anti-Causality


anti-Causality

Knowledge is a tree, not a conclusion, and it has been a tree for all of time. Sometime, however, it verboten in the Bible with a didactic “tale” apparently by oligarchs telling the average religious person to view the tree of knowledge and its information as verboten. This is the beginning of the limits and control of information necessary for oligarchic dominance, as opposed to capital-type control which is more commodity-based --though information is now a commodity as “intellectual property.” (With “intellectual” being a strong word for the slurry capital pumps into the population.)

The most important extension of this type of information control currently exists as academia with its early revival of control as the dialectic and didactic by academy founders Socrates and Plato in ancient Athens, and recently by Hegel to fit current capital. Important is that these instructors specifically used sexual abuse to control, which survived to our time as, for instance, the Aboriginal residence schools openly, and covertly elsewhere.

Causality is a rational reduction of the complexity of life saying that “if something happens in relation to something else, that something else caused the first thing.” As a rational reduction, it is a “dumbing-down” of all the highly sophisticade life-system that affect us. Knowledge is naturally structured both in society and in our minds in tree structures, also called “complex data structures” Personally, I have never been “causal” (I believe) because I have been influenced by aboriginal knowledge organization, and also abstract art and music early on as a child with access to all of New York’s museums and libraries (access has since been restricted to children.)

If I something is unavoidably causal, I say “simple math” --this causes that, w/o making a bid deal about it.

Empiricism is the scientific method (and system) built from causality and is considered the only (measurement) science, even by scientist who should know better. It suffers from being highly-fractured, as it is built from independent causal conclusions that also tend to be ego-vehicles from empiricist scientists. Another widely-misused term is “objective” as a synomym for “cruel” such that normal human thinking, such as the recollection of experiences, is excluded from empiricist conclusions; only empiricist numbers are used, often as an output of highly-purposed statistical systems. Dependance on statistics is such that statistics now often produce hypothesis and theory, that is validated by the same statistical systems. Information from other sources such as experience and observation, no matter how detailed, cannot test well against conclusive information produced specifically to test well by statistical systems. This statistical reality is most true for current control of the mind (both human and animal) in cognitive-behavioral strategies of CBT. Interestingly, in CBT, the dialectic method as the socratic method is also key for (as they say) “thought control.”

Objectivism, such as Ayn Rand’s and (current-capital’s) Adam Smith’s objectivism simply “objectify’s” people to make then inanimate numbers rather than feeling people to allow for capital exploitation. As it happens, capital-supporting empiricism, as info-oligarchic, also leverages this, and fills its capital-supportive role by defining and maintaining it as its own from of exploitation, originally sexual abuse.

Wednesday, February 22, 2012

Goggle Docs: The end is near

Goggle Docs will soon force an upgrade that makes pages exact copies of Microsoft Word pages, but in a highly crippled format (as if Word isn't crippled enough).  Google Docs has not been a great experience, as, for instance the spreadsheet function is too weak for normal use (sycophants will disagree, of course!). There have been many other problems. One strength is the use of Mobwrite, which allows simultaneous collaboration (not available with Word, of course), but that was written in the public domain.

A great many people are panicked and upset and attempting to forestall the process here on the docs forum.

The main problem for me will be that I cannot construct documents in a single stream, and this important to me because I use constructive writing techniques
such I as write about in wikiology.  

Other important losses will be the ability to 
  • share documents using the web (publishing) and using 
  • xmlrpc to upload documents to blogs. 

From my experience with technology, there are no real reasons for force upgrades, and in the case of google docs that is even more the case.  This is not a for-profit service, it is a "false charity" service to give the world the impression that google "pays back," which is especially important as it is basically an advertising corporation that has leveraged a search engine.  Another example is Wikia -- the most advertising obnoxious wiki in existence.  It is owned by the same person who controls the Wikipedia,  Jim "Jimbo" Wales, which, apparently he created to create Wikia -- lying all the way.  Truth, lie are irrelevant in these cases, as for-profit drive, which in people is technically obsessive behavior, is not actually human.  Writely, the company behind Google docs has, in particular, left artifacts of insanity as "comments" in its html text: paranoia.

What is the solution?

Unfortunately, for reasons I write about, it is pointless to ask for reprieve -- Google and with it Writely is successful for the reason that highly professional people have no concern for the needs or feelings of others; no empathy.  This, make no mistake, is the illness of aspergers, and dominates all human activity, even if it appears to beneficial -- there is always a hook.

Well, I generally encourage people not to upgrade anything (with the important exception of security patches).  This is because the technology industry has reached the limits of its abilities and is attempting regression to compensate for the fact that it (being mentally obsessed and defective in other ways, and hence incapable of actually innovating) has eliminated all the normal people from its work staffs in favor of those with the problems it has.  I heard this referred to as reducing the staff to the "best of the best."  In Technics and Civilization, Lewis Mumford would call it the authoritarian triumph over the democratic technic, or normal people.  (This classic written during the great depression shows the consistency of authoritarian, or oligarchic, behavior throughout history; though Mumford did not identify authority with academia, the core oligarchy -- and worst offender).

Clearly, from the beginning, it was obvious that a clear page should appear when no URL is specified, and that, being a composing canvas, would be the place where thoughts manifest into communicative ideas -- the first step for collaboration.  That was the "composer" that Netscape created that really didn't go anywhere.  We do have a number of superior composing screens in the public domain (more flexible and reliable than Google doc's), and it should be elementary to create servers that can "zing" the composed text to wherever it needs to go.  So the Google docs server app is obsolete in that the paths for composed text can only go in the direction of what Word has dictated -- and trust me when I tell you that MS Word is so obsolete that it is hard for me to comprehend how it survives--but I know it is the same (small) set of mental illnesses that plagues us all everyday in every way.

Five or so years ago, I concluded that Docs should really be a "CSS" composer, so as to allow writers to create, share and modify templates for document types using well-described formats such as technical research papers have.  Users could also specify subsections of this templates to create further variations, and could then, in a bottom-up fashion, define for servers how future data can be fed into the formats.  Graphics would also be easy, and highly attractive.

Then, a few months ago, I worked with Inkscape to create SVG files (which can be converted to PDF).  SVG is an XML (or extension of HTML) that is fully graphics capable to make illustrations or maps.  (I used to create psychological genograms, which are sophisticated family trees.)  The W3C (controller of web content formatting) has specified that SVG files be able to contain any HTML.  This means that SVG can be the container for any content, and being fully graphics capable, and be used to instantly create the most beautiful pages.  This is, in my opinion, the way to go  -- how to implement it, I am not certain yet.

On this path, I think I will implement a Perl-based Wiki to make the composer concept happen.  Being Perl-based it can implement all the basics of the operating systems (which are universal) and web communications very simply (and traditionally).  Another important change that has to be made that can be manifested through this composing idea is to bring the web to the user by making things "app-less."  This means that the apps are really one app which is your browser which then implements the core capabilities of apps which are libraries or modules within the browser.  A step in that direction is to put the web server app (that replaces Google docs) in the machine (and accessed through the desktop) and having it "share" with other similar systems universally rather than sending it to a central server (running the "app") to be controlled, and possibly abused, as in our case.  In short, central servers cannot be trusted because the people running them are only subsets of humanity, and the solution is to make your own computer the controller of your data.  This is not to say servers are eliminated; they cannot be, but they will act as directory servers, or massive matrix pointers which can then be used to join information based on similarity of content, and hence users based on similarity of thought and ideas.

No comments:

Post a Comment