gathering vapors, dispersing precipitates

Why Not Events | Awelon Blue

intendtogether — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 13:22:26 +0000

Abstractions in event systems are fragile. Event fusion is highly sensitive to local, arbitrary ordering decisions for merging events that otherwise appear simultaneous. Even in a deterministic system, it is difficult for two observers to achieve consistent views of complex event streams without sharing actual implementation code. Consequently, event systems are difficult to reason about in the presence of open extension. In general, we cannot robustly compose views specified in event systems.

via Why Not Events | Awelon Blue.

Our Friends With Benefits: On The Union Question | Unity and Struggle

intendtogether — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 13:19:35 +0000

At times control over capital in the form of means of production and the ability to purchase labor power has been spread out more or less among the classes over time, but the fundamental fact that capital in the form of dead labor dominates living labor has not changed. Selling labor for a higher wage or lower wage does not impact this fact.

via Our Friends With Benefits: On The Union Question | Unity and Struggle.

Discussion with Alan Kay about Visual Programming | Don Hopkins

intendtogether — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 12:26:51 +0000

So it seems to me that there is a lot of room for new and different ideas for children’s environments for learning powerful ideas. They have to be above threshold and in the spirit of real science and mathematics. Two cautionary examples are Interactive Physics and SimCity.The first assumes that Newton was absolutely right and is a direct embodiment of Newtonian Dynamics and Cosmology. The users are restricted to paramerizing the internal dynamic models and cannot see them, question them, or change them. For example, it is really important to be able to try an inverse cube law for gravity, etc.. This is most assuredly not in the spirit of science! It amounts to a dynamic bible. In order for this to be useful in real education, there has to be a lead up that derives the relationships in an empirical and mathematical form, and only then will the premises of IP be useful.SimCity is similar but more pernicious. It is a black box of “soft somewhat arbitrary knowledge” that the children can’t look at, question or change. For example, SC gets the players to discover that the way to counter rising crime is to put in more police stations. Most anthropologists, sociologists, psychologists, and economists would disagree violently. Alternate assumptions can’t be tried, etc.Both of these packages have won many “educational awards” from the pop culture, but in many ways they are anti-real-education because they miss what modern knowledge and thinking and epistemology are all about. This is why being “above threshold” and really understanding what this means is the deep key to making modern curricula and computer environments that will really help children lift themselves.

via Discussion with Alan Kay about Visual Programming | Don Hopkins.

Complexity Is Bugs

intendtogether — Mon, 04 Mar 2013 12:23:16 +0000

You could also say “complexity is a bug”, referring to the complexity of a given solution that exceeds the essential complexity of the problem. The reasoning is that a “bug” is an instance of poor quality, translated concretely to someone’s dissatisfaction. And excess complexity is a source of dissatisfaction to anyone seeking control over the quality of a solution. Accepting unnecessary complexity, therefore, is itself a “bug”, an error in judgment, and one that leads to derivative “bugs” in the product.

via Complexity Is Bugs.

Introduction to Ashtanga Yoga, Spring 2013 Syllabus

intendtogether — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 13:06:07 +0000

IntroAshtaYoga2013

Syllabus for Yoga Therapy, Spring 2013.

intendtogether — Wed, 27 Feb 2013 12:56:47 +0000

YogaTherapy2013

Bucky’s Law

intendtogether — Tue, 19 Feb 2013 02:31:39 +0000

THE LAW OF SYSTEMS

Absolutely straight lines or an absolutely flat plane would, theoretically, continue outwardly to infinity. Intellectual comprehension occurs when patterns of experience return upon themselves in all directions. The difference between infinity and finity is governed by the taking of angular sinuses, like pieces of pie, out of surface areas a round a point in an absolute plane. This is the way lamp shades and skirts are made. Joining the sinused fan-ends together makes a cone; if two cones are made and their open, ergo infinitely trending, edges are brought together, a finite system results. It has two polar points and an equator. These are inherent and primary characteristics of all finite systems. Man has employed the convention of subdividing the unity of encirclement around a point into 360 degrees, formed by the sum of the radial segmentations around a point in an absolute plane. If we call 360 degrees “unity,” I may state my discovery of the law of systems as follows: if we subtract the sum of the convergent angles around all the vertexes of any system from the numbers of vertexes times 360 degrees, the difference will always be 720 degrees, which is exactly two times unity; this is to say that the difference between infinity and finity is always exactly 2. This law explains many of the previously uncomprehended aspects of topology [Fig. 8]. Its philosophic implications are startling.

The compressively interprecessional cooperative and accommodative functionings of all structural systems are locally persistent constellations of resultant force-vectors, which are always angularly shunted, and regeneratively re-shunted, inwards of the system’s tangential lines, i.e., at resultant angles less than 180 degrees in respect to the direction of origin of the generative force. In the high and low tide cooperative precessional functionings of tension vs. compression I saw that there are times when each are at half tide, or equally prominent in their system relationships. I saw that the exterior of the equatorial compressional island rim atoll of the wire wheel must be cross-sectionally in tension a s also must be its hub island’s girth. I also saw that all these tension vs. compression patterning relationships are completely reversible, and are entirely reversed as when we considered the compressively spoked “artillery wheel” vs. “the tensional spoked wire wheel.”

I followed through with consideration of these differentiable, yet complementarily reversible, functions of structural systems as possibly disclosing the minimum, or fundamental set of differentiability of non-redundant, precessionally regenerative structural systems.

Employing that concept as an hypothetical verity or working premise for further probing, I observed that whereas there existed a limit to slenderness ratio as already noted of a compression member’s girth diameter in respect to its longitudinal axis length, no such limit slenderness ratio characterized tensional dominated structural components. Astronomical magnitudes of structural system coherence are accomplished by tensionally dominated structural functions of zero slenderness ratio, i.e. by gravitational functioning. I also noted that compressionally dominated structural components tend toward contour transformation in which the radius of curvature steadily decreases under axial loading, that is the cigar shaped column forces tend toward “squash-” or “banana”-like bending of their contours [Fig. 11]. This tending of compressionally loaded systems toward arcs of lessening radius was in direct contrast to the contour transformation trending of tensionally dominated structural components which always tend toward arcs of ever increasing radius of axial profile. For instance, the coil of rope tends toward “straightening out” when terminally tensed, but never attains absolute straightness [Fig. 9]; instead, it progresses toward ever-greater radius of locally-spiralling but overall-orbital arcing which must eventually cycle back upon itself [Fig. 12]. Tensionally dominated patterning is inevitable self-closing, ergo finite.

It is seen also that, whereas compressionally dominated functions of structural systems are inherently self-diminutive in overall aspect, tensionally dominated structural functionings are inherently self-enlarging in overall involvement. Therefore the sum of all the inter-active force relationship of universe must continually accelerate their inter-transforming, in such a manner as to ever result in more remotely and locally multiplied islanded compressional functions–comprehensively cohered by ever-enlarging finite patternings of the tensional functions. The universe mast be a comprehencively finite integrity, permitting only a locally-islanded infinitude of observer-considered-and-regenerated differentiating discovery [Fig. 13]. This is to say that we have herein discovered a workable man-awareness of a complete reversal of presently accepted cosmology and of general a priori conceptioning regarding the general patterning scheme of universe which, heretofore, has always conceived only of locally finite experiences as omnidirectionally surrounded by seemingly unthinkable infinity.

via TENSEGRITY by R. Buckminster Fuller.

Erik Davis – On psychedelics

intendtogether — Tue, 19 Feb 2013 02:20:34 +0000

After all, materialists and New Agers, sceptics and shamans, are all united in facing the death of ourselves and our loved ones — a process that remains, even for the most committed sceptic, a mystery poised at the knife edge of meaning and the void. And mysterious ordeals sometimes require mysterious protocols.

via Erik Davis – On psychedelics.

Organisation is Suppression

intendtogether — Tue, 19 Feb 2013 02:02:37 +0000

Organisation is suppression. It’s more accurate to say that systems which avoid self-organisation whilst maintaining trajectories of productive innovation end up parasitically inhabited by organisms of all kinds, whether those organism are biological organisms, corporations or state systems. The history of life on this planet right through to Microsoft is of the successive suppression of distributed, innovated systems.

–Nick Land, via Organisation is Suppression.

Immanent Ethics

intendtogether — Mon, 18 Feb 2013 14:56:08 +0000

Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil (44).

“After all this, do I really need to add that they will be free, very free spirits, these philosophers of the future – and that they certainly will not just be free spirits, but rather something more, higher, greater, and fundamentally different, something that does not want to be misunderstood or mistaken for anything else? But, in saying this, I feel – towards them almost as much as towards ourselves (who are their heralds and precursors, we free spirits!) – an obligation to sweep away a stupid old prejudice and misunderstanding about all of us that has hung like a fog around the concept of the “free spirit” for far too long, leaving it completely opaque. In all the countries of Europe, and in America as well, there is now something that abuses this name: a very narrow, restricted, chained up type of spirit whose inclinations are pretty much the opposite of our own intentions and instincts (not to mention the fact that this restricted type will be a fully shut window and bolted door with respect to these approaching new philosophers). In a word (but a bad one): they belong to the levelers, these misnamed “free spirits” – as eloquent and prolifically scribbling slaves of the democratic taste and its “modern ideas.” They are all people without solitude, without their own solitude, clumsy, solid folks whose courage and honest decency cannot be denied – it’s just that they are un-free and ridiculously superficial, particularly given their basic tendency to think that all human misery and wrongdoing is caused by traditional social structures: which lands truth happily on its head! What they want to strive for with all their might is the universal, green pasture happiness of the herd, with security, safety, contentment, and an easier life for all. Their two most well-sung songs and doctrines are called: “equal rights” and “sympathy for all that suffers” – and they view suffering itself as something that needs to be abolished. We, who are quite the reverse, have kept an eye and a conscience open to the question of where and how the plant “man” has grown the strongest, and we think that this has always happened under conditions that are quite the reverse. We think that the danger of the human condition has first had to grow to terrible heights, its power to invent and dissimulate (its “spirit” -) has had to develop under prolonged pressure and compulsion into something refined and daring, its life-will has had to be intensified to an unconditional power will. We think that harshness, violence, slavery, danger in the streets and in the heart, concealment, Stoicism, the art of experiment, and devilry of every sort; that everything evil, terrible, tyrannical, predatory, and snakelike in humanity serves just as well as its opposite to enhance the species “humanity.” But to say this much is to not say enough, and, in any event, this is the point we have reached with our speaking and our silence, at the other end of all modern ideology and herd desires: perhaps as their antipodes? Is it any wonder that we “free spirits” are not exactly the most communicative spirits? That we do not want to fully reveal what a spirit might free himself from and what he will then perhaps be driven towards? And as to the dangerous formula “beyond good and evil,” it serves to protect us, at least from being mistaken for something else. We are something different from “libres-penseurs,” “liberipensatori,” “Freidenker“, and whatever else all these sturdy advocates of “modern ideas” like to call themselves. At home in many countries of the spirit, at least as guests; repeatedly slipping away from the musty, comfortable corners where preference and prejudice, youth, origin, accidents of people and books, and even the fatigue of traveling seem to have driven us; full of malice at the lures of dependency that lie hidden in honors, or money, or duties, or enthusiasms of the senses; grateful even for difficulties and inconstant health, because they have always freed us from some rule and its “prejudice,” grateful to the god, devil, sheep, and maggot in us, curious to a fault, researchers to the point of cruelty, with unmindful fingers for the incomprehensible, with teeth and stomachs for the indigestible, ready for any trade that requires a quick wit and sharp senses, ready for any risk, thanks to an excess of”free will,” with front and back souls whose ultimate aim is clear to nobody, with fore- and backgrounds that no foot can fully traverse, hidden under the cloak of light, conquerors, even if we look like heirs and prodigals, collectors and gatherers from morning until evening, miserly with our riches and our cabinets filled to the brim, economical with what we learn and forget, inventive in schemata, sometimes proud of tables of categories, sometimes pedants, sometimes night owls at work, even in bright daylight; yes, even scarecrows when the need arises – and today the need has arisen: inasmuch as we are born, sworn, jealous friends of solitude, our own deepest, most midnightly, noon-likely solitude. This is the type of people we are, we free spirits! and perhaps you are something of this yourselves, you who are approaching? you new philosophers? –

Smith DW – Deleuze and the Question of Desire – Toward an Immanent Theory of Ethics.pdf.

gathering vapors, dispersing precipitates

Why Not Events | Awelon Blue

Related Posts

Our Friends With Benefits: On The Union Question | Unity and Struggle

Related Posts

Discussion with Alan Kay about Visual Programming | Don Hopkins

Related Posts

Complexity Is Bugs

Related Posts

Introduction to Ashtanga Yoga, Spring 2013 Syllabus

Related Posts

Syllabus for Yoga Therapy, Spring 2013.

Related Posts

Bucky’s Law

Related Posts

Erik Davis – On psychedelics

Related Posts

Organisation is Suppression

Related Posts

Immanent Ethics

Related Posts