Re: Mind's Eye thought experiments

Welcome to the group, Konara. Inventions are just toys until they find
a market or following. I am interested in reversals of fortune- good
or ill.

On Oct 8, 9:11 pm, Konara Abeyrathne <kona...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear all-Machines are created.invented on the basis of the
> knowledge,skills and creativity of one's mind.the power and the
> eficacyof the mind, if it sharpens is unable to predict.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 5:26 AM, gabbydott <gabbyd...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > OK, I deleted all the words not to be trusted. Here is the rest:
> > My dyslexic friend Lee wishes we were all able to read on the same
> > page, flattening and thereby banning the dancing shadows and ghosts to
> > clearly contrasted black letters on a white ground. On the other side,
> > as Rigs points out, speech whitens itself on this ground. Neil's
> > suggestion for a transparent hypertext in a contextualised world won't
> > make any of the sides fade into meaninglessness then.
>
> > On Fri, Oct 5, 2012 at 5:50 AM, James <ashkas...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> We may be on the same page Gabby, my imagined future possibilities are still
> >> clouded by unknowns (to me). That I consider a consequence of mental bondage
> >> to current circumstances, and left unchecked can be demoralizing to creative
> >> intelligence. As far as I can tell we are meant to invent solutions to
> >> challenges, and hold on as long as possible until the opportunity arises. My
> >> opinion is that we can do little to force change but as facilitators we can
> >> pursue strategic challenges that will open those opportunities.
>
> >> If I said that in 10 years the technology should be accessible to refine
> >> garbage, wood or any other fuel into electricity at 80+ conversion
> >> efficiency from common household materials in your average (modern) garage
> >> there is no shortage of engineers that would call me a quack. If I said that
> >> you could do it today with moderate access to materials refining equipment,
> >> with a net generated income over the winter months, and it could be boosted
> >> by running a greenhouse and indoor fishery I would be surely nuts. SOFC,
> >> steam reforming, plasma reduction, pyrolytic reduction are a few terms for
> >> that type of nut.
>
> >> I think we are missing the spirit of engineering in our social and political
> >> dialogue. It could just be me.. we seem to be able to redefine just about
> >> any kind of waste into an asset, but we insist that primitive human traits
> >> are superior and sacrosanct.
>
> >> Navigating awkward transitions, that is what I think we are doing (not
> >> necessarily excellently, but making progress). Still passin' the buck here,
> >> your turn. Sorry for no answer Archy, too bad telepathy isn't an option
> >> because the picture is clear but I just don't trust the words yet.
>
> >> On 10/4/2012 5:14 AM, gabbydott wrote:
>
> >>> That's right. Us end consumers of your brilliant ideas need time to
> >>> consume your complex theories in simple practice for you to see where
> >>> we fail to get your idea for you to better educate and motivate us. :p
>
> >>> On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 4:25 AM, James<ashkas...@gmail.com>  wrote:
>
> >>>> I was hoping we could evolve sociologically in step with technology, that
> >>>> implies an intelligent management infrastructure that educates and
> >>>> motivates
> >>>> free agents to make contributions to the works of humanity. Suitably
> >>>> educated in the workings of organisms (especially how they relate and
> >>>> compare to man), the arts, sciences, elimination of destitution, poverty,
> >>>> mental illnesses, the list goes on.. It requires that we manage things
> >>>> intelligently, learn from mistakes and move forward. If this progress
> >>>> happened in a 100 years I think we would likely reduce our population to
> >>>> half within the next hundred, there is nothing logical about reproducing
> >>>> ad
> >>>> infinitum and by then the social costs should be obvious enough, added to
> >>>> the lack of need as we extend the human lifespan. I think we have a large
> >>>> potential in voluntary acts.
>
> >>>> Who is pie in the sky now? :p
>
> >>>> On 10/3/2012 5:57 PM, archytas wrote:
>
> >>>>> If workers aren't needed for work, what will happen to them?  The
> >>>>> animal and plant world answer is generally a 'return to nutrients'.
>
> >>>>> On 3 Oct, 09:57, Shekila Tieschmaker<shekilatieschma...@yahoo.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> how do you get out this group thing ?
>
> >>>>>>> ________________________________
> >>>>>>> From: James<ashkas...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>> To: minds-eye@googlegroups.com
> >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2012 10:26 PM
> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: Mind's Eye thought experiments
>
> >>>>>>> Well it is far worse (or better depending on who is looking at it),
> >>>>>>> many
> >>>>>>> of the older trades and crafts-people I've met had an appreciation for
> >>>>>>> seeing their work as an artform. That would be my robot heaven,
> >>>>>>> working
> >>>>>>> toward a world where we can all pursue meaning and purposeful work
> >>>>>>> without
> >>>>>>> the burden of resource scarcity. What would it matter that someone
> >>>>>>> wants to
> >>>>>>> be a plumber or architect in a day when those positions are obsolete,
> >>>>>>> if
> >>>>>>> that is pursuing meaning, it would matter little more than what
> >>>>>>> restaurant
> >>>>>>> someone likes to the next guy. In a world that valued human
> >>>>>>> contribution it
> >>>>>>> might be a plus, there is a name associated with the foundation of my
> >>>>>>> home,
> >>>>>>> or certain furniture or I tweaked my engine to respond exactly the way
> >>>>>>> I
> >>>>>>> like in a curve, finding a way to shield a planet from gamma
> >>>>>>> radiation,
> >>>>>>> optimizing resource allocations in complex evolving environments from
> >>>>>>> nanotech on up to transport vessels for interplanetary mining and
> >>>>>>> settlement, etc..
> >>>>>>> Back to the present time and scale there is the matter of plotting a
> >>>>>>> course of innovation by meeting challenges.
> >>>>>>> Laziness might be a challenge, and frailty, I haven't met many people
> >>>>>>> who have had to wash clothes in a bathtub complain about the
> >>>>>>> advancement of
> >>>>>>> the washing machine, or get whimsical about enduring ailments we've
> >>>>>>> found
> >>>>>>> remedies or therapies for. We seem to be in a transitional stage, not
> >>>>>>> quite
> >>>>>>> coming to grips with the world we could create. Psychology is
> >>>>>>> important to
> >>>>>>> survival, nonproductive time as some call it, I eye some of them as
> >>>>>>> suspect
> >>>>>>> sociopaths. Being motivated can be very rewarding, it is too bad that
> >>>>>>> out
> >>>>>>> word for meaningfully motivated is "naive". I'm taking the long way
> >>>>>>> 'round
> >>>>>>> with this.
>
> >>>>>>> On 9/19/2012 5:56 PM, archytas wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> Thought experiments are devices of the imagination used to
> >>>>>>>> investigate
> >>>>>>>> the nature of things. Thought experimenting often takes place when
> >>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>> method of variation is employed in entertaining imaginative
> >>>>>>>> suppositions. They are used for diverse reasons in a variety of
> >>>>>>>> areas,
> >>>>>>>> including economics, history, mathematics, philosophy, and physics.
> >>>>>>>> Most often thought experiments are communicated in narrative form,
> >>>>>>>> sometimes through media like a diagram. Thought experiments should be
> >>>>>>>> distinguished from thinking about experiments, from merely imagining
> >>>>>>>> any experiments to be conducted outside the imagination, and from
> >>>>>>>> psychological experiments with thoughts. They should also be
> >>>>>>>> distinguished from counterfactual reasoning in general, as they seem
> >>>>>>>> to require an experimental element.
> >>>>>>>>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/thought-experiment/
>
> >>>>>>>> One I like is the notion of robot heaven.  It's easy enough to
> >>>>>>>> imagine
> >>>>>>>> a time when machines grow our food, build our shelter and do our
> >>>>>>>> work.  The interesting stuff comes in thinking what this would mean
> >>>>>>>> for wealth distribution and the nature of society.  What work would
> >>>>>>>> be
> >>>>>>>> left to do?  One can also wonder what place any of our work ethics
> >>>>>>>> would have in such a society.  There may be some deconstructive
> >>>>>>>> effect
> >>>>>>>> on just what current work ideologies are in place for.
>
> >>>>>>>> One of the great improvements technology brought to my life is more
> >>>>>>>> or
> >>>>>>>> less never having to go into a bank.  The only real innovations in
> >>>>>>>> banking are the ATM and electronic banking.  This kind of technology
> >>>>>>>> and similar in agriculture and industry fundamentally reduce the
> >>>>>>>> amount of human effort to grow and make what we need.  We are in
> >>>>>>>> partial state of robot heaven.
>
> >>>>>>>> Our ideologies are not up to speed.  Real unemployment is massive and
> >>>>>>>> education does little to provide job skills.  We are sold life-styles
> >>>>>>>> and products by insane advertising.  Job creation seems to be in
> >>>>>>>> perverse areas like financial services or bringing back attended gas-
> >>>>>>>> pumps.  With more efficient production we should be able to afford a
> >>>>>>>> bigger social sector and I can't for the life of me understand why we
> >>>>>>>> allow competition through crap wages and conditions.
>
> >>>>>>>> A great deal of what we pay for could be available more or less free.
> >>>>>>>> Educational content and utility banking are examples - these are
> >>>>>>>> areas
> >>>>>>>> that could be ratinalised like agriculture and manufacturing.
> >>>>>>>> Millions of jobs would go.  We should be asking why jobs are so
> >>>>>>>> central to out thinking on wealth distribution and how we might
> >>>>>>>> encourage work without the rat race.
>
> >>>>>>> --
>
> >>>> --
>
> >> --
>
> > --- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--