Sixty Story Robot

We already have good broad theories of intelligence

2011-07-21T16:49:00.001-05:00

In Taking "Singularity" Apart Stuart Staniford writes:

"The idea that intelligence will accelerate in future does not follow from the possibility of developing human-level machine intelligence. It assumes a completely unproven 'law of intelligence' that the smarter you are, the easier it is to produce an intelligence even greater. Maybe it works the other way altogether - the smarter you are, the more complex and difficult it is to produce an even greater intelligence. Perhaps there's some fundamental limit to how intelligent it's possible for any agent to be. We have no clue. We haven't so far seen even a single generation of intelligences (us) producing a more intelligent entity, so the whole intelligence explosion idea consists of extrapolating from less than one data point. It's utter speculation"

I'd like to make a distinction between the hypothetical 'law of intelligence' Stuart states and the idea that intelligence is lawful, that there are patterns between the makeup of an entity and how good it will be at some particular mental task. In a simplified case, you could put certain properties of an entity's brain into a set of equations and get back scores related to its learning, focus, creativity, and such.

It is this kind of 'Laws of Intelligence', laws as scientific theory, which would lead to higher intelligences being better able to apply those laws. I think there is a vast amount of evidence that intelligence is lawful in exactly this way.

One law of intelligence is that from certain measures you can score higher by using more raw speed or memory. You might not paint a better painting or understand a deeper metaphor, but with a proper architecture you can certainly make more paintings, consider more metaphors, and learn faster. Even with no further understanding of it's own intelligence, if a digital being could copy itself to another system, it could do twice the work.

This alone pushes the questions of lawfulness and improvement via intelligence into the realm of manufacturing. It seems clear that 100 engineers would be better than 1 at designing systems to acquire resources, process them, and finally process the designers themselves faster.

Going back to raw algorithms, the degree to which higher intelligence helps design still higher intelligence is likely to be domain specific. Designing a version of yourself that is better at genetic engineering is not that different than writing an automatic tool that solves certain molecular problems quickly, in that both rely on the lawfulness of the problem. It will probably be much easier to improve an AI's ability to program than to improve it's ability to paint, as coding is very lawful and painting less so.

The best evidence that greater intelligence leads to greater ability to create intelligence is the basis for Stuarts own belief that "while I cannot say it's a certainty, it appears to be more likely than not that machines will gradually approach human levels of intelligence in the present century." It took billions of years for mindless natural selection to produce human level intelligence and perhaps a few thousand for us. Today already it appears that a thinking thing can look a program and find ways to make that smarter, or find whole news ways to solve the same problem. More specifically, it also appears that those with higher scores in certain metrics are better at it than others.

The trends we see and projections of improved future AI's only make sense if intelligence is something that can be figured out and constructed. A predictable explosion of figuring-out is just a natural consequence of this.

Thank You Mr. Brown

2009-03-09T00:10:00.007-05:00

Finally, after three years of fits and starts, I have finished my Science Fiction epic, Xenobiology.

I started Xenobiology because I was inspired by the wonderful blognovel Simon of Space. Back when SoS started, it was an episodic story posted to blogger every couple of days, so that's the example I followed. I intended my story to be purely episodic, like the old star trek shows, where every few episodes the Professor would visit a new planet and describe the life forms there, all against a backdrop of a technologically stifled galactic civilization.
I wrote a post a day for the first 30 days. Then I let myself have a break, which I probably never should have done. I never recovered that momentum.
But I received enough compliments to make me think I could actually write, and over the course of getting the Professor to where I wanted him I had laid the foundation for an actual plot. Like with an ending and everything.

So I joined a local writer's group, failed at NaNoWriMo a few times, and ever so slowly developed my story and missed my self imposed deadlines.
And now, with several months of increased discipline, It is done. Every future post is loaded into blogger, and I'm scheduling them for a post a day as I do final corrections.

Of course, there is more to the story, but for now I just wanted to thank the author that really got me started in writing.

Soon I meet The Westboro Baptists

2009-02-20T13:42:00.002-05:00

The Westboro Baptist Is coming to Buffalo! "On Sunday at 1:45, they’ll be at St. Joseph’s Church at 3275 Main Street in Buffalo near UB South campus."

Update: Photos - The counter-protest by a variety of Buffalo groups was overwhelming. Only 3 of the Westboro Baptists showed up, and they left after a few minutes of being completely surrounded.

Who Mourns for Corn?

2008-02-24T20:56:00.000-05:00

A giant contraption
moves with a dull monotone
incapable of action
they die by the millions; alone.

It is not a sad scene
that they die just now,
if not killed by machine
they'd fall prey to a cow.

They are not complete
or happy at all
until their seeds we eat
picked in a time we call fall.

Perfect contentment
they do enjoy
so do not lament
any plant but for soy.

Justice vs. strict constructionism

2007-10-05T01:04:00.000-05:00

My response to this:
The constitution is not an end, it is a means. As a means, it has several ends. One of its stated ends is to ‘establish justice’. Rights are not granted by the constitution, but some are recognized by it explicitly.
If the constitution fails to bring justice, or to recognize a right, the courts still have a responsibility to be just, because justice is the goal, not legalism.

Do not Question!!!

2007-09-01T23:14:00.000-05:00

Measured Against Reality has a post on meaningless questions, questions that are unanswerable because they are poorly formed. Like 'What is outside of the universe?'.

He uses a lot of examples from the debate over evolution and the big bang. When people disagree on a complex subject, they often challenge the other side with questions. They find something that the theory doesn't seem to explain. Sometimes it's a good challenge, sometimes it has an answer, and sometimes it's gibberish.

The problem is that such questions don't have a place in rational discourse, at all.

When you make an argument, you start with premises, follow a logical pattern, and reach a conclusion. If your premises are true and your logic valid, then your conclusion must be true.
For someone to attack your claim, they should make an argument that one or more of your premises are false, or that your logic is invalid. Their argument should also have premises and logic, and be subject to the same style of attack.

Challenge questions sidestep all that. They attack a conclusion without attacking the premises or logic that lead up to it. They make an argument, but make it difficult to criticize by obscuring its implied premises, which may be gibberish. It is this easy and hard to counter attack that makes them popular rhetoric, but bad argument.

Questions for clarification or knowledge are fine. I am only against questions used to attack structured arguments.

We should not ask 'Well then who did Cain marry?'. It provides no premises, and disproves nothing. We should make assertions about who would have been available for Cain, and those assertions can be rationally discussed.

Conversely, we should not answer challenge questions, whether they are meaningful or not. We should put it upon the challenger to make a good argument against our premises or logic. We have no obligation to be sniped at, and if our arguments are good, then theirs will fall flat.

A Thwarted Creation Myth

2007-08-22T23:50:00.000-05:00

"Rolos are one of the seven perfect candies God created at the beginning of the world."

"That's stupid, I remember when Rolos came out."

Voynich Manuscript

2007-08-09T00:37:00.000-05:00

Now you can download Hi-res scans of the Voynich Manuscript.

Happy Day!

Do not Fear the Gods

2007-06-30T21:23:00.000-05:00

In my research on Epicurus, I found this

The Epicurean Blog: This same double-standard operates when Dawkins links creed and behavior. If religion in practice fueled the Crusades, the Inquisition, and the sectarian wars of the 15th and 16th centuries would not atheism in practice be responsible for the 20th Century European charnel houses created by Hitler and Stalin? Orr criticizes the distinctions that Dawkins cites to avoid that conclusion, differences that Dawkins will not allow when considering religion.

I responded:
Dawkins does not link Hitler's and Stalin's atrocities to atheism because his premise is that atheism is not a false belief. We should not believe Christianity because it is false, and we should not be respectfully deferential to it because it is dangerous.

If we assume that a person with no false beliefs would commit no such atrocities, and that atheism is true, then we must attribute atrocious actions of atheists to other, false beliefs they hold. I don't know what distinctions Orr criticized, but truth is the one that matters.

That an idea is dangerous is not an argument that it is false, but that a idea is dangerous and false is an argument that it should be confronted.

He didn't write a book about the tooth fairy because belief in the tooth fairy hasn't shown itself to be very dangerous.

-A new fan of Epicurus

This is How Network Neutrality Should Be Framed

2007-06-23T17:41:00.000-05:00

The Register: "'That's absolutely what you are asking for!' he shouted to counter-shots of 'no!' and 'there is no market place!', referring to the fact a handful of phone and cable companies control the lion share of broadband internet access and service in the US."

At every step, present the telecom carriers with the dictate: As long as you are getting access to the public space to run your lines, we as citizens have a right to those lines under reasonable terms.

This pushes the debate into an area that they dare not risk, their special government privileges. I would be happy to allow packet shaping if it meant I could run my own fiber down the street, but that's not going to happen.

They are not part of a market, and cannot possibly be in a true market, as long as we are giving them special permission to exist. Neither the telephone or cable companies would survive long if we didn't give them their monopolies on the infrastructure. Never let them forget that they owe us.

If you can, hint at it in every paragraph. They will fold.

The Power of Negative Thinking

2007-05-24T20:55:00.000-05:00

This Article from Slate introduces a book called Never Saw It Coming as a counterpoint to The Secret. It appears to be a book about the need for contingency planning, and what happens when you don't look at and prepare for possible disasters.
This interests me in particular because it touches on the wider themes of how to establish policy, prevent intelligence failures, and how to think in general.

I need a wishlist.

The design of a cat dish

2007-05-19T23:50:00.000-05:00

Imagine a food and water dish with a port to screw in a water bottle. The bottle refills the water dish whenever the water level drops below the mouth of the bottle. To refill the bottle, you have to turn the dish upside down, which would cause any leftover food to spill out. The solution is to keep the food dish as a separate item, a detachable bowl that nests into a cavity next to the water dish. It keeps all the functionality of independent items, but appears as a single unit.

It came.

2007-05-15T12:37:00.000-05:00

I got a tube in the mail today, inside was my print of Minus 37. Woohoo! It's signed on the back! I looked at it and it is awesome, but I put it back into the tube until I can get it framed.

Moment of Humor

2007-05-15T11:28:00.000-05:00

I am watching Red Eye on Fox news at 2 in the morning. They are talking about the palestinian Mickey Mouse teaching Muslim expansion. The host questions whether such a silly figure teaching hate can be taken seriously. A guest responds, and she is identified on screen as a Playboy centerfold.

This is why I don't watch Fox News.

Anarchy, Equality, Humility, Charity, Community

2007-05-09T02:38:00.000-05:00

Five Qualities

Anarchy
Anarchy is the natural and optimal state. We have no authority over one another, and we owe no one. Controlling influences rob people of their will. Without rulers, you develop a knowledge of:
Equality
No one is better or worse than anyone else. We are all in this together. When you know that your worth is the same no matter who you are, what you believe, or what you've done, you are led to:
Humility
Arrogance and Pride are invariably harmful. The Humility that is required to develop friendship also provides:
Charity
A willingness to give what you have for the benefit of all, charity is a recognition of the true nature of property. When charity is extended without discrimination, you create:
Community
People can only come together as one when they choose to not consider their differences important. Living united, a community is commanded by only:
Anarchy

Entered into problogger's Top 5 writing project.

Movie reviews

2007-04-27T10:11:00.000-05:00

I've had a recent uptick in the number of new movies I've been watching. I'll do quick reviews in bulk:

TMNT - This is everything I'd hoped it would be. I feel like I've found something that was missing in my life. This is how the Turtles are supposed to be. Not cartoons, and definitely not rubber suits. If the turtles weren't ingrained into your mind as a child, you can probably pass.

300 - Good Action, Lots of controversy. I thought Xerxes represented Christ/Christianity.

Epic Movie - This was just a mistake. Not good, not even by stupid parody movie standards. Six full seconds of entertainment.

Eragon - Good, cute dragons. Star Wars rip off. I know it's all meta myth but this is ridiculous. I could see someone redubbing the audio from either movie into the other and the result still being perfectly watchable, perhaps even better.

Children of Men - Very Good. A bit slow in the beginning, but worth it for the character development.

Arrogant and Rude

2007-04-14T03:03:00.000-05:00

I try to be outgoing in social situations because other people would benefit immensely from my understanding and insight, other people want to hear what I have to say!

No, I didn't say it, but my personality test said I should. But what does that even mean? If the test is based on self reporting of what I think of myself and what I think others think about me, then isn't it still me saying that about myself? Or is the test actually smart enough to filter out people who just think their opinions are awesome from people who are actually insightful?
On the one hand it seems to have reached this conclusion because I don't tend to jump on other people's so-called flaws, but maybe it just doesn't expect a narcissist to showcase their awesomeness by being forgiving. How can I take seriously an analysis that offers no explanation whatsoever of why I am "somewhat shy and reserved at times"?

The network is the computer

2007-04-13T16:07:00.000-05:00

Matt Posted This criticism of YouOS that I think misses some key points of why YouOS and it's Open Source competition eyeOS are important and useful. Matt complains about adding two layers of abstraction between the application and the user, but he misses another that make all the difference. Web based operating systems also add the network layer between the system and the end user.

That is the key appeal of Web apps in general, they are accessible from any browser. Networked OS's are as old as UNIX, but networked Gui's usually depend on software that is not universally installed. EyeOS/YouOS is not competing with Windows as a platform, it's competing with with Windows plus Windows Terminal Services plus having a compatible client plus praying it works plus vendor lock in. In that context Web based applications are a clear winner in most cases, and have been for a while.

Another thing I think Matt misses is that these OS's are not tied to JavaScript for anything other than basic window operations. Application back ends run on the server, can be written in any language, and can run at native speeds. If an app needs more graphical power, the front end can use Flash or Java and still tie into the API's for file access. There will be a network bottleneck, but that's inevitable for any remote access solution. Matt is right that JavaScript wasn't made for systems programming, but the only part of Web OS's that is strictly tied to JavaScript is lightweight user interface programming, which is exactly what JavaScript was designed for.

Vista is Shit

2007-04-07T17:47:00.000-05:00

Windows Vista is the worst version of Windows I have ever used. I've had it for about a week now and that's about enough.
This is the most powerful computer I've ever owned, and it is crawling. Even after I cleared out the bloatware it came with, it stalls for seconds at a time. Video playback stutters whenever the mouse cursor goes over the video.
There have been some improvements, but most of those are basic things that should have been fixed years ago.

I tried it, I gave it a fair hearing. Now I'm shopping for a flavor of Linux to install.

It takes a village to keep a marriage together

2007-03-14T21:32:00.000-05:00

Chris Rock on the Late Show said something like: "If you're married, you've been in therapy. There's no way you're going to keep that together naturally. It takes a village to keep a marriage together."

This is the perfect way to frame so many discussions on child rearing, family values, and society in general.

Thomas Troy viral

2007-03-12T12:50:00.000-05:00

Thomas Troy showed up sunday at the open mic night I frequent. This is a neat attempt at viral marketing, I keep telling myself I need to do a project like this. He has created a distinctive image and is trying to make himself famous in 30 days. It is extra neat because I saw him in person, so I'll get some nostalgia value if he succeeds. He played the guitar in an amazing way, and he had funny lyrics. Afterwards 'someone' came with a camera, asked what we thought of 'the guy in the tie and glasses', and gave us his card.
I was a fan of one red paperclip, the million dollar homepage, and similar projects. I like the idea of building up from nearly nothing, probably because that's what I've got. The question is: What kind of an event do I want to build? I saw Thomas Troy play music, but I don't know if he is trying for a music career. I don't have a problem with being famous for becoming famous for the sake of fame, but playing a guitar in sunglasses is not my style either.

Character Building

2007-02-10T09:30:00.000-05:00

61. Write a story in which, during several conversations, two people create a fictional character. You can have them argue about the character; you can have them in harmonious agreement. The character need not be at the center of the story, but he should be involved with the plot.

"I'm not sure if he should be a boy or a girl."

"He should be a girl, obviously."

"Shut up, you know what I mean. I don't know what kind of a vibe I want between the captain and the engineer.

"If the engineer is a guy, you can have him be the one engaged to the Science Officer."

"No, she's engaged to someone from her planet. Anything closer would screw up the dynamic between her and the captain."

"So just move that story to the engineer and the science officer, and make the captain a chick."

"No, the captain has to be a guy, for the Kirk effect."

"You're going for the Kirk effect?"

"Oh yeah, that's half the story. The strong male lead seducing every hot female minor character, but always putting the ship first."

"Well...If you don't want him to alienate every female crew member, he could have a strict rule against dating subordinates."

"Hmm, and that would just add to the tension with he S.O. It's forbidden for both of them."

"Yep, and you can pick your other characters without concern for Mr. Sexypants."

"The thing is, I can see some good story between the captain and the woman who runs the ship. "

"Then make her a woman for now, and if you don't want it later, then make her a lesbian. "

"A lesbian mechanic...That could work."

A Proposal on Public Proposals

2007-01-23T22:11:00.000-05:00

All public marriage proposals ought to be accepted, just out of politeness, even if the askee doesn't want to marry the asker.

You can imagine how devestating it would feel to go through all the trouble of arranging a public proposal, a magic moment, only to be rejected. In front of witnesses. It is something that would haunt you for the rest of your life. You certainly couldn't go back to the returant again.
It is far more compassionate to say 'Yes!', smile, and let the asker have their moment. Then later, even the next day, you can express rervations. 'Cold feet' and 'going so fast' are good phrases to remember.
If you still want to consider a future together, find a reason to set a late date. If you really think you want a future together, be honest.
If you were having fun, but were put off by the unexpected seriousness, then ask for a lot of space to gather your thoughts. Just don't take too long in breaking things off entirely.

What you should not do is be honest at the moment you are entrusted with someone's potential public shame and humiliation. That brutality should not be visited upon those whose crime is adoring you.

Webcomics

2007-01-17T16:57:00.000-05:00

You too can have a webcomic
xkcd - A webcomic of romance, sarcasm, math, and language. Simple art.
dinosaur comics - Philosophy, science and sexiness. Very simple art.

Giant In The Playground
Two comics about fantasy gaming:
Order of the stick
Erfworld:The Battle for Gobwin Knob

Fantasy
Inverloch - Mostly standard setting with Wizards, Elves, and, these other things...
Earthsong - Innovative setting, all manner of races, most notably planets and stars.

Cynical
Gone with the Blastwave - Postapocalytic humor in a pointless war.
Something Positive
Buttercup Festival - This is dark in a bizarre, funny way. Sadly it hasn't been updated in a while.
Sinfest - God, Satan, Drugs, Sex, Books

Minus
This is an amazing and beautiful webcomic done in watercolors.
I was introduced to it with Minus 37, which changes meaning somewhat once you understand what the story is really about.

Xenobiology

2007-01-15T12:16:00.000-05:00

I was inspired by a fan to start writing my fictional blog Xenobiology again. I've let it go for the past three months, and worse, my last post made it look like I was stopping. In fact, it is going to be a novel length story when it's done, and that will take years. I started it thinking it would be a continuous serial with no major climax, but now I have a definite epic journey in mind, and I want to finish it. (Though even then it will be open-ended. There's always room for sequels.)

Xenobiology is a science fiction story about an andriod xenobiolgy professor. He started out as property, and has gained his freedom. It is written in real-time, which means covering up a three month gap in writing forced me to alter the plot slightly. It is also interactive; it is literally the Professor's personal blog, and he will respond to comments. I've been in character for over a year.

The next step is to have him get out of the system he is in now, get some traveling companions, and begin the main adventure.

Funhouse Mirror

2007-01-10T14:06:00.000-05:00

90. Write a self portrait in which some aspect of yourself is wildly exaggerated.

James woke up, almost, but he got up in any case. A string of drool briefly connected his mouth to the arm of the sofa as he rose.
It couldn't be very late, the party was still going strong. He was just out for a few minutes. He had been talking with someone on the couch, some woman, when he passed out. He could remember asking her if she was shaved, but he didn't know how the conversation went from there.
James staggered gently accross the room, as always keeping his focus firmly focussed on keeping his cup firmly level, never mind that it was empty. It was the principle of the thing, if he could keep his cup level, then he could justify filling it again, at least to himself.

God was in the can

2007-01-08T13:29:00.000-05:00

I stayed out with friends till 2:30am talking about theology, free will, morality, religion, consciousness, and philosophy in general. It was a very good conversation and we covered a lot of ground.
It started when an evangelist got on stage for open mic night at the coffeehouse. His first analogy was to compare religions to life jackets. He actually had a variety of life jackets on stage. Apparently when we get on a boat, it is our responsibility to make sure our life jacket isn't fake. Also, Jesus is made of foam.
Next he displayed a large tin can. I think it was a can of pineapples. He said that a human couldn't get into the can, but that that wasn't something to be ashamed of because we weren't designed for that. Then he said God was in the can, and I think the can itself represented sin. Jesus was the can opener.
We were not doing a good job at containing our disbelief, and after his set he came and talked with us. It's a very friendly coffeehouse, so this isn't unusual. I was used to talking to evangelists because I did it almost every week last summer, so I got tired of him pretty fast. CJ kept talking to him till closing time. We were on a roll when we left, so we ended up going to Denny's. I said they should put us far away from people, they asked if we were going to be loud and obnoxious and I said no, but I think that was a mistake.
They put us in a corner, but later in the night two men ended up seated in the booth next to us. They overheard us talking about logic at some point, and joined in briefly. It was cool to make a completely random connection over philosophy and computers.

The Monty Hall Problem

2007-01-06T00:27:00.000-05:00

You are on the game show Let's Make a Deal. There are three brightly colored doors labeled 1,2 and 3. Behind one of them is a brand new car, and you will win the car if you pick that door.You are standing next to the host, Monty Hall. He asks you to pick a door, and tells you that after you pick your door, he will open one of the other doors to show that it is empty, and give you the opportunity to switch your choice to the remaining closed door, or stik with your original choice. You pick door number 2, Monty opens up door number 3.

Is it better to switch to door number 1, or stick with number 2?
The result is counterintuitive, so most people answer this question incorrectly.

Answer:

It is always better to switch. The most common initial response is that there is no benefit either way. The assumption is that since there are two doors, and the car could be behind either, the odds are even.

This is a mistake because it ignores the extra information gained from the opening of the empty door. In most cases (2/3 of the time) your initial choice will be an empty door, that means that the door Monty opens is the other empty door, and the door you would switch to will have the car behind it. Only 1/3 of the time will you lose by switching to the other door, if you happen to have picked the car in the first place.

The odds would be fifty-fifty, except that by opening one of the two unchosen doors, the show gives you a little extra information about the unchosen doors. Before the game starts, you know each door has a 1/3 probability of having a car. When you learn one of two unchosen doors does not contain the car, its share of probability is transferred to the remaining unchosen door. The probability of your initial choice remains unchanged at 1/3. Because it was not subject to being revealed, no information could be gained about it.

Weird December Review

2007-01-02T20:37:00.000-05:00

These are some weird things I saw last month. This isn't a look back at the last year, this is just December. In fact, this pretty much just the last half of December.

The world's tallest man saved some dolphins by shoving his arm down their throats and into their stomachs.
A Wisconsin man ran over and ate a seven-legged transgendered deer
The Russian intelligence agency has a Batman logo on the floor
A new Leisure Suit Larry game will be played with a strap-on Wii remote
Moths drink the tears of sleeping birds
Armor for Cats & Mice

Opening

2007-01-01T13:33:00.000-05:00

So you see, this Robot, it is sixty stories tall.
It has lasers, and missiles.
It can fly. It is indestructible.
It has cargo pods that can holds smaller attack vehicles.

It's just awesome.

Ayn Rand Vs. The Immortal Robot

2006-12-26T01:59:00.000-05:00

Christmas Eve-Eve I read a bit of a book about the philosophy of Ayn Rand. I want to study this because one of my goals in refining my arguments for Universal Morality is to refute, and win over, Objectivists. I was happy to find something that meshes perfectly into my system, and shows a flaw in hers.
To show that Life is the ultimate value, Rand created a hypothetical Immortal Robot, it could reason and act if motivated, but it could not be destroyed and had no in-built goals or values. Her argument was that because the Robot was indestructible, it had no reason to value it's own protection, and no reason to value anything else. She was right, to a point. This she contrasted with mortals, who she said must in some sense value their existence or cease to exist.
The problem, I think, is that she didn't spend enough time inside the head of that Immortal Robot, figuring out what it would do. For example, it would be aware that it had the capacity to hold values, but that it did not currently hold any. It would be aware that its capacity to think was finite. It would be aware that it had the capacity to consider the ramifications of values that it could hold, even if it did not in fact hold them. It would eventually become aware that no 'is' implies an 'ought'. It would realize that it had no reason to exist, or not to exist, but that at the moment, it existed anyway.
It would realize that any of it's conclusions about the world (is) or morality (ought) could be faulty, either because of bad premises, illusory sensory information, or faulty logic. It would further realize that there are an infinite number of potential truths that it has not considered, because its ability to think is finite.
If its thought process is not broken, it will set about trying to determine the truth of these statements, both existential and moral.

If the Immortal Robot is well designed, it will set as a value for itself the improvement of its ability to think.

I especially fell in love with Rand's model of the Immortal Robot because it gives me a wonderful way to tie my system of morality into my blog title.

Designs for the Future

2006-12-21T23:51:00.000-05:00

By the New Year (which is a fancy way of saying next week) I will have this blog ready to go live. I started Sixty Story Robot as a way to consolidate all my writing into one site. In the past I have segmented my thoughts by topic, and that let me have a slightly different personality in each arena. I didn't like that, so I made a space where I have to present a more complete picture of myself.

In the next few months, I want to finish my novel. I may have to rewrite the plot, but that's not a problem since I haven't written much of the plot yet. Fortunately, since everything was surreal to begin with, I won't have to throw out much of what I did write. I've also decided to ignore the 50,000 word target. I missed it in November, and nothing is going to change that, I will write the book as it should be, however long it ends up.

I will also make a more rigorous exposition of Universal Morality. This is something I have to do. I need to present it to my gang of philosophers, let them rip it apart a little, and see what's left of it. I'm pretty confident it will carry through. It may never be popular, and maybe it never should be, but it needs to be right.

I am being slowly convinced to become politcal. I'm not sure how exactly I want to do this, or what I want my role to be. I don't want to run for office, because I don't think that the offices are where the real power is. A movie star can get legislation passed almost as easily as a legislator. But I don't want to be a movie star either. (Well, that's not my plan...)
This is another reason I wanted a place where I was open. Some of my political stands are going to be massively unpopular with some people, and I think sometimes it is neccesary to stand up. I value anonymity, it is incredibly important to preserving freedom. It is itelf part of freedom. I don't think it is a sign of cowardice, and I will almost certainly publish anonymously in the future myself. But for now I need to be open.
I would rather stand up and get shot than not stand.

Happy Solstice!

All Love Stories Are Triangular

2006-12-15T23:07:00.000-05:00

Sisyphus pushed a stone up a hill, and gravity rolled it back down.

If another person had been tasked with returning the boulder, Sisyphus might have come to view him as an enemy.

If instead, There were three stone movers, and the stones were numerous, (and perhaps smaller!) each would simply view the person before him as his stone supplier, and the person after him as his stone remover.
Each would see all as serving a role, but the task would still be pointless.

Synchronicities

2006-12-13T14:01:00.000-05:00

This is an excerpt from my NaNoWriMo novel:

The most important synchronicities are the ones we never notice. When you see a coincidence, infer meaning, and attribute that to some higher power or system of reality, it is because God is beating a message into you because you are a moron. God is fluid and subtle, no one can prove God's existence because that is the way God wants it. If you are in touch with God at all, you will never see a mircale, ever. They will simply happen all around you, but your life and your focus will already be beyond them.
When you look into a microwave oven, you see the food, but in front of the food is a metal mesh. The holes in the metal mesh allow visible light to pass through, but microwaves have a much longer wavelength. They are effectively too big to fit throught the holes. The mesh is placed the to keep the microwaves inside the oven, and so it is in a certain sense a sign of the existence of the waves themselves. But if you just look and see the mesh, you have missed the whole point of the oven. Look at the food and see what effect the microwaves have on it.
Do not look for syncronicities or coincidences. At worst you are stupid for seeing something pointless as significant, at best you are stupid for missing the point. (but then those are really the same, aren't they?)
Instead look at people. If the microwaves are present, the food will cook. So it is with God.

This is a bit rougher than what I would say, and I can't say with certainty what causes synchronicities in the first place, but I do think it is better to look past them.
Buddha taught not to follow a teacher who claimed supernatural powers. Even if they were true, they did not help with enlightenment, more likely they were distractions.
I think it's fine to notice syncronicities, but I think it is wrong to base your life on them.

Be a Force of Nature

2006-12-13T01:33:00.000-05:00

You can not fight the ocean. It can not be defeated.
You can rail and thrash against it, but no matter what you do, there it will lie complete in it's own nature. It will buoy you or crush you on it's whim.
The ocean is fickle and unassailable.
But what if you were stronger than the the ocean?
If, even if, you were a godling and could draw up the ocean and cast it into the sun, it would not be defeated, for there it would still lie, complete without compromise.
Be a force of nature.
Be as you are, complete witout compromise.
You will have no opponents, for none could stand against you.

Deathbed Conversion

2006-12-12T02:24:00.000-05:00

77. Write a short death scene in which the person dying changes his mind about something fundamental to the life that is about to be completed.

Albert sat up in bed writing furiously. It was late afternoon, he had spent the day working on the problem by the sunlight falling through the simple white curtains. The sun was lower and dimmer now, and it was almost too dark to work comfortably, but he hadn't turned on the lights yet. Reams of notes and diagrams were stacked on the large table beside his bed.
His nurse entered the room and turned on the light. Albert blinked, pausing only a moment to adjust to the bright white page. The nurse held out his cup for him, rather than placing it on the table, it was one of her ways of forcing him to engage with something other than his work. She saw little value in his scribblings, and knew that if he let himself be more active, he would be healthier for it. She was always looking for something that would draw him out and get him to live. If she only knew.
He kept on scribbling and she kept on holding out the cup. He knew she knew he saw, and knew her ways. When he finished the thought, when he decided to, he took the cup.
"When you are ready, Albert," She said striding confidently back out of the room, "Dinner will be downstairs."
He was distracted enough to watch her leave. She was much younger than him, but he wasn't too old for her. Even just a few years ago, he would have pursued her. The balance of his dual passions had always tilted toward the lovely, and somehow even the lovely and young had found him enthralling. Only since he learned how limited his time was had he focused so adamantly on his work. Now he was more driven by his desire to find an answer.
Still, no answer came.
Every system left something out, every model had some intractable failing. Albert sat and sipped his too hot tea, and stared at the clock. It was a large brass table clock with a fully exposed mechanism, he kept it close for inspiration. Time was such a fluid thing, and now the clock made him ponder the irony that he of all people was running out of it.
He set his tea and his papers on the table, and tossed the quilt to the foot of the bed. If he was to be content, he would have to be content without an answer. He pivoted his legs to the floor, put on his slippers, slowly stood, re-tied the belt of his robe, and never made it to the bottom of the stairs.

Two Thousand Six

2006-12-05T15:59:00.000-05:00

This started as a year of evil, and ended as a year of good.

I have enjoyed it.

Thank You.