bsedlm

absolutely agree, but I take it further

The language of appropiation implies a sort of 'property'-like dynamic for ideas.

If I learn, get to know, understand an idea from somebody else, I have not appropiated them in any way. I merely have adopted their idea.

This way of copying/adopting of other's ideas is what makes a cultural society thrive. On the other hand, a society where all idea transfers are in fact an exchange of something, is exactly what I consider the essence of a market.

The critical difference is that in a market, widgets are exchanged. And whenever somebody takes a widget from somebody else, only one widget remains.

However when somebody adopts another's idea, the idea is now it two places (and quite possibly, with a slight difference); that it, until "the idea" becomes a digital artifact, then it's the exact same "digital" copy which exists in more than the one original instance.

It's the dumbest action to try and enforce that digital artifacts (and later on, ideas themselves) behave like widgets in a market.

I think that's the wrong question

IMO, a better question (two questions) is where is RSS now and how did RSS get there?

it depends on how much you already know about computers...

I'm very very curious about the concept of 'suspend disbelief'.. which from my ongoing analysis, is all about how any fictional story is connected to reality.

I just watched the Moonfall movie and the most impactful thing for me is just how bad it comes out. While it's clear they've studied what's supposed to make a story work; and the dialog and exposition waste NO time, it fails to get me to suspend disbelief.

On the other hand, considering stranger things which does a better job, without being really good (it's just ok), still manages to get me to suspend disbelief much better than that awful movie.

Anybody have anything on suspend disbelief from a narrative (the technique of storytelling) standpoint?

the fact that the frontpage animation is a cartoon (computer graphics rendering) of what they intend to do, and not a well produced timelapse makes me doubt their entire project.

all of it, I hope...

preferably mostly plants

yes exactly. you've explained this much better than I did

it's really terrible how the caring for one's health aspect of the medicine industry has taken a secondary role, the really important thing is corporate profit, patients are getting treated, but not healed

this is not to say the treatments are not effective, but I think it's telling to consider that the reason treatments remain effective is to avoid defrauding customers (err. patients), not becuase the intention is healing people.

just to generalized bad health and possibly celiac disease

I'd say that part of the problem is that this chemical makes the gut flora sick, not the human... but given as the gut bacteria are symbiotic with us, we also suffer negative consequces which are harder to explain with strictly reductionist biomechanics

also I keep in mind the economic incentives and the sorry state of academic funding

I like to think that in life the code is also the runtime, unlike in computer technology where the hardware is the runtime.

declarative vs procedural?

i.e. saying "what to" instead of saying "how to"

???

profit is not the same as wealth

wrong. some of it sucked maybe even the majority of it (if you insist) but most of it is not all of it.

I was playing patrick's parabox lately and I wonder about a characterization of different outcomes of pushing the box you're in out of it, or into it and so on... but, in terms of lambda-like recursive functions, i.e. a written theoretical description to make sense of what's going on with patrick's parabox

the ones that only service other banks hence only people working in higher level banking are likely to have heard about. e.g. the bank for international settlements

I only found out about this bank because the former president of the mexican central bank -- Mr. Carstens, left the central banking gig to go to that bank.

truly we are living in the age of abundance... but as there are more and more material widgets and stuff, so does the quantity of garbage increase

agreed, the rise of the corporation as the most powerful institution (above the nation-state) in this new budding global civilization is a long time coming.

on the other hand, this is how democracy dies. what structures (systems) exist to prevent apple (and other comparable corporations) from being an oppresive force against human persons? moreover, what incentives do they have?

> no conspiracy theory has yet emerged arguing that the Empire never really fell at all, and that everywhere from Carlisle to Cairo is still secretly being run by an emperor hidden somewhere under Rome. Which is a pity, because that would be brilliant.

it's mere occulted knowledge. Philip K. Dick says so in his exegesis. "the empire never ended"

additionally, the empire, which could also be regarded as an ideology or even an instutional tradition of hiding knowledge (to construct authority and wield it as power) has a deeply ingrained habit of erasing and rewriting history

to the point that this author is doing the bidding of this occulted (and possibly nonexistent) cult of occulting (i.e. hiding and mystery making) ideological/institutional force; he's rationalizing and backing the claim "conspiracies are silly nonesense, mkay? nothing to see but fools and buffoons".

how do you know this? how does one figure this kind of thing out?

it's a train, and it crashed already, but it's a rather humongous train, most of the train hasn't yet felt the shock from the crash

also, it's not a literal train, some people will be able to say there's no crash even as they fly out

they're not men, but persons... they're corporate individuals.

corporations owned by other corporations. even the men at the top, 'running' this things are following a series of written rules (contracts, standard corporate practices). It's in their 'hands' but they're bound by a bunch of stuff that's written down.

this on decisions pertaining to their business/professional lives. in private, this same people "go out to play".

Maybe such kinds of hideous things is the only place where they can feel as though their individual agency is worth a damn. In the office, well, they do as the rules (the data, the procedures and its algorithms, etc) dictate.

In choose to see these people as sick. They have a sickness but they do not see it like a sickness. Maybe I chose to think they're sick so I can cope with the reality that they're really that evil and powerful.

I think it's even worse:

Google these days treats your whole query as a suggestion

but quite frankly I am a bit of a glass-half-empty person

I'm still looking to understand the difference between recursive definitions and inductive ones...

It also has the consequence that from the perspective of the employee getting optimized, what Amazon is doing is exploiting them more, faster, better, and for less effort on Amazon's side.

Let's not forget that each of us the people are more similar to the employee than we're to Amazon. Though I suppose a lot of people who never have had to be an employee anywhere (e.g. due to being born into enough wealth) wouldn't see this as clearly as a more typical person; compound this into the fact that most law makers (specially senators) are from very wealthy backgrounds already...

but will you be able to sell fuel and fertilizer?

and consuming something is labor...

netflix should have to pay ME if they want me to gobble up the content they put out...

I see this, and I just wonder about the millions of dollars in radar technology sold by american companies owned by american congressmen...

I wonder if the chips they're using are made in taiwan... heheh

> What about retention periods? About about paper copies? Should no data anywhere be regulated because it is somehow this nebulously and poorly defined “extension of the mind?”

and extremal counterpoint to this viewpoint is that all data be regulated because it's all digital and in the cloud.

just consider banning paper and pencils

no, it ends where my own mind begins.

the problem here is the "collective mind" aka the cloud of collectively constructed digital information

I'd rephrase that it's the powerful agents dicating what them searchable indexes can find beyond what the algorithms doing the finding can do that's the real problem.

Add in the notion that the police and other important agencies can find a lot more than the Public can, because safety... and continue to completely break democracy while pretending you're doing all this for the greater good (where "for good" actually means "for concentration of power")

This seems to trying to pin down the "problem of identity" (how to ensure people maintain a stable identity over a digital realm)

I think it's important to be clear about why this is important, depending on the use case (votes, currency, etc) there may be a different reasons why it's important that one identity follows one person.

In the case of currency, the reason behind needing stable identity has to do with double spending.

But I have a toy scenario that I like to play around with, consider a cryptocurrency such that anybody can emit tokens (credits) however they deem appropriate, in this case the necessity of a stable identity is clear, the person needs to be able to answer for their emited tokens. If people can just shed the token-emitting-identity, then they cannot be held accountable (forced to answer) for their emitted tokens and the entire construction is useless.

However, for the case of votes and other group-concensus schemes, the scenarios are sufficiently different that I'm not sure if it'e even worthwhile to try to come up with ONE answer to the identity "problem"