Dan Fabulich wrote:
>
>
>
> What's more, unless you're proposing massively improbable violations of
> thermodynamic laws, m-w doesn't allow for magicians: the worlds will remain
> so far split that there is no chance that they will fuse in any way a
> magician could use reliably. Similarly, no magician in the future can
> influence events in the past using many-worlds.
But the FAQ didn't cover the possibility of that quark-like thingy vibrating backwards and forwards across time which would be quite a natural addition to our physical laws if it were ever accepted. As a counterpoint it conjures up a good explanation in my mind that because I mobilized on the probability of winning my war against capitalism, histories were set in motion which gave my country, New Zealand, one of the most dictatorial right wing (fascist) governments in the world today.
>
>
>
>
> >I read accusations that S&B operates in secret and assume this causes
> information
> >loss designed to stymie AI development.
>
> I'm actually beginning to understand you here, but not quite. Does an AI
> need *all* of our information in order to run a neuronomy? Or just lots?
> Why isn't lots sufficient?
"I would say it is not until you have four or five such clearances, that THE NEXT LEVEL is revealed to you. Then you become aware that THERE IS NO LIMIT TO THIS; that these clearances can be generated very quickly in a day or two; and such types of information CAN BE SEGREGATED -- I am not saying only from the public or Congress, BUT EVEN FROM OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE TWO OR THREE OTHER CLEARANCES -- very effectively." [Emphasis added AB] p.508
>
>
>
>
> >Why do I feel that your agenda is S&B's?
>
> The Skull and Bones building is about a block away from where I live here
> at Yale. It is closed to outsiders. Though you have no reason to believe
> me, I happen to be fundamentally opposed to secret societies and their ilk,
> for reasons that don't relate to this conversation.
>
"When I say lie, on the first hand, if you are asked if you have this clearance, you are not allowed to say, no comment. [see p.65 WISE/LYING] YOUR DUTY IS TO LIE AND SAY YOU DO NOT HAVE IT" [EMPHASIS ADDED AB]
ftp://members.aol.com/paulmcg/files/ellsberg-on-secrecy
> Anyway, if I follow you correctly, Ingrid is an attempt to automate and
> coordinate the distribution of personal construct grids, yes? In doing so,
> a simply written program could coordinate the whole of human behavior if it
> had access to enough/ the right grids. Am I on the right track?
Ingrid is capable of extracting meaning from not only personal constructs but from such a vast spectrum of subjective and objective data that next to it the price system would seem tiny. Could a price system run a muscle or artificial vision or a global government? I bet Ingrid can handle all this and what's more all the interpretation is similar. Take SPSS for example, locked up as it is with capitalistic restrictions, at its top end it can verify what Ingrid does but I know how easy it would be for me to get Ingrid gently blended into the background of every computer on the planet, by first getting it used in government; - not as an aid to conduct studies but as a way to link all studies and then fold in democracy then capitalism.
Ah, if only it weren't for that quark thingy making things tough for me, I'd be at the ending of the age of hypothesis, instead of being consigned to the sideshows of history.
>
>
>
> >
> >http://listen.to/jimekus
>
> The link to assassination politics on this page is broken... Do you know
> of any mirrors?
>
> As to the point about assassinations, I'd not heard this particular theory
> before. From whom/where did you hear this?
Thanks, I get a new link and enter a diary note to pass on the Caesar, Lincoln, Kennedy currency coincidences when they resurface.