My situation is weird enough have a global readership without a global press interested enough to ask me pertinent questions, so figured may as well go meta again, and ask and answer questions I think others might wonder. Being press with myself? Ok, will try.
1. Why do you post?
Usually am posting to share information think is important for a particular audience. As main blogs have been around for over a decade there is kind of a long conversation going in a sense.
2. What makes you think your posts do anything valuable?
Generally am looking at some kind of objective measure where long ago discovered was not getting expected ones much. So got creative. Look over a lot of things where do not explain to check if a post reached desired audience. Since am not into the mass market that may look a different way to others.
3. You sound so confident often, are you trying to convince people you're successful?
Not trying to convince as have worked more to accept my ongoing audience, which presumably understands my successes. And have focused less and less on mass market approaches.
4. Sounds like you have a disdain for the mass market, why is that?
Old view from television most successfully was that you could reach a mass market effectively, like most of the country watching sports on Sunday, which is still true to some extent. My focus is niche. Am looking at people interested in particular things, versus say, talking to entire United States.
But also my readership is global. So mass market for me would be billions of people with that reach, which would be scary to have anyway. Prefer things as they are: focused on people interested, all over the world.
5. Why are you not covered by the press if your ideas are so important?
You, me pretending to be press person, ask great questions! If I say so myself, and my best guess is that the press is still 20th century focused on establishment institutions and yup, mass market metrics. That is, measures which indicate ability to do well in the mass market, already talked.
While people like me, with global reach that is more fragmented, don't register with them as worth reporting on. Which will change am sure, as world adjusts to the web. Good question, me.
6. Do you really think this question and answer with yourself will impress anyone or just seem weird?
Um, that is not the kind of question for which I have a good answer self. Think we're about done.
7. Ok, ok, last question. Any plans for Halloween?
Wow, I really took this pretending to be a press person too far. Um, no. You know that too! You're me! Just being mean. Am in a lonely period spending WAY TOO much time on web. Is ok.
Oh, oh, ok. Um, thanks for your time. You're welcome, me.
That was silly fun. Threw in a bit for Halloween too, as why not. Does amaze me though, how often interviews go random that way.
James Harris
Tuesday, October 31, 2017
Finding personal space
Things have gone very well so far, with a few surprises. For instance had already contacted the NSA, yet again, with some of my math, and received an auto-response. Felt as is important should try again, and this time? Simply no reply at all.
So silly, but I respect that NSA is trying. I should give them more respect, I guess. Better than nothing. Reminding myself, am nicer to them these days. Stay polite here.
However, with me is so much about the ideas which DO travel. And was simply doing my best to notify my government as a good citizen. And to cover myself later, just in case. So it is clear, I DID try, and more than once.
With the global things winding down, and most of what I consider to be fixes or patches roaring into place, is time to focus more on my personal place to be found. Is remarkable to me how much can do quite publicly, as not hiding things, with others around it all so quiet. Well quiet at least that I can tell.
Am gratified much with ideas which though global may be of use to me, like the payment intermediary concept, posted a few days ago. Was finally patching a gap which has been impacting global commerce. The global cost of the lag is marching into the trillions US maybe, which means is big enough for me to address. So is just barely.
Could see myself making a company around that concept. But is still a potential, as I ponder, as wind down from mental effort in other things.
Was confident before claiming 99% probability of success, but you do need confidence. So much work done since then. Helps to be motivated.
Now is maybe finally--unless something else pulls my attention--the shift to personal, when shifting from my duties to my planet, consider more, my duties to myself.
Many of these things take time before general public becomes aware. Should happen in about a decade for some. Which is fascinating to watch. Often am simply waiting on the world to catch up to something but that is standard. Is true with many innovations.
My checks are different. As finishing up assessments can finally get that sense to move on. Which is great! So much done.
Looks like could be tough going though, as didn't leave myself much room at all while dealing with other things. Just part of getting things done. Another problem to solve. Will figure it out.
James Harris
So silly, but I respect that NSA is trying. I should give them more respect, I guess. Better than nothing. Reminding myself, am nicer to them these days. Stay polite here.
However, with me is so much about the ideas which DO travel. And was simply doing my best to notify my government as a good citizen. And to cover myself later, just in case. So it is clear, I DID try, and more than once.
With the global things winding down, and most of what I consider to be fixes or patches roaring into place, is time to focus more on my personal place to be found. Is remarkable to me how much can do quite publicly, as not hiding things, with others around it all so quiet. Well quiet at least that I can tell.
Am gratified much with ideas which though global may be of use to me, like the payment intermediary concept, posted a few days ago. Was finally patching a gap which has been impacting global commerce. The global cost of the lag is marching into the trillions US maybe, which means is big enough for me to address. So is just barely.
Could see myself making a company around that concept. But is still a potential, as I ponder, as wind down from mental effort in other things.
Was confident before claiming 99% probability of success, but you do need confidence. So much work done since then. Helps to be motivated.
Now is maybe finally--unless something else pulls my attention--the shift to personal, when shifting from my duties to my planet, consider more, my duties to myself.
Many of these things take time before general public becomes aware. Should happen in about a decade for some. Which is fascinating to watch. Often am simply waiting on the world to catch up to something but that is standard. Is true with many innovations.
My checks are different. As finishing up assessments can finally get that sense to move on. Which is great! So much done.
Looks like could be tough going though, as didn't leave myself much room at all while dealing with other things. Just part of getting things done. Another problem to solve. Will figure it out.
James Harris
Friday, October 27, 2017
Working on knowledge foundations is hard
One thing finally occurred to me recently as considered things like my functional definitions covering some important areas was had found myself working at foundations of basic knowledge. Which should NOT be happening. Should NOT be necessary. And, um, why am I?
Keep asking myself that question.
Most of that work is done, though thankfully. And with repairs where necessary going into place, can reflect more. Our global knowledge base is important enough for me to have taken the time. Glad most important part of that work is done. Is a relief for me. Was kind of hard! But how could one person do so much? Web definitely makes MUCH of that easier, especially the part about putting the fixes in place. Have to have them though to be distributed. And THERE things are very interesting I think.
Is about the power of abstraction. Is like a lever. Had me thinking about a certain person, and found what I wanted at a site with quotes from him, including one have pondered often:
Of course he was right. Am sure he would have loved the web. Archimedes was one of the greatest intellectuals of all time. Was doing calculus over a thousand years before Sir Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz reinvented then I think, though of course assume they developed far further. But hey, we're looking at what was left from almost two thousand years ago, who knows what didn't make it. Not sure what relevant scholars think in that area.
Have explained much and as consider the big picture reality of it all, is helpful for me to emphasize, is actually really hard! And takes a TREMENDOUS amount of mental energy, time and a lot of relentless pursuit of ideas that are useful abstractions. Like abstracting entertainment as a way we use to safely control mood. That is compact folks.
Is like with algebra where basic abstraction is that letters are used instead of numbers. Where you can have that graduated. Like 2+3 = 5, get to x+3 = 5, to x+y=5, to x+y = z. Which is an area of abstraction that apparently many humans at least in the US find very challenging. So much that routinely I have noted when adults complain wondering, what is the point of learning algebra? Many of them apparently confident they don't use it, as adults.
You use the concept of abstraction as an adult, the more you use your mind.
Lawyers are faced with legal abstractions, which can be so difficult to learn, take years, followed by years of practice. Of course medical professionals do as well, where also have to learn vast amounts of medical knowledge, made sensible by abstractions.
I could go on with professions where mind matters more. Next find myself thinking of chefs. But also of why can be so hard to be one, or to be a doctor, or a lawyer. Yup and can go back to that difficulty, with algebra.
Less you handle abstraction, more likely you are to be in a position where simply instructed. Like you can work for a chef, who needs to know a lot of abstraction, while you simply follow instructions to help prepare that wonderful dish that wows the customers of a top tier restaurant. Still important to the process of course.
To me is kind of depressing to look at that way though may be about personal bias. Have wanted to work with my mind for as long as I can remember. But have also simply followed instructions and it was ok. Is also personal I think to make that allusion so should simply state my opinion, people may find that yeah, difficulty with algebra when young? Is related to difficulty in other areas as an adult.
Once found though, abstractions move our world and embody our science and technology with the meaning that allows us to discover and keep progressing.
Like consider the abstraction, all human beings are created equal.
Yes, is also an ideal, but debates over that one still erupt all over our world and consume our politics, but how do you grasp it? Turns out our science actually can give a genetic answer, with it being learned that peoples outside of Africa, are actually more closely related than peoples within, regardless of appearance otherwise. Continent of human origin is also continent with greatest human genetic diversity.
Understanding that science? I think is good.
Considering abstractions at the foundations of our knowledge am pondering why is necessary for me, but appreciative of the ability which began as a child when suddenly that algebra which looked so impossible, looked so easy. It just happened in a process understand now is about neurological development as have considered abstractions that help us understand our reality, and how we know, what we know within it.
Algebra is just presented in the US at about the point certain capacity develops, and yeah, is worth it to just work at it, as best you can. If it escapes you is not doom though, and am sure can learn abstraction in other ways! So much can depend too on how well is taught.
Handling abstraction though is key to the power of the human mind.
James Harris
Keep asking myself that question.
Most of that work is done, though thankfully. And with repairs where necessary going into place, can reflect more. Our global knowledge base is important enough for me to have taken the time. Glad most important part of that work is done. Is a relief for me. Was kind of hard! But how could one person do so much? Web definitely makes MUCH of that easier, especially the part about putting the fixes in place. Have to have them though to be distributed. And THERE things are very interesting I think.
Is about the power of abstraction. Is like a lever. Had me thinking about a certain person, and found what I wanted at a site with quotes from him, including one have pondered often:
Give me a place to stand and with a lever I will move the whole world. -- Archimedes.
Of course he was right. Am sure he would have loved the web. Archimedes was one of the greatest intellectuals of all time. Was doing calculus over a thousand years before Sir Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz reinvented then I think, though of course assume they developed far further. But hey, we're looking at what was left from almost two thousand years ago, who knows what didn't make it. Not sure what relevant scholars think in that area.
Have explained much and as consider the big picture reality of it all, is helpful for me to emphasize, is actually really hard! And takes a TREMENDOUS amount of mental energy, time and a lot of relentless pursuit of ideas that are useful abstractions. Like abstracting entertainment as a way we use to safely control mood. That is compact folks.
Is like with algebra where basic abstraction is that letters are used instead of numbers. Where you can have that graduated. Like 2+3 = 5, get to x+3 = 5, to x+y=5, to x+y = z. Which is an area of abstraction that apparently many humans at least in the US find very challenging. So much that routinely I have noted when adults complain wondering, what is the point of learning algebra? Many of them apparently confident they don't use it, as adults.
You use the concept of abstraction as an adult, the more you use your mind.
Lawyers are faced with legal abstractions, which can be so difficult to learn, take years, followed by years of practice. Of course medical professionals do as well, where also have to learn vast amounts of medical knowledge, made sensible by abstractions.
I could go on with professions where mind matters more. Next find myself thinking of chefs. But also of why can be so hard to be one, or to be a doctor, or a lawyer. Yup and can go back to that difficulty, with algebra.
Less you handle abstraction, more likely you are to be in a position where simply instructed. Like you can work for a chef, who needs to know a lot of abstraction, while you simply follow instructions to help prepare that wonderful dish that wows the customers of a top tier restaurant. Still important to the process of course.
To me is kind of depressing to look at that way though may be about personal bias. Have wanted to work with my mind for as long as I can remember. But have also simply followed instructions and it was ok. Is also personal I think to make that allusion so should simply state my opinion, people may find that yeah, difficulty with algebra when young? Is related to difficulty in other areas as an adult.
Once found though, abstractions move our world and embody our science and technology with the meaning that allows us to discover and keep progressing.
Like consider the abstraction, all human beings are created equal.
Yes, is also an ideal, but debates over that one still erupt all over our world and consume our politics, but how do you grasp it? Turns out our science actually can give a genetic answer, with it being learned that peoples outside of Africa, are actually more closely related than peoples within, regardless of appearance otherwise. Continent of human origin is also continent with greatest human genetic diversity.
Understanding that science? I think is good.
Considering abstractions at the foundations of our knowledge am pondering why is necessary for me, but appreciative of the ability which began as a child when suddenly that algebra which looked so impossible, looked so easy. It just happened in a process understand now is about neurological development as have considered abstractions that help us understand our reality, and how we know, what we know within it.
Algebra is just presented in the US at about the point certain capacity develops, and yeah, is worth it to just work at it, as best you can. If it escapes you is not doom though, and am sure can learn abstraction in other ways! So much can depend too on how well is taught.
Handling abstraction though is key to the power of the human mind.
James Harris
Wednesday, October 25, 2017
How discovery shifted my money focus
There was definitely a profit motive for me in chasing math discovery early on, which I clearly stated back then. My idea was that maybe could find something with modern problem solving techniques which had been missed before, which have often noted, which should also make me wealthy, like with a book deal about my story.
Which to me isn't even a big deal now, but along the way, lost my profit motive, and even lost my money focus which is good, as ran into consequences that made it greatly more difficult to make money as I had. Which have explained recently as an understandably large business risk. I'm read all over the world, just haven't monetized that well.
That discovery pushed me to shift as also learned did not actually have a good understanding of money in the first place. Just had taken it for granted one should try to get rich, and do so young. Like vaguely had plans to make my first million by age 30, which is just common as an idea in my country without it being clear why.
Going to focus on some key things which came to me while typing this post where is a bit of a surprise. I prefer to just let the writing flow then edit. There were things I thought would be here, which did not flow from the writing. And now as I edit, think learned quite a bit more than I expected from that as well. So here is what did make it.
Much shifted then when realized that money is just an abstraction for a favor, which is a social IOU backed up by society. Is like the concept of an I owe you, went from a paper kind of thing for a person, to paper for a country. Where is so cool how money gets introduced into the US system, as is not as intuitive as I thought. Have a post explaining on one of my blogs somewhere. That isn't the point of this post though. Maybe will find it later though. (Found it, from July 2015, on Lost in Commentary.)
With that idea in mind, yeah can explain how a cup of coffee from a friend is one kind of favor common to many who might share time with one over, and from a commercial establishment is great example when get benefit of the favor of a cup of coffee from a stranger, in exchange for money.
So I like to call it the stranger economy.
Where is so wild when you realize that in time it became accepted that the quality of that cup of coffee, and even the experience in the locale, could be so much greater that now more than likely would prefer to share with a friend in a commercial establishment often.
And the cost of getting that mood? Is priced into the things obtained there from that cup of coffee to other items might purchase along with it. Where yeah, my ideas on entertainment helped there as well, as understanding entertainment as a way to safely control mood, could find once again the idea of entertaining friends, as natural.
For a bit had entertainment separated in my mind from entertaining, as if were from very different places versus now realize are not, where one usually involves payment, yup to strangers, while the other tends to be more personal. And yet again, our expectations for paid entertainment quality are MUCH higher than from ourselves for our friends, unless you are that friend people think should be raucously entertaining.
Kind of feel for entertainers who maybe have friends who think they should bring their work with them to the party, if invited. Suspect they probably prefer that time off, to relax and safely enjoy quality time with others, if possible.
So with discovery lost my money focus. Better understood community focus. Then better understood the stranger economy which gets back to money. And now have worked to bring it all together in a way where makes sense, for me and possibly for others.
If makes more sense to you now? I succeeded with you which is a point of sharing. While also is important for me, which means the effort is worth it regardless.
There is a question that still bothers me though, which I may as well put out there, as I wonder, would I post differently if I were wealthy?
James Harris
Which to me isn't even a big deal now, but along the way, lost my profit motive, and even lost my money focus which is good, as ran into consequences that made it greatly more difficult to make money as I had. Which have explained recently as an understandably large business risk. I'm read all over the world, just haven't monetized that well.
That discovery pushed me to shift as also learned did not actually have a good understanding of money in the first place. Just had taken it for granted one should try to get rich, and do so young. Like vaguely had plans to make my first million by age 30, which is just common as an idea in my country without it being clear why.
Going to focus on some key things which came to me while typing this post where is a bit of a surprise. I prefer to just let the writing flow then edit. There were things I thought would be here, which did not flow from the writing. And now as I edit, think learned quite a bit more than I expected from that as well. So here is what did make it.
Much shifted then when realized that money is just an abstraction for a favor, which is a social IOU backed up by society. Is like the concept of an I owe you, went from a paper kind of thing for a person, to paper for a country. Where is so cool how money gets introduced into the US system, as is not as intuitive as I thought. Have a post explaining on one of my blogs somewhere. That isn't the point of this post though. Maybe will find it later though. (Found it, from July 2015, on Lost in Commentary.)
With that idea in mind, yeah can explain how a cup of coffee from a friend is one kind of favor common to many who might share time with one over, and from a commercial establishment is great example when get benefit of the favor of a cup of coffee from a stranger, in exchange for money.
So I like to call it the stranger economy.
Where is so wild when you realize that in time it became accepted that the quality of that cup of coffee, and even the experience in the locale, could be so much greater that now more than likely would prefer to share with a friend in a commercial establishment often.
And the cost of getting that mood? Is priced into the things obtained there from that cup of coffee to other items might purchase along with it. Where yeah, my ideas on entertainment helped there as well, as understanding entertainment as a way to safely control mood, could find once again the idea of entertaining friends, as natural.
For a bit had entertainment separated in my mind from entertaining, as if were from very different places versus now realize are not, where one usually involves payment, yup to strangers, while the other tends to be more personal. And yet again, our expectations for paid entertainment quality are MUCH higher than from ourselves for our friends, unless you are that friend people think should be raucously entertaining.
Kind of feel for entertainers who maybe have friends who think they should bring their work with them to the party, if invited. Suspect they probably prefer that time off, to relax and safely enjoy quality time with others, if possible.
So with discovery lost my money focus. Better understood community focus. Then better understood the stranger economy which gets back to money. And now have worked to bring it all together in a way where makes sense, for me and possibly for others.
If makes more sense to you now? I succeeded with you which is a point of sharing. While also is important for me, which means the effort is worth it regardless.
There is a question that still bothers me though, which I may as well put out there, as I wonder, would I post differently if I were wealthy?
James Harris
Monday, October 23, 2017
Pay after model and find funding?
The pay after model is the dominant payment model of the world, because is really--pay after quality and want have been determined.
On the web people are routinely either assuming you believe they have a quality product you actually want, or demanding you pay whether they DO or not because they can make you. Either pay them first, or go away.
Where people may get creative then.
Am more confident that pay after on the web can be done many ways, if a corporation is created that does not assume people are naturally thieves, which focuses on letting them determine quality, and helps facilitate determining want, and provides a safe business transaction where trust is built over time.
That is, you learn the corporation is a business entity you can trust, which can determine if you are a valid customer as well, based on your behavior though would not assume you're naturally a thief, while there are ways to check people. Like if a software product is provided where you can pay when decide if want or not, and are left to delete off if don't want without being pressured? And you do NOT pay, but later you are back for an upgrade? You are a thief.
But how to get it started? Concept is easy enough, as talked first yesterday abstracting payment intermediary in a longer post. Where have actually talked these concepts for YEARS, but don't feel like linking to that content on this blog and my other blog Lost in Commentary to document in this post or that prior one. Is easy enough to just go off the basic principle.
Consider these ideas open source, and with me, things are definitely interesting. World needs kind of company described am sure.
I'm an idea guy. Not so good at lots of other things where other people are great. So just another post as think, shift! Yeah, I need to make money. Accepting should leverage my ideas in that direction more. Bills don't care either. Gotta pay'em.
So yeah, motivation right now? Purely commercial. Have done enough basic research. Must figure out how to make money, even if to get enough funding to get my commercial blog Seriously Commercial off the ground. Is that classic, need for money, to make money.
Well thankfully have a process that just lets me try things. Who knows where this will go, if anywhere. So just trotting it out there to see if anything interesting happens, like usual.
James Harris
On the web people are routinely either assuming you believe they have a quality product you actually want, or demanding you pay whether they DO or not because they can make you. Either pay them first, or go away.
Where people may get creative then.
Am more confident that pay after on the web can be done many ways, if a corporation is created that does not assume people are naturally thieves, which focuses on letting them determine quality, and helps facilitate determining want, and provides a safe business transaction where trust is built over time.
That is, you learn the corporation is a business entity you can trust, which can determine if you are a valid customer as well, based on your behavior though would not assume you're naturally a thief, while there are ways to check people. Like if a software product is provided where you can pay when decide if want or not, and are left to delete off if don't want without being pressured? And you do NOT pay, but later you are back for an upgrade? You are a thief.
But how to get it started? Concept is easy enough, as talked first yesterday abstracting payment intermediary in a longer post. Where have actually talked these concepts for YEARS, but don't feel like linking to that content on this blog and my other blog Lost in Commentary to document in this post or that prior one. Is easy enough to just go off the basic principle.
Consider these ideas open source, and with me, things are definitely interesting. World needs kind of company described am sure.
I'm an idea guy. Not so good at lots of other things where other people are great. So just another post as think, shift! Yeah, I need to make money. Accepting should leverage my ideas in that direction more. Bills don't care either. Gotta pay'em.
So yeah, motivation right now? Purely commercial. Have done enough basic research. Must figure out how to make money, even if to get enough funding to get my commercial blog Seriously Commercial off the ground. Is that classic, need for money, to make money.
Well thankfully have a process that just lets me try things. Who knows where this will go, if anywhere. So just trotting it out there to see if anything interesting happens, like usual.
James Harris
Sunday, October 22, 2017
Finishing up assessments
Been using my blogs to figure some things out, with bulk of that here, and may as well go ahead and put forward some assessments.
My mathematical research does indicate that an error that entered into the mathematical field in number theory amazingly enough is best explanation for lack of pick up of that research. The error afflicts number theory where number theorists have long gotten away with pure research which doesn't relate to science or technology. Which is good. Is why hasn't impacted science or technology, much. Though there may be a HUGE problem in area of web security.
And yeah is just stunning really that I demonstrated the problem with a published paper which appeared to prove one thing, when by accepted rules same thing wasn't allowed, proving beyond ANY doubt that there was problem that needed to be fixed. That was over a decade ago.
But that problem allows what I call mathematical fiction.
Plenty of my math research opens door to further discovery where for years hoped that could move things forward. But now realize that mathematical truth has little incentive to people who have careers built on lucrative mathematical fiction. Is ironic. So very terribly ironic that the mathematical field would be so afflicted, and for over a hundred years.
Only practical clue in our times is the unfortunate reality that computer security was built around ideas put forward by, yup, number theorists. Unable to do some things that MAY be easy, for someone with greater mathematical ability where I refuse to do much research in that area. And who knows? Maybe endless explanations around security breaches claiming human error are correct.
Or, um, these computer security systems just do not actually work well to stop people who have developed certain expertise. Worst case? Certain ones of them, no longer are working at all with people who know how to breach them, if the worst scenario IS playing out and there IS lying around breaches. So hedging, hedging, hedging as we're talking something unbelievable even for me, if true.
You'd think some government would figure it out then. Oh, maybe some have.
And might help explain SOME of the information that has flowed into the public domain. Presumably some who found out how might try to work, well at least to embarrass certain rich and powerful.
It does fit, but again, am hedging much. Situation is so weird. Must be lots of failures across multiple systems for it to have lasted this long, if that is the explanation. Have long had suspicions and am now simply airing them out. What I do know for sure is there is the problem in number theory which means there must be the problem with number theorists.
Having correct mathematics though draws attention to me. And on top of that have used intellectual techniques developed in other areas which gets me more global attention from those things discovered there as well. But struggled with monetizing, partly because didn't feel like it, was looking for a certifying authority from establishment folks who as noted were not going to give it now believe, and also web has been in development.
Our world is transitioning in many ways. Have been figuring things out as rapidly as I can, while that occurs but it is hard actually.
Oh, and is very weird the global attention indicated by web analytics which always seems just enough to keep me guessing without doing much else, except when I can check by indirect means.
So basic assessment is, world is in flux which makes it hard to be sure about lots of things. Unfortunately is absolutely proven a problem with number theory, which also at this time proves a problem with number theorists. Is true that a better explanation for rampant security problems could be a failure of underlying mathematical ideas, but is not something can say definitively.
Given that math does not entice further discovery from people I believe rely on mathematical fiction, should put to the side for now, and focus on other things. With the concern that global security may be breached, but have notified governments as best I could. And there really isn't much more I can do there.
Moving forward should focus on intellectual discovery in other areas where functional results should lead interested people into picking up and improving upon valuable information. Further should focus more on web analytics and figuring out total numbers of people beyond just total reach with too much focus on country counts.
Assessments in this area, complete.
James Harris
My mathematical research does indicate that an error that entered into the mathematical field in number theory amazingly enough is best explanation for lack of pick up of that research. The error afflicts number theory where number theorists have long gotten away with pure research which doesn't relate to science or technology. Which is good. Is why hasn't impacted science or technology, much. Though there may be a HUGE problem in area of web security.
And yeah is just stunning really that I demonstrated the problem with a published paper which appeared to prove one thing, when by accepted rules same thing wasn't allowed, proving beyond ANY doubt that there was problem that needed to be fixed. That was over a decade ago.
But that problem allows what I call mathematical fiction.
Plenty of my math research opens door to further discovery where for years hoped that could move things forward. But now realize that mathematical truth has little incentive to people who have careers built on lucrative mathematical fiction. Is ironic. So very terribly ironic that the mathematical field would be so afflicted, and for over a hundred years.
Only practical clue in our times is the unfortunate reality that computer security was built around ideas put forward by, yup, number theorists. Unable to do some things that MAY be easy, for someone with greater mathematical ability where I refuse to do much research in that area. And who knows? Maybe endless explanations around security breaches claiming human error are correct.
Or, um, these computer security systems just do not actually work well to stop people who have developed certain expertise. Worst case? Certain ones of them, no longer are working at all with people who know how to breach them, if the worst scenario IS playing out and there IS lying around breaches. So hedging, hedging, hedging as we're talking something unbelievable even for me, if true.
You'd think some government would figure it out then. Oh, maybe some have.
And might help explain SOME of the information that has flowed into the public domain. Presumably some who found out how might try to work, well at least to embarrass certain rich and powerful.
It does fit, but again, am hedging much. Situation is so weird. Must be lots of failures across multiple systems for it to have lasted this long, if that is the explanation. Have long had suspicions and am now simply airing them out. What I do know for sure is there is the problem in number theory which means there must be the problem with number theorists.
Having correct mathematics though draws attention to me. And on top of that have used intellectual techniques developed in other areas which gets me more global attention from those things discovered there as well. But struggled with monetizing, partly because didn't feel like it, was looking for a certifying authority from establishment folks who as noted were not going to give it now believe, and also web has been in development.
Our world is transitioning in many ways. Have been figuring things out as rapidly as I can, while that occurs but it is hard actually.
Oh, and is very weird the global attention indicated by web analytics which always seems just enough to keep me guessing without doing much else, except when I can check by indirect means.
So basic assessment is, world is in flux which makes it hard to be sure about lots of things. Unfortunately is absolutely proven a problem with number theory, which also at this time proves a problem with number theorists. Is true that a better explanation for rampant security problems could be a failure of underlying mathematical ideas, but is not something can say definitively.
Given that math does not entice further discovery from people I believe rely on mathematical fiction, should put to the side for now, and focus on other things. With the concern that global security may be breached, but have notified governments as best I could. And there really isn't much more I can do there.
Moving forward should focus on intellectual discovery in other areas where functional results should lead interested people into picking up and improving upon valuable information. Further should focus more on web analytics and figuring out total numbers of people beyond just total reach with too much focus on country counts.
Assessments in this area, complete.
James Harris
Abstracting the payment intermediary
Years ago realized there was one payment model lacking on the web, which is pay after, like many people in US experience at a fine restaurant. On the web pay models are focused on pay before. And subscriptions even focus on trying to get people to pay before even created.
If we abstract from information producer to information consumer the web solves the distribution problem, but does not necessarily handle the business trust problem.
One might imagine an intermediary there, where with pay before models that can be VERY complex, and has issues of returns as well as heavy litigation potential, while with pay after both should be minimized.
But then the problem is, how do you expect people to pay at all after they gain information product?
Because I say, most people will pay for value received, once they make a buying decision, if payment is possible.
An abstracted business intermediary could potentially then, work to make sure information producer was verified, like as to owning information product and having a good business record. And provide a portal for information consumers who could learn to trust the intermediary, and be trusted to pay when they made a buying decision for a particular information product.
For example, have given idea before that a person could use software, until decided to pay for it, or did not actually need or want it, and be trusted to simply delete off system on their own. Though also noted if they DID cheat at least in that scenario, you could catch if came back later for an upgrade, if one was put forward.
Yeah but like with news organizations they could simply let people pay for an article after reading, if they so chose. Have read articles if had the money, might pay say 99 cents, if felt was really good. Of course, is my idea. Now they either give away for free, relying on advertising, or push people to subscribe, for things not even created yet. Though yes archives are there but I don't think people are into bingeing on news archives.
Still that is the big hurdle. In a restaurant? Hard to dine and dash is the phrase. With information? People need to feel value there and need to pay if that has been established. But would they?
Yeah daunting. Could that be crowdfunded though? I have no idea. Will put here and edit this post as usual as debate with myself.
The pay first model dominates the web, but does NOT dominate ANY other business systems around the globe--which is a bold claim.
People pay contractors after work is done. Pay at fine restaurants after food is consumed. Pay for clothes after tried on. Pay for cars after test drives.
Movies pay before, of course and other entertainment products. But also is why have trailers and various other promotional to try and help people figure out--is quality there? And also, novelty is key there. Novelty is an entertainment thing, but also not over all. Like with music? People prefer to hear a song, maybe even quite a bit, before are sure really like it. I know I do.
Yes, still need novelty with music, but unlike with movies, will NOT accept that as a reason to be forced to pay upfront, am thinking for most people. Definitely would not accept myself. Need to hear that entire song, and more than once, to figure out if I like it.
Restaurant business includes fast food where you pay before, which is a part but not all. Is it dominant? I don't think so. Television industry is HUGE in entertainment, without a pay first. With cable is more like pay for what exists, but subscriptions definitely add in a wrinkle. Otherwise television is relying on advertising. Interesting. Seems like entertainment industry gives me more fits with that assertion than elsewhere, which intrigues me.
Reality is, people like to determine quality, first.
Like have heard of people going to stores to try and get a feel for things or try them out before buying off web at best price.
Totality of the web pay upfront model is about distrust of the consumer, in my opinion.
Have seen cases where executives have ranted about piracy and other varieties of information theft. I think we simply have been limited by business people who think most humans are naturally thieves or there might be SOME cases of the pay after model around by now on web. If there are any, please let me know!!!
As one addendum to earlier ideas, have noted that with subscription models that DO work, people have a lot of content already available. Like sign up for video streaming service and binge watch? You can get your money's worth in a day or two.
Oh, with this model just thinking here, information producer would get 95% of revenue, with payment intermediary company relying on maximum of 5% with probably less if actually worked well.
People who produce should get most of the revenue. Intermediary would just be facilitating business transactions by limiting risk to information producer and information consumer.
James Harris
If we abstract from information producer to information consumer the web solves the distribution problem, but does not necessarily handle the business trust problem.
One might imagine an intermediary there, where with pay before models that can be VERY complex, and has issues of returns as well as heavy litigation potential, while with pay after both should be minimized.
But then the problem is, how do you expect people to pay at all after they gain information product?
Because I say, most people will pay for value received, once they make a buying decision, if payment is possible.
An abstracted business intermediary could potentially then, work to make sure information producer was verified, like as to owning information product and having a good business record. And provide a portal for information consumers who could learn to trust the intermediary, and be trusted to pay when they made a buying decision for a particular information product.
For example, have given idea before that a person could use software, until decided to pay for it, or did not actually need or want it, and be trusted to simply delete off system on their own. Though also noted if they DID cheat at least in that scenario, you could catch if came back later for an upgrade, if one was put forward.
Yeah but like with news organizations they could simply let people pay for an article after reading, if they so chose. Have read articles if had the money, might pay say 99 cents, if felt was really good. Of course, is my idea. Now they either give away for free, relying on advertising, or push people to subscribe, for things not even created yet. Though yes archives are there but I don't think people are into bingeing on news archives.
Still that is the big hurdle. In a restaurant? Hard to dine and dash is the phrase. With information? People need to feel value there and need to pay if that has been established. But would they?
Yeah daunting. Could that be crowdfunded though? I have no idea. Will put here and edit this post as usual as debate with myself.
The pay first model dominates the web, but does NOT dominate ANY other business systems around the globe--which is a bold claim.
People pay contractors after work is done. Pay at fine restaurants after food is consumed. Pay for clothes after tried on. Pay for cars after test drives.
Movies pay before, of course and other entertainment products. But also is why have trailers and various other promotional to try and help people figure out--is quality there? And also, novelty is key there. Novelty is an entertainment thing, but also not over all. Like with music? People prefer to hear a song, maybe even quite a bit, before are sure really like it. I know I do.
Yes, still need novelty with music, but unlike with movies, will NOT accept that as a reason to be forced to pay upfront, am thinking for most people. Definitely would not accept myself. Need to hear that entire song, and more than once, to figure out if I like it.
Restaurant business includes fast food where you pay before, which is a part but not all. Is it dominant? I don't think so. Television industry is HUGE in entertainment, without a pay first. With cable is more like pay for what exists, but subscriptions definitely add in a wrinkle. Otherwise television is relying on advertising. Interesting. Seems like entertainment industry gives me more fits with that assertion than elsewhere, which intrigues me.
Reality is, people like to determine quality, first.
Like have heard of people going to stores to try and get a feel for things or try them out before buying off web at best price.
Totality of the web pay upfront model is about distrust of the consumer, in my opinion.
Have seen cases where executives have ranted about piracy and other varieties of information theft. I think we simply have been limited by business people who think most humans are naturally thieves or there might be SOME cases of the pay after model around by now on web. If there are any, please let me know!!!
As one addendum to earlier ideas, have noted that with subscription models that DO work, people have a lot of content already available. Like sign up for video streaming service and binge watch? You can get your money's worth in a day or two.
Oh, with this model just thinking here, information producer would get 95% of revenue, with payment intermediary company relying on maximum of 5% with probably less if actually worked well.
People who produce should get most of the revenue. Intermediary would just be facilitating business transactions by limiting risk to information producer and information consumer.
James Harris
Web is where attention rules
Distribution is key to a simple understanding of much in modern world economy. And information distribution is where the web has taken over, for instance, removing the need for a physical CD, which shook the music industry, when audiences could just download music direct.
And our association between money and attention to the levels I took for granted growing up, in the 20th century, were ALL about that century, as inventions arrived where for a time, information distributed better through channels requiring heavy capitalization, like radio and television.
Global information distribution arrived with heavily capitalized areas, and then the web simplified, for many like myself, and solved the information distribution problem.
And money in its modern form arrived with the US Federal Reserve System, which is so effective, concepts it embodies took over global monetary systems.
Today people wonder how money gets created when they don't understand that system, and before it, money really was like an IOU to something physical considered valuable, like gold, versus in our times being more of an idea of value exchanged in the abstract.
You cannot have the modern global economy without money as invented in the 20th century.
Yet have considered the simple abstraction that money is a social IOU backed by society, as can be seen with US dollar which is a US federal reserve note backed by the US Government.
Money people were important for distribution in the heavily capitalized system, but today a music artist for example, can conceivably simply have fans download more or less direct and pay, with it questionable, what good are the money people in the middle then?
Worse, some of the greatest excesses in abuse of power can be seen with the money people, like movie producers whereas before information distribution on the web allowed a bigger picture, people were more likely focused on excesses from the celebrities. Now can get nasty picture about whomever.
Now we know as much about producers, agents and executives conceivably, as the web doesn't care.
Web is where attention rules. And unlike with a television station where powerful executives could control content to protect themselves and their friends from scrutiny, on the web? That information flows.
Getting proper remuneration for efforts is the social problem to be solved for the 21st century though, as BIG corporations still rule plenty of areas simply because the people who create lack the ability to get paid for their efforts, without a massive system designed simply to thwart thieves and piracy.
That will change am sure. My own analysis is that MOST people will return value received, when they make a buying decision, with proper remuneration, if is possible.
Such a simple sentence to type, but in those abstractions are a world to come, so much different from the one still here, which to me is just about social inertia, while people learn to choose better.
On the web is not so much about money as to value, but attention received, held and appreciated.
Here on the web? Attention rules.
James Harris
And our association between money and attention to the levels I took for granted growing up, in the 20th century, were ALL about that century, as inventions arrived where for a time, information distributed better through channels requiring heavy capitalization, like radio and television.
Global information distribution arrived with heavily capitalized areas, and then the web simplified, for many like myself, and solved the information distribution problem.
And money in its modern form arrived with the US Federal Reserve System, which is so effective, concepts it embodies took over global monetary systems.
Today people wonder how money gets created when they don't understand that system, and before it, money really was like an IOU to something physical considered valuable, like gold, versus in our times being more of an idea of value exchanged in the abstract.
You cannot have the modern global economy without money as invented in the 20th century.
Yet have considered the simple abstraction that money is a social IOU backed by society, as can be seen with US dollar which is a US federal reserve note backed by the US Government.
Money people were important for distribution in the heavily capitalized system, but today a music artist for example, can conceivably simply have fans download more or less direct and pay, with it questionable, what good are the money people in the middle then?
Worse, some of the greatest excesses in abuse of power can be seen with the money people, like movie producers whereas before information distribution on the web allowed a bigger picture, people were more likely focused on excesses from the celebrities. Now can get nasty picture about whomever.
Now we know as much about producers, agents and executives conceivably, as the web doesn't care.
Web is where attention rules. And unlike with a television station where powerful executives could control content to protect themselves and their friends from scrutiny, on the web? That information flows.
Getting proper remuneration for efforts is the social problem to be solved for the 21st century though, as BIG corporations still rule plenty of areas simply because the people who create lack the ability to get paid for their efforts, without a massive system designed simply to thwart thieves and piracy.
That will change am sure. My own analysis is that MOST people will return value received, when they make a buying decision, with proper remuneration, if is possible.
Such a simple sentence to type, but in those abstractions are a world to come, so much different from the one still here, which to me is just about social inertia, while people learn to choose better.
On the web is not so much about money as to value, but attention received, held and appreciated.
Here on the web? Attention rules.
James Harris
Saturday, October 21, 2017
What value truth?
There is an oddity to emotion am pondering, like when feel that bite of negativity, when worry that people aren't buying what you're selling...when you're not selling anything, and are sharing important information.
Recently was helped out a lot when came across the term gaslighting, where link goes to the Wikipedia. And was reminded of it recently, and thought was striking from Lauren Duca in this column she wrote which gave her a lot of attention.
Then realized recently was actually even earlier came across it from Dylan Farrow telling her story with abuse allegations, in an open letter she wrote published on the blog of Nicholas Kristof, which you can find here.
And was this sentence which just found for this post:
And have my own story of abuse where posted about it yesterday on Seriously Commercial where also linked to a post had done over a year ago.
Have been talking my abuse story since I was 12. Was believed should add, through that time. But I do think there were people who looked at me at times, like what was I selling? When I wanted to find, a feeling of safety again. Yes, have had LOTS of therapy. Maybe now am better at understanding and getting it out in a helpful way.
What is the value of truth is there across it all. And to me, we can too often see society see little value, but why? And I think for me it does all relate. That looking back at boundaries crossed for me so young, and maybe fighting to repair, am stuck still with a useless dynamic I need to let go.
Is not my job to worry about what others are feeling as if the truth should change. The truth does not change.
The value of truth is.
As stories pour out, of boundaries breached by so many that truth will change much. The truth itself will not change, but in accepting it, maybe societies will be better.
Easy enough to write oddly enough. Looking for goals in there for myself. Ways to measure progress for me as well as society. How will we know, better?
James Harris
Recently was helped out a lot when came across the term gaslighting, where link goes to the Wikipedia. And was reminded of it recently, and thought was striking from Lauren Duca in this column she wrote which gave her a lot of attention.
Then realized recently was actually even earlier came across it from Dylan Farrow telling her story with abuse allegations, in an open letter she wrote published on the blog of Nicholas Kristof, which you can find here.
And was this sentence which just found for this post:
There were experts willing to attack my credibility. There were doctors willing to gaslight an abused child.
And have my own story of abuse where posted about it yesterday on Seriously Commercial where also linked to a post had done over a year ago.
Have been talking my abuse story since I was 12. Was believed should add, through that time. But I do think there were people who looked at me at times, like what was I selling? When I wanted to find, a feeling of safety again. Yes, have had LOTS of therapy. Maybe now am better at understanding and getting it out in a helpful way.
What is the value of truth is there across it all. And to me, we can too often see society see little value, but why? And I think for me it does all relate. That looking back at boundaries crossed for me so young, and maybe fighting to repair, am stuck still with a useless dynamic I need to let go.
Is not my job to worry about what others are feeling as if the truth should change. The truth does not change.
The value of truth is.
As stories pour out, of boundaries breached by so many that truth will change much. The truth itself will not change, but in accepting it, maybe societies will be better.
Easy enough to write oddly enough. Looking for goals in there for myself. Ways to measure progress for me as well as society. How will we know, better?
James Harris
Weird comfort without money
One thing has emerged as a major psychological thing for me has been a weird comfort in the discomfort of struggling with money. But is so sad, but also telling, as my finances tumbled got fewer distractions as people disappeared on me. That is classic so not grousing, just noting.
But yeah, dismissed some things, like web attention too much which I think was about willful denial. So put my picture up on the web! Should be fun. Told myself could represent a Black guy in a way the world rarely sees. So many global are known for sports, arts and entertainment, or political position.
I'm known for math, and other ideas. I'm an idea guy.
There are few people at all regardless of gender or race who are globally known primarily on the basis of the thoughts that have come from their minds. And still keep coming I should note, like here now. Global pull for musing? I know I like it.
Soon after decided should put my picture up, got put into a general layoff at company where was doing data entry, which I liked to call, my day-job. But I could rationalize it. Was part of a group layoff, was last hired even though had been there 5 years. Now am like, maybe the picture finally up had something to do with it, but then again, maybe not.
Regardless, have been working at mysteries lately. One of the things I pointed out is that I use a simple meta process: introduce better ideas and expect people to choose better.
Naively have also figured with certain ideas that DO draw attention as mention much, they'd also bring attention to ME, so I've spent more time preparing for and dreading that attention, and definitely NOT pursuing it. Which lets me do things, like social media, my way. I actually pride myself on how somehow I limit my Twitter account. Is so cool.
However, have to make money. Is just how society works. And definitely want to pull my own weight, where feel like yeah, have valuable ideas, but you also have to have realized value in the form of remuneration for your efforts, which is income. And facing my situation involves not claiming is rationalization about the web impact, when I know what has happened trying to get jobs since then.
But hey, being a business and realizing some person somehow, someway gets global attention? That has to become part of your business plan or more appropriately, is an unacceptable business risk. I DO quietly note to myself when some company proudly talks its global, if it even has, and am like, I'm in more countries than THAT. And there must be a way to make money that way but is a longterm thing.
Oh, so other problem is yeah, my ideas do as I say they do. And then others do what I think is weird. Other people have become the mystery, who know the story, and for the most part from my perspective are TOO quiet. What's up with that?
So am blogging two current problem areas. This blog has been working hard to work through problems relevant, and has made great progress. Am expecting rapid answers in these areas as well. And gave myself permission with public notice days ago, to use all necessary steps within law, and within my own rules, so no worries!
Should be fun.
James Harris
But yeah, dismissed some things, like web attention too much which I think was about willful denial. So put my picture up on the web! Should be fun. Told myself could represent a Black guy in a way the world rarely sees. So many global are known for sports, arts and entertainment, or political position.
I'm known for math, and other ideas. I'm an idea guy.
There are few people at all regardless of gender or race who are globally known primarily on the basis of the thoughts that have come from their minds. And still keep coming I should note, like here now. Global pull for musing? I know I like it.
Soon after decided should put my picture up, got put into a general layoff at company where was doing data entry, which I liked to call, my day-job. But I could rationalize it. Was part of a group layoff, was last hired even though had been there 5 years. Now am like, maybe the picture finally up had something to do with it, but then again, maybe not.
Regardless, have been working at mysteries lately. One of the things I pointed out is that I use a simple meta process: introduce better ideas and expect people to choose better.
Naively have also figured with certain ideas that DO draw attention as mention much, they'd also bring attention to ME, so I've spent more time preparing for and dreading that attention, and definitely NOT pursuing it. Which lets me do things, like social media, my way. I actually pride myself on how somehow I limit my Twitter account. Is so cool.
However, have to make money. Is just how society works. And definitely want to pull my own weight, where feel like yeah, have valuable ideas, but you also have to have realized value in the form of remuneration for your efforts, which is income. And facing my situation involves not claiming is rationalization about the web impact, when I know what has happened trying to get jobs since then.
But hey, being a business and realizing some person somehow, someway gets global attention? That has to become part of your business plan or more appropriately, is an unacceptable business risk. I DO quietly note to myself when some company proudly talks its global, if it even has, and am like, I'm in more countries than THAT. And there must be a way to make money that way but is a longterm thing.
Oh, so other problem is yeah, my ideas do as I say they do. And then others do what I think is weird. Other people have become the mystery, who know the story, and for the most part from my perspective are TOO quiet. What's up with that?
So am blogging two current problem areas. This blog has been working hard to work through problems relevant, and has made great progress. Am expecting rapid answers in these areas as well. And gave myself permission with public notice days ago, to use all necessary steps within law, and within my own rules, so no worries!
Should be fun.
James Harris
Friday, October 20, 2017
Thoughts on American movie box office
Looking at projections for another lackluster weekend at the American movie box office, and yeah can't help but think about some of the things have written here. Yes, did expect even the web itself to push much higher standards as well as my own ideas explained most recently here, as have talked how having a functional definition for entertainment can help people choose better.
As expected by me, which finally admitted, simpler mood lines are doing best. Like comedy and horror as harder to mess up the mood line there, in my opinion. Talking my own ideas, admittedly very hypothetical as I made them up. Is MY basic research less than three years old now. Based on my theories more complex mood lines will become successful too, or be successful as long as a higher standard is met than existed before. People just know better now, where quality should be.
Would be cool if could help movie studios with movies before they released. Could be useful with professionals and multi-million dollar entertainment products? Would be cool, but how would I know? What I do ponder just from my own musings though is, do they ask those folks who do the movie trailers pertinent questions?
To me movie trailers are just about the mood line. And have explained mood line maybe best here.
Those movie trailer folks for movies impress me much more now as have my own entertainment science, and finally realize how hard it is what they do.
Regardless, movie industry will be ok. There are still big movies which are doing great at the box office, and reality is, just as I said, with pickier audiences for whatever reason, the ones who can adjust will win.
And audiences will win because audience rules. Where yeah, other thing is that with the web, we can STILL do ok, with streaming options to get best entertainment we want WHEN we want, which is another pressure point on movies.
In our times, movies have to be on point where to me? Is so much about holding that mood line.
If they are on point? Audiences DO show up.
Oh, am working at trying to make money these days though. Mostly focused with new blog Seriously Commercial. So am available if some movie studios wanted to risk my novel ideas, and I'd be very reasonable! And would want to hang out with the people who yup, do the movie trailers.
Those folks and me might be closer to speaking the same language, like to think. But what do I know?
Am not in the entertainment industry. Looking at from a distance like most folks.
James Harris
As expected by me, which finally admitted, simpler mood lines are doing best. Like comedy and horror as harder to mess up the mood line there, in my opinion. Talking my own ideas, admittedly very hypothetical as I made them up. Is MY basic research less than three years old now. Based on my theories more complex mood lines will become successful too, or be successful as long as a higher standard is met than existed before. People just know better now, where quality should be.
Would be cool if could help movie studios with movies before they released. Could be useful with professionals and multi-million dollar entertainment products? Would be cool, but how would I know? What I do ponder just from my own musings though is, do they ask those folks who do the movie trailers pertinent questions?
To me movie trailers are just about the mood line. And have explained mood line maybe best here.
Those movie trailer folks for movies impress me much more now as have my own entertainment science, and finally realize how hard it is what they do.
Regardless, movie industry will be ok. There are still big movies which are doing great at the box office, and reality is, just as I said, with pickier audiences for whatever reason, the ones who can adjust will win.
And audiences will win because audience rules. Where yeah, other thing is that with the web, we can STILL do ok, with streaming options to get best entertainment we want WHEN we want, which is another pressure point on movies.
In our times, movies have to be on point where to me? Is so much about holding that mood line.
If they are on point? Audiences DO show up.
Oh, am working at trying to make money these days though. Mostly focused with new blog Seriously Commercial. So am available if some movie studios wanted to risk my novel ideas, and I'd be very reasonable! And would want to hang out with the people who yup, do the movie trailers.
Those folks and me might be closer to speaking the same language, like to think. But what do I know?
Am not in the entertainment industry. Looking at from a distance like most folks.
James Harris
Thursday, October 19, 2017
Static nature and truth
There are those words that can take on different meanings with technology, and for many static became associated with noise associated with certain systems. Where the point in that context was the randomness of those systems was unchanging. Static means, not changing. But it has the added meaning in our times of being noisy to many.
For me the word then has a fascinating applicability to something that IS important in that truth is important as to how it does not change. Like if a person robs a bank. Either that person did or did not rob the bank. If that person did rob the bank--that truth does not change.
Where picked a criminal example deliberately. As one philosophical problem in the US can be where people do not believe there is such a thing as truth. They will actually tell you that everything is shades of grey, but if that person goes and robs a bank, do you think that may work at all in defense?
Our personal perception can be one thing, but how our fellow human beings react to us, can be another.
In questions of truth, the unchanging quality of truth is extremely useful in my opinion. Which helps in determining whether you are witnessing a truth, or an opinion.
In my opinion, many people may be one thing, but I can learn that opinion is wrong, and change it.
But in truth, we are all human beings, which is a question for science, which has determined that with extraordinary certainty, which arrived with the science of genetics.
Our opinions in that regard though can affect human behavior, while the truth can effect better behavior, as the truth can lead to better interactions with our fellow human beings.
Those two words are so similar, and wonder would it make a difference to say, can effect human behavior? Yup. It FEELS different which is an opinion, as write here now. But is it a truth?
Static actually has fascinating properties in the context of physics, which I know as have a degree in that area and remember the training. Was an odd thing for me, which is emotion on which I reflect here, as my view of static was shifted. And is interesting to understand those properties, which can take over a word, for many.
Does it even feel right to say truth has a static nature? Or go against the grain?
Questions can open doors to perception am sure. So much about what we believe, how we believe, and from where our belief arrives.
The truth does not care. Like if you rob that bank and wish your fellow humans to dismiss what you call the noise of testimony against you, which you might claim as just so much static. The judge may look at you wondering, what planet you think you're on.
And render judgement which will change your life, whether you think is shades of grey or not.
With philosophical discussions maybe, later in your prison cell, where will the truth lie?
That is so harsh as an ending. It is interesting though that static shifted in our times probably because with radio static it was just this noise. And radio was a big deal. Oh and static on television too, which probably is where most get that sense of it being about noise.
There also is a truth: the reality of how many people experience a word in our times, for which have adjusted.
James Harris
For me the word then has a fascinating applicability to something that IS important in that truth is important as to how it does not change. Like if a person robs a bank. Either that person did or did not rob the bank. If that person did rob the bank--that truth does not change.
Where picked a criminal example deliberately. As one philosophical problem in the US can be where people do not believe there is such a thing as truth. They will actually tell you that everything is shades of grey, but if that person goes and robs a bank, do you think that may work at all in defense?
Our personal perception can be one thing, but how our fellow human beings react to us, can be another.
In questions of truth, the unchanging quality of truth is extremely useful in my opinion. Which helps in determining whether you are witnessing a truth, or an opinion.
In my opinion, many people may be one thing, but I can learn that opinion is wrong, and change it.
But in truth, we are all human beings, which is a question for science, which has determined that with extraordinary certainty, which arrived with the science of genetics.
Our opinions in that regard though can affect human behavior, while the truth can effect better behavior, as the truth can lead to better interactions with our fellow human beings.
Those two words are so similar, and wonder would it make a difference to say, can effect human behavior? Yup. It FEELS different which is an opinion, as write here now. But is it a truth?
Static actually has fascinating properties in the context of physics, which I know as have a degree in that area and remember the training. Was an odd thing for me, which is emotion on which I reflect here, as my view of static was shifted. And is interesting to understand those properties, which can take over a word, for many.
Does it even feel right to say truth has a static nature? Or go against the grain?
Questions can open doors to perception am sure. So much about what we believe, how we believe, and from where our belief arrives.
The truth does not care. Like if you rob that bank and wish your fellow humans to dismiss what you call the noise of testimony against you, which you might claim as just so much static. The judge may look at you wondering, what planet you think you're on.
And render judgement which will change your life, whether you think is shades of grey or not.
With philosophical discussions maybe, later in your prison cell, where will the truth lie?
That is so harsh as an ending. It is interesting though that static shifted in our times probably because with radio static it was just this noise. And radio was a big deal. Oh and static on television too, which probably is where most get that sense of it being about noise.
There also is a truth: the reality of how many people experience a word in our times, for which have adjusted.
James Harris
Why knowledge rules
The discovery that a person can produce a mathematical argument that looks correct by long accepted rules, which can be shown to not be correct by those same rules is remarkable, if true.
Consider also that a world routinely accepts that the knowledge does not exist to keep computer systems from routinely being breached, with massive flows of freed information as a result.
What if the actual answer though is that a subtle flaw allowed people who lacked ability to be put in a position to secure the world's systems? Then would not be much of a surprise.
Evaluating such a scenario presumably would require VAST amounts of expertise well beyond most people. And is the kind of arena where governments play.
However can still show you why knowledge rules, as imagine you're in an airplane, and you learn that the pilot is well-trained but the co-pilot is a fraud. And things are ok, until the pilot becomes incapacitated.
Knowledge rules because there are any number of situations where that person you need, needs to have valid information, which is useful knowledge and be able to use it.
One problem we can have in societies is when systems get vast enough that there is not enough checking of authority at all points, where knowledge rules. And plenty of people can believe odd things, like maybe anyone can actually do the job of the American president? Why not? If you can get elected, what more do you really need to know?
Yet, if our current American president screws up enough you may die in a nuclear blast. And your awareness of this reality does not change it.
The fate of humanity may be simply to mostly die, stupid.
Now then, do you understand better why knowledge rules? Have a nice day. Where ever you may be in this world, there are decisions to be made which will affect you, whether you wish it or not.
So much better if the people making those decisions? Know what they're doing.
Talking obvious things. There is a weird thing in the US though which I call a distorted feudal echo.
Some people have a distorted view that somehow some kind of class has a right to positions, even if that is stated as against American ideals. But even in feudal times, people actually in charge, like maybe a regent, were expected to know what they were doing.
Importance of being able to function well with authority is as old as humanity actually.
James Harris
Consider also that a world routinely accepts that the knowledge does not exist to keep computer systems from routinely being breached, with massive flows of freed information as a result.
What if the actual answer though is that a subtle flaw allowed people who lacked ability to be put in a position to secure the world's systems? Then would not be much of a surprise.
Evaluating such a scenario presumably would require VAST amounts of expertise well beyond most people. And is the kind of arena where governments play.
However can still show you why knowledge rules, as imagine you're in an airplane, and you learn that the pilot is well-trained but the co-pilot is a fraud. And things are ok, until the pilot becomes incapacitated.
Knowledge rules because there are any number of situations where that person you need, needs to have valid information, which is useful knowledge and be able to use it.
One problem we can have in societies is when systems get vast enough that there is not enough checking of authority at all points, where knowledge rules. And plenty of people can believe odd things, like maybe anyone can actually do the job of the American president? Why not? If you can get elected, what more do you really need to know?
Yet, if our current American president screws up enough you may die in a nuclear blast. And your awareness of this reality does not change it.
The fate of humanity may be simply to mostly die, stupid.
Now then, do you understand better why knowledge rules? Have a nice day. Where ever you may be in this world, there are decisions to be made which will affect you, whether you wish it or not.
So much better if the people making those decisions? Know what they're doing.
Talking obvious things. There is a weird thing in the US though which I call a distorted feudal echo.
Some people have a distorted view that somehow some kind of class has a right to positions, even if that is stated as against American ideals. But even in feudal times, people actually in charge, like maybe a regent, were expected to know what they were doing.
Importance of being able to function well with authority is as old as humanity actually.
James Harris
Wednesday, October 18, 2017
Other possibilities
Of course there could be other explanations, which would be preferred for how things have gone, which would NOT require some suppression or anything from number theorist at NSA or anywhere else. Which would be great.
I could be an interesting guy with a lot of imagination who draws global interest with some interesting things.
What I know for sure? The math things ARE valid. But how does a person without a math degree get that kind of thing recognized? Probably not babbling about it on the web, one would think from a 20th century perspective. Though yeah, have sent to mathematicians and DID get a paper published, where then the math journal keeled over and died, after chief editor tried to pull the paper.
THAT was most dramatic thing though. And have at least tried to get the attention of the NSA as these things could, maybe, possibly have national security importance. But why would they listen to me given all of the above? Even if they bothered to check?
Reality is, got some things that draw interest from all over the planet which I know from Google web analytics, but not much else. There are some coincidental things too over a lot of time, I guess.
Yet still get stuck with, how could anything that vast stay hidden? Makes no sense. And if there were some kind of suppression thing, wouldn't they have looked at something simpler by now, like simply getting rid of me? (Don't like writing THAT down.)
Not like that would be hard. Which again leads to the theory that maybe is just a lot of HARD getting certain things noticed. And yeah, am glad am still here! Near as I can tell, free to babble on too.
Which is a relief I assure you. The things I worry over and then worry about worrying over.
Who knows. Will admit though, prefer the scenario where just have to get the information to the right people, you know? Would be so much better am sure.
Yeah, but how to know? So much information I don't have. With no clue how to get it.
Will focus on what I DO know, with a faith that the answers will reveal, in time. There has to be a reason for how things have gone. Is just a matter of finding the truth.
James Harris
I could be an interesting guy with a lot of imagination who draws global interest with some interesting things.
What I know for sure? The math things ARE valid. But how does a person without a math degree get that kind of thing recognized? Probably not babbling about it on the web, one would think from a 20th century perspective. Though yeah, have sent to mathematicians and DID get a paper published, where then the math journal keeled over and died, after chief editor tried to pull the paper.
THAT was most dramatic thing though. And have at least tried to get the attention of the NSA as these things could, maybe, possibly have national security importance. But why would they listen to me given all of the above? Even if they bothered to check?
Reality is, got some things that draw interest from all over the planet which I know from Google web analytics, but not much else. There are some coincidental things too over a lot of time, I guess.
Yet still get stuck with, how could anything that vast stay hidden? Makes no sense. And if there were some kind of suppression thing, wouldn't they have looked at something simpler by now, like simply getting rid of me? (Don't like writing THAT down.)
Not like that would be hard. Which again leads to the theory that maybe is just a lot of HARD getting certain things noticed. And yeah, am glad am still here! Near as I can tell, free to babble on too.
Which is a relief I assure you. The things I worry over and then worry about worrying over.
Who knows. Will admit though, prefer the scenario where just have to get the information to the right people, you know? Would be so much better am sure.
Yeah, but how to know? So much information I don't have. With no clue how to get it.
Will focus on what I DO know, with a faith that the answers will reveal, in time. There has to be a reason for how things have gone. Is just a matter of finding the truth.
James Harris
Perfect relationship excuse
So yeah when you have credible reason to believe people working all over the world in high level positions, including number theorists at intelligence agencies, may not exactly like you, is not exactly a situation which is conducive to being out there looking for a significant other. When I'm a good guy who just happened to figure some important and valuable things out, and stumbled across...sounds like a movie plot.
Is kind of interesting though to consider trying to explain to a woman who might be interested. Will admit have in the past had some potentials where is not like got far will say.
And you have no choice. Is real situation. Would HAVE to explain if things got far enough. And yeah that could definitely be important to someone, you know?
Is like living in a movie, but real. And will admit that movies often just aren't exciting enough to me any more. And movies about certain subjects, especially involving intelligence agencies, am like, that's not realistic. Or that wouldn't happen. Or he could totally have handled that different. And yeah, I know is JUST a movie. Haven't watched any like that in a bit. Maybe is too close to home. One of my favorites though, despite it being utterly unrealistic? Mercury Rising
Another one maybe more realistic, and also one of my favorites: Enemy of the State
Those are classics though. And feel like distracted myself.
Does keep your life simpler though. Oh, um when it comes to relationships at least. Other ways? Not so much. Like when in San Francisco, unlike other people was on the lookout for agents of our country or foreign powers. Though also totally just wish someone from the US Government would come around and say hi. But already detailed how have bugged them...wrong word...um, have contacted repeatedly in the past.
Is NOT fun not being sure that woman talking to you in the bar may or may not be an intelligence agent. NOT fun. These days, I figure, of course not. Some thought maybe. Now am like, well if so, who cares, didn't do anything to me. So no, of course not.
(Oh yeah, for people who knew me in San Francisco? Now some of my behavior may make more sense if you read this blog. Or then again, may just seem even more wacky.)
Of course if right woman had come along, and found myself in a conversation, where needed to explain, and after asking smart questions, and checking me on things, she was like, cool--that would have been great. Of course then she could be part of a life where you're wondering every single day, if something interesting is going to happen. Kind of glad though just have to worry about myself, and not also about possible things...which don't have to concern me as didn't happen.
Is like living in a movie...more like multiple movies all going at the same time. So yeah, have found myself not surprisingly VERY single which hadn't wanted to admit. But now is like, why not? Talking everything else lately.
James Harris
Is kind of interesting though to consider trying to explain to a woman who might be interested. Will admit have in the past had some potentials where is not like got far will say.
And you have no choice. Is real situation. Would HAVE to explain if things got far enough. And yeah that could definitely be important to someone, you know?
Is like living in a movie, but real. And will admit that movies often just aren't exciting enough to me any more. And movies about certain subjects, especially involving intelligence agencies, am like, that's not realistic. Or that wouldn't happen. Or he could totally have handled that different. And yeah, I know is JUST a movie. Haven't watched any like that in a bit. Maybe is too close to home. One of my favorites though, despite it being utterly unrealistic? Mercury Rising
Another one maybe more realistic, and also one of my favorites: Enemy of the State
Those are classics though. And feel like distracted myself.
Does keep your life simpler though. Oh, um when it comes to relationships at least. Other ways? Not so much. Like when in San Francisco, unlike other people was on the lookout for agents of our country or foreign powers. Though also totally just wish someone from the US Government would come around and say hi. But already detailed how have bugged them...wrong word...um, have contacted repeatedly in the past.
Is NOT fun not being sure that woman talking to you in the bar may or may not be an intelligence agent. NOT fun. These days, I figure, of course not. Some thought maybe. Now am like, well if so, who cares, didn't do anything to me. So no, of course not.
(Oh yeah, for people who knew me in San Francisco? Now some of my behavior may make more sense if you read this blog. Or then again, may just seem even more wacky.)
Of course if right woman had come along, and found myself in a conversation, where needed to explain, and after asking smart questions, and checking me on things, she was like, cool--that would have been great. Of course then she could be part of a life where you're wondering every single day, if something interesting is going to happen. Kind of glad though just have to worry about myself, and not also about possible things...which don't have to concern me as didn't happen.
Is like living in a movie...more like multiple movies all going at the same time. So yeah, have found myself not surprisingly VERY single which hadn't wanted to admit. But now is like, why not? Talking everything else lately.
James Harris
Out of my comfort zone
There are things I believe them after I write them. And even for me for a lot of years has been this sense that hey, if you have all this important information which is valuable knowledge should be able to DO something with it, effective to resolve things.
Which makes sense to me.
And also completely legal, and decent where with details which would be out there eventually, people would be like, cool!
Which is an interesting standard, I think.
Now out of my comfort zone and writing some things to get that sense of yup, that's the way it is.
Am glad for the ideals around the process. THAT at least is still comforting.
Posts may still go through editing, like usual. However, am putting it on myself to leave them up, and to keep the gist intact.
Just some things I need to face. And some things I need to get done.
Have been careful. Have done my due diligence.
James Harris
Which makes sense to me.
And also completely legal, and decent where with details which would be out there eventually, people would be like, cool!
Which is an interesting standard, I think.
Now out of my comfort zone and writing some things to get that sense of yup, that's the way it is.
Am glad for the ideals around the process. THAT at least is still comforting.
Posts may still go through editing, like usual. However, am putting it on myself to leave them up, and to keep the gist intact.
Just some things I need to face. And some things I need to get done.
Have been careful. Have done my due diligence.
James Harris
Considering steps taken
Can be hard to be sure when trying to do your own best with a difficult situation as to whether steps taken are best ones, or what should be done, or not. And with things stretching over decades which involve others can get especially difficult.
In my situation where have given a LOT more in plenty of posts as try to work through it in a way that has worked well for me in the past, have often been surprised when systems didn't work way I thought they should. And when people have not behaved as expected with information.
Given how dramatic much of it is, is useful to talk through some of the steps taken, as well as to document.
So have revealed that first thought had some important mathematics which should be put out there in 1996, which was rejected as too simple where I stopped there. That is, I only sent to one math journal, but could have continued though do not regret that, as later with more research, actually got published and watched as a math journal imploded where have talked details in other areas.
And found was facing a systemic problem with global implications which didn't realize then would be grappling with over a decade later.
Have sent communications to various mathematicians, being careful to stay in their subject area, which yeah, also meant was going to number theorists who may have been negatively impacted. But with my prime number counting method, meant contact with some of the leading researchers in the area. Am good at reaching people. They just didn't react with enthusiasm, or help required.
Got upset enough at one point looking at implications actually contacted a US Attorney. And not sure which one. Maybe was New York? Got a polite response in essence was, out of their area.
Have contacted the NSA, multiple times. And eventually dawned on me, not really a good idea, you know? They've always been polite when I could get through. Last time did went through public affairs folks, who forwarded message into the agency.
Have not contacted the US Congress on this issue. Guess kind of figured, what's the point?
And have had various levels of upset or calm through the years on the web, where am sure the evidence is out there. And lately focused more on objective evidence, stacked overwhelmingly as simply as possible.
Meanwhile have routinely watched global events which may be related. Watching news especially about security breaches which may be related. Endlessly noting things explained in a way that no one looks closely at underlying systems for security, while recognizing I really don't know if that is where problem lies.
There is much dramatic which does not go easily into a blog post. As I've developed intellectual things have been testing them out in various ways. So no, don't just have ideas for entertainment or science.
To me is an impasse. Which would just as soon not have continue and have put pressure on myself to end it.
But imagine if one of the world's greatest discoverers had been developing intellectual tools for over a decade, with a direct connect to the planet on the web, is in a weird battle with people who are defending their jobs, with many in top level security positions all over the planet.
Would you want to get in the way? If so, you should not. Stay out of this fight. But I want you to understand it.
Because they don't have a chance to win.
Am not asking for your help. Am giving you a chance to understand somewhat, if things go badly in ways I cannot control.
To me, is the right thing to do. Soon, will just get it done, consequences be what they may.
Human progress does not like being held back. I'm the agent put in to do the job, and I have lots of leeway.
And must also follow rules. So you have been notified. Freeing me for next steps.
Public notification complete.
Seems really wacky to me. But is also why is taking as long as it has. There are other things I can do, which are legal. Don't get too excited. In essence talking using my influence more directly than in the past.
However, moving into uncharted territory.
To put it another way, to protect the human species?
Yeah, maybe someone like me is giving a bit more than most might realize, which should be good! And I DO have to follow rules. So many rules have to follow. Is a good thing.
Regardless, even with all those rules, and having to keep it legal, and so much more, turns out there is a lot more can do. But still had to notify, by the rules, as well, maybe some things could get out of control. But have studied situation for years, and have back up plans and things.
So here we go. By my analysis there is a 99% probability of success, with minimal negative global impact.
Which is great! A decade ago was only 50% and you don't want to know any more.
I'll take the current odds.
So then, is time to switch modes. For the first time, to really test out some these things I have.
Will be interesting. Just watch the news. You don't even have to pay attention to me.
Seems really wacky to me. But is also why is taking as long as it has. There are other things I can do, which are legal. Don't get too excited. In essence talking using my influence more directly than in the past.
However, moving into uncharted territory.
To put it another way, to protect the human species?
Yeah, maybe someone like me is giving a bit more than most might realize, which should be good! And I DO have to follow rules. So many rules have to follow. Is a good thing.
Regardless, even with all those rules, and having to keep it legal, and so much more, turns out there is a lot more can do. But still had to notify, by the rules, as well, maybe some things could get out of control. But have studied situation for years, and have back up plans and things.
So here we go. By my analysis there is a 99% probability of success, with minimal negative global impact.
Which is great! A decade ago was only 50% and you don't want to know any more.
I'll take the current odds.
So then, is time to switch modes. For the first time, to really test out some these things I have.
Will be interesting. Just watch the news. You don't even have to pay attention to me.
James Harris
Valuing ideas though
From firm foundations where questions of truth can be settled absolutely has been important to me to find where best process can go. Which means developing intellectual tools, which are more generally applicable than to one particular area. And then noting value of ideas found, and how best to determine.
The web facilitates idea discovery, idea checking, and idea distribution by solving the information distribution problem, and in essence removing social distance.
My post here can be read anywhere in the world by anyone with web access who chooses, though language can be a barrier which technology is helping to remove, as Google Translate is on this blog. Though am not sure will admit how well it works to communicate with my writing style.
To me checking with idea discovery in multiple areas helps check foundations in any one, as predictive certainty is a process which we can study in science, where a body of evidence constantly builds.
The truth stays constant--flip that light switch and it works or not, and you can probably figure out why.
And computing systems actually rigorously test quantum mechanics to a level no scientific theory could be checked before. EVERY computer system is checking science billions of times per second, with clock rates we want ever faster. If the science were off even by very tiny measures, your computing device would cease to operate, as would mine.
With intellectual reach into multiple areas can check process, and also can help with any number of things for myself, with that shared as a benefit to others.
Like noted recently that my ideas about entertainment if correct, should lead to better, as people get a better feel for what works, and what does not.
How we value ideas in the real world is a question am considering, as look at process, effectiveness, community, and discussion considering all the ways we humans, talk ideas out.
James Harris
The web facilitates idea discovery, idea checking, and idea distribution by solving the information distribution problem, and in essence removing social distance.
My post here can be read anywhere in the world by anyone with web access who chooses, though language can be a barrier which technology is helping to remove, as Google Translate is on this blog. Though am not sure will admit how well it works to communicate with my writing style.
To me checking with idea discovery in multiple areas helps check foundations in any one, as predictive certainty is a process which we can study in science, where a body of evidence constantly builds.
The truth stays constant--flip that light switch and it works or not, and you can probably figure out why.
And computing systems actually rigorously test quantum mechanics to a level no scientific theory could be checked before. EVERY computer system is checking science billions of times per second, with clock rates we want ever faster. If the science were off even by very tiny measures, your computing device would cease to operate, as would mine.
With intellectual reach into multiple areas can check process, and also can help with any number of things for myself, with that shared as a benefit to others.
Like noted recently that my ideas about entertainment if correct, should lead to better, as people get a better feel for what works, and what does not.
How we value ideas in the real world is a question am considering, as look at process, effectiveness, community, and discussion considering all the ways we humans, talk ideas out.
James Harris
Why face reality
Some may wonder why I've talked math so much as if is all about me, when problem I found over a decade ago allows a person to conceivably write a mathematical piece which LOOKS correct, but is actually not. And hey, maybe that person is a guy who gets his doctorate that way, and hey maybe he ends up as an up and comer because this thing makes that EASIER with false than true math.
And maybe that guy gets recruited by a top secret US Government agency, and joins more like him, at the NSA.
Or at some leading university he goes. Or into some company looking for a top number theorist.
And a world wonders why somehow it can't seem to get secure, when my suspicions are naturally raised. But how do you know? When a world trusts? When this problem has been there for over a century, so that guy doesn't even realize he had flawed techniques, until he reads about me.
And that was over a decade ago, when I got a paper published highlighting the problem, and the math journal imploded a little while thereafter.
And the math community has continued, possibly still using it. Or maybe they're quietly trying to not use it now. Who knows.
But they're not talking about it that I've noticed. And throughout government agencies, and in major companies where number theorists are? They may know they got there with bogus results.
Now then, what would you do with that scenario, if you were me?
If you say, you'd probably be dead by now? I'm sure, you're probably right. YOU probably would be.
My job though as I see it, is to handle the situation with best process for best world outcome.
Turns out? That's kind of hard. But doable, am sure.
And that is a kind of creative abstract of the full situation. Took me years to work through for sure, where often was wondering, yeah, am I going to survive this situation? Can I just walk away?
With world security systems wrapped up in it though, there is nowhere to run. No way to hide.
May as well face situation, figure it out.
James Harris
And maybe that guy gets recruited by a top secret US Government agency, and joins more like him, at the NSA.
Or at some leading university he goes. Or into some company looking for a top number theorist.
And a world wonders why somehow it can't seem to get secure, when my suspicions are naturally raised. But how do you know? When a world trusts? When this problem has been there for over a century, so that guy doesn't even realize he had flawed techniques, until he reads about me.
And that was over a decade ago, when I got a paper published highlighting the problem, and the math journal imploded a little while thereafter.
And the math community has continued, possibly still using it. Or maybe they're quietly trying to not use it now. Who knows.
But they're not talking about it that I've noticed. And throughout government agencies, and in major companies where number theorists are? They may know they got there with bogus results.
Now then, what would you do with that scenario, if you were me?
If you say, you'd probably be dead by now? I'm sure, you're probably right. YOU probably would be.
My job though as I see it, is to handle the situation with best process for best world outcome.
Turns out? That's kind of hard. But doable, am sure.
And that is a kind of creative abstract of the full situation. Took me years to work through for sure, where often was wondering, yeah, am I going to survive this situation? Can I just walk away?
With world security systems wrapped up in it though, there is nowhere to run. No way to hide.
May as well face situation, figure it out.
James Harris
Tuesday, October 17, 2017
Pondering power of knowledge
Over a decade ago was confronted with my own research with questions about the true power of knowledge. Where yes, have heard the saying. And more recently on my Twitter found myself coming up with a variant which is relevant to this post:
The problem with knowledge is power, which is why every oppressor seeks to suppress it.
Was going to embed it, but will put link to it here. And think that yeah, knowledge has the power to make change which others may seek to resist! And oppressors of various kinds can simply try to suppress that information in various ways.
What is interesting to me is how that can play out and how others may react to it. Where I think many look to various status symbols, like money or celebrity. And others may focus on institutions. Or you may even look to governments, which may be where most would think first.
Knowledge to me is more than just information in that it has demonstrated value.
So knowledge is functional information? I like that, and naturally would focus on functional since use that concept a lot. Ok, let's try it out:
Knowledge may simply be considered to be functional information.
But all information has a function. People share for some reason.
Maybe then knowledge is demonstrated value beyond perceived which can reveal best over time. I can share information I think is valuable, but whether it actually is or not, can be realized in time.
To what extent does knowledge have the ability to BE suppressed though? And how does that look?
How effective is that regardless? And how do people BELIEVE it is effective?
Lately have been considering what I consider to be pseudo-realities where groups of humans convince themselves of things that are not actually true. And in so convincing, work VERY hard to create.
These lead to what I notice are collapsible bubbles. When a stronger force can simply drag these people--into the real world.
Human beings are communal creatures. Throughout human history, there has always been the question, what value truth over community if are in conflict?
James Harris
The problem with knowledge is power, which is why every oppressor seeks to suppress it.
Was going to embed it, but will put link to it here. And think that yeah, knowledge has the power to make change which others may seek to resist! And oppressors of various kinds can simply try to suppress that information in various ways.
What is interesting to me is how that can play out and how others may react to it. Where I think many look to various status symbols, like money or celebrity. And others may focus on institutions. Or you may even look to governments, which may be where most would think first.
Knowledge to me is more than just information in that it has demonstrated value.
So knowledge is functional information? I like that, and naturally would focus on functional since use that concept a lot. Ok, let's try it out:
Knowledge may simply be considered to be functional information.
But all information has a function. People share for some reason.
Maybe then knowledge is demonstrated value beyond perceived which can reveal best over time. I can share information I think is valuable, but whether it actually is or not, can be realized in time.
To what extent does knowledge have the ability to BE suppressed though? And how does that look?
How effective is that regardless? And how do people BELIEVE it is effective?
Lately have been considering what I consider to be pseudo-realities where groups of humans convince themselves of things that are not actually true. And in so convincing, work VERY hard to create.
These lead to what I notice are collapsible bubbles. When a stronger force can simply drag these people--into the real world.
Human beings are communal creatures. Throughout human history, there has always been the question, what value truth over community if are in conflict?
James Harris
Years to simpler perspective
Makes sense to me now that it can take years to get to a more objective, simplified view of one's own story, especially when you're on the constant figuring things out, as reality slowly unfolds.
With me, now can say took a path of discovery that focused on math, over 20 years ago, for what I thought were pragmatic reasons. Though possibly some part of me figured I'd be good at it.
Almost immediately found what I now know to be one of the great discoveries of mathematics, which was rejected as too simple by an editor at one of the most prestigious math journals out there, which was Proceedings of the AMS. Will NOT link to them. Which was in 1996.
Not surprisingly for these type stories, I kept going, and eventually in 1999, invented an approach because got frustrated chasing after what is commonly called Fermat's Last Theorem. Ran out of ideas, and asked myself, how do I expand possible approaches? And got an answer which I finally realized is my own mathematical discipline.
With that mathematical discipline, found a weird kind of hard to explain flaw at the heart of modern mathematics, which I realized could dramatically demonstrate with a paper, which looks correct by currently accepted rules, but which can be shown to be incorrect by those same rules. And got that paper published.
It went live in 2004, for the last 2003 edition of the journal, and at THAT time, I could have been trumpeted around the globe for one of the most important intellectual discoveries of all time.
(But you knew that, right? How else could some guy be read globally for so long at such a constant if it weren't for things really, well, like that reason? You think people all over a planet pay attention to one person, for no reason? Of course you don't, that would be silly.)
That's not what happened though. At least one editor, who was one emailed me when paper was accepted for publication, was nice and explained somewhat apologetically--yeah think somewhat is accurate, but not very, but the chief editor ran from the result. And I did what people like me do--I kept going.
Oh yeah, but of course, who cares about Fermat's Last Theorem at THAT point? Was a relief actually was like, that isn't even close to important to me now. It did help me go in the direction of figuring out my own math discipline, so that's cool, at least. Oh and finding one of the biggest results of ALL TIME so yeah there is that as well. But otherwise? Who cares.
Also simplified in another big area with prime numbers and gave an answer to one big question, which could lead to solving supposedly one of the greatest mathematical problems unanswered, which the math people didn't like, so they ignored it as well. And it's kind of been like that with many things.
I discover. Others apparently work to ignore.
And I hedge as usual.
With the web emergent, not surprisingly someone like me and the web would end up in a different kind of relationship. Where to me, the web is like a great friend, who is there for me. And we kind of understand each other, I think.
And I have VAST reach. Which I don't explain much any more. Have talked it enough.
So what about the press? I think we still primarily have a 20th century press, in that lots of how they do things, is about how things were BEFORE the web. And that even though they think they're adapting, I'm sure they're not, and monetary pressure will fix the situation, in time.
That is, the press people who cannot switch to 21st century techniques, which actually WOULD make them money, will more and more find it hard to make money. Their organizations will shutter, and they will lose their jobs.
Others will emerge. So worry not, the press will be ok.
Which is a good overview as am back to problem solving, which is why is only label.
James Harris
With me, now can say took a path of discovery that focused on math, over 20 years ago, for what I thought were pragmatic reasons. Though possibly some part of me figured I'd be good at it.
Almost immediately found what I now know to be one of the great discoveries of mathematics, which was rejected as too simple by an editor at one of the most prestigious math journals out there, which was Proceedings of the AMS. Will NOT link to them. Which was in 1996.
Not surprisingly for these type stories, I kept going, and eventually in 1999, invented an approach because got frustrated chasing after what is commonly called Fermat's Last Theorem. Ran out of ideas, and asked myself, how do I expand possible approaches? And got an answer which I finally realized is my own mathematical discipline.
With that mathematical discipline, found a weird kind of hard to explain flaw at the heart of modern mathematics, which I realized could dramatically demonstrate with a paper, which looks correct by currently accepted rules, but which can be shown to be incorrect by those same rules. And got that paper published.
It went live in 2004, for the last 2003 edition of the journal, and at THAT time, I could have been trumpeted around the globe for one of the most important intellectual discoveries of all time.
(But you knew that, right? How else could some guy be read globally for so long at such a constant if it weren't for things really, well, like that reason? You think people all over a planet pay attention to one person, for no reason? Of course you don't, that would be silly.)
That's not what happened though. At least one editor, who was one emailed me when paper was accepted for publication, was nice and explained somewhat apologetically--yeah think somewhat is accurate, but not very, but the chief editor ran from the result. And I did what people like me do--I kept going.
Oh yeah, but of course, who cares about Fermat's Last Theorem at THAT point? Was a relief actually was like, that isn't even close to important to me now. It did help me go in the direction of figuring out my own math discipline, so that's cool, at least. Oh and finding one of the biggest results of ALL TIME so yeah there is that as well. But otherwise? Who cares.
Also simplified in another big area with prime numbers and gave an answer to one big question, which could lead to solving supposedly one of the greatest mathematical problems unanswered, which the math people didn't like, so they ignored it as well. And it's kind of been like that with many things.
I discover. Others apparently work to ignore.
And I hedge as usual.
With the web emergent, not surprisingly someone like me and the web would end up in a different kind of relationship. Where to me, the web is like a great friend, who is there for me. And we kind of understand each other, I think.
And I have VAST reach. Which I don't explain much any more. Have talked it enough.
So what about the press? I think we still primarily have a 20th century press, in that lots of how they do things, is about how things were BEFORE the web. And that even though they think they're adapting, I'm sure they're not, and monetary pressure will fix the situation, in time.
That is, the press people who cannot switch to 21st century techniques, which actually WOULD make them money, will more and more find it hard to make money. Their organizations will shutter, and they will lose their jobs.
Others will emerge. So worry not, the press will be ok.
Which is a good overview as am back to problem solving, which is why is only label.
James Harris
Wednesday, October 11, 2017
A gentler way to global really
There is a different way to consider some of my recent disclosures where to me are actually things on repeat, like how was preparing for global attention in 2004, when a math journal decided to go wacky on me, and keeled over and died, after I got a paper published and a chief editor tried to literally simply delete it out of the electronic version.
One way which was how I saw it at THAT time was that I'd been stymied. And quite upset, went through quite a bit of distress wondering what was wrong with the world, as my preparations for news interviews were clearly in vain. And now over 13 years later could seem kind of, sad.
Except now know reality is the news DID gallop around the world, just not on traditional sources, and maybe more perspective on how when blogs arrived, and I got one, discovered when I finally got web analytics as it finally arrived that I was getting visits from over 125 countries.
Which did NOT make sense to me at the time and was then in San Francisco, having a lovely time, which was split between my day-job working at a major insurance company doing clerical work, including writing checks oddly enough, and hanging out at The Mint, which is a San Francisco bar dedicated to karaoke. May as well give them some free publicity, though have no clue how they're doing these days as has been over 5 years since was there.
Now with a good sense of how the web is SO very different with its ability to distribute information, is odd to think that entire time was in San Francisco, was this person globally...there are words still refuse to use. I feel safer there. Is more comforting for my mental equilibrium.
Were there signs of my actual reality? Am sure there were. And debate with myself whether this situation or that thing, or oh, wow there was something...am not sure. Which also helps my mental equilibrium. What will say is, was WONDERFULLY positive so much for time there, where met a lot of interesting people. And they probably wonder more about me as often was really quite a bit, how should I describe? I like to say, fun.
Really then wasn't my fault. Was a problem of news organizations lack of efficiency, in my opinion, which continues. Have learned enough to realize do not have the full story there.
Left San Francisco in 2012, kind of to find even more solid ground to continue pondering things. And now can say, no, the press is NOT necessary for certain things. Where I know in far great detail what that means. The press actually is usually better at showing, yes. Was wondering how to continue but that is good. The press is usually better at noticing certain things.
While the web is the new thing that can throw the old style ones a bit of a loop I guess, which was brilliant for me, as gained a gentler path to global. So many questions could not only keep me guessing, but force me to at least try to be humble, you know?
Which with me? Is indeed, a great thing.
Trying to joke, but actually have had plenty of humbling experiences where learned much from them. And would not have had them a different way. Is remarkable to finally have a better grasp as web reality is becoming more routine, and discover, things went better for me than I realized, especially back then.
Over 13 years and counting to gain perspective? I'll take that, with learned gratitude.
James Harris
One way which was how I saw it at THAT time was that I'd been stymied. And quite upset, went through quite a bit of distress wondering what was wrong with the world, as my preparations for news interviews were clearly in vain. And now over 13 years later could seem kind of, sad.
Except now know reality is the news DID gallop around the world, just not on traditional sources, and maybe more perspective on how when blogs arrived, and I got one, discovered when I finally got web analytics as it finally arrived that I was getting visits from over 125 countries.
Which did NOT make sense to me at the time and was then in San Francisco, having a lovely time, which was split between my day-job working at a major insurance company doing clerical work, including writing checks oddly enough, and hanging out at The Mint, which is a San Francisco bar dedicated to karaoke. May as well give them some free publicity, though have no clue how they're doing these days as has been over 5 years since was there.
Now with a good sense of how the web is SO very different with its ability to distribute information, is odd to think that entire time was in San Francisco, was this person globally...there are words still refuse to use. I feel safer there. Is more comforting for my mental equilibrium.
Were there signs of my actual reality? Am sure there were. And debate with myself whether this situation or that thing, or oh, wow there was something...am not sure. Which also helps my mental equilibrium. What will say is, was WONDERFULLY positive so much for time there, where met a lot of interesting people. And they probably wonder more about me as often was really quite a bit, how should I describe? I like to say, fun.
Really then wasn't my fault. Was a problem of news organizations lack of efficiency, in my opinion, which continues. Have learned enough to realize do not have the full story there.
Left San Francisco in 2012, kind of to find even more solid ground to continue pondering things. And now can say, no, the press is NOT necessary for certain things. Where I know in far great detail what that means. The press actually is usually better at showing, yes. Was wondering how to continue but that is good. The press is usually better at noticing certain things.
While the web is the new thing that can throw the old style ones a bit of a loop I guess, which was brilliant for me, as gained a gentler path to global. So many questions could not only keep me guessing, but force me to at least try to be humble, you know?
Which with me? Is indeed, a great thing.
Trying to joke, but actually have had plenty of humbling experiences where learned much from them. And would not have had them a different way. Is remarkable to finally have a better grasp as web reality is becoming more routine, and discover, things went better for me than I realized, especially back then.
Over 13 years and counting to gain perspective? I'll take that, with learned gratitude.
James Harris
Tuesday, October 10, 2017
Web enabled reality check
Deciding should focus on how to be commercial was a great thing for me, as eventually of course realized that if you do business with others, then they can need an explanation for who you are and what you can bring of commercial value. Which pushed me to both explain and resolve things where found this blog doing most of that work!
Where now have a better grasp myself, where yes, back in 2004, found myself in a very weird position of having two math things had found myself, where had a published paper in a peer reviewed math journal, the real deal, where that journal had gone wacky on me. Against the established process, the chief editor had tried to pull my paper after publication. That can sound one way though, but really was WAY out of bounds for how things are supposed to be done. The chief editor was completely out of line, and breaking lots of rules for academics and journal editors.
But what was I supposed to do? Had relatively fresh research, and that was just one thing, where knew if full implications were picked up by world, my life would turn upside down. Was literally the kind of story that should have rocketed around the globe on traditional news media. And part of me was just waiting for what I thought was inevitable, based on my understanding of news organizations.
Thankfully, I shifted gears, before too long and moved on to other things, and even literally moved to San Francisco, summer of 2005 in June, where had adventures.
First though, put up my own webpage with my math, and tried to figure it all out, while still figuring out more math. And also in 2005, before I moved, blogs arrived which I know because that's when my posts start on them. Actually went to check, and my first post on my math blog is March 2005. So yeah was months before moved in June to San Francisco. Glad for the technology as my memory isn't as precise.
And thought, great! Because was paying for a website, so free with blogs was a godsend, and eventually web analytics for blogs arrived and was floored by country counts, which still am to this day, though think that was 2007? Am not sure when.
What I had discovered there was the direct connect. The web could enable my math ideas and later other ideas to simply travel directly, and there was global demand.
Turns out I hadn't needed formal giddiness from establishment math people that would drive headlines. Though yeah had math authority approval as have explained, though didn't understand authority then that well, or my own need for it completely. And only recently did I get a functional understanding of authority, as information needed from some entity. Trying to go from memory for once.
Was SO huge for me, I refer to my original in this post on my blog Seriously Commercial, and will give that as well to check against--authority relative to one entity is when some other entity has information needed.
For those who wonder, how easily could journalists check me on the value of my published paper?
VERY easily, if they suspected AM correct, they need only refer some establishment mathematician to the paper which is kept up by EMIS, which is an established authority, and simply ask for comment on it, as to correctness.
That did bother me for years. But I think people believe am questioning authority, when am saying you need to check authority. Like if you go to a medical doctor, and check that person actually went to medical school, has certification and training relevant to position, and other things.
Checking authority is very different from questioning authority.
Which I know better now. Maybe even for me, there was a feeling I was questioning authority as didn't understand it, but really no, as I was relying on the establishment. Oh yeah, and had validation FROM that establishment. Just then weird behavior like a chief editor breaking established rules, and other mathematicians simply not doing what they should do given the importance of my results.
For others of course could look like something else. Especially with so many prestigious organizations involved, and a new thing, the web at the center of it all.
Even for me has taken years to get a firm foundation on what those web stats mean. Like yeah, those are indications of real people who know about me or my ideas--all over the world. Years ago was a puzzle because had a lot of notions about what it meant for instance, to be global.
Now I like to say had collapse of a lot of preconceived notions. But think the world is still in that process and we have a transition from authority often perceived in position, to a world where authority is more about valuable information held, like that police officer? In our times that person can more readily be checked if makes a false arrest, by people more likely to check person's authority to act in making one. Like is so easy to web search maybe, and get to trusted authority to GIVE you the relevant law. (And helps with video evidence or other evidence to support regardless.)
In the past it was simply easier to go with seeing power in a position and trust that others had made certain person in that position had needed knowledge to fulfill duties of the position responsibly, and in some areas will always be that way. That medical doctor? Better be properly licensed, for instance.
Otherwise web authority is a thing of our times. And for me, the web has enabled me both to get the information out there, and check the reality of its consequences, for me, and for others.
Web authority more and more rules, in more ways than one, know from my own experience.
James Harris
Where now have a better grasp myself, where yes, back in 2004, found myself in a very weird position of having two math things had found myself, where had a published paper in a peer reviewed math journal, the real deal, where that journal had gone wacky on me. Against the established process, the chief editor had tried to pull my paper after publication. That can sound one way though, but really was WAY out of bounds for how things are supposed to be done. The chief editor was completely out of line, and breaking lots of rules for academics and journal editors.
But what was I supposed to do? Had relatively fresh research, and that was just one thing, where knew if full implications were picked up by world, my life would turn upside down. Was literally the kind of story that should have rocketed around the globe on traditional news media. And part of me was just waiting for what I thought was inevitable, based on my understanding of news organizations.
Thankfully, I shifted gears, before too long and moved on to other things, and even literally moved to San Francisco, summer of 2005 in June, where had adventures.
First though, put up my own webpage with my math, and tried to figure it all out, while still figuring out more math. And also in 2005, before I moved, blogs arrived which I know because that's when my posts start on them. Actually went to check, and my first post on my math blog is March 2005. So yeah was months before moved in June to San Francisco. Glad for the technology as my memory isn't as precise.
And thought, great! Because was paying for a website, so free with blogs was a godsend, and eventually web analytics for blogs arrived and was floored by country counts, which still am to this day, though think that was 2007? Am not sure when.
What I had discovered there was the direct connect. The web could enable my math ideas and later other ideas to simply travel directly, and there was global demand.
Turns out I hadn't needed formal giddiness from establishment math people that would drive headlines. Though yeah had math authority approval as have explained, though didn't understand authority then that well, or my own need for it completely. And only recently did I get a functional understanding of authority, as information needed from some entity. Trying to go from memory for once.
Was SO huge for me, I refer to my original in this post on my blog Seriously Commercial, and will give that as well to check against--authority relative to one entity is when some other entity has information needed.
For those who wonder, how easily could journalists check me on the value of my published paper?
VERY easily, if they suspected AM correct, they need only refer some establishment mathematician to the paper which is kept up by EMIS, which is an established authority, and simply ask for comment on it, as to correctness.
That did bother me for years. But I think people believe am questioning authority, when am saying you need to check authority. Like if you go to a medical doctor, and check that person actually went to medical school, has certification and training relevant to position, and other things.
Checking authority is very different from questioning authority.
Which I know better now. Maybe even for me, there was a feeling I was questioning authority as didn't understand it, but really no, as I was relying on the establishment. Oh yeah, and had validation FROM that establishment. Just then weird behavior like a chief editor breaking established rules, and other mathematicians simply not doing what they should do given the importance of my results.
For others of course could look like something else. Especially with so many prestigious organizations involved, and a new thing, the web at the center of it all.
Even for me has taken years to get a firm foundation on what those web stats mean. Like yeah, those are indications of real people who know about me or my ideas--all over the world. Years ago was a puzzle because had a lot of notions about what it meant for instance, to be global.
Now I like to say had collapse of a lot of preconceived notions. But think the world is still in that process and we have a transition from authority often perceived in position, to a world where authority is more about valuable information held, like that police officer? In our times that person can more readily be checked if makes a false arrest, by people more likely to check person's authority to act in making one. Like is so easy to web search maybe, and get to trusted authority to GIVE you the relevant law. (And helps with video evidence or other evidence to support regardless.)
In the past it was simply easier to go with seeing power in a position and trust that others had made certain person in that position had needed knowledge to fulfill duties of the position responsibly, and in some areas will always be that way. That medical doctor? Better be properly licensed, for instance.
Otherwise web authority is a thing of our times. And for me, the web has enabled me both to get the information out there, and check the reality of its consequences, for me, and for others.
Web authority more and more rules, in more ways than one, know from my own experience.
James Harris
Saturday, October 07, 2017
Answering some mystery?
Finding answers for me has been refreshing and some of my answers have greatly helped explain things that were mysterious to me. Like with important ideas? Really did take it for granted that main thing was presenting to some relevant expert, who would snap up something important with glee!
That preconceived notion got tested though with my own ideas, when shared with relevant experts, and didn't get that expected, where feel like I then did the rational thing--I severely questioned my own ideas.
However, had an explanation within one of my ideas which got published in a math journal with a wacky story where chief editor tried to literally pull from electronic publication by just deleting out, and after one more edition the journal shutdown. Um, here's a link to its archives. The archives are maintained by a European organization I think is wonderful, as they clearly take math publication very seriously. They even separately link out to my original paper, and no point to give that link here. (If really want it go to my blog Some Math.)
Ok, so yeah, problem with the result is it could undermine the careers of number theorists, a type of mathematician, who might find out they, um, have no valid research as a result.
And then it's like, duh! Of course such people might not exactly have a passion for the truth in such a situation! But am just talking number theorists and maybe, though now feel more confident, very likely based on their behavior. Though yeah, a dead math journal was probably a clue.
For me, a good word for implications of my own research is, unsettled.
As much as wanted a certifying authority, publication even with that weird, was certifying. By the rules, was validated, and am now a published mathematical author. However that feeling of having the foundations of your understanding shattered, can still be there with your own ideas.
I talk about my ideas like are people. That is from a sense of the willfulness, which is my imagination. Like running away from implications so much only to realize will catch you eventually, is a sense of WILL. My ideas are relentless.
But my need to try and settle my feelings lead to so much. Driven by a need to be certain, found a functional way to check a mathematical argument. Once pondered power of what I call a functional approach decided to look for one for science. Why? To talk climate change in a more effective way.
When had a functional definition of science, oh yeah, and one for money in there somewhere though NOT formalized, also had reason to find ones for other things, including one for entertainment. And is SO simple. Isn't that weird?
Ever wonder how it could be possible that entertainment could be so simply defined as just a way to safely control mood and that be something I can claim to have made up a couple of years ago?
Just check definitions out there for entertainment and notice if there is anything like mine.
My guess is that our human ancestors understood that intuitively on such a level it was just understood, and they didn't have much time for entertainment anyway. Too busy trying to survive.
With our greater time for leisure, entertainment has risen in dominance without people feeling a need to properly abstract it. While I did end up having a need, in order to explain something else. Was explaining social media audience counts, which I think is more accurate though not as much used, as so many clearly prefer to claim as, followers.
The linkages explain much but for me, means am a person read all over the world. Which was unsettling as well. And understanding there has been so much more fun.
If those math people had acted as a proper authority, might never have figured out half the things I have. And to me would have been such a loss, though, how do you know what you don't know? Or even more directly applicable, what you never knew?
Guess I would have been happy with what I had actually. Like am now.
Maybe it was destiny. Used to hate that word. Now I mutter it to myself often.
Well there I've gone again to do my best to explain, from my perspective. Eventually some other folks WILL probably get properly gleeful over the truth of the story, and who knows what THEY will say.
For now at least I DO try, to help resolve, some mystery.
James Harris
That preconceived notion got tested though with my own ideas, when shared with relevant experts, and didn't get that expected, where feel like I then did the rational thing--I severely questioned my own ideas.
However, had an explanation within one of my ideas which got published in a math journal with a wacky story where chief editor tried to literally pull from electronic publication by just deleting out, and after one more edition the journal shutdown. Um, here's a link to its archives. The archives are maintained by a European organization I think is wonderful, as they clearly take math publication very seriously. They even separately link out to my original paper, and no point to give that link here. (If really want it go to my blog Some Math.)
Ok, so yeah, problem with the result is it could undermine the careers of number theorists, a type of mathematician, who might find out they, um, have no valid research as a result.
And then it's like, duh! Of course such people might not exactly have a passion for the truth in such a situation! But am just talking number theorists and maybe, though now feel more confident, very likely based on their behavior. Though yeah, a dead math journal was probably a clue.
For me, a good word for implications of my own research is, unsettled.
As much as wanted a certifying authority, publication even with that weird, was certifying. By the rules, was validated, and am now a published mathematical author. However that feeling of having the foundations of your understanding shattered, can still be there with your own ideas.
I talk about my ideas like are people. That is from a sense of the willfulness, which is my imagination. Like running away from implications so much only to realize will catch you eventually, is a sense of WILL. My ideas are relentless.
But my need to try and settle my feelings lead to so much. Driven by a need to be certain, found a functional way to check a mathematical argument. Once pondered power of what I call a functional approach decided to look for one for science. Why? To talk climate change in a more effective way.
When had a functional definition of science, oh yeah, and one for money in there somewhere though NOT formalized, also had reason to find ones for other things, including one for entertainment. And is SO simple. Isn't that weird?
Ever wonder how it could be possible that entertainment could be so simply defined as just a way to safely control mood and that be something I can claim to have made up a couple of years ago?
Just check definitions out there for entertainment and notice if there is anything like mine.
My guess is that our human ancestors understood that intuitively on such a level it was just understood, and they didn't have much time for entertainment anyway. Too busy trying to survive.
With our greater time for leisure, entertainment has risen in dominance without people feeling a need to properly abstract it. While I did end up having a need, in order to explain something else. Was explaining social media audience counts, which I think is more accurate though not as much used, as so many clearly prefer to claim as, followers.
The linkages explain much but for me, means am a person read all over the world. Which was unsettling as well. And understanding there has been so much more fun.
If those math people had acted as a proper authority, might never have figured out half the things I have. And to me would have been such a loss, though, how do you know what you don't know? Or even more directly applicable, what you never knew?
Guess I would have been happy with what I had actually. Like am now.
Maybe it was destiny. Used to hate that word. Now I mutter it to myself often.
Well there I've gone again to do my best to explain, from my perspective. Eventually some other folks WILL probably get properly gleeful over the truth of the story, and who knows what THEY will say.
For now at least I DO try, to help resolve, some mystery.
James Harris
Tuesday, October 03, 2017
My methods with moods and science
Really feel good about locking certain things down, where for me has been life changing, and worth it to talk out how that works. One of the most profound hypotheses have had, was that authority relative to one entity is when some other entity has information needed. Which was just stunning for me, as realized for a LONG time had been seeking approval from some authority with my own ideas.
And relying on that word hypothesis, as decided to explain things a bit differently, like when I suggested over two years ago that entertainment was a way to safely control mood? Was a hypothesis.
With THAT could start looking at myself and others to determine if fit with it, or if needed to be adjusted or dismissed based on real world evidence.
Importantly considering whether or not people use entertainment to safely control mood, could lead to what I like to call predictive certainty, like how you have a good idea when you flip a light switch, whether it will come on or not. And if it doesn't, can probably figure out why.
So yeah, was working on a science of entertainment, and no, when I put ideas like that out, am not certain at THAT point, but am checking relying on a simple meta process:
Introduce a better idea, and expect people to choose better.
That thing is rather cool, as it has multiple meanings. Will pick one and note that with entertainment hypothesis, figured that people, including myself, could choose better with their entertainment! And yeah, have with mine, which was so epic. For the first time in my life, felt a great sense of control, when could pick better for my moods versus do the equivalent of channel surfing, which had learned before which was a LOT more hit or miss. Often? Mostly miss.
Now can often figure out my mood and go get the entertainment I want, like when mood is for a space epic. Yeah wanting to escape into the depths of deep space? Lots of emotions can fuel that mood. But also can realize not enough at quality I like, and wish for more. (More great space epics please, entertainment industry.)
Therefore, my secondary hypothesis was that pickier people would start pushing entertainment industry, and that earlier established processes might resist! Which would lead to collapse of revenue in those areas, EXCEPT for those who delivered. Quality entertainment would still work, of course. Give people what they want and why wouldn't they want to get it?
And with movies is just one area, but a highly visible one.
Which steps through my meta process, yet again, where this time have used a more traditional word, noting that ideas presented are often hypotheses and the presentation itself is part of the process, where then I can just check what happens, in the real world.
And better is better. I like using phrases that are tautologies. So yeah, is better IF the hypothesis is correct to know what you're doing in selecting entertainment, and as YOU choose better, and people around you choose better, you not only find greater sense of fulfillment from that entertainment, you pressure entertainment industry, to DO better.
Which I think is great. And that completes this discussion of my meta process, how what I do is a science, includes some of predictive certainty, but focuses more on the benefits of better.
James Harris
And relying on that word hypothesis, as decided to explain things a bit differently, like when I suggested over two years ago that entertainment was a way to safely control mood? Was a hypothesis.
With THAT could start looking at myself and others to determine if fit with it, or if needed to be adjusted or dismissed based on real world evidence.
Importantly considering whether or not people use entertainment to safely control mood, could lead to what I like to call predictive certainty, like how you have a good idea when you flip a light switch, whether it will come on or not. And if it doesn't, can probably figure out why.
So yeah, was working on a science of entertainment, and no, when I put ideas like that out, am not certain at THAT point, but am checking relying on a simple meta process:
Introduce a better idea, and expect people to choose better.
That thing is rather cool, as it has multiple meanings. Will pick one and note that with entertainment hypothesis, figured that people, including myself, could choose better with their entertainment! And yeah, have with mine, which was so epic. For the first time in my life, felt a great sense of control, when could pick better for my moods versus do the equivalent of channel surfing, which had learned before which was a LOT more hit or miss. Often? Mostly miss.
Now can often figure out my mood and go get the entertainment I want, like when mood is for a space epic. Yeah wanting to escape into the depths of deep space? Lots of emotions can fuel that mood. But also can realize not enough at quality I like, and wish for more. (More great space epics please, entertainment industry.)
Therefore, my secondary hypothesis was that pickier people would start pushing entertainment industry, and that earlier established processes might resist! Which would lead to collapse of revenue in those areas, EXCEPT for those who delivered. Quality entertainment would still work, of course. Give people what they want and why wouldn't they want to get it?
And with movies is just one area, but a highly visible one.
Which steps through my meta process, yet again, where this time have used a more traditional word, noting that ideas presented are often hypotheses and the presentation itself is part of the process, where then I can just check what happens, in the real world.
And better is better. I like using phrases that are tautologies. So yeah, is better IF the hypothesis is correct to know what you're doing in selecting entertainment, and as YOU choose better, and people around you choose better, you not only find greater sense of fulfillment from that entertainment, you pressure entertainment industry, to DO better.
Which I think is great. And that completes this discussion of my meta process, how what I do is a science, includes some of predictive certainty, but focuses more on the benefits of better.
James Harris
Sunday, October 01, 2017
Finding process worked well
One thing recently realized was that I did develop a process for putting things out on the web, which was honed over 20 years plus. Which is rather cool. And now can have a sense of a feel for a system that goes back to 1996.
When looking at a well-honed process can be fun to figure out how arrived, and how some of the details work, where understand now that much don't understand really of how it works.
Which is ok.
Have a constant level of attention, just there from my ideas, as have explained before.
The process more and more, is more about how that attention moves across various things to the extent that I can possibly guide, which is probably, not much. And less about putting out new ideas.
People will go where they want for the information they need. Or more simply, audience rules.
The sheer number of people needed for some of the web stats I have is a mystery to me, as the tech companies have THAT data, and I can more notice trends or speculate. Which I like to do.
Maybe reality is that part of me would just as soon not know what those numbers are. And point of mentioning? Is thanks for the support! Have clues about countries more than anything else.
Not surprisingly then, the process I have now really is country level. Is simpler that way too, but rather abstract, to the extent I even understand it.
Waves of attention can study on the daily, as to me that is how attention works now, as information waves constantly propagate around the globe enabled by the web. Our planet pulses with information bouncing around the various information distribution networks, so much more easily called, the web.
And at times I will go out and web surf a few attention waves. But my web surfing? I think is a little different...a LOT different from how that term is usually used.
Where yeah, there are times will check out there over the globe and see massive attention waves? And be like, nah. Going to just watch from a distance.
Often though, am out there in it. Enjoying the ride. With a process that makes it possible.
From putting ideas out there, to processing attention as a result, to getting a feel for an attention wave? Process over twenty years in the making, makes possible.
James Harris
When looking at a well-honed process can be fun to figure out how arrived, and how some of the details work, where understand now that much don't understand really of how it works.
Which is ok.
Have a constant level of attention, just there from my ideas, as have explained before.
The process more and more, is more about how that attention moves across various things to the extent that I can possibly guide, which is probably, not much. And less about putting out new ideas.
People will go where they want for the information they need. Or more simply, audience rules.
The sheer number of people needed for some of the web stats I have is a mystery to me, as the tech companies have THAT data, and I can more notice trends or speculate. Which I like to do.
Maybe reality is that part of me would just as soon not know what those numbers are. And point of mentioning? Is thanks for the support! Have clues about countries more than anything else.
Not surprisingly then, the process I have now really is country level. Is simpler that way too, but rather abstract, to the extent I even understand it.
Waves of attention can study on the daily, as to me that is how attention works now, as information waves constantly propagate around the globe enabled by the web. Our planet pulses with information bouncing around the various information distribution networks, so much more easily called, the web.
And at times I will go out and web surf a few attention waves. But my web surfing? I think is a little different...a LOT different from how that term is usually used.
Where yeah, there are times will check out there over the globe and see massive attention waves? And be like, nah. Going to just watch from a distance.
Often though, am out there in it. Enjoying the ride. With a process that makes it possible.
From putting ideas out there, to processing attention as a result, to getting a feel for an attention wave? Process over twenty years in the making, makes possible.
James Harris
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)