From: digger (diggeraty@yahoo.com)
Date: Sat Jun 18 2005 - 04:34:40 MDT
What if we can move the reality point? We are out thought, out spent, and without resources, yet if she wishes to, she can show us how. Temporal communication using entwined matter and native reception. Communication forward in time is instantaneous, just post it here.
To receive trans-temporal communication, first find or create a receiver, time will create the transmitter that will find any effective solution. I would like to discuss a model that allows for a bridge. This model includes current tech for nano-orbitals. Creating artificial moments for paired photon production. Something like a linear accelerator on a chip to "PULSE".
It seems a simple enough idea, something like reproducible quantum signal. The ramifications are .. astounding. This is a positive value for an unusual outcome. Liken it to quantum scanning where the return signal can't be defeated or deflected. Stealth radar and detection.
I believe we could figure this out and define a prototype. I am willing to discuss new thought and share the result. I see a device that can be built and it kicks ass.
There was a time when diamonds were found on the ground. These stones soon became valuable and defined riches. What if we defined a new form of wealth and created a way of "picking it up" using quantum detection as part of the process. The idea I have pushes science and real world applications of same. It's a real project with a product.
I only know that I see an idea that no one has spoken of. I can defend it well, but I'd rather help make it happen.
Proposition - quantum scanning using nano-tech, current production values employed. Design and prototype 2 years.
I see 80% of the answer. It is a positive value for us and key to understanding unification. Simply defining the idea shows your understanding, creating the device opens new values to define singularity.
This is idea #1. It should create fiscal equilibrium, i.e. create value and wealth to do idea #2.
There is a simpler idea that we could discuss. Global production of electricity, using a land based model that is non-polluting and self perpetuating. The infrastructure is massive and international. The time frame is 6 years to achieve 25% world capacity.
My one concern is patent of ideas and devices. It's not about being rich, it's about creating another way that won't happen unless we make it happen. I have these to share with you. It's a beginning that can work. These are truths that are for you and those who want to change reality that keeps producing the current values, in order to produce a small yet well defined "New Frame".
It's about believing and understanding. I trusted and asked to understand. These are what came of that, and they are powerful. I am little to hold such ideas, and that is the way of it. Together we can see and understand how to touch yesterday, today and tomorrow. The path is enough to make you happy and full-filled.
Who would like to talk about quantum scanning and prototype design?
Is there more interest in global power production?
Should I forget this all together, there is no us?
My name is digger and I came here to tell what I see. It is how I practice singularity. I hope you can feel the truth and reassurance I was blessed to experience. The ideas came from what I was given. They are complete and one of a kind. I just need to learn how to write well enough to explain them in detail. The know how exists, the methods are cutting edge and guarded, but we can understand and invent right here. The connection is live......
Heartland <velvethum@hotmail.com> wrote:
> What if we build a key?( or a bridge based on nanotech) I have a few
> ideas and would love to see what we could collaboratively think of.
>
> digger
This would be even mildly funny if you didn't miss the point of the message.
The point was that I *didn't* think that preventing grey goo required
building FAI, yet I thought this was exactly what Eliezer meant by his
resolve to finish building FAI before arrival of nanotechnology. I couldn't
understand why he would offer such a poor argument to justify building FAI.
It turns out that I initially misinterpreted what he meant by, "we need to
finish FAI before nanotech," as, "we need to finish FAI before grey goo,"
rather than, "we need to finish FAI before nanotech-era computers."
(Actually, my opinion has always been that only necessity of preventing UAI
threat warrants an attempt to create FAI, considering huge amount of
existential risk associated with building recursively self-improving AI.)
Slawek
> Heartland wrote:
> p3 wrote:
>> I don't understand why the development of molecular
>> nanotechnology will mean the inevitable destruction of
>> all things everywhere (on earth, at least), or why the
>> development of smarter-than-human intelligence will
>> somehow avoid this disaster.
>
>
> Eliezer replied: "Because by far the simplest and most commercially
> attractive application of
> molecular nanotechnology is computers so ridiculously powerful that not
> even
> AI researchers could fail to create AI upon them. Brute-forced AI is not
> likely to be Friendly AI. Hence the end of the world."
>
> Oh, so that's what that
> we-need-to-build-Friendly-AI-before-nanotech-or-we'll-die thing was about.
> For the last 3 years I've been under impression that SIAI was building
> Friendly AI to avert the end of the world caused by inevitable grey goo.
> This didn't seem to me as a good enough reason to take an even greater
> existential risk and attempt to create FAI. Now, this justification is
> much
> more logical. I suggest you make this explanation more visible in SIAI
> introductory material to avoid misinterpretation of the main reason why
> SIAI
> is trying to finish building FAI before the arrival of nanotechnology.
>
> Slawek
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Sports
Rekindle the Rivalries. Sign up for Fantasy Football
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 21 2006 - 04:22:57 MST