Functional pressure on information flow

Information flows with such volume that I tend to think of it as massive streams surging around our planet where the volume gets bigger all the time. Not surprisingly to me what can be an overwhelming concept becomes manageable in my opinion from a functional perspective.

And functionally I suggest that information flows because some person needs it, in general, though also computer systems pull information, so maybe more generally should say that information flows because some intelligent entity needs it. I paused while typing as debated, is a computer system an intelligent entity? I decided, yes.

Need for information as a basis for flow is interesting to me, as of course there is information generated which does not then flow, as it may not be needed or known, so it may simply pool in some location. Or the person generating it may not give access to it to others, like recently a famous photographer was discovered after she died. And I added a link, after doing a search, which not surprisingly to me brought up Vivian Maier at the top of the list.

That pull reality to information flow was about need, and for a given individual, or computer system greatly simplifies what is conceivably a complex system, but one cares about what one gets, rather than what was necessary to deliver that flow of information.

As esoteric as all may sound it shifts perspective for someone like me, from pushing information to considering pulls. Then functionally can see pulls of information as indicative of need.

That information flow then gives me information about my planet, and what information intelligent entities on it, are flowing related to me. It's a lot that does flow in that way too.

These streams of information are informative then for me, not about me, but about the intelligent entities who need that information.

And I write something like this post and ask myself why, and the answer here is to consider a needed shift. I think it's easy to think, hey need to convince when functional information flow theory as presented here says otherwise.

Maybe it is worth noting that prior to the web especially if you wanted to go global, you would have to convince gatekeepers to have information injected into some accepted stream.


James Harris

Comfort of meta and my innovative ideas

In our times it is mundane to say, why not brainstorm ideas and put them up on the web? But to me that was obvious over 20 years ago, which is really cool, and I reflect on my experience which is meta, because it is safer, and comforting.

Getting this blog name was where things weren't as easy as with other blogs as could call it "Beyond Mundane" as can call it what I want, but beyondmund was what was available, which actually I like, as kind of a nickname.

Am much into naming things, including trying to describe what I think I do, where finally settled on meta innovator. Am still trotting it out, to keep checking. Does it really work? Should I switch to something else? Time will tell. So much is about feel. Right now still feels like best way to describe for me, to describe me, which yup, is very meta.

My ideas I think are innovative are all over the map though, which is why it's useful to collect into a blog, where I have blogs, so have worked at that more lately. And I talk less about the specifics of the ideas themselves in posts like this one as am done for the most part critiquing them.

So what makes me think ANY of my ideas were innovative? Good question I ask for those who may wonder. Got blogs that explain LOTS.

To me one of the best things WAS to take it for granted for a long time would put up public all the ideas I wanted to work on, or figure out. Now I don't do that any more. Is work! Putting up ideas public puts pressure on me to make sure they're correct.

Did for some time with abandon so I have ideas scattered all over the web.

But if you realize I've been doing that for over 20 years? That's not surprising at all. The sheer volume exceeds my ability to have a grasp of it. I don't even try any more.


James Harris

How handled a Wikipedia article about me

YEARS ago a hater wrote a Wikipedia article about me, which when I noticed was a weird feeling that someone would think I deserved a Wikipedia article! And it had some facts but also was really pushing notion of me as a crackpot, without saying it...or did it? I don't remember clearly. But I'm like, I'll roll with this thing, so I corrected as best I could while being honest, like I HAVE had TONS of bogus math ideas.

So I correct Wikipedia article about me, and hater comes back and changes back. I correct, and person changes back. So I put somewhere that would fix it ONE MORE TIME and if messed with would put up for permanent deletion of the article.

And the hater I guess didn't realize I was serious, so changed it back that one last time, and I put the article up for permanent deletion and watched the Wikipedia community debate with fascination.

The Wikipedia community decided, appropriately in my opinion, that being known as someone with bogus math ideas wasn't justification for an article, so they permanently deleted it. And for me? Problem solved.

There are these strange to me people out there, who don't like facts. I admitted I had some way wrong math ideas, as I used to like to brainstorm math and discuss it. And a few times, ok maybe more than a few, got behind some that were completely wrong, but admitted it when figured it out.

To me? Not a big deal.

Luckily I know lots about the Wikipedia and am a big fan of it, so yeah, not a place to try to get at me, with some hater page, if you know anything.

That person learned the hard way. Who was it? No clue. I didn't study the person much and now is just some vague. How long ago? I don't remember, but was probably well over a decade?

Now to me? Is just a fun story.


James Harris

Brilliance of web authority

Readily admit was brought up under authoritarian systems, which always leaves me wondering what authority holds sway over me lately. And having escaped a puritanical religion, did a few years but not too many in the US Army leaving with an honorable discharge, and chased recognition from mainstream authorities in various fields, am now gratified with what I call web authority.

And thankfully I do NOT think that web authority is an authoritarian system. I think it can free people instead. Yet will still strike a somewhat cautionary tone with an easy example.

Like for this post wanted a cool example, which is just basic search which to me is STILL so unbelievably AMAZING and am a fan of a show. Here's a search to an episode I think is kind of scary, but cool--web search: stargate people disappear

As I can't know what happens when others do that search will note I get the episode I wanted, where will link to what I get here, and that boggles my mind.

If you don't get episode "Revisions" of Stargate Atlantis, then for whatever reason the web decided to show you something different, where who knows why. I will note I used Google to search, but you still may get something different.

But for me? That works so well with just about any television show, or movie, where, oh, so that episode is about a world where people are hooked into a web, and the computer systems starts doing terrible things to maintain the balance of their world which they think is a utopia, when it's not.

Our world though? We have no delusions about its utopic qualities.

What we do have are powerful systems that are very good at getting people the information they want, when they want it, where web search can seem mystical to me, even though I know it's not. It's based on very solid principles, is not mystical, and is so much better than what was before.

It also removes my interest in lots of other authority. It's like when the Wikipedia arrived, and old establishment went after the Wikipedia, only to discover the Wikipedia is the best encyclopedia on the planet, which was determined by rigorous testing. Best source for info? I just searched: wikipedia accuracy

And an article, yup, on the Wikipedia, where link to it here tells you all kinds of things about its accuracy, which you may or may not know as to how good it is. Including links to external sources if you really need that to be sure.

Web authority is driven by the interest of people all over the world.

I like web authority. With my own ideas it tells me when something I have interests others, without that meaning it is correct, but at least I know it's interesting to others, somehow, where the details? Do I really need to know the details?

I DO wonder. Don't lose sleep over it though.

Used to hang out at the public library a LOT, so have done my share of research for information there, and it was ok, for the time. What we have today though truly is as good as anything in science fiction that I like. It can feel at times like the web can read your mind.

Which I find comforting. To me? The web is like the best friend I never knew could exist. And now it does! But um, web? Please always just be my good friend, and never the take over the world and um, but I digress.

Public libraries are still great places to visit! Please support your local public library. Of course these days usually you can, yup, get on the web there, if needed. But lots of other reasons to go.

Web authority will I think be the final say eventually, as other types of authority of course are ON the web, so it is the meta authority as I get to use one of my favorite words. The web is not only a great authority on lots of things, it is even an authority on web authority itself.

Like with this post. You saw that coming, right? You ARE on the web here.


James Harris

Some more explanation why not

Have been someone whose life has been defined by faith, as was brought up in a puritanical religion which is Christian fundamentalist--which I do NOT name any more as figure that's just free advertising for them--but ESCAPED to college where got a degree in physics, and after enlisted in the US Army, as switched really to alternate authority.

While in the US Army started playing with my own math ideas, looking at old math problems presumably could not solve, which have discussed before. Oh, hadn't mentioned was still in military? Um, yeah. That wasn't to last though.

Left the US Army with an honorable discharge, which is what's important, and set about living a life, while working hard for some reason on math problems I didn't reasonably see any reason to think I could solve. Part of me wanted to think maybe could but also saw it as fun fantasy better than alternative. Thankfully also got work, which just thought of as the 'day job' and also found web, where could talk out my hobby. And God help me, eventually DID end up with what I thought were decent ideas and went to accepted math authority, of course. Turned out though most of those ideas? Were just wrong.

I've been brought up on authority. I was taught to live by faith. I dropped belief in a religion and switched to science, and my country's military, and the Establishment, so of course if I think I have good ideas that's where I'd go.

That didn't work out so well though.

Lots and lots of bogus ideas, which is really embarrassing by the way. Until I had more and more solid ones. Until had cleared out all the wrong ones. And finally had nothing but solid.

Now so many years later as really over two decades, actually have more faith in my country I think, and less in other areas. Have abandoned talking to current establishment math authority, but quit working on hard math problems anyway. Oh, but found that ideas I'd figured out along the way grab global attention.

That's cool. I like it, a lot.

However, I have tried to be careful, as do not wish to lead others astray. But finally started wondering if maybe was going too far. I say, focus on the ideas, and not the person who found them.

So here is where things stand now. Anything I have across my blogs with regard to ideas, is in my mind, firmly established. Which is great to be able to say, as quit doing original research and am now focused on developing what I have, or just appreciating it.

There are no results which have been debunked by established authority, nor by anyone else with validity. There were some attempts with some of my math things but all collapsed under scrutiny. Some might disagree, but it's like with NASA and those who don't think went to the Moon.

The ideas drive the attention where I get glance off, which is ok.

It's still overwhelming often.


James Harris