Skip to main content

On Movements, counter points of noteriety to those of social good.

The common element of all movements, be they those that have been seen to realize social good (like civil rights) and those that are inspired by some perceived injustice that has been generally seen as delusion (white power movement) is fear.

 Fear, is the engine that inspires the movements to the planks that they represent...coupled with the spark of ignorance. The difference though between movements of social good and movements of notoriety is that consistently for those of noteriety, when evidence is brought to bare on the veracity of the claims upheld to represent the movements wishes they are consistently invalided with logic and data.

 Racism has no foot to stand on because we are one human race with superficial differences far LOWER than in lineage differences (and that's all that matters). All claims to superiority based on such superficial claims are thus de facto false. Argumentation beyond this point by those engaged in a debate is tangential to the fact.

 This thus bolsters the claims for civil rights by eliminating one of the main accusations for establishment of different reasons for treatment of one person over the next due to some perceived difference (not that ...even if those distinctions existed it would then be valid, ultimately the rights to individual pursuit of self determination as outlined in our constitution should be held for all humans and now ...as we infer the minds of our animal brethren...all sentient beings!)

 Men's rights is likewise based on a fear charged by ignorance, fear of female domination in the work place, fear of emasculation by females in social situations in preference to continuing to enjoy the advantages of the dominant patriarchy...that males should assert and females should be subservient. fear that women exploiting the schism that changing to a more equitable system necessarily creates would take advantage of the gains made (I think this is a big one).

 It's the same reason why some are against affirmative action, to them it looks like a clear system to be gamed. After all they don't see their people of color being abused with water canons in the streets, refused entrance to shops and restaurants or spat on and called "nigger" and told to walk in the gutter...those where a nameless , faceless generation "long" gone, from which they had zero benefit.

 Just in the recounting these ideas make some one educated in the nuance chuckle before they frown but there it is, as a counter point to movements of social good.... it was at work for civil rights, was at work for women's rights, is at work for gay rights and now here it is again for the new perceived Chimera of men's rights...and just like those counter points when examined closely for logic and data, the movement comes up for the most part, equally illusory.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

On the idea of "world wide mush" resulting from "open" development models

A recent article posted in the Wall Street Journal posits that the collectivization of various types of goods or services created by the internet is long term a damaging trend for human societies.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703481004574646402192953052.html

I think that the author misses truths that have been in place that show that collectivization is not a process that started with the internet but has been with us since we started inventing things.

It seems that Mr. Lanier is not properly defining the contexts under which different problems can benefit or suffer from collectivization. He speaks in general terms of the loss of the potential for creators to extract profit from their work but misses that this is and was true of human civilization since we first picked up a rock to use as a crude hammer. New things make old things obsolete and people MUST adapt to what is displaced (be it a former human performance of that task or use of an older product) so as to main…

Engineers versus Programmers

I have found as more non formally trained people enter the coding space, the quality of code that results varies in an interesting way.

The formalities of learning to code in a structured course at University involve often strong focus on "correctness" and efficiency in the form of big O representations for the algorithms created.

Much less focus tends to be placed on what I'll call practical programming, which is the type of code that engineers (note I didn't use "programmers" on purpose) must learn to write.

Programmers are what Universities create, students that can take a defined development environment and within in write an algorithm for computing some sequence or traversing a tree or encoding and decoding a string. Efficiency and invariant rules are guiding development missions. Execution time for creating the solution is often a week or more depending on the professor and their style of teaching code and giving out problems. This type of coding is devo…

Waking Out: A proposal to emerging ethical super intelligence safely.

The zeitgeist of Science fiction is filled with stories that paint a dystopian tale of how human desires to build artificial intelligence can go wrong. From the programmed pathology of HAL in 2001 a space odyssey, to the immediately malevolent emergence of Skynet in The Terminator and later to the humans as energy stores for the advanced AI of the Matrix and today , to the rampage of "hosts" in the new HBO series Westworld.

These stories all have a common theme of probing what happens when our autonomous systems get a mind of their own to some degree and no longer obey their creators but how can we avoid these types of scenarios but still emerge generalized intelligence that will leverage their super intelligence with empathy and consideration the same that we expect from one another? This question is being answered in a way that is mostly hopeful that current methods used in machine learning and specifically deep learning will not emerge skynet or HAL.

I think this is the …