vokain
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1834
Merit: 1019
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
March 26, 2016, 11:41:21 PM |
|
Now I think we must summon Carl Jung to help us break down consciousness. To cut it short you are not alone in your brain, there are more processes running than the one that has tapped into the sensory information flow and feeds from it and dominates (Ego). Your Brain is an ecosystem. I think that as energy flows give rise to life processors likewise information flows give rise to cognitive processes, that are to consciousness what cells are to organisms. Yes the brain provides the break from causality simply by providing a true RNG , but is simply a computation platform for yet another emerging phenomenon.
Ubuntu: "I Am because We Are"
|
|
|
|
CoinCube (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 01, 2016, 01:34:30 AM Last edit: April 01, 2016, 02:27:04 PM by CoinCube |
|
Hi can you answer my question, i am curious what your answer is: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=355212.msg14317190#msg14317190
Tell me how can consciousness arise from the brain, if the consciousness experiences the outside world, including the brain... It's circular logic.
Ok I have a question for you because I see that you are pretty intelligent, here it goes: What you see with your eyes and interpret with your mind, is that the outside world or the inside world? - You can answer outside, because its detached from your body, therefore it seems like it's the outside world, outside from your body - You can answer inside, because you experience it with the mind ,therefore everything you experience is filtered through your mind, so what you see outside is actually inside your head - You can't answer both, because that's illogical, can't be both at the same time
So which one is it? Think about it hard because it's a very tricky question, and if you find the right answer then you will instantly see what i`m talking about...
"What you see with your eyes and interpret with your mind, is that the outside world or the inside world?" My answer: It is neither the outside world nor the inside world for this is a false dichotomy. To view consciousness as arising from the brain is an oversimplification stemming from a flawed conceptualization. Instead the brain should be viewed as a medium or functional scaffolding for consciousness to propagate itself. As there is no coherent boundary dividing biology and not-biology all matter can essentially be viewed in this manner. Individual interaction with the world can thus be understood as consciousness propagating through one medium interacting with consciousness propagating through another medium. This interaction can be reinforcing or destructive. Instead of an inside or an outside world there is simply the propagation of consciousness interacting with itself in increasingly deep and complex ways. Orchestrated objective reduction’ (‘Orch OR’) proposes that consciousness consists of a sequence of discrete events, each being a moment of ‘objective reduction’ (OR) of a quantum state. The theory suggests conscious experience is intrinsically connected to the fine-scale structure of space–time geometry, and that consciousness may be deeply related to the operation of the laws of the universe.
|
|
|
|
|
|
thaaanos
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 01, 2016, 04:59:42 PM |
|
Hi can you answer my question, i am curious what your answer is: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=355212.msg14317190#msg14317190
Tell me how can consciousness arise from the brain, if the consciousness experiences the outside world, including the brain... It's circular logic.
Ok I have a question for you because I see that you are pretty intelligent, here it goes: What you see with your eyes and interpret with your mind, is that the outside world or the inside world? - You can answer outside, because its detached from your body, therefore it seems like it's the outside world, outside from your body - You can answer inside, because you experience it with the mind ,therefore everything you experience is filtered through your mind, so what you see outside is actually inside your head - You can't answer both, because that's illogical, can't be both at the same time
So which one is it? Think about it hard because it's a very tricky question, and if you find the right answer then you will instantly see what i`m talking about...
"What you see with your eyes and interpret with your mind, is that the outside world or the inside world?" My answer: It is neither the outside world nor the inside world for this is a false dichotomy. To view consciousness as arising from the brain is an oversimplification stemming from a flawed conceptualization. Instead the brain should be viewed as a medium or functional scaffolding for consciousness to propagate itself. As there is no coherent boundary dividing biology and not-biology all matter can essentially be viewed in this manner. Individual interaction with the world can thus be understood as consciousness propagating through one medium interacting with consciousness propagating through another medium. This interaction can be reinforcing or destructive. Instead of an inside or an outside world there is simply the propagation of consciousness interacting with itself in increasingly deep and complex ways. Orchestrated objective reduction’ (‘Orch OR’) proposes that consciousness consists of a sequence of discrete events, each being a moment of ‘objective reduction’ (OR) of a quantum state. The theory suggests conscious experience is intrinsically connected to the fine-scale structure of space–time geometry, and that consciousness may be deeply related to the operation of the laws of the universe. There is and it is "computation". in that sense computers are alive only of a different make. Nah Im more inclined to the software/hardware paradigm. Orch OR sound like treating conciousness as an iterated function over a State Monad universe, even with the quantum flavor it looks deterministic the simplest way to break determinism is getting a true random number generator as an input
|
|
|
|
CoinCube (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 02, 2016, 02:22:46 AM Last edit: April 02, 2016, 02:58:30 AM by CoinCube |
|
The Bohm pilot wave interpretation of quantum theory is the only consistent one that really works and shows us exactly the place of consciousness in the universe.
There are many interpretations of quantum theory. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_Broglie%E2%80%93Bohm_theoryThe Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy article on Quantum decoherence (Guido Bacciagaluppi, 2012) groups "approaches to quantum mechanics" into five groups, of which "pilot-wave theories" are one (the others being the Copenhagen interpretation, objective collapse theories, many-world interpretations and modal interpretations).
You claim that the pilot wave interpretations of quantum mechanics is the only one that works but this appear to be an unproved assertion. Upthread I highlighted the Orch OR theory of consciousness. This theory does not use the pilot wave interpretation it uses a competing model of objective collapse. I have a solid background in mathematics and science but this background does not include quantum mechanics. My understanding, however, is that all of the five "approaches to quantum mechanics" fit with the currently available experimental data making them all a possible but competing visions of reality. Pilot wave theory is deterministic. Objective collapse theory is indeterministic. I argued upthread that grounding consciousness in objective collapse theory makes consciousness itself indeterministic and provides a mechanism for free will. It does not appears that this argument can be made with a deterministic pilot wave theory. You appear to have rejected objective collapse theory as false. What is your reasoning for this conclusion?
|
|
|
|
CoinCube (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 02, 2016, 02:49:00 AM Last edit: April 02, 2016, 03:00:58 AM by CoinCube |
|
As there is no coherent boundary dividing biology and not-biology all matter can essentially be viewed in this manner.
There is and it is "computation". in that sense computers are alive only of a different make. Nah Im more inclined to the software/hardware paradigm. Orch OR sound like treating conciousness as an iterated function over a State Monad universe, even with the quantum flavor it looks deterministic the simplest way to break determinism is getting a true random number generator as an input My understanding is that Orch OR is based on objective collapse theory which is indeterministic. There are competing theories of quantum mechanics like the pilot wave theory, however, that are deterministic. Computation as a dividing line is an interesting choice. However, that choice forces us to examine what forms of matter are capable of computation. In conventional views, the experiential qualities of conscious awareness are assumed to have emerged from complex neuronal computation at some point in evolution, whether recently in human brains, or at some earlier, but unspecified level of development. In these views, consciousness is an emergent property of complex computational activity. On the other hand, Orch OR follows the notion that OR events with primitive ‘experiential’ qualities have been occurring in the universe all along, in the reduction R of quantum superpositions to classical reality. Small superpositions lacking isolation would entangle directly with the random environment, rapidly reaching OR threshold by τ≈ħ/EG, resulting in non-orchestrated OR events. Each such event would lack cognition or any non-computational influence, but would be associated with an undifferentiated ‘proto-conscious’ experience, one without information or meaning. Such undifferentiated experiences are taken, in the Orch OR scheme, to be irreducible, fundamental features of ‘Planck scale geometry’, perhaps ultimately having a physical role as important to basic physics as those of mass, spin or charge. ... What about Orch OR in non-biological systems? After all, τ≈ħ/EG happens everywhere. What kind of role might there be for it in consciousness elsewhere in the universe?
Very large masses can be involved in quantum superpositions, occurring in the universe in quantum-mechanical situations, for example in the cores of neutron stars. One might imagine that τ would then be ridiculously tiny. But EG could still be relatively small if the mass-displacement remains small owing to the uniformity of the material. But generally, by OR, such large-scale superpositions would reduce extremely quickly, and classically unreasonable superpositions would be rapidly eliminated. Whether such quantum systems could be orchestrated to have meaningful, cognitive Orch OR conscious moments is unknown
Here is another take from a the perspective of biology ORIGINS OF LIFE An example is the question: What is life? – which is the title of that influential book by Schroedinger (1944). The current answer is, implicitly: that is ‘life’ which reproduces or replicates and is subject to natural selection.
But this answer includes viruses, phages and prions – which hardly seem to be ‘alive’ in that they lack a dynamic metabolism; and also some forms of crystal – which are usually regarded as certainly not-alive (Cairns-Smith, 1990). Furthermore, some economic theories and computational programmes explicitly use the mechanisms of natural selection - and these are not regarded as part of biology.
Strikingly, there has been no success in the attempts over sixty-plus years to create life in the laboratory under plausible ancestral earth conditions – not even the complex bio-molecules such as proteins and nucleic acids. It has, indeed, been well-argued that this is impossible; and that ‘living life’ must therefore have evolved from an intermediate stage (or stages) of non-living but evolvable molecules such as crystals – perhaps clays (Cairns-Smith, 1987). But nobody has succeeded in doing that in the lab either, despite that artificial selection can be orders of magnitude faster than natural selection.
Since there is no acknowledged boundary dividing biology and not-biology, then it would seem that biology as currently understood has zero validity as a subject. What are the implications of our failure to divide the living from the non-living world: the failure to draw a line around the subject? Well, since there is no coherent boundary, then common sense leads us to infer in that case either everything is not-alive or everything is-alive. If nothing is-alive, not even ourselves, there seems to be no coherent possibility of us knowing that we ourselves are not-alive, or indeed of anything knowing anything – which, I take it, means we should reject that possibility as a reductio ad absurdum.
Alternatively, the implication is that if anything is-alive, then everything is-alive, including the mineral world – so we dwell in a wholly animated universe, all that there is being alive but – presumably – alive in very different degrees and with different qualities of life. This inference I intend to regard as valid: it will be my working metaphysical assumption, and is one to which we will return later.
While it may be true that the simplest way to break determinism is getting a true random number generator as an input that may not be the only way.
|
|
|
|
RealBitcoin
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 02, 2016, 04:00:42 PM |
|
"What you see with your eyes and interpret with your mind, is that the outside world or the inside world?"
My answer: It is neither the outside world nor the inside world for this is a false dichotomy.
It has to be one or the other othwerise, you deny that inside and outside world exists. If consciousness arises from the brain as a property of matter, then there is no inside world, and everything is deterministic. If counsciousness is separate from matter and exists in another plane, then there is no outside world, and only what is experienced exists. So which one is it? To view consciousness as arising from the brain is an oversimplification stemming from a flawed conceptualization. Instead the brain should be viewed as a medium or functional scaffolding for consciousness to propagate itself. As there is no coherent boundary dividing biology and not-biology all matter can essentially be viewed in this manner.
Sure but that is what your theory says that it arises from quantum phenomena inside your brain cells, which is in some way part of the brain, and when the brain dies consciousness dies. This means that it's 100% tied to the material world, even if you add interesting words like quantum to it. Orchestrated objective reduction’ (‘Orch OR’) proposes that consciousness consists of a sequence of discrete events, each being a moment of ‘objective reduction’ (OR) of a quantum state. The theory suggests conscious experience is intrinsically connected to the fine-scale structure of space–time geometry, and that consciousness may be deeply related to the operation of the laws of the universe.
I still dont believe science can explain this because it is still full of circular logic. You are using now consciousness to explain consciousness, doesn't that seem weird to you? Not to mention totally illogical. ![Cheesy](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/cheesy.gif)
|
|
|
|
CoinCube (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 03, 2016, 04:07:00 AM |
|
"What you see with your eyes and interpret with your mind, is that the outside world or the inside world?"
My answer: It is neither the outside world nor the inside world for this is a false dichotomy.
It has to be one or the other othwerise, you deny that inside and outside world exists. If consciousness arises from the brain as a property of matter, then there is no inside world, and everything is deterministic. If counsciousness is separate from matter and exists in another plane, then there is no outside world, and only what is experienced exists. So which one is it? I do not believe this is a mutually exclusive choice and would argue it is a false dichotomy. As I stated above consciousness may not so much arise from matter as propagate through it. Think of an ordered series of ripples traveling across a body of water. If we disrupt the medium those ripples are traveling through by removing the water or walling it off the ripples will cease. This outcome does not require us to assume these ripples spontaneously 'arise' from the water. Instead it simply means that the ripples require the water to propagate. Our consciousness requires a far more ordered medium then a body of water to propagate. If we destroy the brain consciousness ceases. Destroying the medium disrupts the ripples. To determine if consciousness is deterministic requires us to examine the mechanism the ripples use to propagate. Orchestrated objective reduction’ (‘Orch OR’) proposes that consciousness consists of a sequence of discrete events, each being a moment of ‘objective reduction’ (OR) of a quantum state. Orch OR is based in objective collapse theory which is one of the five main theoretical offshoots of quantum mechanics. The others are pilot-wave theories, the Copenhagen interpretation, many-world interpretations and modal interpretations. Objective collapse theory is indeterministic thus if Orch OR theory is correct consciousness is likely also indeterministic with regards to traditional causality. All attempts to understand consciousness must by necessity use consciousness to try and explain consciousness.
|
|
|
|
RealBitcoin
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 03, 2016, 04:32:40 AM |
|
I do not believe this is a mutually exclusive choice and would argue it is a false dichotomy. As I stated above consciousness may not so much arise from matter as propagate through it.
Think of an ordered series of ripples traveling across a body of water. If we disrupt the medium those ripples are traveling through by removing the water or walling it off the ripples will cease. This outcome does not require us to assume these ripples spontaneously 'arise' from the water. Instead it simply means that the ripples require the water to propagate.
Our consciousness requires a far more ordered medium then a body of water to propagate. If we destroy the brain consciousness ceases. Destroying the medium disrupts the ripples.
To determine if consciousness is deterministic requires us to examine the mechanism the ripples use to propagate. Orchestrated objective reduction’ (‘Orch OR’) proposes that consciousness consists of a sequence of discrete events, each being a moment of ‘objective reduction’ (OR) of a quantum state.
Orch OR is based in objective collapse theory which is one of the five main theoretical offshoots of quantum mechanics. The others are pilot-wave theories, the Copenhagen interpretation, many-world interpretations and modal interpretations. Objective collapse theory is indeterministic thus if Orch OR theory is correct consciousness is likely also indeterministic with regards to traditional causality.
All attempts to understand consciousness must by necessity use consciousness to try and explain consciousness.
Interesting worldview, but that is not how I view the world. I believe matter doesn't exist, that is why I`m not a materialist. I`m the first capitalist that is not materialist it's very weird. I view the assets, the substances that exist, wether the so called "physical" stuff or mental stuff as ethereal things. I certainly don't view them as solid, because to some degree QM might be correct, but I also dont believe it really explains anything substantial, it just scratches the surface of the world. I`m constantly aware of entropy and how the world changes around us, so it's really foolish to believe in solid objects, but many people do that because of their ego. The funny thing is that we have absolutely no evidence that there is a universe, it can all just be an ethereal projection or a complex illusion.
Also the big paradox about consciousness is that you have to use consciousness to explain it, and that is circular logic. What's your opinion on that?
|
|
|
|
CoinCube (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 03, 2016, 06:20:26 AM |
|
Also the big paradox about consciousness is that you have to use consciousness to explain it, and that is circular logic.
What's your opinion on that?
That it will be very difficult for us to ever fully understand consciousness. I posted a link to an interesting video series earlier https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=lMBt_yfGKpUPart one is just hard science of QM and theoretical physics and is quite good. Part 2-3 gets much more into opinion and philosophy. The world view presented there matches up fairly well to your current model RealBitcoin.
|
|
|
|
CoinCube (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 04, 2016, 08:17:51 AM |
|
http://m.jpost.com/Israel-News/Huge-leak-reveals-deep-corruption-linked-to-offshore-accounts-450146#article=6017OTE0NTUwM0RERkE2RjVGREZBRUQ2RUI3NUZEODVEMDc=German newspaper Suddeutsche Zeitung said it received a cache of 11.5 million leaked documents from the law firm's database, and shared them with more than 100 other international news outlets as well as the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ).
The files reveal the offshore holdings 140 politicians from around the world, including 11 heads of state. The effects of the financial activities are allegedly aimed at illegal activity such as tax fraud, money laundering and sanctions evasion. ...
Ramon Fonseca, the director of the Panama-based law firm Mossack Fonseca, specialized in setting up offshore companies, said in a telephone interview with Reuters that his firm had suffered a successful but "limited" hack.
He said that all of the firm's clients have been notified of "this problem," arguing that the firm has been caught up in an international anti-privacy campaign.
"We believe there's an international campaign against privacy. Privacy is a sacred human right (but) there are people in the world who do not understand that and we definitely believe in privacy and will continue working so that legal privacy can work," he said.
From upthread: I agree wealth will increasingly seek to hide by moving into tax havens in other countries. It will also be increasingly hunted. Pressure applied in the name of shutting down tax havens will be one more tool to drive political consolidation and weaken the nation state. Those running from the tax man will increasingly be identified, caught and punished. Options for legal evasion like you mentioned above will be shut down or restricted to a even narrower elite.
Tax havens that survive will likely be rare and limited to select jurisdictions where citizenship is hard to obtain. These areas are likely to be funded by income taxes (there will likely be no escape for wage earners anywhere) In these havens citizens will likely be exempt from inheritance, capital gains, and wealth taxes. This will allow the billionaire class to safely run their interests from afar.
|
|
|
|
thaaanos
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 04, 2016, 03:33:20 PM |
|
Data is a Toxic asset, lets keep that in mind in a Bid Data world
On circular references lets not forget that numbers have the same problem, that doesn't them nonexistent,or not usefull, same with conciousness we may expand our understanding up to a point.
On Iterative functions. they are either deterministic stable, or chaotic unstable and are immune to randomness in inputs. I could accept that the wiring of the brain creates an Iterative Function system that its attractor-functor is the conciousness. But it's emergence would still be a predetermined by the wiring, not by quantum randomness. Also take note also that no quantum feedback is possible. Ie the brain cannot receive states in superposition, in effect that means that conciousness cannot get quantum input only classical. Any states in superposition are within the brain itself. So that kinda breaks the iterative reduction process because the reduction has already happened by the sensors (at least for external input).
|
|
|
|
CoinCube (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 04, 2016, 11:51:46 PM |
|
Instead of spontaneous generation ex nihilo, I postulate REVERSAL OF POTENTIAL AND CYCLES:
POSTULATE NO. 1: All bodies are continuous. They never cease. They merely reverse their potential TWICE in every CYCLE of their eternal journey within and beyond the range of your sensing by compressing into visibility and then expanding into their invisible seed-recordings.
POSTULATE NO. 2: All bodies are expressed in cycles. A cycle is a continuous two-way spiral journey from the expanded condition of a body to its opposite compressed condition and back again to its expanded condition. A most familiar example of a cycle is DAY and NIGHT. Each is the opposite half of the other, such as one's breathing.
So why not choose cycles as the explanation, especially since it is far simpler than creation ex nihilo? Even if you were to conclude (somehow) that something (awareness) arose from nothing, how would you know for sure that this is the case?
Here is a neat little physics experiment that POSTULATE NO. 1 brought to mind Where does light go when it is 'destroyed' by destructive interference? https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RRi4dv9KgCg
|
|
|
|
CoinCube (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 05, 2016, 12:12:22 AM |
|
On Iterative functions. they are either deterministic stable, or chaotic unstable and are immune to randomness in inputs. I could accept that the wiring of the brain creates an Iterative Function system that its attractor-functor is the conciousness. But it's emergence would still be a predetermined by the wiring, not by quantum randomness. Also take note also that no quantum feedback is possible. Ie the brain cannot receive states in superposition, in effect that means that conciousness cannot get quantum input only classical. Any states in superposition are within the brain itself. So that kinda breaks the iterative reduction process because the reduction has already happened by the sensors (at least for external input).
I think I am nearing the limits of what I can contribute to this discussion. My background in quantum mechanics is not currently sufficient to fully understand the proposed orchestrated objective reduction model of consciousness discussed upthread and I have no working experience with iterative function systems and attractor-functions. Until I have time to read more and better understand these issues I am going to leave your conclusions above unchallenged. ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
|
|
|
|
fr4nkthetank
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2294
Merit: 1182
Now the money is free, and so the people will be
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 05, 2016, 12:16:03 AM |
|
Consciousness in the universe: A review of the ‘Orch OR’ theoryBy Stuart Hameroff and Roger Penrose http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1571064513001188Highlights • The Orch OR theory proposes quantum computations in brain microtubules account for consciousness. • Microtubule ‘quantum channels’ in which anesthetics erase consciousness are identified. • Evidence for warm quantum vibrations in brain microtubules is cited. • Interference of microtubule vibrations are ‘beat frequencies’ seen as EEG. • Orch OR links consciousness to processes in fundamental space–time geometry. Abstract The nature of consciousness, the mechanism by which it occurs in the brain, and its ultimate place in the universe are unknown. We proposed in the mid 1990's that consciousness depends on biologically ‘orchestrated’ coherent quantum processes in collections of microtubules within brain neurons, that these quantum processes correlate with, and regulate, neuronal synaptic and membrane activity, and that the continuous Schrödinger evolution of each such process terminates in accordance with the specific Diósi–Penrose (DP) scheme of ‘objective reduction’ (‘OR’) of the quantum state. This orchestrated OR activity (‘Orch OR’) is taken to result in moments of conscious awareness and/or choice. The DP form of OR is related to the fundamentals of quantum mechanics and space–time geometry, so Orch OR suggests that there is a connection between the brain's biomolecular processes and the basic structure of the universe. Here we review Orch OR in light of criticisms and developments in quantum biology, neuroscience, physics and cosmology. We also introduce a novel suggestion of ‘beat frequencies’ of faster microtubule vibrations as a possible source of the observed electro-encephalographic (‘EEG’) correlates of consciousness. We conclude that consciousness plays an intrinsic role in the universe. wat I think we think we are concious to a point, but there is so much unknown, that we have no idea about, we cant feel it, touch it or even think it.
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 05, 2016, 01:34:40 AM Last edit: April 05, 2016, 10:47:44 AM by TPTB_need_war |
|
I'm linking to the OP in my upcoming crowdfunding campaign. An excerpt from the rough draft is quoted below: ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fd3v9w2rcr4yc0o.cloudfront.net%2Fuploads%2Fstream%2F2016%2F04%2F1207377%2F05010629%2F01-01.jpg&t=665&c=KyKGw8DmlbUhcA) ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fd3v9w2rcr4yc0o.cloudfront.net%2Fuploads%2Fstream%2F2016%2F04%2F1207377%2F05010633%2FJAMBOX%25203.jpg&t=665&c=eX1sYk8HXDvl1Q) Decentralize Social Distribution with JAMBOX
Many attempts[1] such as Diaspora* have failed to disrupt centralized social networking, because users didn’t have a compelling reason to adopt them; and some features of centralized social networks can’t be implemented in a decentralized paradigm[2]. Successful centralized alternatives to Facebook such as Twitter, LinkedIn, and OdnoklassnikiVkontakte, pursue compelling untapped niches of sufficient scale. The prior decentralization paradigm attempts didn’t pursue a compelling niche which only a decentralized paradigm can fulfill.
I’m Shelby Moore III, a repeat offender of creating “million user” software[3], seeking crowdfunding to apply my significant marketing and programming experience in an untapped aspect of social distribution of music and mobile games that requires a decentralized paradigm. This untapped niche is large enough to scale up a $billions decentralized paradigm that should be potentially capable[4] of disrupting the centralized behemoths that spam us with ads, disrespect our privacy, control our software choices, and don’t maximally empower widespread “indie” (independent) musicians and developers.
We will provide a more efficient and effective platform for indie musicians, mobile game developers, and their fans to synergize, monetize, distribute and foster discovery through social sharing.
My overarching conceptual goal is to enable millions of creative people to work independently, fulfilling the prediction of my autodidact macro-economic theories about the inability to finance, top-down profit, and parasite on the creativity of others[5] in a coming cataclysmic shift[6] from the dying top-down, fixed capital investment economies-of-scale Industrial Age to a decentralized, maximum division-of-labor self-improvement Knowledge Age.
There is currently no free music streaming without advertising that is both integrated with [...]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_software_and_protocols_for_distributed_social_networking
[2] http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/what-happened-to-the-facebook-killer-it-s-complicated
[3] https://www.linkedin.com/in/shelby-moore-iii-b31488b0 http://relativisticobserver.blogspot.com/2015/11/rapidly-growing-niche.html?showComment=1458863526651#c5360070863037191067
[4] http://techcrunch.com/2011/06/28/sean-parker-on-why-myspace-lost-to-facebook/
[5] https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=355212.0
[6] http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2459986,00.asp https://www.technologyreview.com/s/519241/report-suggests-nearly-half-of-us-jobs-are-vulnerable-to-computerization/
|
|
|
|
CoinCube (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1946
Merit: 1055
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 05, 2016, 03:41:39 AM |
|
I'm linking to the OP in my upcoming crowdfunding campaign. An excerpt from the rough draft is quoted below: ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fd3v9w2rcr4yc0o.cloudfront.net%2Fuploads%2Fstream%2F2016%2F04%2F1207377%2F05010629%2F01-01.jpg&t=665&c=KyKGw8DmlbUhcA) ![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fd3v9w2rcr4yc0o.cloudfront.net%2Fuploads%2Fstream%2F2016%2F04%2F1207377%2F05010633%2FJAMBOX%25203.jpg&t=665&c=eX1sYk8HXDvl1Q) I like the logo and this is a cause I am comfortable supporting. Please let us know when you launch this. I will make an investment.
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 05, 2016, 01:59:58 PM |
|
I like the logo and this is a cause I am comfortable supporting. Please let us know when you launch this. I will make an investment.
Thank you. There will be more details at the crowdfund page within a week or so. FYI, I started a topic to discuss about the true odds of speculating on startups.
|
|
|
|
TPTB_need_war
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
April 06, 2016, 08:15:46 AM |
|
I chose to agree. This would be the single biggest issue that would cause an enslaving of nations. thats why we need country fiat and bitcoin.
I thought we are already in this situation. *Ahem the US dollar? last time I checked everyone loves it, despite its covered bad value. So why would it recourse into another world reserve currency. The difference will be that the new one-world reserve coming approximately 2020, will not be controlled by any nation, but rather by a world government body. This will be viewed by the world as more fair. But in reality it will be much less fair, because the world government will act basically the way the Troika does in the EU now, lending to the nations and never letting them default. They will lend in the world currency, but the people will be paid in their nation's shit currency which is debased like hell by the national politics. So then when the national currency loses value, the people are stuck paying back loans in the relatively more expensive world currency. This is precisely what the Troika did to the PIIGS to destroy them. They will then do this on a global scale to enslave us all.
|
|
|
|
|