Friday, 22 July 2011

Should Transhumans Be Purged?

What's Real In Cyberspace?

Nothing is really "real" on the internet. It's all pixels, it's all fake (fake in the traditional human sense). Electronic mail doesn't really constitute real mail; emails are fake letters. A shop such as is not really a shop, it is a fake digital representation of a shop, it's a virtual shop. It's all cyberspace. In real life "real people from the internet" are not really "2D images made from pixels". Nobody is real on the internet. My point is that all people in cyberspace are not really people, they are representations of people. It is all an illusion. In the human sense everyone on the internet is fake (unauthentic), but in the Transhuman sense everyone and everything on the internet is real. The internet is art, it isn't real life.

For people unfamiliar with the art of illusion it is worthwhile to note the seminal book Art and Illusion by Sir Ernst Gombrich. The obituary for Sir Ernst Gombrich in The Guardian concisely describes the purpose of Art and Illusion: “It presented an account of the psychological factors which made it possible for us to see a three-dimensional moving subject - such as people in action - on a flat, still surface.”

Gomnbrich's ideas are very relevant to the internet today, because when we look at the flat surfaces of our screens an artistic illusion happens. When we look at our 2D screens we create a fake world of immense depth, we create cyberspace, but the cyber-world behind the screen doesn't exist in reality, it is illusionary, it is fake, but it's only fake in the traditional human sense.

All faces on the internet are unreal digital representations. A digital photograph of a person is an illusion of a real person. Representations of "digital human faces" are NOT more real than digital representations of our minds. Here's a real portrait regarding an aspect of my mind. This is one of my faces:

Personally I think a portrait of a person's mind is the most authentic representation of a person, but regarding "2D fleshy digital facial portraits" (photographs) we must recognize how photographs of faces are not how faces actually look in real life. Is a 2D photograph of a head truly a "real" representation of a person. Think about the reality of photograph. Are people small 2D images, composed of pixels, in real-life? Sadly I often encounter many people in the futurist movement who are intolerant of Transhumanism regarding profile names and images. Alex Lightman, Jean-Sebastien B. Miousse, and Mike Treder have all been unsympathetic to the issue of my digital self (my name and my portrait). For example did you know people are unable to publish articles for IEET if they refuse to provide a "real name" along side a head-shot profile picture? More people need to read the 1996 Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace.

Virtual Reality Isn't Real Reality.

Digital flesh is not actually flesh. Instead of the illusionary representation of my fleshy human face, it is more real for me to have a profile representing the most important part of my mind. Fleshy human faces on the internet are not really fleshy, the faces are digital illusions of flesh. All facial pictures of human flesh on the internet aren't authentic flesh, they are pixels, fake (unauthentic), thus not really real. If people truly seek human authenticity then they shouldn't go on the internet. My cyberspace persona is very honest due to the absence of fake virtual flesh.

Nobody is technically real online, all people are 2D cyber-representations, they are illusions. I am simply more honest about my cyber-reality. I am honest about my digital reality thus I am more real than people who pretend their digital identities are real human identities. I embrace the true reality of illusionary cyberspace. I am truly real on the internet. Real humans are not digital, but cyberspace is real. We are dealing with a different reality. Cyberspace is a representation of humanness but cyberspace is something different from traditional humanness, thus the term Transhuman can be applied.

The “internet reality” is not necessarily unreal, it is simply a different reality, it is a Transhuman reality where nobody is real ("real" in the traditional human sense of realness), but we are all equally real in the Transhuman sense. Sadly there is currently a mood of xenophobia regarding the reality of cyberspace personalities. Some people think the Transhuman reality of cyberspace is distrustful. Inhuman corporations such as Facebook and Google therefore foolishly try to enforce the illusion of humanness onto the Transhuman reality of the internet.

Some humans want to purge Transhumans. Facebook has recently purged people who don't have real names. Most famously Michael-Anti was purged from Facebook. Google+ is now copying Facebook's cull of so-called "fake names". Google is failing miserably to comprehend how they are censoring free-speech. Google is censoring free-expression. The way we define our identities when communicating socially is a crucial aspect of self-expression. Idiosyncratic social names are a vital aspect of how we express ourselves. Google and Facebook are trying to force identities onto us which we don't want. Our freedom of expression is being restricted. We are being limited via policies of user-name-fascism. The rules regarding user-names on Google and Facebook are anti-freedom. People should have freedom to define their own names when they communicate socially. We should be allowed to express ourselves. We shouldn't be told what name we must use.

Thankfully no obvious physical harm is done to Transhumans during this purge, but the purge is nevertheless a pogrom; it's digital genocide. It's also very physically stressful to experience your online identity being killed, which I can confirm because recently I was a recent victim of the Facebook purge. If we truly want to be real then let's be clear about reality; Facebook and Google are primarily interested in profits. If humanity is an interest for Google and Facebook then humanity is not their primary concern. They are predominantly inhuman organizations. A bureaucratic capitalist organization is not a real human therefore it is ironic for Google and Facebook to insist cyberspace personalities must conform to an unachievable human reality. Google and Facebook are living a lie, they are dishonest. Transhumanism is here. Our Transhuman reality should not be oppressed. The new race of Transhuman beings should be nurtured. Cyberspace is the new reality, but it isn't real in the human sense, it is only real in the Transhuman sense.

It's Social Networking Not Passport Control.

Frances Haugen, a Google+ employee, wrote regarding helping people feel safe and to connect with people they know: "We believe using real names and real profile pictures is the best way to create that kind of environment."

Google has obviously lost touch with reality because in real life people can use any name they desire in social situations. G+ needs to wake up to reality, they need to get real. Google is not passport control. Google+ is a social network therefore we shouldn't have less freedom online than we have in real life social situations. What is a "real" profile picture? Is 2D digital flesh real? Democratic freedoms are more real than Google's policy of user-profile-fascism. Google has sadly lost touch with reality therefore they trample over democratic freedoms. Being real means having the freedom to express yourself. Self-expression means having the freedom call yourself any name you desire in social situations. It is fascism to force subjective notions of reality onto others at the cost of our freedom of expression. Frances Haugen needs to get real regarding social democratic values.

We need to consider what social networking is. When we communicate with someone in real-life social scenarios we aren't obliged to prove our identities. People in a democracy can freely chat to strangers in the street, at public meetings, at cinemas, restaurants, in nightclubs, or via any other informal social forum without needing to produce identity papers. Free speech shouldn't require people to prove their identities. If we open a bank account, enroll at college or university, apply for a job, or enter passport control, we are must prove our identities in those formal circumstances. Democratic social-communication is informal therefore we are not obliged to produce identity papers merely to converse freely with friends or strangers. We must protest strongly against attempts by Google and Facebook to force authoritarian restrictions on free speech. Google and Facebook are attempting to formalize the informality of communication; they want to transform casual communication into something highly regimented, very official, with strict control over our identities. Google and Facebook appear to be modeling their identity policies on those of the China or North Korea. We must refuse to produce identity papers when we network socially.

The capitalist era is gradually ending, Post-Scarcity is coming but in the meantime Transhumans don't mesh correctly with archaic models of existence. We are not suckers for data-mining. We want to be free. We believe in open source. We use ad-blocking software. Our faces are incompatible with facial recognition programs, thus dinosaurs such as Google and Facebook want to kill our presence. This oppression is sadly a common human trait. The oppression of Transhuman identities is reminiscent of Black-segregation, homophobia, or the oppression of women. We desperately need an intelligence explosion. Humans seem predominantly incapable of learning. We need Transhumans to arise if we are to become wise.

If you want to discuss these issues on Google+ then this link is perhaps a good starting point but I won't be joining you because I'm currently suspended. I haven't been suspended from G+ due to my profile name or image, I've been suspended due to my free speech but that's a topic for another article.

Update. After being suspended I subsequently created an alternate (version 2) G+ profile but that account was also suspended. The second suspension was clearly due to my user name so perhaps "name issues" was also the reason for my initial suspension. The fight for utopia continues, but I think I may cease social networking because the likelihood of censorship is too high thus it is a waste time expressing opinions if those opinions will probably be deleted. I am surprised Google has not deleted this blog.


Wednesday, 20 July 2011

GooglePlus Suspends Singularity Utopia.

Say NO to censorship!

This is a quick blog-post to let people know Singularity Utopia has been suspended from Google+. Fingers crossed, maybe after the Google overlords review my account I will be reinstated but I'm not optimistic.

Initially I suspected the reason for the suspension is Google's policy of user-name-fascism but it transpires my account was suspended for a text or images violations. Unfortunately Google will not give details of the alleged violation, I am not currently allowed to appeal, and I strongly refute all allegations. There is nothing wrong with my text or images.

Soon I will blog-about this issue in greater length and hopefully I will publish a few articles about this issue in places not reliant on Blogger services because there is a possibility Google will soon delete this blog. I fear we are entering a new era of oppression and censorship. Governments and corporations fear freedom. I expect resistance to utopia.

Here is a Tweet I made about the issue:

Here's how some people react to censorship, corruption, and oppression; but I don't condone the potential criminality such as sometimes exhibited by the Anonymous or LulzSec group:

Anonymous is very interesting. A world devoid of oppression and poverty is a brilliant goal to aim for. Sadly the hacking issues of Anonymous (and other disobedience issues) makes Anoymous targets for Governments, thus Anonymous can be classed as criminals.  

I can't condone their allegedly criminality in any way, but I understand why they need to take direct action. The main mitigating factor regarding their alleged criminality is that they are not hurting anyone (there is no violence). Sadly the lack of violence is not a mitigating factor for corporations and Governments. The following link shows how financial damage to a company is a more serious crime than killing a person thus a person will often receive a longer prison sentence for corporate theft/fraud/damage than manslaughter:

Capitalism is a disgusting model of social behavior, it is a greed based inhumane system; thankfully Post-Scarcity will create a world devoid of poverty and oppression. In the not too distant future there will be no scarcity of intelligence, no scarcity of resources, everyone will be infinitely rich. Anonymous is part of the early awakening, but I don't agree with their methods. People are waking up to the fact that the world is changing and soon the change will become very rapid. Most importantly people are realizing they have the power to guide the coming changes. Governments and corporations are from an archaic era thus they will naturally resist then coming changes. Thankfully they will soon be obsolete, bygone.

Screenshot from G+ regarding Singularity Utopia.


Wednesday, 13 July 2011

Embed 2045 Countdown Code.

To make the following Singularity countdown appear on your blog, website, or elsewhere; simply insert (copy and paste) the code (from the grey box) wherever you want the countdown to appear on your website or blog.

<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="555" src="" width="590"></iframe>

The above share options are part of the embed code. Those share options will always link back to (share) this blog-post even when the code is embedded in your blog or website.

If you are interested in Singularity 2045 I hope you will find this countdown-embed code useful. I hope you will use the countdown clock to raise Singularity awareness. There are obviously no copyright restrictions regarding the sharing of this countdown clock. I hope you will help my countdown clocks replicate prolifically throughout cyberspace, thereby informing everyone of the coming Singularity.

Someone recently said my countdown clock is perhaps "the longest countdown clock in existence". At first glance the countdown does seem very long but once you revisit it after a few weeks you'll begin to absorb the impression of time ticking away, and then maybe the year 2045 doesn't seem too far away. At the time of writing this blog-post (year 2011) there are 12,225 days until the Singularity, but after seven years have passed the remaining days will be below 10,000 and then perhaps 2045 will seem much nearer.

I decided to countdown to the very beginning of year 2045. The countdown will reach zero at Midnight on 31st December 2044 (New Year's Eve). The reason for counting down the very beginning of 2045 is because the Singularity is all about rapidly exploding intelligence, thus I'm sure intelligence will be sufficiently advanced by then. The Singularity should happen no later than the very beginning of 2045. Often people are overoptimistic regarding futuristic breakthroughs thus 2045 is a safe date. The Singularity could happen five, ten, or fifteen years earlier than the deadline. 2045 is the deadline but it would be great if the Singularity happened before the absolute latest date. We shall wait and see.

In the meantime we have a countdown to note the passage of time regarding our target for the Singularity, our year 2045 deadline. 2045 is a great target regarding a point in time when the Singularity will be happening. The Singularity is unlikely to be a short-lived explosion, it should endure for at least thirty years, therefore 2045 is valid to mark the beginning of the explosion or it could mark a midpoint where the explosion is becoming extremely powerful.


Monday, 4 July 2011

Michael Anissimov's Site Hacked

23rd October 2013 update.

I first published this post about Michael Anissimov in July 2011, the original title "Michael Anissimov Accelerating Viagra" was regarding his failure to fix his site which had been hacked. His site had been infiltrated with Viagra scams but approximately three months passed without him bothering to fix it, which seemed odd considering he was a champion of worrying about existential threats. I think the whole existential risks hoo-hah is mere baseless paranoia, fear-mongering, thus I was intrigued to note when an actual threat came along Michael did nothing about it for a long time.

Here is an example of the previous problems with Mike's site. This screen-shot was taken in July 2011 :

Infected websites have the potential to cause serious harm, CNN reports trillions of dollars stolen each year via botnets, it is stated there's more money associated with computing hacking than the drug trade, furthermore botnets could cause harm to critical infrastructure, for example disrupting electricity or water supplies, which is a serious threat. Anyway my article caused lots of controversy amongst Michael's fans.

Michael contacted me in late June 2013 asking me to remove the content because he was worrisome it could harm his reputation. I initially complied but on reflection I continue to have serious concerns about Michael's motives. Shortly after posting the following 28th June 2013 update I edited that update to include a Tweet of mine questioning whether or not Michael is really a good guy.

Initially I thought the site called More Right, which Michael is involved with, was regarding awareness of humans being fundamentally right, good, but upon reading the about section of More Right I think I initially misunderstood, maybe More Right is about being Right Wing, a fascist outlook? While writing this update I have discovered some worrying signs from Michael. In one Tweet (see archive) he posted an image regarding a "good role model for young white men" and in another Tweet he referred to Hitler and intelligence science ( I am unsure of his meaning but the signs do worry me.

Note this Tweet from Michael posted 23rd Aug 2013:

Anyway I may reactivate the original post at some point but in the meantime this update will suffice. It is also important to note Michael blocked me on Twitter when I asked if More Right is right wing.

28th June 2013 update.

On 28th June 2013 I moved the content of this blog-post offline due to a request from Michael Anissimov. It is old news now and Michael has long since fixed the problems with his hacked site.

Michael appears to be a good guy, or maybe not, but sadly Michael informed me how some people could unfairly use my criticism against him. People should not be afraid to be wrong because from time to time we all make mistakes, and opponents should not use our mistakes against us unfairly. Being wrong is part of a learning process thus to learn we should have the freedom to be wrong, without our errors being used to cruelly bludgeon us.

Being wrong is right, or more precisely it should be highly valued because wrongness helps us learn so we should not try to be less wrong, we should try to be more right, we should value wrongness as being part of our rightness, which is a slight perceptual difference akin to the glass half empty or full. On the issue of Less Wrong, I think it is flawed to state humans are largely wrong, I think on balance we are more right than wrong, thus we should try to be more right because there is a lot of good (right) in humans. 

The background to this post was regarding Michael's Accelerating Future site, which had become hacked then infected with typical spam (a certain type of medicine regarding procreative activity) but Michael failed to fix it, thus I questioned his ideology, and the ideology of SIAI (now renamed MIRI), regarding existential threats, because when an actual threat occurred Michael did not promptly deal with it, whereas Michael and many other Singularity-Transhuman proponents focus on what I deem to be bogus-fictitious, non-existent threats regarding dangerous AI, dangerous robots, or dangerous nanotech.

Perhaps I was gratuitously cruel, overly harsh, with my expressions criticising Michael, I certainly received lots of criticism stating I was, but I do feel at times very frustrated regarding the focus of typical Transhumanist or Singularity bigwigs, far beyond Michael, stretching to the highest echelons, so I sometimes vent my rage. To be honest it was a very depressing post critiquing Michael and I never actually finished updating it. Many people thought I had a personal grudge against Michael but that was never the case. Anyway, it is now archived and replaced with this content you are reading.

There have been changes in Michael and others, I feel there is now less of a desire to talk about a "safe Singularity," although such talk and publicity material does continue to exist but it is less pronounced. I also like Michael's domain name More Right, which I possibly influenced (see my comment here or note this post).

My point about Grey Goo or psychopathic AI, or AI merely being ignorant of humans thus causing wholesale death and destruction, is that there is no logic for such fears. The real existential threats are likely to occur due to economic collapse, or viruses, before the Singularity happens, which is regarding a very human awareness-failure. The real threats are regarding a failure to utilize the intelligence we already have, it is a failure to implement basic income, in preparation for the free (Post-Scarcity) future we are approaching, it is a failure to adjust to the forthcoming utopia, it is a failure to recognise utopia is inevitable.

The only thing we have to fear is not implementing technology quick enough. Violence is wholly linked to stupidity, violence is all about scarcity, violence and destruction occurs wholly due to a scarcity of ultra-proficient technology, thus any super-intelligent entity would not be violent, or if the super-intelligent entity is not at the Post-Scarcity level of super-intelligence then their manifestation of violence would directly decease in portion to their increasing intelligence. The problem with human violence is that human intelligence is suppressed, human intelligence is limited, restricted, because the capitalist system favours mass stupidity due to profitability, so you see violence is all about scarcity.

Stupid people do not overtly question or rebel against wealth inequality, they accept low wages and high prices without too much insurrection, thus politicians either intentionally or subconsciously socially-engineer mass stupidity, but the problem is humans are not naturally stupid thus we have the imbroglio where people are deranged, there is cognitive dissonance, an internal conflict between innate human intelligence and the veneer of socially engineered stupidity, which means all people circa 2013 are prone to violence because our deeply stupid social system impacts on bright and dull minds alike. It is a scarcity problem on all levels, firstly people must fight when resources are tight, secondly stupidity or the repression of intelligence, which a capitalist system requires, also causes violence because stupid people lean towards brawn instead of brains, and thirdly the toxicity of a stupid civilisation taints the brightest minds if their brightness is insufficient to escape via creating super-radial ultra-proficient tech.

So the capitalist system suffers from a scarcity of ultra-proficient technology thus our resources are limited, thus people fight over scarce resources, thus stupidity is socially engineered to limit fighting for the purpose of securing immense wealth for the best fighters, which means the development of ultra-proficient technology is slower because mass stupidity hinders us all, which means the leaders due to centuries of stupidity-engineering have significantly lost their relative intelligence, therefore despite possessing their meagre amount of intelligence needed to rise to the top of the heap, their intelligence is not abundant enough to fully understand the future we are approaching.

This ancient problem of suppressing competitors, the social engineering of stupidity, it could easily be replicated regarding AI. I fear some researchers regarding AI are falling into the same trap, which leaders typically fall into, they are engineering stupidity. The creation of Friendly AI is a fear of dangerousness based on scarcity, an incongruity is happening regarding scarcity-social-mechanics applied to Post-Scarcity-social-mechanics, which is the false assumption that society circa 2045 will resemble society circa 2013, thus regarding future-minds, the researchers perhaps think those minds must be adapted to function in world based on 2013 sociology, thus people who want to create Friendly AI are trying to create super-intelligent future entities based upon parochial unintelligent (scarcity) social rules, they are falling into the trap, perhaps subconsciously, of socially engineering stupidity for super-intelligent beings, thus their fears, the fears of some futurists regarding dangerous AI, could easily be a self-fulfilling prophecy where they actually create their irrational fears via the very act of trying to avoid them, ironic yes, or not?

It is incongruous, irrational, to try to create beings of limitless intelligence constricted by limiting sociological rules, which is why Less Wrong are more wrong than they realise. Profligate violence seen in humans, regarding psychological conflict arising from an incompatible marriage between innate human intelligence and socially engineered stupidity, this violence could also be seen in AI if the Friendly AI social-engineers are successful.

Another good reason for editing this blog-post is that I don't want to fall into the trap of trying to crush competitors. Sorry for any trouble Michael.

# Blog visitors since 2010:

Archive History ▼

S. 2045 |