, fire ants survive floods by creating floating structures:
It seems so hard to believe that there is that kind of planning in the ant brain. But the program is probably highly situational i.e. One use case and not a lot of variables in the requirements. I used to wonder why black people always steal shit. People insist its societal problems because how could anyone be genetically programmed to steal cars or mug people. Black people do it almost exclusively. They seem to think its normal. Many do anyway.
They seem to see the world as a set of abstract symbolic forms kind of like a programmer or a mathematician does.
So interesting. Chiro and I were discussing this shit (communication/coordination through the culture) and the conversation turned to starling murmurations. The instruction or argument, to use the programming metaphor again, is succint —-then off they go to jew shit up.
I hope you continue to develop this idea of winning and losing circuitry. I love your systematic thinking! Is that too forward? ;-)
>I hope you continue to develop this idea of winning and losing circuitry. I love your systematic thinking! Is that too forward?
Not at all. We have to start to actually do stuff soon, talk is cheap.
It is starting to become obvious that we need some of these built:
A truth machine to document and test ideas.
Collaborative training where we can start to create micro courses that people can take and start to practice on their own.
Explore other options for our people.
It's easy to talk shit on here, quite another to do something about it. Everything we spoke about also fits into a much larger set of global challenges:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJSD8XV3qzE
We have to feed, clothe and employ our people and give them tools to protect them selves and their children from our enemies. The conversations here are interesting for how much buy in ideas get and for any testing for truth value as we have vocal participants.
Let's see how much is possible.
A truth machine to document and test ideas.
Can you eleborate on that? Do you mean a literal machine?
No,no, website or offline software.
So, for example, in the software world we have a tool called source code version control. It allows a programmer to sit anywhere in the world, code, share the code updates with others and control the software update cycle on each iteration. You know exactly who made what changes in which version, if there is an error you can roll back the changes to any point that you like, or if you like you can replicate a branch of software and start your own fork and build out from there.
We basically need something like that for truth claims where anyone can participate and either:
Start a truth claim
Contribute to testing a truth claim.
Fork a truth claim and make it your own and explore the branch as you see fit.
Wikipedia is a kind of similar because you can fork and version documents I guess, so various versions of this already exist.
I would like to built something that is:
- decentralized
- you can replicate either all of or a subset of the data with you
- works over the onion network in a decentralized way
- is encrypted
- it has to be trivial to install for people that want to mirror information on their computer
- it has to be super easy to use and create beautiful documents and presentations
- it has to have a structure so that we can make a truth claim, offer evidence for / against for review
- it has to have mechanisms for "voting" on the truth claim
We have a couple of bottlenecks to getting our people together and sharing knowledge with them:
Infrastructure control - Our enemies own most of the infrastructure we depend on so we have to put the technology on the devices our people own.
Finance / resource access - Our enemies control our banking and transaction systems. it is trivial for our enemies to cut us off at any time. The financial system can force any part of the infrastructure system to kick us off.
I don't know how much of this I have right. My initial thought about the "truth claim" idea is basically this: We talk a lot of shit on here and other places, but it seems like everyone that comes on board has a subset of the shared knowledge base. What if we could start documenting each claim everyone on here makes, and start looking for evidence of the truth claim, for or against. It's not important whether or it's mostly false, it's simply important that the claim is documented and for / against arguments are documented and perhaps some kind of voting systems or a set of scoring systems is developed to track probably how much agreement / disagreement there is with the truth claim.
Think of every article written by mainstream media. Each article has at the root of it a truth claim. All articles can be summarized to: This happened. Well, did it? As we are finding out, most of the shit in media is just outright lies and even deliberate propaganda designed to control us. What if we could start aggregating evidence for or against? And somehow weigh the evidence for or against?
How about the evolution conversation on here, we could break that down into a whole bunch of claims. Of particular interest would be all of the negative responses where we break those off into truth claims and see if they hold any water.
You pointed out that parasitic civilizations infect our bureaucracies. There are a lot of ways to think about how to treat the infection. One way is to start to starve out the bureaucracies of power. So, first, if you can make something super easy and super fun to use we can start to bypass the bureaucracies that control access to information to our people. The moment that you start to do that, you are starting to decentralize bureaucracy it self and create the potential for self organizing structures.
I think the moment we distribute "bureaucracy" to our people is the moment we start a parallel "bureaucracy". I mean, it kind of happened already here and .win. Most of the people on here and on .win still go to the other social media sites, but the base of reality is here, not there.
(post is archived)