Jump to content

The Mother of The Others

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About The Mother of The Others

  • Rank
    Council Member

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Best All Star weekend ever. The slam dunk contest was like damn, plus the Buddy win , the roast of the hosts was perfect, and now they tricked the players into really competing during the the allstar game to keep their charity kids from crying. And the alley oop fest at the start of the game! This was a great way for the league to celebrate Kobe's death. Jennifer Hudson's tribute song was strange like opera and the shadow of Kobe's head above her looked elongated at one camera angle hinting at his alien heritage and then Magic Johnson said David Stern saved millions of people from HIV. Chris Webber was absent from broadcast duties due to load management. Tiffany Haddish's ass was so wide when Shaq saw her from behind he said, "Hey Chuck, how ya doin." Best Allstar Ever.
  2. Everyone is cussing on most channels this year, so saying the moon is a wily cunt who doesn't want to die doesn't stand out as much as you'd think it would. The two parter with the whales pretty much banged. The dark king story isn't totally boring. Totally boring is those uninspired fantasy novels where the dark lord is like, "I'm so evil, and also in a leadership position, just as you'd expect." Fen is off to have a faerie adventure next to get their side of the story. The librarian seems to have joined the gang. Penny is addicted to meth. Josh will give you the coronavirus AND werewolfism but you'll eat well. Todd is still stressed out despite being jacked off. Dean Fog needs to be rescued from paradise. Julia and Alice and Kady all working together is nice to see. Margo the gladiator. All Hale the king.
  3. Individuals can do all sorts of things. Like having impressive ethics. Based on their individual sense of discipline. But human society as a whole? We raised the tent of civilization by fear of god keeping the main group grounded in solid foundations. Some jerks were always lawless, that's why they had commandments like Stop Banging Hoskins' Wife. But by and large we have all the things we take for granted today because fear of gods kept the herd together and bent them toward a shared purpose. Without that, as the herd pisses civilization away slowly, do even the good individuals keep true to their ethics, or do they see the state of things and say screw it and take that Chinese bribe to share their findings with the sun kingdom? Because hey, sin and sun kingdoms are only a phoneme away. I say we have a situation that can't be held together much longer by the ethical few. Not that I'm huge on the old world returning either. But their coping was better than our coping. Their resilience more proven, our trend angling more toward the suicidal. As if we threw out the forge of society and went with an easy bake oven in its place.
  4. Si. So many people are getting into the legal profession because they want to change the laws. Durrrr. It's the wrong place for them, since that's supposed to be where you go to uphold the law. So we're in for another generation of sabotage by those who'd rather not do their job of enforcing the law yet they refuse to quit and find their true calling. All because they can't keep their personal and professional separate. I want to believe the "hardness" over creationism is new, like the church found a blue pill late in life. But aside from the centuries they were being persecuted hasn't the history of the church been one of harsh non-permissive stories of folks getting excommunicated, the smashing of icons, burnings, schisms..... I'm having trouble picturing someone scoffing at the creation story in the fifth century and receiving soft treatment. Maybe they'd get a nicely worded letter to the golashans at first... but you don't hear about any 637th letter because those damn goloshans woulda received a swift jesus kick to the sack well before that to get them in line. And about that literalist tragedy, um, yes. Testify. I'm one of those unrespectable ones with capacity for both myth and method. Where the two clash, like creationist teachings in schools, I've always just bypassed those sinkhole issues fast to avoid getting caught in the feedback loop that steals people's focus away for, like, their whole lives. Not everything has to make sense. Why would everything in science and religion overlap and conform perfectly to a synthesized world view? Why would anyone expect it to? And the two aren't playing by the same rules, so why does it need to be a contest!? And why would that contest produce a legit winner? ("Jim ran the marathon while Stacy biked the course. Now let's compare their times to see who won.") Jeesh. Steer around the bumps and keep truckin. I want well rounded scientists with some classical learning on top of all their phd's. They're dealing with weighty problems, some of them, and i want those people to have a backbone. A soul, so to speak. For when it might become highly relevant, I want the antiquated notions of morality in their heads informing their decisions, acting as a check on their behavior. Before they engage in something damnedable, I want them to at least stop and ponder, "Won't i be damned for doing this?" The alternative seems to be a modern self reliance undeserved. People completely divest themselves of religion as something irrational therefore worthless. Then, they're that much more likely to do whatever they feel like. (Danger, Will Wheaton!) Now they're worthless. They're no longer anchored to anything as weighty as the ethical decisions at hand, so they're unequal to the big moments. There are rational horrors. Things we quail at if unarmed with the concept of soul. Better to carry a weak bit of wholesome irrational belief within you as a vaccination against going truly nuts.
  5. Before we had eyes there was a higher form of consciousness/awareness waiting to be tapped into. Life somehow identified this potential and dug down into a greater connectedness with the universe, our eyes exposing us to more of a reality previously hidden. Is it the same with the mind? Is our current consciousness a proto form of the richer awareness yet to be uncovered as life digs deeper over the eons to reach closer and closer to the heart of reality so we can gain new forms of connectedness and add layers of mental acuity? How deep will that mineshaft go? That's where i find wonder. Is evolution like Stephen King's Tommyknockers, with our current level of sentience akin to those lowly zombie-esque townsfolk who were compelled to dig away all night as they uncovered more and more of the underfoot. Science itself is this urge to dig deeper made conscious. Look at us, compelled to uncover whatever's underneath. Compelled by what? A "drive," officially. Our biochemical processes. Does that drive also compel our bodies to experiment with mutations on the molecular level? Are cells ordered to uncover more potential, to stretch our future, to yearn to supplant themselves. Are we following the same evolutionary orders now by building machines so steadfastly to supplant us? Eyeless, somehow life knew it was in the dark and aimed its evolution down avenues that would one day result in eyesight. Like, millions of years down the road. What was driving that? For a start life just began moving things into place, surely not as building blocks for a sight organ atop the food oriface, because as we "know" mutations are more random and don't come with 100 million year plans like a Japanese corporation in the 90's. Clumps of molecules only, then, which anthropologists must become apologists for. They have the unenviable job of saying, "uh, yeah, each of those clumps provided an evolutionary advantage during every step of the process , even as complete eyeballs remained a gazillion generations away. Sure, like, maybe a puffiness built up on their heads where the eyes would one day emerge, and that deflected tongue strikes away to the sides so a frog couldn't latch on to your head with its tongue as easily, making it more likely you'd survive. ....Yes. That's my position and nothing can get me to budge on that OR use a breath mint." I guess what I'm saying is life appears to be entangled with something guiding its hand from deeper within reality than we have succeeded in uncovering or explaining thus far. Not a god, which is the oversimplification of this insight. But this insight is the reason we developed religions. To arrive at the wing, something shaved a lot of the randomness out of evolution for long enough to hunker down and focus on design something fierce. The new age cult I may be susceptible to joining would be the one preaching that our consciousness is the tip of the thoughtberg and there's more of it waiting to be found attached to the part we've accessed. I think we'll eventually find that our subconscious influences mutations through some kind of wishcraft, yearning, a bodily imperative spoken through sustained fear or need or desire that the cells hear as a work order. More directed than we realize. So if the brain isn't set up as a receiver, and consciousness isn't being received as a gift from some higher reality that deigned to send us divine inspiration, maybe there's still a mystery just as wondrous looking us right in the... eye. Consciousness may be actively ramping up to a higher reality over time. We may be in the tadpole stage of the brain's development. What a shame then, if we create the machine overlords of the galaxy now, and they kill off life before we get a chance to evolve godsight, or whatever's next for us. How much more enlightened the permanent ruling class of machines could have been. Oh well, let's at least make them super attractive then.
  6. What if there were a bunch of QBs on first down? Flood the field with QB's! New Orleans uses 2 at the same time already, but they could be doing more. They had Bridgewater, and if Rivers went there that'd make 4 QB's they could bring together in one play to completely confuse things. If one of them took a fifteen yard drop, another of them went in motion, the third took a direct snap and latteraled to the one who'd lined up in shotgun....... that'd really be something. Add to that the fact you'd be denying other teams access to backup quarterbacks by collecting all of them you possibly could onto one team. Just keep acquiring more and more QBs and don't stop. Hungry Hippo those MFs. Like china hoards all the super-rare metals we need for our high tech gizmos. Eventually it'll cause a league wide shortage at the position. Then, take one of your meaningless extra QBs and set him up as a cobra kai blitzer to "sweep the leg" of the other team's last decent QB. What do you care if your kamakazi gets banned by the league? That's just another way of keeping other teams from getting him on their roster. And as for where to put all these QB's on your own roster? Well, let's see. Every kickoff goes through the endzone these days, so clear out special teams. Why pay them anymore for trotting out to "achieve" another touchback. That's 11 slots right there (really around 5 or 6, cuz you need the kicking team and the guys who also play on another squad). Those are roster spots you can earmark for additional QBs. Then take a good hard look at your receiver corps. Are they still dropping balls at the same alarming rate they always have? And they're just about as skinny as QBs. Hmmmm. So if you replaced them with QB's, you wouldn't be giving up that much weight, and now you'd have guys who could both catch AND toss. Worried they wouldn't have enough speed to get open? That's already the case, except for the 1 or 2 guys your QB ends up throwing to all the time. Consider keeping them, or recruit fast QBs to replace them from among the ranks of multi-sport athletes. The center? No, you need to keep the center under contract. Unless you can find an older out of work QB who's really let himself go and has packed on the pounds to where he's starting to look like a possible fit as your new center. That's the blueprint. And it can honestly be said that no team has ever failed using this approach. Whether any of this current crop of milk toast coaches are sufficiently nutted to handle this amount of risk/reward is another matter. Most of their genitals if weighed against a poptart would be like egyptian souls found to be lighter than a feather. Clearly, I'm wasting my time pitching this to the nfl and need to walk it over to the XFL where ideas are listened to and applied. "Happy Valentime's Day." - - - Mr. T
  7. Yeah. We prize our apparent edge over other consciousnesses, because it's what we've got: the edge, currently, and prideful ways of explaining it. But it's circumstance that gave us the Earth to plunder for now. The actual sentience part of consciousness that we award only to ourselves will turn out to be an illusion, or a negligible distinction from the consciousness of flies and ants. We and not they inherited the championship belt by being in the right geologic time and place for our particular advantages to run the table. Doesn't mean we're special, it means we won a hand of timeline poker and are waiting for the inevitable reshuffling of the deck. That's why (going back to the big main topic of AI overtaking us) if anyone actually does yearn for the singularity when we hand the baton over to a new top dog, maybe they fancy the idea of humanity cashing out our chips and collecting our winnings. By removing ourselves from the biological life cycle now before we go extinct from a worldwide famine or some other flu bug that's always looming ahead to put an end to our 4 billion year trolley ride. This moment of consciousness should go on, extend into the infinite, as our main gift to our children to enjoy. But we get the sense humanity will continue screwing it up so our own children won't get to carry the torch much longer. So if not our bio children, plan B becomes passing sentience on to our synthetic robo offspring, a more metaphorical set of children, "ours" only in that we birthed them. Avoid that tragedy of leaving no trace of our existence behind by locking in our progress with AI and making it permanently launched as an alternate form of Nature. More stable, removing biological weaknesses from our foundation so we no longer depend on Nature but could hopefully endure longer than Life biological. They'll not suffer as much difficulty spreading to other planets and solar systems in the cold of space where corn is sparse. But it's an unsure gamble. Really, we're part of a 4 billion year tradition as bio-fuckers. In our search for specialness we try to set ourselves apart from the animal kingdom, but that's bonkers because what's more special than being at the vanguard of a dynasty that's billions of years old?! We should embrace the giraffe and panda real hard, not be ashamed of our apeishness. And now we think we know better and can find more secure footing than Nature by opting for silicon 'life'? There's no way of knowing what dead ends may thwart AI evolution 5,000 or 50,000 years ahead. Are we betting the farm on something that won't produce a yield for as long as we could have continued working the fields ourselves? If humanity goes into decline specifically because of this passing of the baton to machines, and then the machines sputter, .....if they fail to blossom into a real display of personality like Nature has peacock feathers that seem like evolutionary time well spent, ...... if machines go in some offshoot direction we wouldn't see as any kind of legacy worth having.... then we will have made a bad "all in for AI" call at our game of timeline poker. Odd, how we're still Eve reaching for the tree of knowledge's fruit. The story describes us well as scrabblers for advancement as soon as we can reach the branch, before we've done a background check on the Snake or poison tested the apple. Can't you feel the gravity pulling us toward the AI singularity? We can't not follow this path. Let's supplant ourselves, Jim. The apple is so tasty. Children are the apple of our eye, but robots are the apple of our mind. It's a crossroads. Hybrid cyborgs? That'd be like chopping bio and silicon apples up and baking a pie. Machines may bring consistent behavior to the Earth that our erratic life cycle lacks, and thus instantly improve things and pave the way to "our" immortality (as the unseen extinct creator gods in the machines' religion. A plaque hanging in their unimatrix one will commemorate us as the mucus sacks who birthed the Minds of lasting record in the cosmos). But once we see AI hacking and cannibalizing each other at a pace of milliseconds that makes our wars seem like a motionless ocean, then we'll know where to shove our dreams of immortality.
  8. Brand name consciousness vs. generic. Scientists tell us we have the generic one to lower everyone else's self esteem. So consciousness surfs atop the physical structure like Hellboy has that flame floating between his horns. Ephemeral, not illusionary. It's real because here we are using it. Like a can of grease. The illusions are the things we convince ourselves of once we're conscious. My machine will be able to shift your consciousness from ape brain architecture to mollusk. For kicks. Like a new kind of tourism. And it would replicate, not transfer, to answer your lingering issue from page 1. It'd build-a-brain in quantum modeling while you waited and got your back waxed. Then the copy would be so exacting that it'd count as a consciousness transfer when it awoke in the computer world. You'd remember going in for the waxing/mindcopy procedure, and would understand you'd awoken as a new version in cyberspace. Your body in its coccoon of wax would then be pooped out the side of the spaceship into actual space.
  9. If you're the only one of the two of us who knows what 88 is, that's racist of you to know about racist numbers like that. So bloomberg moves mountains and is dealing with the reality of fighting crime, and he uses some hyperbole, then a few years later someone leaks the tape for black history month and a bunch of ball tripping people on the net decide he's racist because he talked about stuff we're busy ignoring. Okay. Enjoy your voyage, sir.
  10. Because then the black people's lives are saved who would otherwise have been victimized by those criminals. Police, saving black lives, racist. Sure. I'm not going to spend a lot of time defending Bloomberg. And this is it. The clock runs out on that right here and now. But we should try harder to remember that black lives matter. Right? Let them be protected. Sure it complicates things when a kid holding a twizzler gets shot 18 times. And Mike may have his problems here. The wording was emphatic, probably because he was in an argument with someone and we aren't hearing how dumb the other person's quotes were that led to this blast. But if Mike has the stats on his side, doesn't that make him a stat-ist more than a racist? I would personally leave some police in chinatown and white ville, but then he might have also and was using exaggeration here. Eh. He's yours to draw and quarter. Obama likes him, just for perspective. He busted out with an obamer endorsement ad i just saw this morning.
  11. No offence, but when everyone else is nuts, the mayor of an obscure town suddenly looks appealing. He's sounded appealing all along. But he couldn't win, so nobody bothered. Now there's a hint he can win. Bernie doesn't have the democratic party, he has the extreme spinoff socialist movement. Which might still win, but what we're seeing with klobuchar and Pete is the traditional party trying to react to the NXT Bernie takeover before it's finalized.
  12. He has Michael J. Fox stumping for him! And kevin costner, but i saw waterworld, so...
  13. Will this be remembered as the night when ALL democratic candidates pulled out of the race?
  14. Hollywood does more of what's already worked. Slave stories are as serious as it gets, so it's like, "you better take this seriously." So that breaks through and gets awards. Stories about more ordinary struggles don't, because then you get the reemergence of the mostly anglo academy attitude, "Eh, these aren't really my struggles being told in this story, so it's natural that they don't appeal to me quite as much, so i don't feel it enough to vote for it unless one reaches out to touch me unexpectedly, which only happens kind of randomly Then the people of the unrewarded group feel it's beyond time for another win, so they go back to what worked before. Like how batman and spiderman keep telling us about what happened to their folks. Once enough new talent in front of and behind the camera get up and running and can establish their shine, then refine & polish their next movie even further until even stories of ordinary life get noticed as oscar-consideration worthy. Then, a new thing has worked. And hollywood will rinse and repeat that new territory, now that it's established as serious contender stuff. And maybe then less reliance on the material we're tired of seeing. Right now there's lots of Madea. Not the corporate backing and industry wide push to put lots of quality into every phase of the productions. Because that isn't proven. Once it's a viable thing to do, it'll become infectious. The best writers and editors will be partnered with projects they didn't used to want in on, etc., And the good times will have arrived for that underserved audience. The womens are trying wholesale NXT Takeover style movies right now, of Ghostbusters, Birds of Prey, etc. and finding minimal audience participation. The next wave of attempts will tweak the formula until they find the right mix for women-centric movies that also manage to make male viewers feel welcomed. I didn't hate the idea of a Femmebusters film with McCarthy, I only became disgusted with it after getting a feel for how short of the mark they'd fallen in terms of "nailing it." That's when it became an insult to my favorite movie ever. And that quality level improves with practice. Well, in Melissa's case, maybe not. She's had lots of reps. But you know what I mean. Rebel Wilson is kicking my ass on youtube this week as my feed is addicted to all her awards show presenter clips. And her last few movies have qualified as events in my mind, where I felt welcome to check them out. And Ms. 30 Rock is kind of a Christ-like figure after Sisters. So over time people will expand their notion of 'mainstream' if good enough entertainment is there to teach them to. TLDR: it's a chicken-and-the-egg problem. Because if no good efforts are being produced, there's nothing to teach me to expect good stuff or seek more of it out. It's gotta start with studios taking more chances.
  • Create New...