Transformation to Transcendence
Qubits will prevail (Read Notes first)17 total reviews
Comment from Dr. Nad
Wow, that was quite something I just read. I type slow and I don't know how to access talk to text on my Mac. So, my response will not be the disquisition that I just consumed.
1. You are brilliant. Your knowledge of computing technology is incredible.
2. Your political bias is evident, and an understanding of diversity of thought seems to have alluded you. There are equally strong arguments that I am sure you are aware of that buttress a polar opposite perspective on the best course of action for nations and people to take that would minimize globalism. No more time to expound.
3. I find it extremely challenging to take anyone serious who ignores the creator of the universe. You may not be doing so but you did not address His role in our past, present or pending.
You have a great mind and you wrote this extremely well.
reply by the author on 01-Mar-2023
  |
Wow, that was quite something I just read. I type slow and I don't know how to access talk to text on my Mac. So, my response will not be the disquisition that I just consumed.
1. You are brilliant. Your knowledge of computing technology is incredible.
2. Your political bias is evident, and an understanding of diversity of thought seems to have alluded you. There are equally strong arguments that I am sure you are aware of that buttress a polar opposite perspective on the best course of action for nations and people to take that would minimize globalism. No more time to expound.
3. I find it extremely challenging to take anyone serious who ignores the creator of the universe. You may not be doing so but you did not address His role in our past, present or pending.
You have a great mind and you wrote this extremely well.
Comment Written 27-Feb-2023
reply by the author on 01-Mar-2023
-
Thanks
-
Welcome
Comment from Ulla
To be honest with you, why on earth didn't you divide this into several chapters? It's far to long and tedious for a forum like this. It's an interesting subject, but how on earth would any of be able to post anything if everything was this long? I'm just being honest. I read barely a third and then I gave up. Far too long. Ulla:))
reply by the author on 26-Feb-2023
|
To be honest with you, why on earth didn't you divide this into several chapters? It's far to long and tedious for a forum like this. It's an interesting subject, but how on earth would any of be able to post anything if everything was this long? I'm just being honest. I read barely a third and then I gave up. Far too long. Ulla:))
Comment Written 26-Feb-2023
reply by the author on 26-Feb-2023
-
Understood
Comment from Annmuma
When I began reading this post, I thought I would simply read it, note my thoughts and move on. Easier said than done. I've read it; I made notes and I DON'T know my thoughts.
I do know that, without emotional ego, there is no humanity. I believe is a supreme being, a complete source of energy and knowledge from whom all humanity - and all life - originated. I believe hell to be separated from that supreme source and that we all experience hell as we work our way toward reuniting.
Many religiions attempt to make it easy -- just say, believe or do certain things and you are there. I'm not sure it works that way. We must all work our back to a source of perfect love and, perhaps, that requires a series of lifetimes. I don't know.
I know we are creatures of freewill and I know this world was created to be perfect; via mankind, it has been corrupted by individuallity and, I believe, computers and AI are part of the path back to perfection. I also think it will take more than two or three milleniums to make it back.
I am fan of Mary Baker Eddy and have read her book. I believe our world offers the source of cure for every illness, but we are not there yet. I believe that people's desire for instant cures and instant answers and dependence on big pharma, as well as the advantages of getting some sort of immediate relief do not help in moving toward true cures on an individual basis.
I remember when I first heard the term of 'artificial intelligence' in mid-1970's. It was in a conversation with my boss, Tom Bohs. I remember telling him that it sounded like a contradiction in terms to me. I seemed to me and still does that 'real intelligence' cannot also be 'artificial intelligence'. Of course, I understand that the term artificial means that the intelligegency eminates from real and true date, not smirched by human ego and/or feelings. I believe artificial intellegence is a tool, not an answer.
I enjoyed reading your post, but admit my 'intelligence' and brain power falls far below what is necessary to truly understand everything you are saying.
By the way, I believe in the NOW and in living inthe NOW. I also believe it to be a near impossible goal. I often think of the person who fell in a chasm 100 foot deep. He caught a root, held on, and noticed some berries growing from a nearby bush. He reached for some, and as he enjoyed their sweetness, the root from which his life hung was beign pulled from the the ground. Instead of panic, the person, enjoyed the berries and commented on the delicious taste of each. That is living in NOW. It rarely, if ever, happens.
Thanks for your post.'
ann
reply by the author on 26-Feb-2023
|
When I began reading this post, I thought I would simply read it, note my thoughts and move on. Easier said than done. I've read it; I made notes and I DON'T know my thoughts.
I do know that, without emotional ego, there is no humanity. I believe is a supreme being, a complete source of energy and knowledge from whom all humanity - and all life - originated. I believe hell to be separated from that supreme source and that we all experience hell as we work our way toward reuniting.
Many religiions attempt to make it easy -- just say, believe or do certain things and you are there. I'm not sure it works that way. We must all work our back to a source of perfect love and, perhaps, that requires a series of lifetimes. I don't know.
I know we are creatures of freewill and I know this world was created to be perfect; via mankind, it has been corrupted by individuallity and, I believe, computers and AI are part of the path back to perfection. I also think it will take more than two or three milleniums to make it back.
I am fan of Mary Baker Eddy and have read her book. I believe our world offers the source of cure for every illness, but we are not there yet. I believe that people's desire for instant cures and instant answers and dependence on big pharma, as well as the advantages of getting some sort of immediate relief do not help in moving toward true cures on an individual basis.
I remember when I first heard the term of 'artificial intelligence' in mid-1970's. It was in a conversation with my boss, Tom Bohs. I remember telling him that it sounded like a contradiction in terms to me. I seemed to me and still does that 'real intelligence' cannot also be 'artificial intelligence'. Of course, I understand that the term artificial means that the intelligegency eminates from real and true date, not smirched by human ego and/or feelings. I believe artificial intellegence is a tool, not an answer.
I enjoyed reading your post, but admit my 'intelligence' and brain power falls far below what is necessary to truly understand everything you are saying.
By the way, I believe in the NOW and in living inthe NOW. I also believe it to be a near impossible goal. I often think of the person who fell in a chasm 100 foot deep. He caught a root, held on, and noticed some berries growing from a nearby bush. He reached for some, and as he enjoyed their sweetness, the root from which his life hung was beign pulled from the the ground. Instead of panic, the person, enjoyed the berries and commented on the delicious taste of each. That is living in NOW. It rarely, if ever, happens.
Thanks for your post.'
ann
Comment Written 25-Feb-2023
reply by the author on 26-Feb-2023
-
Many thanks for an in-depth evaluation. You have helped my focus...John
Comment from royowen
What the original sci fi writers feared the the most, (at least as far back as I can remember,) I read them all, Asimov, Herbert, Vonnegut, Wyndham, Tolkien, CS Lewis etc. etc, it seems to be coming true, at least we know that pride won't be there! Do they understand grace? Or is Logical law. How does one eliminate emotion, which is notoriously unreliable, although one's grasp of grace eliminates to a degree. I can now understand why there will no need for feelings, the superseding of the human perhaps. I understand the various theories of philosophical idealism. But can they truly work with the lusts of the human proclivities? Or do we still have yet another form of totalitarianism? Hmm interesting, blessings Roy
reply by the author on 26-Feb-2023
|
What the original sci fi writers feared the the most, (at least as far back as I can remember,) I read them all, Asimov, Herbert, Vonnegut, Wyndham, Tolkien, CS Lewis etc. etc, it seems to be coming true, at least we know that pride won't be there! Do they understand grace? Or is Logical law. How does one eliminate emotion, which is notoriously unreliable, although one's grasp of grace eliminates to a degree. I can now understand why there will no need for feelings, the superseding of the human perhaps. I understand the various theories of philosophical idealism. But can they truly work with the lusts of the human proclivities? Or do we still have yet another form of totalitarianism? Hmm interesting, blessings Roy
Comment Written 25-Feb-2023
reply by the author on 26-Feb-2023
-
The body-mind (ego) must give in to true intelligence for us to overcome human selfishness. Thanks, Roy...John
-
When the clever can?t, I think we might be devolving
-
Agreed
-
Agreed
Comment from John Ciarmello
You have a brilliant mind, or at least you are extremely proficient in this field, and kudos to you.
I must admit that most of this went entirely over my head, which is no fault of mine. That said, It would have been much more interesting had it not been written like a professor's college textbook.
I think some relatable terms for the layman in the group might have taken this to another level. I'm not bashing this by any stretch. I simply wish you had tried to make us understand as it sounded intriguing but fell short because a lot of it DID NOT COMPUTE! Best, JohnC
reply by the author on 26-Feb-2023
|
You have a brilliant mind, or at least you are extremely proficient in this field, and kudos to you.
I must admit that most of this went entirely over my head, which is no fault of mine. That said, It would have been much more interesting had it not been written like a professor's college textbook.
I think some relatable terms for the layman in the group might have taken this to another level. I'm not bashing this by any stretch. I simply wish you had tried to make us understand as it sounded intriguing but fell short because a lot of it DID NOT COMPUTE! Best, JohnC
Comment Written 25-Feb-2023
reply by the author on 26-Feb-2023
-
Thanks for the input. I get better because of comments like these...
Comment from Kaiku
I have been watching the original Star Trek series the last few nights. 1701 has come along way. Your writing here is certainly scientific and loses probably 99 percent of your readers, or has those 99 percent not caring because of age and the `I won`t be around long enough for this quantum stuff to affect me` To your early quote about genius, I heard a speaker once say, `There is genius in every man` In fact; I use that saying quite often. There is youtube video that speaks of Elon Musk and his research into quantum computing such that if you follow the advice of the financial research people behind the video you will be shown how to be a successful investor without ever losing a dime. But hurry, this secret is only going out to the first 100 subscribers. Go ahead, take away our ability to think and you will take away the genius of man.
reply by the author on 26-Feb-2023
|
I have been watching the original Star Trek series the last few nights. 1701 has come along way. Your writing here is certainly scientific and loses probably 99 percent of your readers, or has those 99 percent not caring because of age and the `I won`t be around long enough for this quantum stuff to affect me` To your early quote about genius, I heard a speaker once say, `There is genius in every man` In fact; I use that saying quite often. There is youtube video that speaks of Elon Musk and his research into quantum computing such that if you follow the advice of the financial research people behind the video you will be shown how to be a successful investor without ever losing a dime. But hurry, this secret is only going out to the first 100 subscribers. Go ahead, take away our ability to think and you will take away the genius of man.
Comment Written 25-Feb-2023
reply by the author on 26-Feb-2023
-
Thanks for your input...John
-
yep
Comment from susand3022
Well, Cogitator, this is Quite the post. Kind of like a term paper. Well broken down into sets, subsets, and well explained. As a learning tool, it's pretty good. Did you ever write textbooks? If you haven't, you might want to think about it. There's good money in it.
Susan :)
reply by the author on 25-Feb-2023
|
Well, Cogitator, this is Quite the post. Kind of like a term paper. Well broken down into sets, subsets, and well explained. As a learning tool, it's pretty good. Did you ever write textbooks? If you haven't, you might want to think about it. There's good money in it.
Susan :)
Comment Written 25-Feb-2023
reply by the author on 25-Feb-2023
-
Thanks
Comment from Olivanne Marsh
Five stars for effort and obvious knowledge. This is so interesting and complex, but for the average reader it's too long and not simplified enough. I kept being distracted by questions and variables not considered, which would pop into my head as I read, and made the piece seem even longer. Depending on your audience, perhaps the sentences need to be shorter and simpler too. I would love to have a long talk with the author. I've included a few examples below of the kinds of things that just popped into my head as I read. Also felt like there were several places where you repeated ideas, perhaps in different language or as re-enforcement, but.... Bottom line, gut-reaction, the ideas are fascinating...but the article (?) is daunting and a bit off-putting for someone who considers the deep technical and scientific ideas explored a little over their heads.
"It would be difficult for anyone who voted for Trump to understand this post." ***Funny and true. Wouldn't it be impossible for anybody who voted for any politician to fully understand this post? As humans, we don't fully understand or communicate pure truth? Isn't all truth relative and contaminated by point of view?
"Intelligence is universal and contained in every manifestation of energy, even rocks. Artificial (fabricated) Intelligence is the human persona (ego). Computers have no emotional ego to deal with, ergo- no bias and preconceived notions. Human egos can be decent passengers but can be dangerous in the driver's seat. Think politics for a moment." **** But, computers are designed and built by human intelligence and so are the AI's driving them, so therefore flawed as are humans and as dangerous in the driver's seat they are still the ones doing the driving? No?
"Helen Keller had no ego to spoil her accomplishments - like computers."**** How could she be human and be ego less? I dispute this statement.
"Communication is the key. All human languages are zeroes and ones in various combinations to a computer. Computers can now be universal translators just like Picard's on the Enterprise." **** This is not completely or always true. Communication is accomplished without language. So, not all communication is through language. Not all accurate communication could be binary without some way of processing inflection, tone of voice etc. into a binary system???
I could ask questions forever here. I loved this attempt and I learned a lot, the topic and the interesting, distracting questions kept me involved, but, I was also pretty overwhelmed by the scope. So maybe a series of articles and narrow the scope considerably in each one. utopianism and Buddhism could in relation to technology, communication, artificial intelligence and human nature could each fill a book.
reply by the author on 25-Feb-2023
|
Five stars for effort and obvious knowledge. This is so interesting and complex, but for the average reader it's too long and not simplified enough. I kept being distracted by questions and variables not considered, which would pop into my head as I read, and made the piece seem even longer. Depending on your audience, perhaps the sentences need to be shorter and simpler too. I would love to have a long talk with the author. I've included a few examples below of the kinds of things that just popped into my head as I read. Also felt like there were several places where you repeated ideas, perhaps in different language or as re-enforcement, but.... Bottom line, gut-reaction, the ideas are fascinating...but the article (?) is daunting and a bit off-putting for someone who considers the deep technical and scientific ideas explored a little over their heads.
"It would be difficult for anyone who voted for Trump to understand this post." ***Funny and true. Wouldn't it be impossible for anybody who voted for any politician to fully understand this post? As humans, we don't fully understand or communicate pure truth? Isn't all truth relative and contaminated by point of view?
"Intelligence is universal and contained in every manifestation of energy, even rocks. Artificial (fabricated) Intelligence is the human persona (ego). Computers have no emotional ego to deal with, ergo- no bias and preconceived notions. Human egos can be decent passengers but can be dangerous in the driver's seat. Think politics for a moment." **** But, computers are designed and built by human intelligence and so are the AI's driving them, so therefore flawed as are humans and as dangerous in the driver's seat they are still the ones doing the driving? No?
"Helen Keller had no ego to spoil her accomplishments - like computers."**** How could she be human and be ego less? I dispute this statement.
"Communication is the key. All human languages are zeroes and ones in various combinations to a computer. Computers can now be universal translators just like Picard's on the Enterprise." **** This is not completely or always true. Communication is accomplished without language. So, not all communication is through language. Not all accurate communication could be binary without some way of processing inflection, tone of voice etc. into a binary system???
I could ask questions forever here. I loved this attempt and I learned a lot, the topic and the interesting, distracting questions kept me involved, but, I was also pretty overwhelmed by the scope. So maybe a series of articles and narrow the scope considerably in each one. utopianism and Buddhism could in relation to technology, communication, artificial intelligence and human nature could each fill a book.
Comment Written 25-Feb-2023
reply by the author on 25-Feb-2023
-
Very good analysis
Comment from Terry Broxson
There is a lot to digest. I am certainly not capable of digesting it all. Even if I can not understand the quantum computer part of the commentary, I am glad that somebody can. I don't understand brain surgery either, but I am glad somebody can.
I do like music. Some of it makes me happy. Some music makes me sad. Television has entertained me from time to time. I have read thousands of books and articles, and now your commentary. I have found all sources interesting.
I don't think I was ever programmed by any source.
I will meditate on some of this. It is possible it will put me to sleep. If it does, please understand that will be my priority at that moment in time.
Cheers! Terry.
reply by the author on 25-Feb-2023
|
There is a lot to digest. I am certainly not capable of digesting it all. Even if I can not understand the quantum computer part of the commentary, I am glad that somebody can. I don't understand brain surgery either, but I am glad somebody can.
I do like music. Some of it makes me happy. Some music makes me sad. Television has entertained me from time to time. I have read thousands of books and articles, and now your commentary. I have found all sources interesting.
I don't think I was ever programmed by any source.
I will meditate on some of this. It is possible it will put me to sleep. If it does, please understand that will be my priority at that moment in time.
Cheers! Terry.
Comment Written 25-Feb-2023
reply by the author on 25-Feb-2023
-
Sweet dreams
Comment from Wayne Fowler
Sorry, I have no sixes left.
The beginning and middle effectively describe my wife and my marriage. You did masterful work (except for the redundancy)
I wish you had separated, for another post, the political and predictive portions, though you would have to devise some way to sucker those among us (many) who would rather shoot guns than think.
What I fear is that the American educational system will separate us into two groups: movers and shakers (thinkers and innovators), and hamburger flippers. I also fear that in your 'Plutarchy' the thinkers and innovators will be rendered useless, leaving no choice but anarchy the final solution.
I can't comment on all of your very important points (overload), but I wish I could.
Thank you for writing. (Maybe you would consider posting portions with a mind to absorbability?)
reply by the author on 25-Feb-2023
|
Sorry, I have no sixes left.
The beginning and middle effectively describe my wife and my marriage. You did masterful work (except for the redundancy)
I wish you had separated, for another post, the political and predictive portions, though you would have to devise some way to sucker those among us (many) who would rather shoot guns than think.
What I fear is that the American educational system will separate us into two groups: movers and shakers (thinkers and innovators), and hamburger flippers. I also fear that in your 'Plutarchy' the thinkers and innovators will be rendered useless, leaving no choice but anarchy the final solution.
I can't comment on all of your very important points (overload), but I wish I could.
Thank you for writing. (Maybe you would consider posting portions with a mind to absorbability?)
Comment Written 25-Feb-2023
reply by the author on 25-Feb-2023
-
Will do