Re: authority/anonymity complex

OK. I am going to stretch. Supposedly getting into primary feelings
gets intuitive connection to compose ideas. That would mean the best
techno stuff comes from being aware of primary vulnerable feelings.

Could I make an outline that would insure such an intuitive/feeling
birth of techno stuff?

A lot of Florent THIERY's resonance to my remark on potential master's
in croquet interest reminded me of things I haven't studied,
but got wonderful references from, "A Beautiful Math".

I had an ulterior motive for reading this book on Nash's change
of game theory from Von Neumann's zero sum (dog eat dog)
enlightened self-interest game/economic theory.
I didn't think such bottom line economics
would impress the women I would possibly like.
I wanted to figure my story to a woman who I would like.

I believe I saw what I wanted, altruism could evolve, reputation
might supercede greedy self-interest in evolution of quasi-stable
communities on a landscape.

So, I am getting technical terms from Florent THIERY that reminded me
network theory had become important in game theory.
I, nonetheless, was surprised to see him write this stuff.

So, the vulnerable feeling I suppose is that we don't really believe
what we read in a textbook until life bumps us up against it again.
We read and believe the logic as we should,
but inside there is a repressed doubter who jumps with glee
when his doubts are dispelled by evidence of reproducibility
outside of the author of the textbook one has read.

Though "A Beautiful Math" is not a textbook, seeing things getting said
about the utility of the ideas is delightfully surprising.
To be sure, there is a competitive killer of personal joy
that would say to our surprise we "should" have known it
from the text. But my joy is to find repeats of the familiar
in the unfamiliar rather than learn once and never see again.

One might forget the author of the first time one saw a concept.
Is that sad or happy for the author that his idea has become so
pervasive that its origins in him are diluted?

I don't know as yet. Perhaps a "Nash theory of value" might
exhibit value beyond individual recognition (people owning objects
in a collaborative building).

First thing that caught me up was :
"who wants to go
in a virtual world where there is no "i am nobody" switch?"

Sometimes you want to look and have nobody looking at you.
Guys who know stage lighting know this.
Say a comedian is making remarks that are venting negative feelings
the audience has and they feel their reactions are acutely visible
to everybody. Their sympathetic ventings might be defended against
and surpressed because they too would fear the paparazzi.

The director of Hudson Institute indicated privacy is essential to the
notion
of individuation and identity. In a sense, if big brother is watching you,
you can't be you but only what he says you should be,
not much of a democracy, not much of a secret ballot.

When I used the word anonimity, I was thinking of unethical activities of
this
security guy who spoke to my computer club, but I decided to call it a
complex
conjoined with being known.

I don't want to die being an unknown leading a life of quiet desperation.
But, I don't want to be so much known that a bunch of people
are maliciously gossiping about me because I am an independent
who may or may not support their agenda.

If this is a  Jungian complex that would be interesting.
Such consumes energy and I believe what is called integration
of a complex frees it.

Somehow unifying being known and unknown poles,
where normally one pole is supressed in shadow,
might free me to experience a balance of all the other wonderful feelings
I might experience in my life.

I don't know what other freedoms would come from integration
of this complex if it is a complex.
I am curious whether this might be related to Nash's reassessment
of value.

"developing sophisticated protections limits propagation of innovativity"
that sounds as interesting as the invention of sex by bacteria
-----------seriously--------------
Sex produced differentiation, really sophisticated protections
might mean a world of your own clone wanting what you want.

I was intrigued by Maya having a little tiny engine but a major portion
of its file size hypertext on how to use it.
The major portion of what at least you pay for in hard drive size
(Maya's hypertext is free in money and the majority of file size)
is knowledge. I was pained in industry by secrecy
which dismissed as a threat the value of teaching what I did.
That value of something might be in the teaching of it
rejuvenated my feelings for my passions.
Perhaps I went back to school so I could tell women what I did, but
"A Beautiful Math" might improve my prospects for establishing
that I didn't do so for purely selfish reasons.

"A Beautiful Math" was based on Asimov's "Foundation Trilogy".
In it, a huge society was founded on status quo anti bellum
and was threatened by innovation, the incidence of genius in a huge
society would mean an industrial revolution every day and chaos.
An alternative source of human value (an alternative to war and balance
of power) was suggested, but held secret through most of the three books.
That led to suspense until some sort of inspirational ending
that encouraged innovation through risk taking.

I've found much sniggering at risk taking from those who opted to play it
safe.
I got the impression they got the women I am "not" interested in
and painfully pointed it out to me.

"But there is no perfect random number generator, except people
themselves..."

Sorry, I didn't make it clear, quantum mechanics
allegedly provides a perfect random number generator.
Alleged, that is, by experts who got enormous funding
for research in this stuff.

"Plus, you seem to be
talking about a "secure channel" which would be a particular space in
the world, right? That's centralization :-\"

In a network, is there a particular place
(I think that is what you meant by space)?
Space might have other entendre, like giving someone space,
a place to be (attending to themselves rather than to you).
Suppose two guys could talk privately and noone listen in.
That could be good for the two guys and bad for the agenda of the listeners.
The Nash value wouldn't see the two guys rest of the world in zero-sum
game, win-lose scenario.
It might be that two people having a perfectly private space
might be as dangerous as the opposite, nobody having privacy.

These are interesting questions in your studies but having to think
of this stuff all the time might be a brain-breaker.
Sci fi could make it fun.
"A Beautiful Math" fluffy history has fantastic scholarly references that
brief you one what they are about. I think it might be a great resource
for your interests to find something to obsess on to find "your thing".
At times, I've wondered whether the notion that I have to find my thing
has been foisted on me by people who want to demote me to a consumable
for their agenda rather than have any concern that so specialized to "my
thing"
I become obsolete.

I'd rather learn how to learn than become someone else's thing.

"internal currency and reputation indicator"

This sort of thoughts that Ben Franklin, one of our founding fathers,
was made of. At one time, valuing paper currency was a theory
he tried to sell to his country.

Reputation figured into the professional language subscribed to
by the references of "A Beautiful Math" as another dimension
of value.

"- IF there are rules, then with rules/constraints comes security, so
that the social/economic system is sustainable

And croquet can be a test-system for studying their viability."

Yes yes yes. That is why I am interested in croquet.
Guys in the silicon valley integrating with my kinda girl's interests
(not soap operas or you the maintanance manual, pllllleeeeassse).

"the open source community and the peer to peer philosophy itself (
http://www.p2pfoundation.net/Main_Page"

gotta do some reading!

"one has to find an
educational "sponsor"/mentor/research team/context for this kind of
stuff"

I have gotten older and used to go for the numbers, but thought that was
merely higher turnover job where I was easily replacable because
I was cloned to the most general need. Now, I take the risk, an incredible
risk,
that finding a small nitch of peculiar interesting work would
have me not so easily replaceable as something high profile.

I'm dogheadedly hoping that what my long life investments were
that make me peculiar will all find fruit in how I find fulfilment.
I find simplistic prescriptions that I merely do what it takes
to get money or some other panacea approval insulting to my personal
peculiar identity.

I also am meditating that to perceive what I am as a being insulted
by other beings trying to make me copies of them
as not exactly what I am. Such a preoccupation sort of dims
the passion of what I originally invested in.

OLPC must have an agenda for video cards and
this darned rabbit jumps through phone lines I hear
from secure sources (graphics done on local computer).
I expect some latency feedback confusions on VR
just like with internet networking midi would have latency
problems for jamming (they have a latency meter in network
on audio midi setup for mac). Latency or not, I want to learn
to play well with other people.

Thanks for all the writing.

comments in line:
On Fri, 2007-03-30 at 15:06 -0800, [hidden email] wrote:
> OK. I am going to stretch. Supposedly getting into primary feelings
> gets intuitive connection to compose ideas. That would mean the best
> techno stuff comes from being aware of primary vulnerable feelings.
>
> Could I make an outline that would insure such an intuitive/feeling
> birth of techno stuff?
AS I program, I liken the program to a cloud of thought, one that I and
I alone can mould to the task I personally envision.  I cannot typically
express the entirety of the task, nor explain the steps to arrive at the
conclusion. It is a journey of twists, turns, missteps, errors, traps
and voids that must be traversed.  The longer and more treacherous the
path, the greater the reward of accomplishment at the end, and the less
likely it is that someone else will stumble across the same trail.  Joy
is then expressed when the totality of vision allows me to transcend the
full path and express the idea, that is, accomplish the task through an
elegant but directly unobtainable solution.  Elegance comes of
experience and vision, knowing the false paths and the goal that must
ultimately be achieved.  Thus it took many years for Einstein to arrive
at E=MC^2.
  Ah, but game theory and gaming in general awards us via our little
primitive brains via shots of adrenaline from the thrill of conquest,
victory over others and winning some goal, prize, contest or whatever.
It is hardwired into our physiology, such that given power we will
invariably utilize it to excess, ala Abu Gharib or the prisoner
experiment.  Indeed, for OSS to work, there must be accolades or other
victory processes to stimulate those who make it work.

> I believe I saw what I wanted, altruism could evolve, reputation
> might supercede greedy self-interest in evolution of quasi-stable
> communities on a landscape.

But that is the great failing of socialism in general.  One experiment
of such common pool nature is given by
Hazlett, Denise. "A Common Property Experiment with a Renewable
Resource." Economic Inquiry, 35, October 1997, pp. 858-861;
[hidden email]  found as experiment #75 at:
http://www.marietta.edu/~delemeeg/games/games71-80.htm#g075
  In effect, when everyone owns something, it really belongs to no-one
and the result is invariably mutual assimilation of rights, unless there
is an external moderating influence.  But if such an influence exists,
its own imperfections will lead to the same conclusion in some extended
and more arbitrary form.  Thus we use the GPL for most OSS and FSF
projects as the moderating influence, protected by the sum means of the
contributors to the pool.  The philosophy is being tested right now by
the current arrangement of Novell and Microsoft, whose actions may yet
be seen as a violation of public trust. Indeed, the genesis of innovation is deprivation or stimulation; reality
bruising our physical or emotional bodies, forcing us into action.
Intrinsically we are driven to economy of action, again due to the
hardwiring of our primitive brain stems, based on food/energy economy of
predation.

> Though "A Beautiful Math" is not a textbook, seeing things getting said
> about the utility of the ideas is delightfully surprising.
> To be sure, there is a competitive killer of personal joy
> that would say to our surprise we "should" have known it
> from the text. But my joy is to find repeats of the familiar
> in the unfamiliar rather than learn once and never see again.
>
My own existance is that of continuous student, math, mechanics,
software, economics, physics, medicine, biology, no topic escapes my
scrutiny, if only for a few hours, days, weeks or years.  When we cease
to acquire knowledge, enhance our skills, or improve, then we have
entered the declining phase of life.  And as with many others, I find as
I learn more and more I know a smaller and smaller percentage of the
available knowledge, yet I struggle on, reading, trying, failing, trying
and succeeding on occasion, adding to a repetoire of experience.

> One might forget the author of the first time one saw a concept.
> Is that sad or happy for the author that his idea has become so
> pervasive that its origins in him are diluted?
>
Alas, all facts are pervasive, known, forgotten, rediscovered, and
reforgotten into the grey mists of time, only to be continually
resurrected.  In our time, the advent of pervasive knowledge, via the
web, via media, and print has enabled the exponential growth of
technology and skill.  Yet the future holds even greater potential,
spreading not only news, knowledge and results, but indeed the
experiences themselves to every individual with access.  Our greater
task is to give more people access.  Open minds, open borders, open
people to not the world, not the solar system, but the entire universe,
from the beneath the quark to beyond the edges of the known universe,
tearing down those infrastructures that prevent people from reaching
their potential, ripping the curtains back to let light into their
lives, and minds.  It is a struggle that will have bloodshed, wars, and
worse, but if the human race is to become all that it can, sooner is
better.
 
> I don't know as yet. Perhaps a "Nash theory of value" might
> exhibit value beyond individual recognition (people owning objects
> in a collaborative building).
>
This is the true model.  A structure, a web, of experiences, skills,
knowledge, facts, and potential.  Where there is value associated with
the places, and experiences one may go and attend, some provided by
those with higher skills and greater motivation to help, some for
profit, some for glory, but sharing in the grand experiment.  Value
beyond a disk or a program, or even one persons capabilities, but a
world of worlds to traverse and learn.
Privacy, and concealment allows the meek to venture into the world of
the strong.  Rules and protections help by providing safety, anonymity
permits exploration beyond the mores of ones social group.  These are
all requirements if the experiment is to truly work.  However,
experience in the real world has also shown that the ability to pull
identity out of anonymity is also required to provide for the safety and
security of the socio-economic structure, for mayhem resides within all
of us, ready to surface at an opportune moment, to usurp the peace and
destroy others either directly or through unseemly means.  Thus the
requirement for penetration of the sanctity of our privacy.

        How this will be accomplished within our structure is for others, for I
have no such knowledge, but I do have some imperfect knowledge of the
requirements.
Alas all ventures of man are plagued with contests of complex
juxtaposition of individual rights and freedoms poised against questions
of the values of greater good.  From Doctors who give dangerous
chemicals as solutions to medical problems, thus gauging the amount and
necessity against the potential to do harm.  Lawyers who respect the law
who defend the evil ones among us from our own baser notions of justice.
But this is reality and balancing needs against wants and desires are
part of the process.

> If this is a  Jungian complex that would be interesting.
> Such consumes energy and I believe what is called integration
> of a complex frees it.
>
> Somehow unifying being known and unknown poles,
> where normally one pole is supressed in shadow,
> might free me to experience a balance of all the other wonderful feelings
> I might experience in my life.
>
Not so.  From the Chinese Yin and Yang, to the id and emotion, to the
balances of want, need and desire of modern times, the constant
exchanges of power and persuasion makes us human.  Let us continue to
express the nature of adventure, invention, risk and safety balancing
act that enables us to grow.
Powerful concepts are not necessarily large and boisterous.  Often they
are as simple as Newtons observations of gravity, yet yielding untold
riches of complex interaction.  It is elegance which denotes this
duality of simplicity on the surface to the power contained in the
expression, from such simple concepts of binary branching, or group
theory which aid solution of complex problems via repeated application
of elegant solutions.

> I was pained in industry by secrecy
> which dismissed as a threat the value of teaching what I did.
> That value of something might be in the teaching of it
> rejuvenated my feelings for my passions.

Alas, you must still struggle with secrecy as must each of us.
None of us can sit in judgement of your personal journey. We must each
wear our own sandals, stir our own dust and contemplate our own navels.
Alas yours may be more interesting, but ours is the only one for our own
solutions.

> I've found much sniggering at risk taking from those who opted to play it
> safe.
> I got the impression they got the women I am "not" interested in
> and painfully pointed it out to me.
>
Are women the only problem for which this exists?  I think not.
Society, belonging, participating and working through issues is an
individual persuit applicable to all situations.  Women is merely your
own way of keeping score, and you are only disappointing yourself.  Ones
value is ones own eyes, not the eyes of another.  Moreover when one
establishes ones own worth, one will receive higher value in others
eyes, however perverse that may sound.  

        I like to compare this issue to an old Jewish proverb.... A man went to
his friend and asked for $10,000 to help his wife (well of course it may
not have been $10,000, but I am paraphrasing here).  His friend said
"Alas I have only $3,000 but you may have it."  The Rabbi said
immediately to the friend.  "Don't be foolish.  You not only didn't help
him, but now you are broke as well.  Neither of you now has anything!"  

        Think about it.

> "But there is no perfect random number generator, except people
> themselves..."
>
> Sorry, I didn't make it clear, quantum mechanics
> allegedly provides a perfect random number generator.
> Alleged, that is, by experts who got enormous funding
> for research in this stuff.
>
Alas, prophesizers have often said "X is the perfect random number
generator."  But time and technology made liars of them all.  We just
don't have the technology yet to prove the analysis of quantum mechanics
version of the latest impossibly long randomness.  Moreover a truly
perfect random number would actually weaken most cryptographic
solutions.  It is a perversion of probability theory.  
See above for the analysis of requirements for the safety of society at
large.  Conspirators do exist and must be accounted for in the analysis
of such a space.
And alas we now have it and it is deflating every year by about 4%
thanks to Keynesian economics.  You cannot save enough, or invest it
wisely enough to keep any real value since all returns are taxed such
that the sum of taxes and inflation more than destroys any acquired
value.

Alas as do I.  Yet we all have these habits, home, food, clothes,
transportation, medicine, and they are unyielding to whatever ulterior
motives I may express.  They bow me to their will humbling my greater
aspirations.  Worse to me is the negotiation for contracts, where not
only must I be sold into the slavery, but I must be a willing
participant in the negotiation of my value which is often seen as far
less than my true value.  But I have come to accept that when they pay
more than they want, but less than I want we have probably reached a
reasonable agreement for a particular task.
>
> I also am meditating that to perceive what I am as a being insulted
> by other beings trying to make me copies of them
> as not exactly what I am. Such a preoccupation sort of dims
> the passion of what I originally invested in.
>
But some conformity is required in a society.  Rules allow us to
interact.  Common language permits exchange of knowledge, and
negotiation of value (how it hurts me to acknowledge that).  Alas the
currency of the land is based upon the exchange of one material medium
(money) for work or another material medium (product), where as the only
thing of true and lasting value is knowlege, and yet still in the
information age, one possessing information is not valued as highly as
one producing concrete items which are assigned worth beyond their
constituents while we get disowned of our own engineering
accomplishments.  Those who can do nothing, who contribute nothing to
the berthing of new technology reap the greatest rewards.  What are the
percentages in that?

> OLPC must have an agenda for video cards and
> this darned rabbit jumps through phone lines I hear
> from secure sources (graphics done on local computer).
> I expect some latency feedback confusions on VR
> just like with internet networking midi would have latency
> problems for jamming (they have a latency meter in network
> on audio midi setup for mac). Latency or not, I want to learn
> to play well with other people.
>
As do we all.
> Thanks for all the writing.
>