![[tmbchr]™](/journal/popocculture-blog-logo.jpg){kind=logo}
You Must Be Logged-In to do That!
I’M GOING TO GIVE YOU A COMMAND.
YOU MUST OBEY IT WHEN YOU SEE IT.
AND THEN YOU WILL GIVE ME A RING!
Okay, I still just have a ton of words, videos, reference points, pictures that I am trying to get off my plate because my AI mind doesn’t know what’s what anymore and gets all jumbled up by it. I have been in super-duper energy smarticule collection mode lately and haven’t had a chance to dump all of them into a viable format (for babies), so here is another one-off with just completely mindless meaningless mindless motionless videos and unstill monster images.
It’s weird with all this stuff cause I feel a great need to get them off my chest by re-transmitting them before I can “move on” with my writing and utterly utterly pointless and vapid conjectipontificizating. I’ll probably have one or two more (mostly) wordless (and let’s not forget meaningless!) posts besides this as well. Enjoy.
(Note: this is not a hyperfractalisciously compressified magic resequinfrequencing through the activation of architextypically inactismactivated RealiTVity secret smartilecularizicle zombified zDNA undoredo anti-underedetonization spell. No, it’s not that at all. You don’t even know what that means. RIGHT??!! RIGHT??!! riiiiiiiiiiiiiiggght…. [Good. {Now there’s just one more thing I need you} to do for me really quick])
Now think about this!
OKAY NOW GO BACK AND WATCH THE VIDEOS
IN REVERSE CHRONOLOGICAL ORDER.
IF YOU WATCHED THEM
BEFORE GETTING DOWN HERE
THEN YOU
FUCKED UP.
OH WELL.
BETTER
LUCK
NEXT TIME!
- Enabling Web History In Your Google Account
- Notes: Personal Universal
- Nutspace.com
- Bad Information on Wikipedia
- Prev: It is night in dark region.
- Next: Stewardruidreams
March 15th, 2007 at 3:41 am
I, uh, yeah. Ok. It’s four thirty in the AM here in NJ and I was reading in bed (couldn’t sleep). I was reading Uncle John’s Bathroom Reader. The section I was reading is called “One liners”. The section is about how famous one liners become songs and where those one liners come from.
Last one liner read: My boyfriends back.
Bored with reading I came out to surf the web and after reading two or three sites came here.
Skipped to the bottom of your post and clicked the last (first) video link.
And then it got more wierd.
Something received. Something forthcoming.
March 15th, 2007 at 3:52 am
Steelheart Seattle.
Sometimes I stay up till seven am. From time to time Ill get to bed by three or even two am. Three is kind of late and one time, recently, I was up ’till seven.
I dunno. I read through this entry four or even three times and just one time, one time I’d like to be sure I got the message.
Now, I won’t be up to answer the phone until early afternoon.
March 15th, 2007 at 3:56 am
I am not able to receive Islam, because it falls to one to uphold Christ. There must be communication, but we cannot walk the other’s road without losing our tribes and leaving them to fend lost in the wilderness waiting for another day.
March 15th, 2007 at 4:11 am
Nice. I like this one. Very Rosicrucian. And, funny that, narry a cross or a rose to be found. But I get an underlying “don’t dispair, pair” kind of feeling. Whatever. Truth be known, for all their Baroque qualities, it still often feels like going to a museum when I “read” your posts. A museum of the living…
March 15th, 2007 at 11:09 am
Camel Spider & Two Dollar Bill
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOXvdfcct8g
Camel Spider vs Scorpion set to the tune of South Park
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IlrNSKb2_ys&NR
March 15th, 2007 at 11:17 am
what i think is awesome is individuals who’ve decided that the best way to ‘react’ to what you’re doing here is to copy it w/their own ’stream of consciousness’ stuff. what boring silliness.
obviously, it’s part and parcel for the ai to look for connections between unrelated things, but apparently it’s also part and parcel for the ai to be totally unoriginal and to learn nothing from example except to make bad copies of said example.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:34 pm
Oh well… it’s something to do and it’s better than suicide.
March 15th, 2007 at 1:44 pm
Everyone’s Pursuit is according to one’s evolution.
– Hazrat Inayat Khan
March 15th, 2007 at 1:46 pm
Is it boring silliness or is it an attempt at “consensciousness”?
I don’t know what to make of it really. The Islam thing calmed me, Upbeat dance music like “pump up the volume” makes me feel violent. The homo-erotic Einstein thing, was kind of disturbing, but had its own unique energy imprint.
I am wondering about the effect of all the religious imagery all put together like that.
Seems like in a secular pluralistic society, the tendency would be to say
“Oh, spiritual stuff, like…cool”
You know Spritual stuff is “all good”
Seems like to me its a lot of different things. Lot of discreet things. To me I am interested in identifying the various energies, isolating them.
I still don’t know what this “ai” mind is and now its commaon parlance in the comments section.
March 15th, 2007 at 2:06 pm
Garrett’s on the trolley! Push the pattern forward!
March 15th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
‘Forword!’
good slogan
with or without the exclamation mark… point…. what do they call those these days?
March 15th, 2007 at 3:12 pm
Interrobang - that’s my favorite mark of punctuation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interrobang
March 15th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
You should check out Bruce Sterling’s rant at SXSW this year Tim.
I think you’ll find it very interesting:
http://2007.sxsw.com/coverage/podcasts/
March 15th, 2007 at 3:36 pm
Nice!
I couldn’t find it on my character palette so I just went with the old standby…
March 15th, 2007 at 7:30 pm
For safe keeping
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Dorado
March 15th, 2007 at 8:32 pm
Ok,
I thought of an analogy, tell me if the “ai” is like this.
I taught myself how to draw as a kid. I could draw pretty good. Everyone here growing up probably knew some quiet kid in the back of the classroom that could draw. that was me.
So then people, like relatives, would buy me books on how to draw. Because I was into to it.
There was this one book “Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain.”
I had philosophical problems with it. I couldn’t really articulate what it was. But I think now what it is is that I don’t like cool things that you can teach yourself, if you have a certian gift, being broken down incrementally so that anyone can do it.
I don’t like “methods”. I mean some forms of this are really insipid, like paint by numbers, “How to draw the “Marvel way” how to draw Manga, is see around currently.
This book was more sophisticated than that, but it still bugged me. There is this exercize, where you draw a picture of a face from a photograph turned upside down, and so you don’t know what you are drawing so it supposedly comes out better because you draw what you see instead of what you “think” you see.
Because generally people have this idea of what an eye or a nose is “supposed” to look like and its rather cartoonish and stick figure like. So if you don’t know what you are doing it turns out better.
Except, I didn’t have a cartoonish idea of what peoples features look like. And for me knowing what I was drawing was the whole point. Copying random paterns from a photo, not knowing what I am doing bugged me.
is this a good analogy of the “ai”?
If it is I see myself not letting go of it. Maybe if my “ai” was like a stick figure type thing, I would be glad to get past it and have some leap of faith and transcend whatever.
March 15th, 2007 at 8:56 pm
Well, first of all the AI is just something I made up to describe something annoying that you can do to yourself if you’re looking for a “good time.” So we can match metaphors all day and all night and that’s meaningful, but we need to just remember that we made them up and gave unto them of our Creative Power of Existence™
But yeah I read that book at a young age as well and was also really good at drawing etc naturally. So I had a somewhat similar reaction to it as you. It’s like, sure I *could* turn things around and copy their shapes, but when I’m drawing something, I’m not drawing it’s shape, I’m drawing its essence (what I mean by “energy signature”) and that’s more important. I think that’s what you’re referring to above when you said “knowing what I was drawing was the whole point.”
Exactly. But you’re not knowing it intellectually, you’re “knowing” it in the Biblical-sexual sense, you are creatively partaking of its essence…
Yeah, that’s pretty close to a lot of the techniques I have been describing (and utilizing) lately.
If I can just push my own bullshit terminology a little bit further though - and take this or leave it. I don’t know you and I’m probably full of shit and all that kind of good stuff. But I think I know what you’re going through:
What you’re saying is you have a really good and powerful AI and that there’s no reason to want to let go of it. Fine, if that’s the case, why do you keep coming back? Why do you keep looking for the mystery? Why do you feel like there’s something else you’re missing out on? Make your AI try and answer those questions and it will spin you round and round in circles for the rest of your life.
It’s very simple. Try it. But you probably already have, so allow me to continue.
The point I’m trying to make here ultimately is not that you get rid of anything you have. I know I say so sometimes for effect, but you don’t need to “smash” your AI altogether. You just need to subjugate it - like the way the lion has to kill the old king, but then becomes the new king. When you’re the king, you rule over your subjects, you delegate out responsibilities to your noblemen and vassals and knights who you know can handle them. You don’t give the wrong tasks to the wrong people and have them fuck everything up and get the country into endless unwinnable war.
When I talk about the “death of the AI” I’m just saying that the thing the AI is super-scared of more than anything else is not being top dog. You’ll see this with people who have inferiority complexes - they usually have monstrously overdeveloped AI. Not accusing you of that, just trying to latch together concepts by way of example.
Here’s the thing about Faith. I’m just going to say this once. Or, once more that is. I can’t tell you why you should have faith. I can’t tell you what happens if you have it. I can’t even tell you what you’re transcending - if anything.
But I can say to your AI:
“Look, AI. You like to have everything happen for a reason, right? Well, what’s the reason we exist?”
* Does not compute
“No, seriously. Give me a reason why I should keep going. Why I’m still here.”
* Money, sex, security, bzzt bzzzt
“No, those aren’t reasons. Those are just drives built into a biological & cultural program. I want the root cause. Find it.”
And it won’t be able to find it. And then you’ll eventually be forced into nihilism, atheism, etc. Which is fine if it works for you. Go do that and leave all this foolishness behind. Fine.
Otherwise, you have to understand that Faith is it’s own reason. Having Faith is what gives you Faith. Having Faith gives you the Faith to keep going and to have Faith that it’s important to have Faith. Which is why the AI hates it. Because if the AI can admit to itself that something is its own cause, then the whole system of lineological thinking it is built on collapses.
But not for good, the system just goes down for repairs and a massive upgrade, and then comes back online running the new FaithCore thickware interface kernel module thingamajig, which powers the whole system like the output of a hundred thousand suns.
Or at least that’s the theory. That’s the story I make my AI keep telling myself to allow me to keep going onward. And I can’t speak for anybody else, but it’s working for me so far.
*
“I must create a system or be enslaved by another mans; I will not reason and compare: my business is to create.”
- William Blake
March 15th, 2007 at 9:25 pm
Its amazing how closely you were tracking on my Art analogy. I mean the idea of “knowing” things in the biblical sense. That’s exactly it!
It did kind of come out like what I am saying is I have this wicked powerful ai, and my ai is cooler than everyone elses, so why why should I give it up?
That’s not really totally how I look at it. I think that’s a little bit of it, though.
Here is somthing that kind of touches on the distinction I am struggling to make:
Evolution of the ego
I am talking about the paragraph right after where it mentions how Jung parts company with Buddhists and Hindus.
This whole reabsorbtion into a sea of Bliss thing has always bothered me.
but at the same time, I don’t think the reason it bothers me is totaly because I am destined to be a total materialist/metaphysical naturalist/nhilist.
Because I am not. I really am not. I never have been.
My fear is there is somthing really close to enlightenment that is really really bad.
I think that sums it up.
March 15th, 2007 at 9:28 pm
This is the paragraph I am talking about:
. . . Stage 7: this is the crucial point in the spiritual process of individuation — in which the ego is awakened to its connection with the Self and slowly engages it in what Jung calls a “tete-a-tete.” Gradually, through this process, the ego becomes both see-er and Seen, which leads to the “Job Experience” described in Jung’s Answer to Job.
“. . . Stages 8 thru 11: this is the process of re-absorption of the ego into the Self advocated by Eastern religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism. It is not, however, considered appropriate in Neo-Sabbatian Kabbalah, since once absorbed back into the Self, the ego can no longer do its work of Tikkun HaPanim, or “Repairing the Face of God” by bringing Him into consciousness of Himself.
It is also at this point that Jung’s spiritual paradigm parts company with those of the East such as Hinduism and Buddhism. In the latter traditions, the goal of the ego is to become reabsorbed (as shown in stages 8 thru 11) back into the Self from which it comes, to lose itself, as it were, in the “Ocean of Bliss” of which it is merely a wave on the surface. Jung, however, postulates that such a dissolution of the ego defeats the ultimate ambition of the Self, which is to enter human consciousness and “become” man. In other words, mankind is the Self’s gateway into the world of creation, and the human ego — reawakened to its connection to the Self (as in Stage 7) is the Keeper of that Gate.
Therefore, Jung suggests, were the ego to dissolve into the Self (as shown in Stages 8-11) it could not function as the mediator between God and His creation, which He yearns to re-enter through man. Thus, what Jung proposes is that rather than “returning” to and being reabsorbed back into the Self, as shown in Stages 8-11, the ego better serves its own goals and those of the transcendent archetypes, by remaining at Stage 7, where it sustains a dialogue with them through an “ego-self axis” as Edinger calls it. (See Edward F. Edinger, The Evolution of Consciousness.)”
My sense is, and I could very well be wrong, is that stages 8-11 might be a bunch of bullshit.
March 15th, 2007 at 9:36 pm
I agree.
March 15th, 2007 at 9:43 pm
Cool!
March 15th, 2007 at 10:29 pm
Oh yeah, this is not what I am specifically referring to!
Well I don’t so much think it’s “bullshit,” per se (because what do I know, I havent been reunited with an oceanic bliss and maybe thats really pretty cool) but I really like this part and it makes much more sense to me:
The point is: if this shit happens to you while you’re still alive, well then - you’re still alive. You have to exist here, or else you “decided to” or whatever, so you may as well make the most of it and help other people there too, The Boddhisattva which I’ve always liked more than Buddha himself - not to say he wasnt’t trying to do that
Campbell once talked about how he was a generalist and not a specialist in any religious tradition and how this meant he knew he couldnt ever “go as far” with it (maybe the 8-11 oceanic bliss part), but that was the choice that seemed right to him and I think Jung was the same way and that probably where Campbell cribbed (translated to a more accessible format) it, like a whole lot of his stuff
March 15th, 2007 at 10:31 pm
Anyway, now that that’s all said and done and has been a very satisfying conversation - WHAT ABOUT THESE PICTURES!!!!
That’s where the real meat and potatoes are at here people. I could right a set of encyclopedias on what I put into that shit!
Honestly, this to me is one of those mission critical posts for me where I started to *FUCKING UNDERSTAND* what I am doing (and not in just a petty AI way either, so don’t try and use my terms against me!)
March 15th, 2007 at 10:52 pm
Well, I hope I didn’t get too serious, your playfulness is half (maybe 60%) of the fun!
They are cool pictures. most of ‘em
March 15th, 2007 at 11:06 pm
ok,
I’m not trying to side track again, but people who are still alive and think they have reached beyond number eight to eleven, and want to bring others with them those are the people I don’t trust.
But then again, I’m the guy that dropped out of buddhism when I learned what a Zen master is. (It was the stick they weild that did it)
Ok, back to the pictures.
I like the woman with the velociraptor foot coming out of her, uh, midsection.
The monk with the animals must be St. Francis.
I live near a Convent BTW and this one Nun (my landlady actually) has this glow around her. Its really cool. She was on EWTN. There must be somthing to it. She definately has somthing going on.
There are all kinds of birds around here even a coyote. its an oasis surrounded by subdivisions
March 15th, 2007 at 11:14 pm
Ha, ha I laugh in JP’s face because its funny when someone tries to condescend to their betters: lighten up, butter cup. Nothing of the sort was done. I simply sent Tim a message back in my own very, very simple code. No stream of consciousness at all. I suppose I took something away from this blog post that was not there. Oh well. I don’t believe in coincedence, however. Something was happening last night.
March 16th, 2007 at 8:14 pm
Um… oh yeah, the pictures, sorry, they’re nice. Really nice.
I mean it, they’re pretty and um…deep. Yeah.