I think suffering comes from optimisation. Not from building things from scratch.

People are hired to go through reports, create reports and do analysis. It's boring work.

Write proof of concept in a quick to develop language like Python.

Then when you need performance, rewrite in a more serious language like C. If you ever need to, I doubt you need to.

Bob: Pointing his laser pen towards a spinning black hole, and wondering, how to do so that it would always return with more energy than my laser puts in.

Alice: (Affixes perpendicular prisms to Bob's laser pointer, controlled by a program to point directly above the event horizon of the black hole for boomerang geodesic) -- Now, no matter which direction you point -- guaranteed profitability, for both of us!

Bob: I'm getting paid for whatever I do!

Alice: (Creates an incentive structure in her governance on the ship to ensure that there are always just enough people who happen to care to do what's needed naturally.) -- Now, look, no matter how many people do whatever they want, there will always be just enough of those that come to fix the systems because of their natural curiosity and interest before they break, so everyone gets to do what they want, end enjoy the profit.

Bob: That's magic, thanks Alice!

// Can computers do this? Symbolic reasoning?

Depends on what is x and y in "x ? = y". If they are numbers or some low complexity objects, then computers can do this (it is sometimes called entity grounding). For example, it is easy to imagine how computers can do search for path, like technological method, in a similar way how it searches for driving directions.

However, if x and y are non-trivial (having vague features or vague value dependency on feature combinations (that can only be evaluated by a human looking at it and using one's value system to feel about it), or computationally complex, or not fitting into memory), then computers usually can't do it, unless you think of entire universe and humans as computers, which is probably not what you meant by "computers" :)

This reminds me of my MRSGREN idea on github.

https://github.com/samsquire/ideas3#35-mrsgren

Then the company can truly be a lifeform. As it sees, it hears and it talks.

There's the humanist manifestos if you're not Christian.

Can computers do this?

Symbolic reasoning?

Buildings could be designed to he habitats for birds and insects.

Update: after contacting with a few researchers so far, there is a definite concern about the details of how the so-called "exchange" could happen, because doing this exchange may equate to "kidnapping" in some circumstances, and that is definitely not what we want.

So, while the "how exactly?" -- what are these preparations -- part of the "exchange" is still a question, I guess, among the most natural and sound ways would be, if the experiment happened as a natural extension of letting dolphins play with our tools, like boats that would have one communication portal with the rest of the pod, -- the boat that could be used for fun and would continue driving forward, until they decide to stop with a special sign meaning "come back" as a collective decision of the dolphin's own desire and the voices from the pod members. Later, replacing the "boat" with an airplane, with the abort option always left up to the dolphins.

//Video on Cymatics and example on Dolphins Seeing Sounds

That video made me wonder: are they speaking in rapid successions of what I would call hologlyphics (holographic hieroglyphics), modulated by intermediate syntactic signals.

A note on portal design choice: perhaps these portals could have not only public channel, but directional (e.g., fanning out if pod is circular) access booths for private 1-1 communication, that would allow each dolphin to swim to a specific portal (the portals could be numbered with light-based signs, e.g., a human letter with a digit), and that way choose to interact with another specific dolphin at the other end.

rich. fit. happy.

to clarify why I share this question, I would further ask "how does creativity occur?". to me, it's about collecting drafts (inspirations and observations) and then, suddenly when my mind is defocused, thoughts connect and an insight is born!

overall, to me, (creative) thinking is like constructing thoughts as puzzles which are sparked by someone else's thoughts and also my experiences.

(related resource on "mind defocused and focused" and what happens in the brain in both cases is Learning How to Learn course - see links)

I mention B.Fuller's thinking on "thoughts being a system" on purpose, because I wonder if there's some guiding number in the process of collecting observations and then synthesising them into an insight.

it's useful to reflect on how thoughts occur, and especially valuable thoughts, because if education can be transformed, so it can be transformed into a teaching people how to think better.

Yeah, you could do all of that, and much more, like the things mentioned under Social Real-Time Data Sharing. ;)

I used to think I didn't think, as I was intuitive. So I don't think things through actively. I don't have an internal monologue. I just do.

I think pretty deeply about things, but it's all invisible thoughts and below the surface.

It's pre-verbal.

And, I bet you already have a project on that! [+].

I've had discussions about unity with Mindey. We have different views of unity. I think unity is a beautiful concept, where people believe the same things and unite on some thing. It could be as simple as going to the same cafe because you believe in the cafe's values or quality of coffee. It's a trivial example of unity.

I believe you can unite on random variables. And I'm a member of different groups: single man, aged 30, computer enthusiast, cafe goer

I want an application on my phone called "Unity" which lets me find people who believe the same thing as me and allows me to interact with them.

I was randomly imagining future tribes based on values:

Burners: Burning Man type of people who seek experiences and value creative expression of all kinds.

Offgriders: Invisible communities living off-grid.

Calculators: Those who love the quality of life and new gadgets and scoring corporate ladder badges.

Who else? :) This is a creative exercise!

// And thinking is not part of a modern culture (consumerism is).

This is insightful, and indeed. What is happening under the current system, is AI getting directly connected to the limbic system, not the neocortex. This seem to have happened due to marketers finding out that subliminal and subconscious messaging works better, and abusing people's brain circuitry (limbic system), to control the populations with monetary system connected to those more basic needs, and pushing the whole internet to that direction of "images-first" instead of "tables first."

It may be because of the lack of tools for big-data decentralized thinking, and new ideas for that may change the status quo, I believe.

Along these lines, among interesting possibilities I just thought of, is dolphins getting to know the human concept of cultivating not their babies, but cultivating other fish and plants for food... (farming and husbandry)

Notes from "A Fuller Explanation" book club:

"Thinking isolates events; "understanding" then interconnects them. "Understanding is structure,"

"Realizing that a thought required at least enough "somethings" to define an isolated system, it seemed vitally important to know the minimum number ..."

"A "thought" is a "relevant set": experiences related to each other in some way. All the rest of experience is outside the set-not tuned in."

-- sounds like a structure of creativity/ideation! which could be transformed into "learning how to think" guidance"

B.Fuller defines life as "thoughts" and 4 being a min.number for having a thought. But what does it mean in practise?

Reference: http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/s05/p1000.html

//Video on Cymatics and example on Dolphins Seeing Sounds

very interesting. If dolphins have a society, then this underwater society may not be like human society, they can naturally communicate with holograms!

If dolphins develop a technological civilization, it must be very different from the technologies developed by humans living in the atmosphere.

// What if dolphins see images based on sounds?

Good point, but the restriction I've described in the idea was a bit intentional -- just like people couldn't transmit full range of their expressions via chat terminal, but were hooked so much that they shared their livelihoods in a sense-packed abstract language -- would dolphins do the same? Before we had Zoom and Hangouts, we had text chat-based communications, that worked miracles for collecting a training sets for things like translation services. :)

What if dolphins see images based on sounds?

So, if humans want to learn the language of dolphins, humans need to turn dolphins sounds into images (with cymascope), collect lots of images and then identify meaning in those images, and finally synthesise it into an English-Dolphins dictionary.

(References added to Links)

Current questions for 0oo front end:

• How can UI work as an ice-breaker and encourage people to post humourous responses?

• What types of ideas there are? So that diverse people feel welcomed to share their idea on 0oo.

// "Everybody generally wants the same things"

Yes and No. At certain level of abstraction -- yes: for example, everybody wants one complex condition satisfied (call this "happiness"), which is the same for everyone, but consists of many conditions to be satisfied ("experiences": "health", "relationships",...), which are not exactly the same, but we can find similarities.

Due to those similarities, systematic cooperation must be possible, which we do see in a variety of collaborations actually happening in the world.

// Make manifestos that describe what everybody wants

I think you already had a particular instance of this idea when describing the specific instance of it -- wantsfiles, and how they would work.

So, what would this be? Would this be written in legalese, or yaml? Or any language or format, and then auto-aligned with formats mapper like metaformat? But if you're so general, I could say that surveys exist (well, more often customer surveys, rather than surveys from the world engineers asking us what world we'd like to live in), and what we currently have is tracking (people telling what they want implicitly, through their behaviors, cause it's automatic, and people are lazy -- so, unless this writing of people's manifestos becomes some kind of school homework globally, or a form of communication (like in the wantsfiles), I don't see people naturally thinking to write such manifestos -- they have got to be pragmatic).

Hmm. What I like about this idea, is that suddenly, everyone would start showing their wants publicly, so they would become more transparent, and helpful. :)

But what about secret desires that people don't want to necessarily make public? Also, how far would this extend? Countries and organizations also often have their domains. Would domains replace markets (=become decentralized internet of wants)?

I imagine one that would have merit on the internet:

Here's an archive and its hash, i will pay people £X currency to host it for me

There would have to be another protocol for the exchange of wants with gives files.

The seller could contact the buyer and automatically arrange a price based on the minimum that the buyer is willing to buy.

Or the buyer could spider the sellers and contract the seller that they choose.

it should be all automated

Would that extend to all autonomous agents? How would this file be updated, would it have encrypted sections? What would be the language to describe those needs? Are those would be limited to the operations available by various standardized systems, or have a more vocabulary to describe more abstract wants?

I so see this used by advertisers... it's like big ASK with lots of bidders.

That makes me think, that this is how internet search should work -- you specify what is your current condition, and what is your target conditions (what you're trying to achieve), and the ? -- is the driving directions, or sequence of hints, that the search engine should provide to get you there. To be able to do that, it actually does require to have information about your current situation. Most search engines do that automatically, as we use a plethora of their services (in case of Google). So, they know what situation each person is in. Now, the task is to figure out what each person actually wants to happen in their lives ^__^ and provide search results with that context in mind, to make it happen... What could possibly go wrong?

Welcome [bauhouse] to the 0oo! It's great to have you here, and your comment is very relevant!

// The implication is that we may have conceived of the universe as being lifeless, but it is actually alive.

While I also adhere to panpsychism, I think there is a boundary, as Paul Budnik asks in his video poem -- where does the consciousness beings or ends?.

// but that humans have compromised the world’s ability to work as it has been working

Humans are just a new life form on the plant Earth, just like animals were a new form of life, after plant life. If a form of life is able to change ecosystem, does it mean that it really compromises it? For example, Earth's temperature during the last 500 mln. years has been outside the current range, and the ecosystem has recovered. I think it's worth a discussion and research to understand, how much humans do actually compromise the world’s ability to deal with the consequences. Albeit, it's a bit of a digression from universal utility.

My concern is, that of what to consider to be "life," and does all life, including life in computational universes, like in Avida, count, and if so, how?

David Bohm’s explorations of quantum physics, general relativity, and wholeness might bring into question the notion of a distinction between sentient life and non-sentient life. The implication is that we may have conceived of the universe as being lifeless, but it is actually alive. If we depend on the non-sentient life of the Earth for the oxygen we breathe, those life forms are an integral part of the whole that maintains the health of the whole.

Creating such a world is rather presumptuous, then. Instead, should we not merely observe how the world already works for all life, but that humans have compromised the world’s ability to work as it has been working by disrupting the systems of life?

[transiency] so, the surveillance cameras should point to skies, when idle? :)

Should it be for all life, or for sentient life? There are life forms, like viruses, that are arguably not readily sentient. How do we think about that?

This category, while similar to Conflict Resolution, is sufficiently different in its description, i.e., more economic-theoretic, in that it refers to the principal–agent problem. You can use markdown syntax pretty much everywhere on the site.

// funds a set of activities or programmes

Hmm. This actually go much deeper than one might anticipate -- activities or programmes -- tend to have all aspects of volition and cognition as well. Will we not require the entire f(x)=y to wrap it? :)

It looks like it's what we'd naturally have by having products on 0oo, because products here are connected to projects, and them with ideas and goals... by buying on 0oo, one would naturally see supply network that one's supporting.

Thinking, of double strategy: business that funds decentralization encryption of user data from being able to see itself, and funds decentralization and dis-own-ment of its services.

Why? Because it's the amount of funds needed for development of the decenralized solution is large enough, that can only be funded as part of the business operations.

I see every purchase of a product funds a set of activities or programmes, the money must physically go to those areas. That's what I mean by wrapped, you're buying more than just the thing on the shelf, but you're investing in lots of other things too.

A map on the wrapper or a link to the product map is a great idea. I like that.

It makes sense to me, and relates to the idea of consumer price breakdown requirement.

How do you see it implemented? Would displaying the entire supply chain, on the wrapping of the product do it? For example, in case of a food product, -- not just the price, manufacturer and nutrients, -- but the entire story, and how related agents will benefit from my purchase.

I certainly think this information would affect purchasing patterns, but how would you compact that all information onto the products? While we could just add proper QR-codes, leading to web addresses with explanations, people like the convenience of not having to scan every item with their phones. In that case, would some kind of elaborate color-coding for initial screening while strolling or scrolling through marketplaces, do it, or how do you imagine it?

What about decoupling technology from the problem it solves and solve with a definition language?

Thanks, [chronological], very appreciated! :)

I've given you SSH access so you can share some storage space in the form of a backup. Although I'm taking a dump every 30 minutes anyway.

Quadrillion dollar question. There's lots to share: CPU, GPU, DISK, RAM, NETWORK...

Cloud computing allows resources to be shared. But I bet there's a simple technique to sharing programs and data that allows the maximum use of technology.

Actually, I was looking into more abstract example and how to have a thinking template for creating systems.

What does any business, any community, any garden, any system need to work (by driving inspiration from how natural systems work)?

Thinking, perhaps what's the most important in the system is a movement of energy and not its parts (parts can change.. if it's a real world system).

So, for a business as a system to work, a movement of money is key. So a transaction moment must be designed. And then missing puzzles to enable that transaction.

For a garden as a system to work, a flow of water and heat must be designed. And later, the plants in the garden.

For a community or a town as a system to work, an interaction is a must-have. So, space that triggers interactions designed. And later, specific people invited who may come and go as they will.