The Big Picture via distorting filters onto Big Data?
2013/3/24 andrew vecsey <[email protected]> > I do not think that we lie to our self so much as that we only see/hear > what we want to see/hear. Also we tend to say what we think the other > persons wants to hear or say things to hurt other people. > > On Sunday, March 24, 2013 10:46:03 AM UTC+1, rigs wrote: >> >> I am more interested in why we lie to ourselves, suppress reality and >> snarl logic in our brains. There are life and death moments of >> survival, I suppose, but much of our potential is engineered by family >> and culture in order to achieve some sort of control and order. Even >> rebels are often little more than a reaction. Pretense and etiquette >> are often the same thing.//I must have "lost" my thought re "big >> data"/"Big Daddy? as an organizer of human knowledge versus the >> present scatterings and specialties.// Yes- I agree most have a gut >> reaction- but so do other life forms- it's a survival mechanism. But >> it can be distorted. >> >> On Mar 24, 4:12 am, andrew vecsey <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Faked enthusiasm is as easy to spot as fake love. It is like a built in >> > like a lie detector that god created us with. Sounds like a good way to >> > detect lying on the internet. You can call it "god" instead of "big >> > brother". >> > >> > On Saturday, March 23, 2013 6:08:39 PM UTC+1, archytas wrote: >> > >> > ..................... >> > >> > >> > >> > > Quite what junk DNA is has raised a big recent controversy - gist at >> > >> > >http://www.guardian.co.uk/**science/2013/feb/24/** >> scientists-attacked-ove.<http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2013/feb/24/scientists-attacked-ove.>.. >> >> > > I agree with rigs that the term is unfortunate. >> > >> > > ........but I could feign 'enthusiasm' .. >> > > ........' to detect resistance! Even this >> > > .....no employees dumb enough to support >> > > excellence, ...... >> > > if we spent out time pointing such devices at >> > > each other though rigs! Watch out for the first one minute dating >> > > agency providing such! Arghh" . >> > >> > > On Mar 22, 1:06 pm, rigs <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > > Junk is an unfortunate adjective- it sounds too random. My guess is >> > > > that further selection takes place in this area which selects the >> > > > strongest marker- or whatever it's called- such in the color of >> eyes, >> > > > hair, and other characteristics. There are also generational skips >> in >> > > > play. I have noted other strange echoes of a missing parent such as >> > > > the style of laughter which is a surprise and so many other >> > > > recognitions. At any rate, we are just beginning to sort through >> the >> > > > data in this one area as in others- I think it is called "big data" >> > > > which will overcome the religious notion of "sins of the father" >> stuff >> > > > as well as curses and fate and will hopefully allow a more rational >> > > > and postive approach/life choices for each unique individual. But >> it >> > > > will also cause mischief. >> > >> > > > On Mar 22, 5:16 am, andrew vecsey <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > > > Not all DNA code for protein. We have non coding DNA called "junk >> DNA" >> > > that >> > > > > ensure we are all unique. While normal DNA codes for protein to >> make, >> > > for >> > > > > example a "nose", junk DNA ensures that we grow a nose that >> "looks" >> > > like a >> > > > > mixture of our father`s and our mother`s nose. >> > >> > > > > On Friday, March 22, 2013 12:36:39 AM UTC+1, Ash wrote: >> > >> > > > > > My thoughts didn't include "junk DNA", my thinking on such >> terms are >> > > > > > mixed in that some genes may not be useful or represent just >> another >> > > > > > failure point, but also that the supposed junk in one set of >> > > > > > circumstances may prove quite beneficial in others like a >> backup, an >> > > > > > alternate development chain or complex interdependencies we >> haven't >> > > > > > observed yet. You may have a connection in mind I haven't >> gleaned. >> > >> > > > > > Developing the market sounds similar but I am trying to root >> out an >> > > > > > aspect of this that doesn't require jumping to a premature >> > > conclusion, >> > > > > > such as in 'intelligent design', materialism, rigid ontologies >> or >> > > > > > realism. Thanks for helping me explore here gabby, lets hope >> some >> > > form >> > > > > > emerges in expression. :) >> > >> > > > > > On 3/21/2013 3:57 AM, gabbydott wrote: >> > > > > > > Now that sounds more like you. :) >> > > > > > > What you are describing or asking I now >> understand/interpret/hear >> > > in >> > > > > > > terms of what I know about what they are trying to find out >> about >> > > > > > > "junk DNA". Its purpose/function/added value. As for what you >> > > describe >> > > > > > > as another way, I know/experience/see this in what the >> companies >> > > > > > > describe as "developing the market". We are still on topic, >> aren't >> > > we? >> > >> > > > > > > 2013/3/21 James <[email protected] <javascript:> <mailto: >> > > > > > [email protected] <javascript:>>> >> > >> > > > > > > I have a feeling you are being charitable with me gabby >> > > (cringe). >> > > > > > > What you say makes sense, and should add that the intent >> I >> > > refer >> > > > > > > to is in excess of that needed for mere gene survival >> fitness. >> > > In >> > > > > > > that sense I consider the adaptations as simulations and >> the >> > > > > > > excess as breaking the barriers of meta-simulation, or in >> > > another >> > > > > > > way, not just running within time but operating on it by >> > > taking >> > > > > > > advantage of the rules and finding ways to bend them. Now >> it >> > > is my >> > > > > > > turn to ask, does that make sense [to anyone]? >> > >> > > > > > > On 3/20/2013 3:01 AM, gabbydott wrote: >> > >> > > > > > > I don't know if this is good or bad, but i hear that >> you >> > > > > > > haven't just heard about mirror neurons, that this is >> a >> > > > > > > relatively consciously made up construct, a construct >> with >> > > > > > > intent or purpose. Also it sounds strange when you >> say >> > > that >> > > > > > > this neurological mechanism is strange (to you). >> That's >> > > where >> > > > > > > my "parallel mirror neurons" come into play, i >> compare >> > > what >> > > > > > > you say with what i have heard you saying before and >> add >> > > the >> > > > > > > info as well as my judgement on what you say to my >> > > internal >> > > > > > > "Virtualization" of you. The leap is more of a >> constant >> > > > > > > exercise of differentiating between you and me while >> > > operating >> > > > > > > on the virtualization of each participant, so to >> speak. >> > > Does >> > > > > > > that somehow make sense to you? >> > >> > > > > > > Of course, I could go back to the group website and >> search >> > > for >> > > > > > > the real data on what you have been saying on >> neurological >> > > > > > > mechanisms. But this would be a completely new >> project. >> > > I'd >> > > > > > > have to go back and construct a new image with my >> > > knowledge of >> > > > > > > now. >> > >> > > > > > > But since you are still alive and still >> communicating, I >> > > find >> > > > > > > it much easier and more purposeful to keep on >> listening to >> > > > > > > what you say, to respond to it, and to rely on you >> saying, >> > > if >> > > > > > > you disagree. Not a good position for me to be in, >> more of >> > > a >> > > > > > > survival strategy. Now that's worth a leap into >> rethinking >> > > > > > > mode. ;) >> > >> > > > > > > 2013/3/20 James <[email protected] <javascript:> >> > > > > > > <mailto:[email protected] <javascript:>> <mailto: >> > > > > > [email protected] <javascript:> >> > > > > > > <mailto:[email protected] <javascript:>>>> >> > >> > > > > > > My response was mostly a parallel narrative, my >> > > thinking on >> > > > > > a >> > > > > > > personal level is when does a system of >> components >> > > > > > > transcend the >> > > > > > > boudaries of automata and begin to engage in the >> > > operations >> > > > > > of >> > > > > > > intent. Where does gene fitness adaptation break >> loose >> > > into >> > > > > > > something perceiving, interacting, understanding >> and >> > > > > > > mastering? I >> > > > > > > have heard that our ability to reflect and >> interact on >> > > an >> > > > > > > intimate >> > > > > > > level arises from a strange neurological >> mechanism >> > > called >> > > > > > > mirror >> > > > > > > neurons. If this is something like the >> virtualization >> > > > > > > technologies >> > > > > > > we have been building in technology then with a >> bit >> > > more >> > > > > > > scale and >> > > > > > > pondering our science may make the leap >> > > logarithmically. >> > >> > > > > > > On 3/18/2013 8:15 PM, James wrote: >> > >> > > > > > > I see this sometimes too Andrew, and we learn >> how >> > > our >> > > > > > > internal >> > > > > > > systems and culture drive and shape us, so we >> can >> > > > > > > create. We >> > > > > > > model from the simplest sensory stimuli on to >> > > > > > > reflections on >> > > > > > > the nature of our existence and what could be >> in a >> > > > > > > simultaneous simulation of reality. Our world >> can >> > > be >> > > > > > > full of >> > > > > > > intent, or I should say we experience it thus >> due >> > > to our >> > > > > > > capacity arising from our nature and drawing >> > > parables >> > > > > > > in the >> > > > > > > mist. It makes me wonder how many levels of >> > > abstraction, >> > > > > > > simulation and foresight are necessary to >> > > represent >> > > > > > > the human >> > > > > > > element. That minds like ours are derived >> from >> > > nature is >> > > > > > > astonishing and awe inspiring, that we reach >> so >> > > far >> > > > > > > and yet >> > > > > > > innocence is so fragile, the experience of >> > > awareness >> > > > > > > is far >> > > > > > > from today's science I think. Our synthetic >> > > > > > > counterparts or >> > > > > > > robots will have to wait. >> > >> > > > > > > On 3/13/2013 5:35 AM, andrew vecsey wrote: >> > >> > > > > > > Perhaps we are born into a world filled >> with >> > > > > > negative >> > > > > > > aspects rather than positive aspects so >> as to >> > > give >> > > > > > > us a >> > > > > > > direction. We are born small so that we >> can >> > > grow. >> > > > > > > We are >> > > > > > > born ignorant so that we could know. We >> are >> > > born >> > > > > > with >> > > > > > > negative aspects so that we could acquire >> > > positive >> > > > > > > ones. >> > >> > > > > > > On Monday, January 28, 2013 12:11:39 PM >> UTC+1, >> > > > > > andrew >> > > > > > > vecsey wrote: >> > >> > > > > > > Why do so many of us remember >> negative >> > > > > > > feelings easier >> > > > > > > than >> > > > > > > positive ones. Pain over >> > >> > ... >> > >> > read more ยป- Hide quoted text - >> > >> > - Show quoted text - >> > -- > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > ""Minds Eye"" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > -- --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
