I know longer believe in Techno-utopia or Accelerating Returns

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.



Dolos
What's been brought to light on the matter is that information technology does have limits, it has not been steadily exponential, it's been dropping and should plateau in 2020. Also, computers don't work like human intelligence, no matter how fast or powerful they get, they aren't intelligent. Lastly, Utopia isn't viable, it cannot be implemented, those who are able to gain power seem to be able to oppress. We have human nature and the law of thermodynamics.

However, I do believe that we will manage to colonize space, and spread out, and that we'll always find new ways to better implement technology even when it's reached its limits, or achieve linear gains in computer technology as we make it larger, but compression stops at a certain point. Ultimately, we won't escape an entropic event unless we utilize Planck scale energy, but we might as well harness dark energy and achieve instantaneous inter-galactic space travel. Are those exploits possible?

Lord Lucien
You no, you coulda just posted this in your other thread.

COG Veteran
Utopia is fantasy, good for books but impossible. The future you speak of (technologically) will be possible but give it about 300 years before the general population of Earth gets off the stupid pills and begin with advancing tech and space.

Astner

Dolos

Bardock42
What a fast, and just as unfounded, switch in opinion...

Dolos
Originally posted by Bardock42
What a fast, and just as unfounded, switch in opinion... You don't have education here, like me.

So, to instigate these little debates, you like to wait until someone who is educated like Astner or SM to jump in, so you can say something like this.

Obnoxious tweens. smh.

And it's not a switch, I never said either way whether we'll be able to generate enough energy on the Planck length to affect space or harness dark energy to affect space, or something similar, to various effects. And I never believed otherwise, so it's not even a switch in opinion from the opposite of what I believed before. It's still the same ole Star Trek inspired tech. And it's still only what I believe.

I actually still believe AI is possible, now I'm just as interested in IA (intelligence augmentation), but current humans could be surpassed in every capacity by computer technology and by future humans.

I don't know anyone who can beat even a medium level pc in an online chess match on chess.com. Relatively rudimentary computers ARE smarter than us in many important capacities and are making us less skilled in those areas as we rely on calculators and the like. However, future super duper computers are nothing compared a mere child in the common sense aspect of intelligence.

As for IA, the human brain is already an advanced system, when we complete the human genome, will have an understanding of it from the ground up, and therefore have a head start on AI in certain areas. Utilizing them together will deliver supreme effects.

The key things I gave up are a) Utopia and b) Endlessly exponential computing power.

Lord Lucien
Originally posted by Dolos
Obnoxious tweens. smh.
Oh God, irony overload! Irony overload!

Astner
Originally posted by Dolos
Energy powerful enough to exert pressure on the Planck scale has been theorized as being able to produce a rift and allow for non-linear time travel by affecting the quantum foam we know as empty space, according to Michio Kaku.
No, it hasn't been theorized in a scientific sense. In fact 90% of the crap Kaku spews out is philosophical jargon and shouldn't be confused with actual physics.

Originally posted by Dolos
You're saying something is impossible when have no idea whether it is or not.
It's impossible because what you're describing isn't physics. If you want to understand higher education physics then you'll have to study it. You're not going learn anything by watching documentaries and reading popular science articles.

Dolos
@Bardock - When I said you don't have education here, like me. I meant that neither of us have any education in these fields. Though, that is a stupid assumption on my part as I have no idea whether you have education or not, the assumption is based off the fact that you never actually debate me on technicalities. But that could be because you know I'm full of it.

As has been pointed out, I base things off what I read. I debate higher level concepts than Astner, for instance, but my side of the debate is fundamentally flawed because everything Astner and the like debate about they have learned through more scientific rigor, they know and understand things imperative for these higher level concepts that I don't.

Anyone can read a thousand articles, doesn't make them a scientist.

Astner
Originally posted by Dolos
I debate higher level concepts than Astner,
I'm fully capable of debating whatever concepts you're able to find. The reason I don't is because I'd have to bring out gauge theories and Lie algebras to get anywhere, and you're a ten year-education away from even understanding those.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Dolos
You don't have education here, like me.

So, to instigate these little debates, you like to wait until someone who is educated like Astner or SM to jump in, so you can say something like this.

Obnoxious tweens. smh.

And it's not a switch, I never said either way whether we'll be able to generate enough energy on the Planck length to affect space or harness dark energy to affect space, or something similar, to various effects. And I never believed otherwise, so it's not even a switch in opinion from the opposite of what I believed before. It's still the same ole Star Trek inspired tech. And it's still only what I believe.

I actually still believe AI is possible, now I'm just as interested in IA (intelligence augmentation), but current humans could be surpassed in every capacity by computer technology and by future humans.

I don't know anyone who can beat even a medium level pc in an online chess match on chess.com. Relatively rudimentary computers ARE smarter than us in many important capacities and are making us less skilled in those areas as we rely on calculators and the like. However, future super duper computers are nothing compared a mere child in the common sense aspect of intelligence.

As for IA, the human brain is already an advanced system, when we complete the human genome, will have an understanding of it from the ground up, and therefore have a head start on AI in certain areas. Utilizing them together will deliver supreme effects.

The key things I gave up are a) Utopia and b) Endlessly exponential computing power.

Nah, I would have said that earlier, had I found the thread earlier.

And I believe, I may be one of the people closest to the practical applications of Information Technology here...

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Bardock42
And I believe, I may be one of the people closest to the practical applications of Information Technology here...

I'm currently working in an IT department...

Astner
Originally posted by Bardock42
And I believe, I may be one of the people closest to the practical applications of Information Technology here...
Dude, you primarily use an iMac running OSX...

Do you even code?

Bardock42
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I'm currently working in an IT department...

You weren't here doped

Bardock42
Originally posted by Astner
Dude, you primarily use an iMac running OSX...

Do you even code?

I primarily use a MacBook Air running OS X.

And yes, yes I do.

Dolos
Funny you mention IT. One day (not more than 10 years, Astner) I hope to blow you in the dust as an IT warrior, a modern Achilles in a totally different field of combat.

Cyber Security and Espionage Specialist for Federal Intelligence. A thief of financial, military, and political secrets - a mercenary of cyber hackers. Total mastery of everything there is to know about the language 01. I'll make you a criminal overnight.

I jest.

However, such benefits from the Federal Government I'd earn could allow me to both afford and invest the time to earn every PhD there will be. If I wanted to go BatOzymandias and make everyone gawk at my impossible skill-set.

Omega Vision
Looks like Dolos is still Dolosing, so nothing has changed regardless of his current opinion.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Dolos
Funny you mention IT.

Is it, though? Or did you perhaps mention it in the opening post?


It's one or the other, but I'm unsure.

Newjak
Originally posted by Bardock42
Nah, I would have said that earlier, had I found the thread earlier.

And I believe, I may be one of the people closest to the practical applications of Information Technology here... I'm a software developer stick out tongue

Bardock42
Originally posted by Newjak
I'm a software developer stick out tongue

So am I, so am I... so can we all be

Originally posted by Bardock42
one of the people

together now? sad




Actually, let me just take back what I said completely, here's what I mean:

"Dolos, I know more about IT than you"

Newjak
Originally posted by Bardock42
So am I, so am I... so can we all be



together now? sad




Actually, let me just take back what I said completely, here's what I mean:

"Dolos, I know more about IT than you" Sweetness smile

Symmetric Chaos
You people with your "code" and your "development"! Let me tell you something, we're in the trenches every day dealing with the real Information Technology problems. Practical things, not the abstract theories from your ivory towers. I'm glad your programming is so elegant but Jimmy doesn't care, he chewed his own thumb off explaining how to open up Gmail. He was one of the lucky ones.

Newjak
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You people with your "code" and your "development"! Let me tell you something, we're in the trenches every day dealing with the real Information Technology problems. Practical things, not the abstract theories from your ivory towers. I'm glad your programming is so elegant but Jimmy doesn't care, he chewed his own thumb off explaining how to open up Gmail. He was one of the lucky ones. I heard the horror stories but I did not believe them to be true.

I shall unleash the nerds of war, let lose the binary bombs(They either explode or they don't stick out tongue) the IT field shall not let poor Jimmy's thumbs have been chewed in vain.

In short, I'm going automate all your jobs so you don't have to worry about it anymore big grin

Bardock42
I'm so good, my software doesn't need support.

Dolos
Originally posted by Omega Vision
Looks like Dolos is still Dolosing, so nothing has changed regardless of his current opinion. I interpreted that as, "Looks like this derp is still derping."

I assure you there is a reason for everything I do. It's difficult to derp when one views every sentient subjectively, including oneself. One who views everyone as mere eyes for a primordial...thing to see out of, including oneself. I am possessed by that thing. I'm what the Hindu"ists" call a Jivanmukta, I'm on the prasannatma (Ecsatcy) platform. "I'm" subject to an ecstatic viewer.

This is all a big theater, and we serve as the main entertainment. The universe has a structure. But how can something have a structure if it can't perceive itself? In the quantum world objects are undetermined until observed. Nothing exists until it's observed, so why do things exist if there's nothing to observe them.

Astner
Originally posted by Dolos
In the quantum world objects are undetermined until observed. Nothing exists until it's observed, so why do things exist if there's nothing to observe them.
To "observe" in particle physics means to conduct measurements, interacting with the particle or body of particles you're examining to receive whatever data you're looking for.

You're not altering particle properties by having them in your field of vision through some psychic influence like you're implying. Hence why I told you to stay away from the documentaries and get yourself an education.

Robtard
http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/5822/t6rr.png

Bardock42
Originally posted by Robtard
http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/5822/t6rr.png

thumb up

Cyner
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
You people with your "code" and your "development"! Let me tell you something, we're in the trenches every day dealing with the real Information Technology problems. Practical things, not the abstract theories from your ivory towers. I'm glad your programming is so elegant but Jimmy doesn't care, he chewed his own thumb off explaining how to open up Gmail. He was one of the lucky ones.

I laughed at this...

At my place it's all "I can't print!", "I can't get email", "my outlook doesn't work!". I'm trying to work on the image server and people can't press the one or two buttons it takes to fix their issue... at least I have job security.

Dolos
I often turn my psycho-blabber into entertainment, especially when other people start psycho-blabbing.

This is what happened here.

And Astner, this is America, education costs an arm and a leg if mommy and daddy can't help ya. I'm working on it. It's just not that easy, when you slacked off in high school. Gotta invest time in studying before you can have it.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Dolos
...it has not been steadily exponential, it's been dropping and should plateau in 2020.


Wrong: it has accelerated. Moore's law and an extension of it (the one that says FLOPS is doubling every two years) have done nothing but accelerate meaning it no longer takes 18 months or 2 years.


Additionally, there are emerging technologies that will force a massive jump (memristors hit commercial production from HP, early next year) to the processing power.

Processing power is not everything. In actuality, we have all the processing power we need, right now, to duplicate the brain power of a human. The problem is the software, not the hardware.

Symmetric Chaos
It is worth noting how increasing power has done increasingly less over the years. There was a time when computing knowledge went out of date literally within a year because things that were simply impossible before became practical. That's just not true anymore. More polygons on a figure or solving an equation in half the time is nothing like the first hard drive or the first GUI.

A memristor computer hitting the shelves sounds SOOOOO cool, by the way. Where did they announce that?

dadudemon
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
It is worth noting how increasing power has done increasingly less over the years. There was a time when computing knowledge went out of date literally within a year because things that were simply impossible before became practical. That's just not true anymore. More polygons on a figure or solving an equation in half the time is nothing like the first hard drive or the first GUI.

A memristor computer hitting the shelves sounds SOOOOO cool, by the way. Where did they announce that?

Uhhhh, apparantly, they are ahead of schedule according to this article:

"HP said it expects to ship Memristor storage as a denser (higher capacity in the same space) alternative to flash, by the end of this year in commercial applications. This is a faster schedule than has previously been indicated."

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/04/03/memristor_and_photonics/

That article was written in April of this year.

Astner
Is commercializing readily existing technology really considered technological advancement?

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Astner
Is commercializing readily existing technology really considered technological advancement?

Who said anything about technological advancement? If you want to be a grouch, fine, when lightsabers make it to mass market you don't get one.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Astner
Is commercializing readily existing technology really considered technological advancement?

You mean an extremely rare technology that less than 4 organizations have developed enough to make it useful beyond an ultra clean laboratory where successes were literally measured with electron microscopes?

I will be more direct: you have no clue what you're talking about.

Omega Vision
Originally posted by dadudemon
You mean an extremely rare technology that less than 4 organizations have developed enough to make it useful beyond an ultra clean laboratory where successes were literally measured with electron microscopes?

I will be more direct: you have no clue what you're talking about.
Dadudemon finally using his powers for good.

Astner
Originally posted by dadudemon
You mean an extremely rare technology that less than 4 organizations have developed enough to make it useful beyond an ultra clean laboratory where successes were literally measured with electron microscopes?
You don't think that has to do with that those four organizations are the only ones allowed to legally work with the technology due to fact that it's patented?

dadudemon
Originally posted by Astner
You don't think that has to do with that those four organizations are the only ones allowed to legally work with the technology due to fact that it's patented?

A memristor can and has been implemented in many different forms. The methods and the results are what is patented, not the idea of a memristor. What you're suggesting is that someone has patented the transistor so now everyone has to pay a royalty fee to the idea/concept of a transistor. Not so: there are many ways the transistor has been made, over the years, and those ways are what is patented: not the concept, itself.

Some most people are not eletrical physicists, I'll put it a different way: you cannot patent the discovery of the gravitational constant or the weak nuclear force. That would be pretty dang silly. However, you can patent a machine that takes advantage of either of those two.

Astner
Methods and results can't be patented, only ideas can.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Astner
Methods and results can't be patented, only ideas can.

And the ideas that are patented are particular ways of making memristors.

Astner
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
And the ideas that are patented are particular ways of making memristors.
Right, which brings us full circle back to my point.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Astner
Right, which brings us full circle back to my point.

Your point was that no one has a patent on memristors?

Did you get replaced with dadude part way through this conversation?

Bardock42
Originally posted by Astner
Methods and results can't be patented, only ideas can.

Methods can be patented.

Astner
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Your point was that no one has a patent on memristors?
No, my point was that the only reason the development of them are on such a small scale was due to legal issues. As soon a new material for a new model is discovered it's patented, limiting the development of research of that particular model.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Methods can be patented.
Right. Methods of production can be patented, but not methods of research. I should've been more clear on that.

Bardock42
That's fine, but it's surely not what dadudemon meant. He obviously meant the method in which a memristor is made and the resulting product, both of which can be (and are) patented.

Oliver North
I'm not even sure if that is true, anyways.

Sure, the "scientific method" probably couldn't be patented, but a lot of the software and equipment that were part of the methods of the research I was most recently doing were proprietary and under copyright. I suppose "methods" could be defined in a lot of ways though. Certainly the experiment itself wasn't patented, though, to reproduce it one would need copyrighted software and cameras, etc.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Oliver North
I'm not even sure if that is true, anyways.

Sure, the "scientific method" probably couldn't be patented, but a lot of the software and equipment that were part of the methods of the research I was most recently doing were proprietary and under copyright. I suppose "methods" could be defined in a lot of ways though. Certainly the experiment itself wasn't patented, though, to reproduce it one would need copyrighted software and cameras, etc.

You probably could patent an experiment, but I guess it kinda defeats the purpose of what you are trying to accomplish with it.

Oliver North
not necessarily if I'm a massive pharmaceutical corporation.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Oliver North
not necessarily if I'm a massive pharmaceutical corporation.

True, like if your finding do not support what you want them to support or something, you may not want anyone to repeat your experiment. Like if it turned out that your medicine actually kills 100% of people who take it, or that the earth happens to be older than 6000 years...that's dangerous stuff.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Astner
No, my point was that the only reason the development of them are on such a small scale was due to legal issues. As soon a new material for a new model is discovered it's patented, limiting the development of research of that particular model.

Oh, it is like those old arguments with dadude.

Please go on. pizza

Oliver North
I really just meant the competitive advantage a company might have if they designed a new method for mimicking neurotransmitters or something, but sure, being able to hide results that didn't conform to expectations would work.

Astner
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Oh, it is like those old arguments with dadude.
No, I'm just ignoring straw men. I could point them out and make a fool of him, but why bother?

dadudemon
Originally posted by Astner
No, I'm just ignoring straw men. I could point them out and make a fool of him, but why bother?

Sure, be my guest. It would take some massive stretching to pull it off, though. And by stretching, I mean backpeddling on your part (which is what you've been doing) and pretty much changing your position.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Astner
No, I'm just ignoring straw men. I could point them out and make a fool of him, but why bother?

So you've just completely lost the thread of the conversation, then?




Anyway, to Dolos: It seems like you've been "talked out" of these specific Kurzweilian notions of the future but I don't think that was the intention of any of the people you spoke with. I, at least, was trying to get you to think differently. Whether you believe in techno-utopia or not isn't that important to me it's the uncritical view of technology. Saying "I don't know if this is possible but I believe it is" is fake intellectual honesty. Real intellectual honesty is "I don't know." full stop, and then you try to find out the truth.

Read critics, not supporters. This is more than a pithy bit of advice, there are practical reasons to look at "critics" and "skeptics". If you can't answer a critic's challenges to a belief don't take a position on it because that means your understanding is poor. If you don't understand something well enough to defend it then you're vulnerable to rhetoric and specious arguments, from either side.

Mindship
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Read critics, not supporters. This is more than a pithy bit of advice, there are practical reasons to look at "critics" and "skeptics". If you can't answer a critic's challenges to a belief don't take a position on it because that means your understanding is poor. If you don't understand something well enough to defend it then you're vulnerable to rhetoric and specious arguments, from either side. thumb up

It's why I also watch Fox news. cool

Dolos
Originally posted by dadudemon
Wrong: it has accelerated. Moore's law and an extension of it (the one that says FLOPS is doubling every two years) have done nothing but accelerate meaning it no longer takes 18 months or 2 years.


Additionally, there are emerging technologies that will force a massive jump (memristors hit commercial production from HP, early next year) to the processing power.

Processing power is not everything. In actuality, we have all the processing power we need, right now, to duplicate the brain power of a human. The problem is the software, not the hardware.

I have a very...interesting future ahead of me. I'm more ambitious than Astner and with all his schooling. He'll settle for one PhD, I won't.

Dolos
The human brain does so much more than IT with so much less that it makes any software look like a joke. A complete layout of synaptic activity, aka "Mind Uploading", would allow for a simulated sentient system that would still deviate from the human thought process eventually, wouldn't it? Or maybe not, such a sustained method might take away why computers are so good at computing. I'm picturing The Oracle from the Matrix, a super artificially intelligent computer system unlike the Architect, in that instead of being very good with equations, she somehow "knew the future".

I have this theory that humans, unlike animals and any future Super Intelligence from nanoelectronic circuity, runs on a kind of predestined mindset. Hence; religion, why people see things and put a meaning to it, providence. Why we experience and interpret such as "purpose". In Dune that's how the Kwisatz Haderach was able to utilize probability manipulation, by seeing glimpses of the future. But obviously they weren't of the future, this prescience to me was a very advanced mind predicting very accurately. Hence, probability manipulation.

The best intelligence utilizes AI for its strengths and human intelligence for its strengths.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Dolos
I have a very...interesting future ahead of me. I'm more ambitious than Astner and with all his schooling. He'll settle for one PhD, I won't.

ide

Dolos
Originally posted by Bardock42
ide I know that this is an abbreviation for something obscenely offensive. (I don't even?)

I was joking, calm down.


----------------CALM DOWN-----------------

Dolos
Let me try and clarify whilst responding/debating with myself real quick.

Originally posted by Dolos
The human brain does so much more than IT with so much less that it makes any software look like a joke. A complete layout of synaptic activity, aka "Mind Uploading", would allow for a simulated sentient system that would still deviate from the human thought process eventually, wouldn't it?

What I was trying to get at here is that a software system can observe and mimic the patterns of a thousand neural networks for the duration of a thousand biological lifetimes.

Yet, the software that is mimicking these patterns will eventually revert to logic; and, something about the human condition that makes us so efficient at synchronizing our skills and personalities to greater affect on the sociological level; will eventually be lost in the process.



*The Matrix Trilogy.



Not exactly probability manipulation, the first few books in Dune were about the Golden Path, it was diverting from using machines to become socially apathetic. Replacing that machine control of things with human control. And how that happened was a more advanced version of the societal hierarchy common all throughout pre-machine history. Ergo; religion, collective consciousness.

Not probability manipulation, coerced or organized synchronization based on the metaphysical premises of purpose and destiny inherent in all of us.



Don't abolish the things that make us so great at society. But also, don't rule out a machine society either, instead try and see how things work out, work towards total assimilation.

I think both Dune and the Matrix try and make it a point that we rushed things, and that's why there was conflict, and no transition from Type 0 to Type 1. It wasn't until the later Dune novels or the finale of the Matrix films that machines and humans found this fact, and started working towards Michio Kaku's version of Kardashev's Type 1 civilization.

Robtard
Originally posted by Dolos
I have a very...interesting future ahead of me. I'm more ambitious than Astner and with all his schooling. He'll settle for one PhD, I won't.

thumb up

You've already usurped him as KMC's #1 Sciencer. Future's limitless now.

Dolos
Lol, I'm no scientist yet.

Talk is cheap. Come on, be real now.

Bardock42
When will you be a scientist you think? What kind of scientist?

dadudemon
Originally posted by Dolos
He'll settle for one PhD, I won't.

I won't, either. After I finish up a Ph.D. in IT Enterprise Management, I'll move on to physics and then philosophy. I've got four years before I can move on to finishing up physics. no expression

Mindship
So, eventually, you guys will be catching up to me.

Bardock42
I'm considering dropping out of University for good. Degreeless, of course.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Mindship
So, eventually, you guys will be catching up to me.

That would be a bit of an overstatement: I really don't think we'll ever catch up to the mighty Mindship. big grin


Originally posted by Bardock42
I'm considering dropping out of University for good. Degreeless, of course.

Go to school to study stuff you like.

Bardock42
Originally posted by dadudemon
Go to school to study stuff you like.

Nah, I'm good, thanks tho.

Astner
Originally posted by Robtard
You've already usurped him as KMC's #1 Sciencer. Future's limitless now.
What's a sciencer?

Originally posted by Bardock42
I'm considering dropping out of University for good. Degreeless, of course.
From Ubuntu to OS X to a drop out, you're going in the wrong direction.

Mindship
Originally posted by dadudemon
That would be a bit of an overstatement: I really don't think we'll ever catch up to the mighty Mindship. big grin laughing out loud

I am so tempted to start profiling stuff...

Dolos
Originally posted by Bardock42
When will you be a scientist you think? What kind of scientist? I think the pension I'm looking will take 7 years. To get that I'll need a special degree which will take me until age 26-27. So at aged 33-34 I'll have all the time in the world to focus on educating myself and providence for a free unlimited education to boot.

The degrees will all be used for fields of advanced technology and medicine. Psychology, neurology, biology, evo devo (Human Genome), biochemistry, information/internet technology, engineering, robotics, integrated circuit technology, electronics, nanoelectronics, nanorobotics, bionanorobotics, all pure mathematics degrees and the physics extensions of those, nuclear physics, particle physics, theoretical physics, etc.

Dolos
Social Engineering, Structural Engineering, Architectural Design, Industrial Design, Astronomy, astrophysics, cosmology, astrobiology, space science, planetary science, Economics, Socio-economics, Politics, Government, etc.

Dolos
Computer Sciences: algorithm and data structure development and design, software engineering, information theory, database theory, computational complexity theory, human-computer interaction, numerical analysis, programming language theory, computer graphics, and computer vision, etc.

I have interests in futurism, space exploration, post-scarcity civilization, intelligence augmentation, and strong AI.

Bardock42
How do you make money to live?

And it appears like you want to get a PhD or even two, which field of study do you want to focus on for these first two?

Dolos
Originally posted by Bardock42
How do you make money to live?

Google the word, "Pension". A 7 digit pension will keep you in the middle class, even with the dramatic inflation ahead.



There were nearly 20 PhDs, and at least 6 fields of study in my response.

Those are probably the tip of the iceberg, I'll horde degrees, everything I'm interested in I'll study.

Symmetric Chaos
Originally posted by Dolos
A 7 digit pension
wink

Astner
Originally posted by Dolos
Google the word, "Pension". A 7 digit pension will keep you in the middle class, even with the dramatic inflation ahead.
How the **** will you work yourself to a seven digit pension in seven years?

Originally posted by Dolos
There were nearly 20 PhDs, and at least 6 fields of study in my response.
The issue, though, is that technological universities discourage multiple technological degrees and the only exception to that rule is if a doctor wants to change fields. Even then there's a lot to go through.

Then there's the issue that you're pretty much ten years of study away from even starting working on a Ph.D. On top of that you're going to be too old to be offered a doctorate position.

Originally posted by Dolos
Those are probably the tip of the iceberg, I'll horde degrees, everything I'm interested in I'll study.
I think that somewhere along the line you confused ambition for talking shit. Once you get your Ph.D. then you can talk shit, until then you can't.

Bardock42
Originally posted by Dolos
Google the word, "Pension". A 7 digit pension will keep you in the middle class, even with the dramatic inflation ahead.

Okay, let me rephrase. What job are you working right now?

There were nearly 20 PhDs, and at least 6 fields of study in my response.

Originally posted by Dolos

Those are probably the tip of the iceberg, I'll horde degrees, everything I'm interested in I'll study.

I feel like that's a bit utopian, considering the current way academia works. But it's nice that you have goals. Perhaps more realistic ones or shorter term ones might be better though.

Originally posted by Astner
How the **** will you work yourself to a seven digit pension in seven years?

If you count 2 digits for the cents, perhaps.


Originally posted by Astner

I think that somewhere along the line you confused ambition for talking shit. Once you get your Ph.D. then you can talk shit, until then you can't.

That's a bummer, I guess no one in this thread then can talk shit?

Dolos
The field of National Intelligence and Defense for a Cyber Espionage Specialist doesn't exist per se, it would have to be acquired from the inside after acquiring your conventional Cyber Security Specialist for the relatively measly CIA.

How much innovative product and $$ am I hacking for them? How much oil and ore am I relocating? Cyber warfare is very real. The Nation can laugh at some petty super board of directors for Harvard and dozens of special universities and tech schools. My last legitimate degree is a Masters in cyber espionage. With what may as well be an IQ of 300+ it would take me literally hours to build fail proof firewalls for routes (that have totally altered the global network's infrastructure on a nightmarish scale) that would take trillions of years worth of algorithmic computation to trace, even with hundreds of petaflops. Who the hell else is going to be capable of doing that for the U.S.? No one.

Can't afford to play fair in this world.

Dolos
The shadow governments don't care who you are, they care about results. I was born for war more than most, not conventional war.

Dolos
National interests and intelligence, there's no defense about it. The modern world's infrastructure is run by its cybernated networks, information is paramount and there can be no information on this scale without cybernated network communications. This is modernized plunder, one really potent hacker is worth more than an army of hackers.

Bardock42
I have no idea what you are talking about.

dadudemon
Originally posted by Bardock42
I have no idea what you are talking about.

Remember Czarina Czarina?

Oliver North
I love how Dolos' "Hey look I'm more reasonable now" thread has become more ridiculous than most...

Bardock42
Originally posted by Oliver North
I love how Dolos' "Hey look I'm more reasonable now" thread has become more ridiculous than most...

Than most of his thread, or than most threads ever?

Lord Lucien
Originally posted by Dolos
The field of National Intelligence and Defense for a Cyber Espionage Specialist doesn't exist per se, it would have to be acquired from the inside after acquiring your conventional Cyber Security Specialist for the relatively measly CIA.

How much innovative product and $$ am I hacking for them? How much oil and ore am I relocating? Cyber warfare is very real. The Nation can laugh at some petty super board of directors for Harvard and dozens of special universities and tech schools. My last legitimate degree is a Masters in cyber espionage. With what may as well be an IQ of 300+ it would take me literally hours to build fail proof firewalls for routes (that have totally altered the global network's infrastructure on a nightmarish scale) that would take trillions of years worth of algorithmic computation to trace, even with hundreds of petaflops. Who the hell else is going to be capable of doing that for the U.S.? No one.

Can't afford to play fair in this world.


The shadow governments don't care who you are, they care about results. I was born for war more than most, not conventional war.


National interests and intelligence, there's no defense about it. The modern world's infrastructure is run by its cybernated networks, information is paramount and there can be no information on this scale without cybernated network communications. This is modernized plunder, one really potent hacker is worth more than an army of hackers. You either have the most bloated, egotistical delusions of grandeur ever... or you're on the best kind of drugs.

Dolos
Originally posted by Oliver North
I love how Dolos' "Hey look I'm more reasonable now" thread has become more ridiculous than most... I'm pretty confident we're in an opaque war with China.

They give you certain tasks depending on your skill-set, your ability, not just your education - because they can give you what you need to know (algorithm and data structure development and design, software engineering, information theory, database theory, computational complexity theory, human-computer interaction, numerical analysis, programming language theory, computer graphics, computer vision, etc.) if you're able to pick it up quickly and pick up more and adapt to new tactics on the cyber battlefield.

A masters in cyber espionage is a good way to get in, especially if one's GPA in that field is flawless. Building a million+ dollars wouldn't take much more than 7 years for the elite cyber warriors, I'd think. Especially since we're outnumbered by China. If events like hacking the Department of Energy perpetuate, that is. There's no reason they won't.

My mind is wired for software. If I were to be a self-fulfilling prophecy in anything---not that anyone anywhere with a normal IQ isn't capable of outsmarting everyone else at anything eventually, just like anyone is as capable at being as angressive, apathetic, or passive or empathetic as they want to be---it would be in networking.

Mindset
Originally posted by Dolos


A masters in cyber espionage babby

Oliver North
Originally posted by Dolos
I'm pretty confident we're in an opaque war with China.

They give you certain tasks depending on your skill-set, your ability, not just your education - because they can give you what you need to know (algorithm and data structure development and design, software engineering, information theory, database theory, computational complexity theory, human-computer interaction, numerical analysis, programming language theory, computer graphics, computer vision, etc.) if you're able to pick it up quickly and pick up more and adapt to new tactics on the cyber battlefield.

A masters in cyber espionage is a good way to get in, especially if one's GPA in that field is flawless. Building a million+ dollars wouldn't take much more than 7 years for the elite cyber warriors, I'd think. Especially since we're outnumbered by China. If events like hacking the Department of Energy perpetuate, that is. There's no reason they won't.

My mind is wired for software. If I were to be a self-fulfilling prophecy in anything---not that anyone anywhere with a normal IQ isn't capable of outsmarting everyone else at anything eventually, just like anyone is as capable at being as angressive, apathetic, or passive or empathetic as they want to be---it would be in networking.

is this before or after you attain 20 other advanced degrees?

Dolos
Before.

Education is paramount to taking on a larger, more cumbersome responsibility than just the defensive/offensive aspects of network infrastructure. There's the essential accounting for resources when overly printed money proves mostly unreliable without the gold standard, and the minutiae of organizing the masses for global projects, et cetra. It's very very tedious and requires an all-encompassing intellectual plasticity, an ever-evolving knowledge base.

I don't like being left-out, I don't like being sub-par or even on par with others. I'm a competitive Arien, but in this age Aries' simple, "school-boy heroics" are so predictable I'd be better off as a devious Scorpio.

Bardock42
So, do you have any programming experience at all? What about any hacking skills? What do you know about cyber security? What are some simple ways to hack a website? What does one have to consider when running a database on a server with a web component?

Oliver North
Originally posted by Dolos
There's the essential accounting for resources when overly printed money proves mostly unreliable without the gold standard

untrue, one of the reasons standard-backed currencies were abandoned was because they were only the most stable in theory. In practice, they don't allow enough flexibility in monetary and fiscal policy for a state to deal with natural ebbs and flows of the international market. Were there no such ebbs and flows, a standard backed currency (any of them, gold isn't magic for some reason) would work, real world economics just doesn't work that way.

Dolos
Originally posted by Oliver North
untrue, one of the reasons standard-backed currencies were abandoned was because they were only the most stable in theory. In practice, they don't allow enough flexibility in monetary and fiscal policy for a state to deal with natural ebbs and flows of the international market. Were there no such ebbs and flows, a standard backed currency (any of them, gold isn't magic for some reason) would work, real world economics just doesn't work that way. No, that's what I said. I agree totally.

The fact is that accounting for resources is a very daunting task when there're ever-increasing currencies to back, requiring a supremely conscientious attention to minutiae. Especially when one considers motives and agendas and people cheating and breaking rules, you have to literally see patterns and motives to why things go awry. The corporate world is filled with illegitimate methodologies. Don't try and play dull to that.

Dolos
Enough of cyber hackers and businessmen who may be cheating the current system.

I'm more interested in AI's ability to create software capable of cracking the human genome, and future nano-electronic strong AI's ability to generate software capable of matching the human brain, and cracking the human cognome.

That in itself, aside from enhancing anyone, could at least remove all setbacks, disorders, diseases sicknesses. At the same time there's post-scarcity, an idea that could slowly become practical, especially when we really get a synergetic system for manufacturing and producing efficiently, because the overabundance of resources to make pricetags superfluous.

But the key to doing that, is still Strong AI, capable of resource management. The stronger the AI, the better, and when weak AI software is culminated with the enhancement applications of the human cognome process, there begins the autocatalytic reaction that makes such a psuedo-cybernated government possible. Even without Moore's Law.

Once we get our own civilization completely in order, we can move onto to colonizing space.

Text-only Version: Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.