝖈: YF3feU4PNLHrjwa1zV63BcCdWVk5z6DAh5 · 𝕭𝖙𝖈: 12F78M4oaNmyGE5C25ZixarG2Nk6UBEqme
Ɏ: "the altcoin for the everyman, where the sweat on one's brow can be used to cool one's overheating CPU" -- theprofileth
Sondey10mg
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 250


View Profile
June 05, 2013, 12:10:34 PM
 #3

TL;DR?

 *Image Removed*
 *Image Removed*
superresistant
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2156
Merit: 1131



View Profile
June 05, 2013, 12:18:15 PM
 #4

Cool story bro.

This.
kelsey
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1876
Merit: 1000


View Profile
June 05, 2013, 01:26:19 PM
 #5

you had me at hello  Wink
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
June 05, 2013, 05:25:44 PM
 #6

I wrote that article in a rush so there are some lapses...

Society requires money to be maximally fungible...

Society requires that money be maximally fungible...

Only agreement of the majority for a shared partial default of the value of all money and bonds as Julius Caesar did, will restore trust in money, entice gold out of hiding, and usher in a new period of growth and prosperity. For as long as there is a standoff between the insistence of monetary capital (regardless of the type of money or investment it is stored in, including gold) to not allow even partial losses and the insistence of the masses for socialism funded with debt to avoid temporary reduction in their standard-of-living, then the financial system will further self-destruct towards a Mad Max Dark Age.

Caesar was able to overpower the vested interests (who later assassinated him), that was a key point of the link above. The Euro + unions + social systems are bankrupting Europe and probably also being defended by vested interests. For sure Europeans don't vote to leave the Euro, even though that is what is killing their economy (see my all comments spread over the page at the link above), because it would mean near-term reduction in their social systems, etc.. They are still dreaming that getting all that for free was reality.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
anderl
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 05, 2013, 06:19:28 PM
 #7

a very interesting read and plays on a lot of the ideas and concepts I've read on and taken to heart.   

the problem i that technology will surpass us and the human story will end with the beginning of an artificially intelligence presence.  like frogs slowly cooking in a pot we are unaware that it is happening.  technology is disrupting and rebuilding all the facets of our social and economic lives and in our mindset it is always happening to someone else.

20 years from now we will have artificially intelligence super computers, 10 years after that the same computers will be had for $1000 in hardware.  I've long accepted this concept that they will replace us and I know I am doing my part to accelerate it.  No point in fighting it as it can't be stopped without the total destruction of the human race.

So have fun while it lasts.
jackjack
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1176
Merit: 1280


May Bitcoin be touched by his Noodly Appendage


View Profile
June 05, 2013, 06:21:41 PM
 #8

TL;DR ?

Own address: 19QkqAza7BHFTuoz9N8UQkryP4E9jHo4N3 - Pywallet support: 1AQDfx22pKGgXnUZFL1e4UKos3QqvRzNh5 - Bitcointalk++ script support: 1Pxeccscj1ygseTdSV1qUqQCanp2B2NMM2
Pywallet: instructions. Encrypted wallet support, export/import keys/addresses, backup wallets, export/import CSV data from/into wallet, merge wallets, delete/import addresses and transactions, recover altcoins sent to bitcoin addresses, sign/verify messages and files with Bitcoin addresses, recover deleted wallets, etc.
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
June 05, 2013, 07:08:31 PM
Last edit: June 05, 2013, 07:28:46 PM by AnonyMint
 #9

jackjack that is a hilarious (love the humor thanks), and in the rare case that you were making a serious criticism then perhaps your inability to distill any useful info is the vacuous space may be your cranium, lol. Just saying.

anderl, the sentient advance of knowledge will always be done by humans, never by computers. Kurzweil's Singularity is sensational nonsense (Luddites were making similar dire predictions, global warming and global cooling propaganda scares have repeated in history, etc). Computers and robots are just tools that will make us more productive at that task of creating knowledge. The unemployment is both due to destruction of private markets by the failing socialism and because most people haven't been training to be computer programmers, nanotech and biotech researchers, robotic engineers, etc..

These 78 year cyclical collisions between technological shift and socialism failure often do result in a Mad Max outcome, but more often on local scale (e.g. local strife and massacres) whereas the multiple-century Dark Ages have only occurred apparently 3 times in human history, which I documented in the following linked comment:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4946&cpage=1#comment-402880

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
skyangel
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 301
Merit: 260


FLO dev


View Profile
June 05, 2013, 07:17:40 PM
 #10

read parts of...

so is it pro crypto-coins or against crypto-coins?

AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
June 05, 2013, 07:22:56 PM
Last edit: June 05, 2013, 07:54:41 PM by AnonyMint
 #11

read parts of...

so is it pro crypto-coins or against crypto-coins?


It is not against crypto-coins in terms of advancing digital money for society. That will probably happen and efficiencies can probably be gained.

It is against the concept that crypto-coins will subvert the power elite and socialism and provide some lasting individual freedom in the way that is gained from truly "personal empowerment technology, e.g. portable energy-dense compact carbon fuels, the automobile, telephone, personal computer, internet, the open source software model, and coming 3D printers.".

The reason being that no currency will ever exist that isn't subject to control by the majority, as explained in the OP. There is even a technical justification in the OP.

Whereas, true personal empowerment technologies (such as the examples provided above) enable routing around facets of control of the majority.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
BadBitcoin (James Sutton)
Donator
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 452
Merit: 252



View Profile
June 05, 2013, 07:56:21 PM
 #12

jackjack that is a hilarious (love the humor thanks), and in the rare case that you were making a serious criticism then perhaps your inability to distill any useful info is the vacuous space may be your cranium, lol. Just saying.

anderl, the sentient advance of knowledge will always be done by humans, never by computers. Kurzweil's Singularity is sensational nonsense (Luddites were making similar dire predictions, global warming and global cooling propaganda scares have repeated in history, etc). Computers and robots are just tools that will make us more productive at that task of creating knowledge. The unemployment is both due to destruction of private markets by the failing socialism and because most people haven't been training to be computer programmers, nanotech and biotech researchers, robotic engineers, etc..

These 78 year cyclical collisions between technological shift and socialism failure often do result in a Mad Max outcome, but more often on local scale (e.g. local strife and massacres) whereas the multiple-century Dark Ages have only occurred apparently 3 times in human history, which I documented in the following linked comment:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4946&cpage=1#comment-402880

http://www.tgdaily.com/general-sciences-features/67819-artificial-brain-spaun-passes-iq-tests

your entire argument is invalid.
We are at the advent of producing artifical intelligence based off our own brain blueprints, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that once the basics work, a slight alteration to capacity will make a "spaun" brain more powerful than a human brain, which can then quickly be put to use in creating innovation and technological advances.
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
June 05, 2013, 08:18:49 PM
Last edit: June 06, 2013, 12:29:38 AM by AnonyMint
 #13

your entire argument is invalid.

My entire argument in the OP was not about whether technological disruption is insurmountable this time, unlike in the past. The thesis of my article had nothing do with this issue and it was only a "Sidenote" in the OP.


http://www.tgdaily.com/general-sciences-features/67819-artificial-brain-spaun-passes-iq-tests

your entire argument is invalid.
We are at the advent of producing artifical intelligence based off our own brain blueprints, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that once the basics work, a slight alteration to capacity will make a "spaun" brain more powerful than a human brain, which can then quickly be put to use in creating innovation and technological advances.

Bwahahaha  Roll Eyes

Another naive Mathusian bites the dust.

I guess you missed the word "model" in your quoted article. And I guess you missed the phrase "new knowledge" in my post, implying dynamic creation of new models. Only humans innovate!

When you have a computer that innovates itself then call home again.

The fundamental reason a model can never innovate, is because knowledge creation isn't fungible-- one size does not fit all.

Each human brain is entirely unique. This diversity is the only way we get innovation. Evolution is about diverse fitness.

Sorry models won't do. The dynamic development of each individual human has diverse entropy that begins 1000+s of years ago...

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
BadBitcoin (James Sutton)
Donator
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 452
Merit: 252



View Profile
June 05, 2013, 08:40:26 PM
 #14

your entire argument is invalid.

My entire argument in the OP was not about whether technological disruption is insurmountable this time, unlike in the past. The thesis of my article had nothing do with this issue and it was only a "Sidenote" in the OP.


http://www.tgdaily.com/general-sciences-features/67819-artificial-brain-spaun-passes-iq-tests

your entire argument is invalid.
We are at the advent of producing artifical intelligence based off our own brain blueprints, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that once the basics work, a slight alteration to capacity will make a "spaun" brain more powerful than a human brain, which can then quickly be put to use in creating innovation and technological advances.

Bwahahaha  Roll Eyes

Another naive Mathusian bites the dust.

I guess you missed the word "model" in your quoted article. And I guess you missed the phrase "new knowledge" in my post, implying dynamic creation of new models. Only humans innovate!

When you have a computer that innovates itself then call home again.

The fundamental reason a model can never innovate, is because knowledge creation isn't fungible-- one size does not fit all.

Each human brain is entirely unique. This diversity is the only way we get innovation. Evolution is about diverse fitness.

Sorry models won't do. The dynamic development of each individual human has diverse entropy that begins 1000+s of years ago...

the entirety of human civilization can be modelled, every single gene that has ever been passed on can be modelled and simulated using a computer, something of this nature would be called a genetic algorithim.

its a single brain, and its far from perfect, were not yet at the stage where we can tell it to go do something and it will think on its own and decide how to tackle a problem, however we are moving in that direction.


Think of this as a thought exercise; this simulated human brain running on a computer is hooked up to a 3d printer, a 3d scanner, and has the ability to use human like senses (sight, sound, touch, taste, smell, etc). This machine is able to move and interact with its environment, it drops an apple from a table onto the floor, it records its acceleration, velocity change, and so on and empirically determines newton's law of gravity.
Does that sound farfetched? I think were really really close.
GSnak
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182
Merit: 100



View Profile
June 05, 2013, 09:00:40 PM
 #15

We technologists have looked deeply for an alternative to Bitcoin, that would eliminate its 51% attack vulnerability, and have concluded with the 51% Rule of Decentralized Agreement, which implies that no decentralized digital currency will ever be able to (sustain an) escape from the desires of the majority of society.

You really made five posts in a row?

Technologists? ...
anderl
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 500



View Profile
June 05, 2013, 09:07:05 PM
 #16

jackjack that is a hilarious (love the humor thanks), and in the rare case that you were making a serious criticism then perhaps your inability to distill any useful info is the vacuous space may be your cranium, lol. Just saying.

anderl, the sentient advance of knowledge will always be done by humans, never by computers. Kurzweil's Singularity is sensational nonsense (Luddites were making similar dire predictions, global warming and global cooling propaganda scares have repeated in history, etc). Computers and robots are just tools that will make us more productive at that task of creating knowledge. The unemployment is both due to destruction of private markets by the failing socialism and because most people haven't been training to be computer programmers, nanotech and biotech researchers, robotic engineers, etc..

These 78 year cyclical collisions between technological shift and socialism failure often do result in a Mad Max outcome, but more often on local scale (e.g. local strife and massacres) whereas the multiple-century Dark Ages have only occurred apparently 3 times in human history, which I documented in the following linked comment:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4946&cpage=1#comment-402880

why do you think I'm speaking of a dire outcome.  I"m all for it.  I think it will be a net benefit overall.  nothing dire about my speculation.  we are not thee same human beings that walked the earth a hundred thousand years ago.  heck from a social stand point we are much different than people 2-3 generations earlier.  2 to 3 hundred years from now we will still call ourselves humans but will be completely alien to what we consider being human now.  again its the slowly boiling frog.
Impaler
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 826
Merit: 250

CryptoTalk.Org - Get Paid for every Post!


View Profile
June 05, 2013, 11:16:10 PM
 #17

Good read on some of Ceasars domestic policies, though your blog tends to ramble at times.

You should really look into Silvio Gesell's theories, he explains much the society wide chronic effects that lead to economic crisis (it's not the fault of bad actors but a result of the system) but devises a simple yet effective escape in making money lose face-value over time.  This allows us to do away with both capitalism (the loaning of money at interest) and Marxist counter-reactions while preserving the free-market.

 
                                . ██████████.
                              .████████████████.
                           .██████████████████████.
                        -█████████████████████████████
                     .██████████████████████████████████.
                  -█████████████████████████████████████████
               -███████████████████████████████████████████████
           .-█████████████████████████████████████████████████████.
        .████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
       .██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████.
       .██████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████.
       ..████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████..
       .   .██████████████████████████████████████████████████████.
       .      .████████████████████████████████████████████████.

       .       .██████████████████████████████████████████████
       .    ██████████████████████████████████████████████████████
       .█████████████████████████████████████████████████████████████.
        .███████████████████████████████████████████████████████████
           .█████████████████████████████████████████████████████
              .████████████████████████████████████████████████
                   ████████████████████████████████████████
                      ██████████████████████████████████
                          ██████████████████████████
                             ████████████████████
                               ████████████████
                                   █████████
CryptoTalk.org| 
MAKE POSTS AND EARN BTC!
🏆
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
June 06, 2013, 12:09:12 AM
Last edit: June 06, 2013, 08:14:23 AM by AnonyMint
 #18

the entirety of human civilization can be modelled, every single gene that has ever been passed on can be modelled and simulated using a computer, something of this nature would be called a genetic algorithim.

No because we can't reverse time and go back and encode (load into the model) the infinite entropy from the past and because due the Heisenberg (uncertainty) principle reality is a moving target that has changed as soon as any entity does anything including observe it.

Thus there can never be any top-down model that catches up to evolution. We actually have to be born from all the genetic history to take part in the diversity of the reality. As smart as computers become, humans will leverage them to be even more innovative, because we have the entropy (diversity of thought/ideas/genetic history) to input into that tool. Notice in my OP, I made a big point about the difference being fungible sharing in society and the non-fungibility of knowledge production.

This is also why we can digitally sign with a newspaper clipping to prove the signing occurred after a point in time (as Satoshi did to prove that he did not pre-mine), but we can't use any absolute reference point for proving something happened before a point in time, rather different observers will have a different recollection of reality.

This is also why fungible money (can't be private) and can only be the will of the majority.

Thanks for raising the issue and enabling me to clarify the importance of the non-fungible diversity of knowledge production.

Hey pray wake me up when they can model what is at the edge of the universe (or model that there is no edge)...where the entropy of the universe trends to maximum (2nd law of thermodynamics)

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
June 06, 2013, 09:34:59 AM
 #19

From email:

Quote
> So funny.  Your logic escaped me in the paragraph just before you quoted
> Armstrong.  And when I saw you mention Armstrong's name, I breathed a sigh
> of relief, since I know he is an apt deceiver.  I thought he thusly
> deceived you, which he did, and which I saw easily.
>
> His trick was to assume that the value of everything else must go up, by
> first introducing a word meaning that it can fluctuate, or go up and down,
> and then to blast gold for being fixed.  Then, he confused the issue, by
> saying that if everything else must go up, then gold must go down.  I
> agree!
>
> However, his trick is that he neglected to mention that if the value of
> wages and prices goes down, then the value of gold must go up.
>
> This does NOT mean gold needs an unstable value, or that gold is flawed in
> some way, which he states, and which you bought.
>
> In other words, gold is fixed in value, as 1 oz. = 1 oz.  That's the only
> fix needed.  Everything else, quoted in those terms, may go up or down,
> and there's no flaw in that, and yes, you can have that both ways.
>

Hope you don't mind, I will share my reply publicly but I won't attribute you by name. Some important points are raised below.

You didn't realize Armstrong was referring to a government enforced fixed price for gold within the reality that society will always use debt and thus require fractional reserves.

I don't hate gold. It is a form of money that individual capitalists can hold to opt-out of socialism, but if too many do then it is a war against socialism. If such a widespread standoff is taken to the extreme of 100% backing, it can result in a Mad Max Dark Ages (because of the power vacuum I described in my article). See my one paragraph rebuttal on why Western Rome collapsed:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4946&cpage=1#comment-402900

A rebuttal on 0% interest rates signaling trust & creditworthiness:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4946&cpage=1#comment-402880

Armstrong's point is precisely the same as yours, which is that if the price (value) of gold is fixed in a strict government enforced legal tender gold standard, then it is the same as Marxism. Armstrong is not against 1oz = 1oz, and he is saying the value will fluctuate which agrees with your conclusion. He is also saying (see other links in my article) that society will always use debt and thus fractional reserves will always be required, and thus 100% gold backing will never exist (any attempt to force it will plummet society into the Dark Ages). Note how I expounded on what Julius Caesar did:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226033.msg2380965#msg2380965

And that is what I am saying with this article.

Also I I finally succinctly articulated why Kurzweil's Singularity (remember Dash's robots) is impossible:

http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=4946&cpage=1#comment-402889
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=226033.msg2382656#msg2382656

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
AnonyMint (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 518
Merit: 521


View Profile
June 06, 2013, 10:19:30 AM
Last edit: June 06, 2013, 04:06:43 PM by AnonyMint
 #20

Quote
Each human brain is entirely unique. This diversity is the only way we get innovation. Evolution is about diverse fitness.
And what stops those scientists from making
 every new "modeled" artificial brain unique ?

That was my point  Wink

The creation of the uniqueness is done by the scientists, not by the computer model creating unique variants of itself.

The key point is to understand difference between a deterministic and random function. A model generator can only create random variants if it has random input entropy.

Nature is the only source of that random entropy, i.e. we humans.

The reason we can't model the edge of the universe is that it is disorder (but then we must get into my theory of the universe and the Entropic Force):

http://goldwetrust.up-with.com/t124-theory-of-everthing


Quote
No because we can't reverse time and go back and encode (load into the model) the infinite entropy from the past and because due the Heisenberg (uncertainty) principle reality is a moving target that has changed as soon as any entity does anything including observe it.
Imagine a lot of artificial brains working
 say 1000x times faster than "natural" human's brain. What gives ?

Faster in computation speed has nothing to do with duration in fitness during diversity over time. We actually have to move through all the infinite time since the beginning of the universe in order to aggregate the same entropy that is in nature now.

P.S. For the Christians who are offended by evolution and an infinitely distant past for the starting point of the universe, note this is congruent with the bible if one notes that time is non-linear in the bible, i.e. the ancients had 1000 year life spans (if measured in today's years), thus movig backwards in time in units expressed relative to the duration of any year in the current time, would be exponentially approaching infinite time in the past, because note that the units of current time is always moving and getting slower (i.e. knowledge production via communication is accelerating), so there is no statement of fixed # of years in the past that can be made (even a picosecond later it has moved). In other words, history never has an absolute reference point. See the point in my next post.

unheresy.com - Prodigiously Elucidating the Profoundly ObtuseTHIS FORUM ACCOUNT IS NO LONGER ACTIVE
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 »  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!