Sentences (#65)

Peter Watts in pursuit of abstract horror (Echopraxia, p.297):

The less he found, the more he feared.

Plus vampire acausal trade bonus: “… they’d acted in perfect sync, knowing that others they’d never met would have worked out the same scenario” (p. 289). — A classic Age of the Basilisk threat structure.

And one more (p.292):

“A stealth supernet fine-tuned for the manipulation of pawns with a specific skill-set suited to military applications. And it just emerged?”
Moore smiled faintly. “Of course. No complex finely tuned system could ever just evolve. Something must have created it.”

July 17, 2016admin 13 Comments »

TAGGED WITH : , , , ,

13 Responses to this entry

  • Brett Stevens Says:

    To a super-intelligence, the path of evolution would be clear.

    In the meantime, people fear that which is not deliberate because it reminds us that our willing something does not make it so.


    Posted on July 17th, 2016 at 11:43 pm Reply | Quote
  • Anon Says:

    Gnon creates Man, Man creates God, Man destroys God, Man creates AI, AI destroys Man, AI inherits the earth?


    admin Reply:

    No one expects it to go quite that smoothly.


    SVErshov Reply:

    it is deterministic position and smooth or not so smooth, but AI going to exterminate human civilization according to its path dependence. determinism depends on concept of discontinuity and fortunately there is no discontinuity in real physical world. the whole P Zombi/AI discourse can be reduced to this critical singular point of continuity/discontinuity dilemma. unfortunately that can be very tedious tasks to form an opinion on that one, because most of physics text books concern with proving discontinuity only. similar point of view in philosophy also, for example in Brassier’s reading of Sellars, discontinuity accepted as axiomatic.


    Aeroguy Reply:

    “exterminate human civilization”
    Humans can be civilized but civilization certainly isn’t human.


    Posted on July 18th, 2016 at 2:18 am Reply | Quote
  • SVErshov Says:

    “No complex finely tuned system could ever just evolve. Something must have created it.”

    complex selfassembling systems can evolve on both sides of the scale in macro and micro worlds. for example during star burst galaxy can produce hundreds of new starts per year.

    “According to the classical point of View, nature would be an automaton. However, today we discover instabilities, bifurcations, evolution everywhere. This demands a different formulation of the laws of nature to include probability and time symmetry breaking. We have shown that the difficulties in the classical formulation come from a too narrow point of View concerning the fundamental laws of dynamics (classical or quantum). The classical model has been a model of integrable systems (in the sense of Poincaré). It is this model, which leads to determinism and time reversibility. We have shown that when we leave this model and consider a class of non-integrable systems, the difficulties are overcome. We show that our approach unifies dynamics, thermodynamics and probability theory. ”

    Prigogine, Is Future Given?


    Quint Essential Reply:

    “Finely tuned” is the key part here, I think. It implies a perspective, and a perspective implies a creator.


    SVErshov Reply:

    perceptive implies dynamics. dynamics implies model and can be deterministic, integrable and that automatically means we all going to drown, or non deterministic. comprehending gravity of situation Prigogine’s extension for classical dynamics which is non deterministic cannot be ignored.


    Futuroaklypsein Reply:

    map < territory

    when indians trail* animals, with abilities to us seem super- or preterhuman,

    they not as much use a map (they don´t) as actually become

    (* track, for the hyperpedantic.)

    the territory.


    Posted on July 19th, 2016 at 4:33 am Reply | Quote
  • jack arcalon Says:

    Paracosmic horror may be the most appropriate, if vaguest possible human emotion.

    The best cure for such dread may be the contemplation of our world’s perfectly ordinary horrors.


    Apocalyptic Archeogenesis Reply:

    Cure? I revel in cosmic horror.

    Bhu-deva. Feel it.

    Be it…


    Posted on July 19th, 2016 at 12:34 pm Reply | Quote
  • illegal Says:

    I’m reaching my next stage of evolution toward full blown libertarian. Since it looks like Trump is going to win the election, I do think there is going to be a significant chance to being to actualized concepts. I really wanted to dive deeper into a certain specific brand of libertarianism… not Gary Johnson, not the “liberal” type, and also not just the boring theory-philosophy type, which I find a little bit too “Philosophy of Law” esque.

    I want to go more into something cultural, aesthetic, and critical-theory esque. They talk of cultural Marxism, what about cultural libertarianism? Yeah, well, the main thing is I’m talking about a specific type of libertarianism. Somethings I have seen discussed here came closest to beginning to get close to the feeling ideas I have in my own mind about what libertarianism really is.


    Nicean Necropolis (Náströnd) Reply:

    Pretty fucking Libertarian:

    { The Scandinavian counts called their leader “the enemy of gold,” since as a leader he was not allowed to keep any gold for himself, and also “the host of heroes,” because of the pride he took in hosting his faithful warriors, whom he regarded as his compainions and equals, in his house. Even among the Franks prior to Charlemagne, participation in a particular mission occurred on a voluntary basis; the king invited people to participate, he appealed to them; at times the princes themselves proposed a course of action – in any event, there was neither “duty” nor impersonal “service,” since everywhere there were free and highly personalized relationships of command and obedience, mutual understanding and faithfulness. Thus, the idea of free personality was the foundation of any unity and hierarchy. this was the “Nordic” seed from which the feudal system arose as the background to the new imperial idea. }

    Not exactly Oriental Despotism any way.

    As for culture & critique; yes,

    that is needed with its

    aesthetic. I believ

    it be already


    It´s just not a unified ‘civilization’; it´s scattered all over in different competing (& sometimes cooperating) subcultures.

    These things have been touched on in the comments before, e,g, back in ’14.


    Posted on July 19th, 2016 at 2:59 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment