This posts builds on a response to a thread started by a mutual friend on facebook that I thought merited exposition here. I am a firm proponent of the methods of science having been trained in them and employ them in my work and life, but I have no faith. The collections of data that form the theories posited by science are not accepted by what they will predict they are accepted by what they have predicted...this is a subtle difference that makes assertions of all scientists having "faith" as some define it a fallacious one. I have no faith that any of the systems which have succeeded at answering questions about the workings of the world will continue to do so, I have only past evidence that they have. This is the difficulty of scientists...of falling into the "I believe this will happen." trap instead of asserting the "In the past, data of this sort was explained by this process." in the first, "faith" and "belief" are implicit...in...
A chronicle of the things I find interesting or deeply important. Exploring generally 4 pillars of intense research. Dynamic Cognition (what every one else calls AI), Self Healing Infrastructures (how to build technological Utopia), Autonomous work routing and Action Oriented Workflow (sending work to the worker) and Supermortality (how to live...to arbitrarily long life spans by ending the disease of aging to death.)