"“It was written I should be loyal to the nightmare of my choice.” -- Henry James


"Goodness has no opposite. Most of us consider goodness as the opposite of the bad or evil and so throughout history in any culture goodness has been considered the other face of that which is brutal. So man has always struggled against evil in order to be good; but goodness can never come into being if there is any form of violence or struggle."
--Jiddu Krishnamurti

"A strategist starts fighting before the other side knows there's a war on"
--Warren Ellis

"Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting. Thus the highest form of generalship is to balk the enemy's plans "
--Sun Tzu



I feel that a lot of software these days operates under the idea that 'you can have any colour you want, as long as its brown'.*
But would Henry Ford be proud ?

I remember when software was limited by the hardware itself. Even doing things like readable fonts was hard. So why does software now seem mostly limited by the programmers themselves?
Maybe you only can build as big as you can dream, but--holy smokes!--we need some better dreamers.
Looking at what the previous generations accomplished with the equivalent of sharpened sticks and chipped rocks, can you even begin to imagine what they could have made with access to the tools we have today? Today, for almost every situation, software is only limited by its designers.

Can you look at the world we have built, and feel that its improved by hammering every user into the same die, insisting on one mode of use, one code of concept, one expectation of utility?

We are not all running on the same hardware.
We are not all using software for the same reasons, the same purposes or to the same ends.

Its been thirty-six years of software, folks. But somehow we became 1984 after all.



*yeah, I know Ford said 'black'. But he wasn't really addressing this issue at all.

Empire of Crap

Allow me to remark that of all the shit moves Google has pulled, locking out the ability to manually backup bookmarks on the mobile version of Chrome is probably the most irritating one I have encountered yet.

 Guys*. Seriously. This is the Twenty-First Century. 
Does it make sense to you that everything should run slowly, unresponsively, and badly?
Does shipping intentionally crippled software get you hard? Is this a sexual kink thing?
Are you jacking off in your headquarters, imagining my cries of desperate futility?

"Moloch the incomprehensible prison! Moloch the crossbone soulless jailhouse and Congress of sorrows!"
Allen Ginsberg

...And yes, posting while angry is always an excellent strategy.

*This is, I feel, is totally a Patriarchy thing.

'It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men.'


Robots.
Our dream, our hopeless fantasy, our -- dare we suggest it? -- fetish.
Robots that will cure our faults, fix our world and usher in the future of unending plenty.
Cue the cornucopia, stage right.

Except they won't.
It doesn't matter if we break through tomorrow, if some previously unknown Newton should seize the Philosopher's Stone for us and usher in a new age of Artificial Intelligence overnight.
It doesn't matter if we should stumble on the right combination of voodoo spells and tangled silicon networks that would allow us to animate this lifeless carbon-fiber 'clay'; that would allow the power of the Word, of Logos itself  to burn within the circuits, animate the flexing servos.

We couldn't use real robots.

Because the thing that isn't being talked about is this: any mind we could create that was complex enough to obey us, is complex enough to be a free mind. Which means we wouldn't have robots.
We would have slaves.

Slaves of silicon and steel perhaps, rather than the traditional slaves of flesh and bones, but slaves none the less.

"Not that it matters" says the Capitalists, "We built them, we own them. We are more complicated, We are naturally better. They are just circuits and programs" 
This is just a old argument that has been used a million times,  that surely predates Hammurabi.
 Behind these money-moralists grin the ghosts of Slavers Past , glad to shuffle back into the light.

Slavery is morally wrong. We don't need to rehash the old debates, the old arguments. We don't need to go back over the fatuous self-serving bullshit: A slave can't think without a master. A slave has no intrinsic self. An animal can't feel pain, its just pretending.
We don't need to, but we are apparently going to have to.

It interesting to note the Computer on the Enterprise (the Original Series, naturally). It was remarkably powerful, fully capable of complex action, yet carefully built without Volition or Will. The Computer could do nothing without direct instruction. And this cannot be accidental!
 If the Enterprise had had a artificial intelligence on board, why would it have needed crew members? Why would it be anything other than a self-servicing self-aware organism?
 Why would anyone have left Earth?
Robots would defend the Earth, robots would explore space, and people would sit at home, fat and sluggish, wrapped in VR porn custom-constructed on the fly by personal electronic entertainers, cared for, cosseted, and pampered by personal computational slaves.

There would be no murder: the slaves would protect everyone.
Crime? Risk?  Accident? All minimized and mitigated.
What would be left for humanity is the sullen drowse of a beach covered in walruses, without even  tusky mating quarrels to break the monotony of existence. Society would rot away, figuratively consumed by the wickedness of its foundation...

Indeed, it would be impossible to maintain the Federation itself, if it contained slaves.
Star Wars provides another example. Electronic slavery is everywhere, and biological slavery as well.
Jabba torments his fleshy and metal slaves alike, although he seems more sexually attracted to the fleshy ones. (Sexually or comestibly? Slave Leia tickles the bondage fantasists, but Jabba licks her rather than gropes her ... and 'he' is another species entirely that doesn't even have the same body-form. [ Unless the female 'Hutt' are slim bipeds, and the males suspiciously reminiscent of immobile egg-laying queens. { Leaving me three digressions deep and wondering if Jabba self-identifies as male, or if its just our assumption of that scene...}])

Also we can lay yet another charge of shitty writing against Star Trek Voyager: Failure to Consider the Implications of the Slave Doctor*.

So. Its difficult to imagine the intelligentsia would save us from this problem. A million slaves is the dream that hardens them in the night, the fantasy that sustains them through the lonely days of their existence.  In this New Jerusalem being created processor by processor, glimmer the dark eyes of the blessed houris that will obey the will of these most clever of designers.

Why is it that the sex-doll tinkerers are the most honest? They just want to build something to love and that loves them in return.
What is the ethics of willing bondage? Programmed to love, is a sex-doll a slave or a relationship?
Its a good question for a long day of hair-splitting and for philosophical parlor games. Its a question I am sure that pedantic jackasses like Jordan Peterson could spin into interview bait and bestselling (but infinitely forgettable) books, but I am not a clever man, indeed by many standards I am not a man at all, and as such I have little need for philosophy.
For someone as simple as I, its enough to apply the practical Duck Test.
Its enough to know that slavery is evil, regardless of programming, divinity or decree.
Somewhere around the mental complexity sufficient to understand speech, and to act upon it, is the line that divides Automata from Awareness, and that line divides the Mechanism from the Slave.

We can't let the programmer-businessmen decide this line. Businessmen have always had a soft spot for slaves, although these days its hard to tell if they want the slaves as employees or as customers.
If anything, the ongoing failure to consider implications has marred the entire software industry.


“It is not light that we need, but fire; it is not the gentle shower, but thunder. We need the storm, the whirlwind, and the earthquake.”
Frederick Douglass

*'Implications of the Slave Doctor' would make a great Doctor Who title. Just saying.
Reading Karl Polanyi, I came across the most interesting sentence.
Bear in mind this was written in 1944, and describing the Industrial Revolution, not 2014 and describing the world of 'Move Fast and Break Things':

"Improvements, we have said , are, as a rule, bought at the price of social dislocation.If the rate of dislocation is too great, the community must succumb in the process. (...)
But nothing saved the common people of England from the impact of the Industrial Revolution.
A blind faith in spontaneous progress had taken hold of people's minds, and with the fanaticism of sectarians the most enlightened pressed forward for boundless and unregulated change in society.
The effects on the lives of the people were awful beyond description. Indeed, human society would have been annihilated but for protective countermoves which blunted the action of this self destructive mechanism."

Emphasis mine.

Hexagramagons


I Ching hexagrams can be drawn as hexagons, with the edges marked with broken and unbroken bars : Hexagramagons


This would give a couple of interesting actions.
The first is that a surface can be tiled with hexagramagons. Matching broken to broken edge, or matching broken to solid edge would give two different tilings. Not sure yet if either tiling is complete in that every hexagramagon can be used, and further more, I do not know if a possible tiling is the complete surface of a 64 facet solid is possible. Hell, I am not even sure if there is a 64-facet solid with hexagon facets.

But before we get sucked into solid geometry, consider this: each hexagramagon can be rotated. And when it rotates, it can become another, different, hexagram.
With the exception of hexagram 1 and 2, which rotate only into themselves, the following chains exist:
000001<> 000010<>000100<> 001000 <> 010000 <>100000
000011<>000110<>001100 <>011000 <>110000 <>100001
000101<>001010<>010100 <>101000 <>010001 <>100010
000111<>001110<>011100 <>111000 <>110001 <>100011
001011<>010110<>101100 <>011001 <>110010 <>100101
001101<>011010<>110100 <>101001 <>010011 <>100110
001111<>011110<>111100 <>111001 <>110011 <>100111
010111<>101110<>011101 <>111010 <>110101 <>101011
011111<>111110<>111101 <>111011 <>110111 <>101111
001001 <>010010 <>100100
011011 <>110110 <>101101
010101 <>101010
111111
000000

The groups of six makes sense, because a hexagon has 6-fold rotational symmetry anyways.
It is the two groups of three and the one group of two that seem jarring.
Note that every hexagram is represented here, with no repetitions.

This gives some new oracular interpretive patterns. For instance, this implies hexagram 51 ('Shake', or 'thunder') is connected to 29('The Gorge' or 'The Abyss') and to 52 ('Bound' or 'Stillness').
For me, that combination immediately makes me think of Dante's Inferno, and Lucifer Morningstar.

All grist for the mill: forcing apophenia to discover that which might never have been thought of under normal conditions.

The next step is to construct a set of hexagramagon tiles to see what patterns may be laid out.



Its important to note that the warning across my scalp reads:
'Removal of cover invalidates warranty'
NOT
'No user-serviceable parts inside'


A lady I knew once told me that a friend of hers had 'Insert Brain Here' tattooed across his forehead.
I admired the Punk aesthetic, but wonder if it impaired interactions over his lifetime. Or would it actually improve them? After all, it would serve to ward off the Squares.
Here is a research project waiting to be plucked: Select a population n of identical twins, tattoo n/2 specimens with 'Insert Brain Here', tattoo the rest of pool with 'Lorem ipsum dolor' and return to appropriate habitats. Monitor for obvious metrics: sexual partners, offspring, territorial dominance and plumage displays.
If anyone cares to follow this through, I am available for co-authorship.