To me transparency is not only fun it helps I think as it keeps me from needing to explain myself much, and over time helps with consistency. And I've been chasing my own solutions for things publicly for over 20 years now.
Start of the problem solving thankfully noted at least the month and year as was April 1995 when I started as a hobby. And at some point decided I needed a day and I think I started April 15th so declared that the day. Figured was a good way to exercise my mind. Yup, it is. Not so much public at first though.
So before social media existed and before blogs. Actually had a website at one point, but even before was really first public back in 1996 when I got on Usenet and tried to talk out math ideas.
With that kind of time have seen quite a few things, and even had situations where was certain had important things, and there were other people along you can say who were paying attention, and I found out I was WRONG. The ideas didn't pan out.
Well I'd feel terrible even though felt was a longshot anyway figuring out anything important, and talked out my ideas and put up just about everything was thinking but still made mistakes especially early on, which it turns out is natural.
These days have a very refined process which actually does limit that at least that I can see. Where reality is most of the ideas that make it through to my blogs have been put through some kind of testing, and definitely if they stay up.
So yeah in case you didn't know I pursued an open idea search process where I think hiding basic research ideas out of fear that someone else might steal them is just boring. Which meant I'd post about an idea near its inception, and talk out theories as I chased it down. And got bored years ago with the fear that someone might scoop me.
Reality is, it was easier. And I do NOT recommend it. Having ideas stolen is a reality. I'm just in a unique position where it doesn't matter for me with BASIC ideas that are global if valuable. People can't steal the biggest ones.
History will always dig to figure it out.
So yeah if you've wondered, no I didn't care if someone tried to steal my ideas. I encouraged it. It may take awhile, but eventually credit for the idea will still go, to me
Basic research phase is OVER though. I need to call it. So today is good. That means end to open process as well. Was fun.
Have tried before to end it but I feel it now. So from April 15, 1995 to July 31, 2016, was a good run. I've got a enough basic ideas. Now more interested in refining. And THAT does not work so well all out in the open.
James Harris
Sunday, July 31, 2016
Saturday, July 23, 2016
Advancing knowledge reality
Our species has done well in comparison to itself, which is the meta perspective we're stuck with as human beings, and that has required VAST amounts of useful and working knowledge figured out by countless humans most of whom are unremembered. That working knowledge is necessary for the technology which moves our world and so much more that makes human life meaningful.
Not surprisingly many would like to add to that vast amount of working knowledge I'll call functional from here on out, as I like the word even though is longer, and plenty of people do. And scientists especially are tasked with pushing the foundations, reworking them if necessary, and expanding the predictive certainty that lets so many live comfortable lives, though admittedly too many others still do not.
Of course even more fun if you can push the limits of functional human knowledge, which means plenty of people think they can. And lots try, where the odds of doing so in some really big way especially for a single human being, are infinitesimal. The odds that some ideas running around in the head of one of the billions of humans currently on the planet are really going to change things for ALL those billions is not surprisingly, thankfully, really, REALLY tiny.
Doesn't keep people from trying though! And should not. Through millennia there have been the people who have done it. Some of them recognized and honored with great prestige.
People long gone who changed your life today with what they figured out.
But make no mistake, if you are some person who thinks you have figured out some knowledge that will be functional in a HUGE way for the human species you better be prepared for the burn I like to call it. Imagine your species sitting on you for awhile until they can figure out if this thing actually works or not, if they notice you that is. And they probably will not.
That can feel rather brutal as you face endless checks and sometimes harsh criticisms, or the bleakness of being simply ignored, which should test every aspect, push you against so many things you thought impossible, test your limits, and more than likely? You will probably fail.
And like countless others before you, your efforts may seem meaningless in the mix, as at the end of the day, either you couldn't get that knowledge through? Or it really wasn't as important as you thought it was. So it can seem like was a waste of people's time. But the effort can matter, if only in finding your limits.
But yeah there are plenty of ideas that will just not be worth others considering. That reality means it's not an easy path and shouldn't be.
Which can help protect our species from being pushed around by idea after idea like a leaf in a windstorm. And despite it, dangerous notions still plague humanity, so appreciate the intense tests which can feel like trials or be actual trials, if you dare. Cherish the intensity needed to pursue truth no matter what. Wish humanity were more efficient in figuring out who is right or not, but don't doubt the necessity. Routinely our species knocks off people with very valuable ideas! Dismisses people who were brilliant and right, who end up terribly wronged. But guess what? We know about them because we still have their ideas.
People come and go. Our species? Would be nice for humanity to stay awhile.
Shouldn't treat that too lightly though as is terribly sad and MUCH better when people get proper recognition for great ideas without going through a painful process or even just never having in their lifetime.
Proper recognition is not guaranteed though.
If you want to help your species on the large with world changing new ideas?
Then prepare yourself.
You will be tested. And you will probably, fail.
Cannot work any other way. And I love it that way. I find it comforting.
Know I've tried despite knowing all of the above. And yeah there will be people who DO try regardless. I do wonder at times to myself why.
I think is the quest to know. I like to tell myself that the pursuit of truth is the highest ideal. But how does anyone know?
James Harris
Not surprisingly many would like to add to that vast amount of working knowledge I'll call functional from here on out, as I like the word even though is longer, and plenty of people do. And scientists especially are tasked with pushing the foundations, reworking them if necessary, and expanding the predictive certainty that lets so many live comfortable lives, though admittedly too many others still do not.
Of course even more fun if you can push the limits of functional human knowledge, which means plenty of people think they can. And lots try, where the odds of doing so in some really big way especially for a single human being, are infinitesimal. The odds that some ideas running around in the head of one of the billions of humans currently on the planet are really going to change things for ALL those billions is not surprisingly, thankfully, really, REALLY tiny.
Doesn't keep people from trying though! And should not. Through millennia there have been the people who have done it. Some of them recognized and honored with great prestige.
People long gone who changed your life today with what they figured out.
But make no mistake, if you are some person who thinks you have figured out some knowledge that will be functional in a HUGE way for the human species you better be prepared for the burn I like to call it. Imagine your species sitting on you for awhile until they can figure out if this thing actually works or not, if they notice you that is. And they probably will not.
That can feel rather brutal as you face endless checks and sometimes harsh criticisms, or the bleakness of being simply ignored, which should test every aspect, push you against so many things you thought impossible, test your limits, and more than likely? You will probably fail.
And like countless others before you, your efforts may seem meaningless in the mix, as at the end of the day, either you couldn't get that knowledge through? Or it really wasn't as important as you thought it was. So it can seem like was a waste of people's time. But the effort can matter, if only in finding your limits.
But yeah there are plenty of ideas that will just not be worth others considering. That reality means it's not an easy path and shouldn't be.
Which can help protect our species from being pushed around by idea after idea like a leaf in a windstorm. And despite it, dangerous notions still plague humanity, so appreciate the intense tests which can feel like trials or be actual trials, if you dare. Cherish the intensity needed to pursue truth no matter what. Wish humanity were more efficient in figuring out who is right or not, but don't doubt the necessity. Routinely our species knocks off people with very valuable ideas! Dismisses people who were brilliant and right, who end up terribly wronged. But guess what? We know about them because we still have their ideas.
People come and go. Our species? Would be nice for humanity to stay awhile.
Shouldn't treat that too lightly though as is terribly sad and MUCH better when people get proper recognition for great ideas without going through a painful process or even just never having in their lifetime.
Proper recognition is not guaranteed though.
If you want to help your species on the large with world changing new ideas?
Then prepare yourself.
You will be tested. And you will probably, fail.
Cannot work any other way. And I love it that way. I find it comforting.
Know I've tried despite knowing all of the above. And yeah there will be people who DO try regardless. I do wonder at times to myself why.
I think is the quest to know. I like to tell myself that the pursuit of truth is the highest ideal. But how does anyone know?
James Harris
Tuesday, July 19, 2016
Advice for The Rock on YouTube
Update Jun 12, 2019: Posted this thing jokingly back July 2016. And not surprisingly, none of this advice was followed by him, but hey, who knows if the guy ever read it. Who cares. Was fun for me to write, but later thought better of having it public for some reason. But now decided, I need it up. ___JSH
-------------------------------
Noticed that noted actor and sports figure Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson is promoting his YouTube channel. And watched his first video which has already got over a million views, so figure he knows what he's doing, but what do I care? Can trot out my own advice anyway:
1. Have a mood for each video
Got my own theories of entertainment focused on mood, so of course that's first. And mood should be SAME through entire video clip, and should be easy as videos tend to be short.
2. Have a consistent mood for videos
BEFORE I even click on the freaking video as yeah I subscribed I need to have a rough idea of how it is likely to make me FEEL and it better DELIVER. Which means, have a consistent SET of moods.
3. Forget the noise, range is NOT your friend
On YouTube if you range too much with the mood it will destroy your channel.
4. Forget celebrity, YouTube doesn't care
So except for really um, about to contradict myself but some look SO GOOD, but sure you know plenty of celebs but can just leave them off your channel. Sigh. I shouldn't give that advice. And have them anyway just for fun as won't help view counts.
5. Ignore all advice except mine
Forget any other advice others have given. Just use the above and your own knowledge of entertainment. Having been a performer, should be easy.
Take me seriously if you must but just got in a mood to type up something. I'm not taking me seriously. Going to post anyway as why not?
It's my blog.
Well that took all of ten whole minutes. Guess gotta go find something else now to entertain myself. Maybe I just write too fast? Nah. I'm just that good.
Oh almost forgot! Kick butt on that movie about the Man of Bronze. I figure you were born for that role as character came out before you were born am sure: Doc Savage
Even the freaking name is freaking awesome cool.
Ok, twelve minutes. Twelve whole minutes to write this post? Gotta practice more. But now to editing, and who knows how long that will take.
Oh yeah, no affiliation with The Rock, nor is this post in affiliation with any entertainment folks or YouTube guess should note. Just some guy who likes to babble on his blog. Is fun. Yeah.
James Harris
-------------------------------
Noticed that noted actor and sports figure Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson is promoting his YouTube channel. And watched his first video which has already got over a million views, so figure he knows what he's doing, but what do I care? Can trot out my own advice anyway:
1. Have a mood for each video
Got my own theories of entertainment focused on mood, so of course that's first. And mood should be SAME through entire video clip, and should be easy as videos tend to be short.
2. Have a consistent mood for videos
BEFORE I even click on the freaking video as yeah I subscribed I need to have a rough idea of how it is likely to make me FEEL and it better DELIVER. Which means, have a consistent SET of moods.
3. Forget the noise, range is NOT your friend
On YouTube if you range too much with the mood it will destroy your channel.
4. Forget celebrity, YouTube doesn't care
So except for really um, about to contradict myself but some look SO GOOD, but sure you know plenty of celebs but can just leave them off your channel. Sigh. I shouldn't give that advice. And have them anyway just for fun as won't help view counts.
5. Ignore all advice except mine
Forget any other advice others have given. Just use the above and your own knowledge of entertainment. Having been a performer, should be easy.
Take me seriously if you must but just got in a mood to type up something. I'm not taking me seriously. Going to post anyway as why not?
It's my blog.
Well that took all of ten whole minutes. Guess gotta go find something else now to entertain myself. Maybe I just write too fast? Nah. I'm just that good.
Oh almost forgot! Kick butt on that movie about the Man of Bronze. I figure you were born for that role as character came out before you were born am sure: Doc Savage
Even the freaking name is freaking awesome cool.
Ok, twelve minutes. Twelve whole minutes to write this post? Gotta practice more. But now to editing, and who knows how long that will take.
Oh yeah, no affiliation with The Rock, nor is this post in affiliation with any entertainment folks or YouTube guess should note. Just some guy who likes to babble on his blog. Is fun. Yeah.
James Harris
Monday, July 18, 2016
Meta of some of my idea directions
Recently concluded that am a meta innovator, which can help explain recent idea directions, and meta means self-referential. So yeah, I like to focus on the why of why I do things, like why talk entertainment now?
Talking entertainment as have been frustrated with things that missed the mark for me, and especially with bad endings, where I had a functional definition for science already. So why not figure out a science of entertainment?
So why did I have a functional definition of science?
Because I was frustrated with discussions around climate change, while have been a bit with talk about science before, but felt a more pressing need. Remarkably having my own functional definition of science makes it MUCH easier for me to talk subject of climate science, when I do so, in political arenas.
But how did I know how to do a functional definition of science?
Because decades ago started working on old math problems deemed difficult though relatively simple to express in order to exercise my mind. Idea was that with little likelihood of solving them could work on them indefinitely, like a dog gnawing on a bone. But instead felt I had solved a few but started asking myself, how did I know for sure?
So I defined mathematical proof in a functional way so that I could tell if a mathematical argument was true or not, as I went looking at dictionary definitions and found that going from them to actual mathematical arguments of mine I was studying, I still didn't know.
So my first formal functional definition was for mathematical proof, then for science, and then for entertainment. Functional definitions let you know if you have the thing defined.
And that is the chain of how I ended up defining entertainment functionally.
Turns out it's about lots of frustration really.
My feeling though? If I need something and it isn't there already with ideas, have no problems now with figuring something out.
And I want better entertainment. See? It's not complicated when it's all laid out I think.
James Harris
Talking entertainment as have been frustrated with things that missed the mark for me, and especially with bad endings, where I had a functional definition for science already. So why not figure out a science of entertainment?
So why did I have a functional definition of science?
Because I was frustrated with discussions around climate change, while have been a bit with talk about science before, but felt a more pressing need. Remarkably having my own functional definition of science makes it MUCH easier for me to talk subject of climate science, when I do so, in political arenas.
But how did I know how to do a functional definition of science?
Because decades ago started working on old math problems deemed difficult though relatively simple to express in order to exercise my mind. Idea was that with little likelihood of solving them could work on them indefinitely, like a dog gnawing on a bone. But instead felt I had solved a few but started asking myself, how did I know for sure?
So I defined mathematical proof in a functional way so that I could tell if a mathematical argument was true or not, as I went looking at dictionary definitions and found that going from them to actual mathematical arguments of mine I was studying, I still didn't know.
So my first formal functional definition was for mathematical proof, then for science, and then for entertainment. Functional definitions let you know if you have the thing defined.
And that is the chain of how I ended up defining entertainment functionally.
Turns out it's about lots of frustration really.
My feeling though? If I need something and it isn't there already with ideas, have no problems now with figuring something out.
And I want better entertainment. See? It's not complicated when it's all laid out I think.
James Harris
Sunday, July 17, 2016
Is mood focus entertainment innovation?
Seeing entertainment as a way to safely control mood is a path I put forward over a year ago, and after playing with it a bit, am now wondering, how innovative is it?
People have long talked mood with entertainment. In my own experience I can think of friends asking, what are you in the mood for? That could be about food or movies or other things, like just hanging out. And people talk about things that break the mood or ruin the mood. That can be VERY important on a date, not to ruin the mood.
And people pursue that mood control entertainment can bring, but only if something is entertaining! The innovation then is if mood focus can help you understand why anything entertains you. That word "anything" is scary to me. Anything? Really? Well the idea to me is to build a science of entertainment, so yeah, goal is anything. Not playing around.
More accurately focusing on mood I think can improve entertainment and have given some basic analysis as just starting. With only a little over a year am still lots considering possibilities.
But I focused in this direction with television and a recent series to talk how Battlestar Galactica reboot could have ended in a way that kept the mood. Occurs to me can shift how you see the series so warning upfront if are a fan of it.
And I explained why the heroes should usually win in entertainment, and why what some claim is supposedly realism in movies can really be like following worse performers in tennis instead of the most dominant champions. Just look at top tennis players, don't they usually win too? Want more "realistic" tennis where they lose more?
Have also brainstormed how to get the mood for some particular entertainment.
Or you can check out the post with a formalized functional definition of entertainment, to see the foundations on which these ideas operate.
If these ideas resonate and want to help, best way? Be skeptical, and ask someone else for an opinion. Yeah that means you share the concepts. Caught me at that, eh? But rest assured that will move things along. Good news though is you don't have to do a thing. If these ideas work well then eventually I kind of think there will be some movers and shakers who notice.
James Harris
People have long talked mood with entertainment. In my own experience I can think of friends asking, what are you in the mood for? That could be about food or movies or other things, like just hanging out. And people talk about things that break the mood or ruin the mood. That can be VERY important on a date, not to ruin the mood.
And people pursue that mood control entertainment can bring, but only if something is entertaining! The innovation then is if mood focus can help you understand why anything entertains you. That word "anything" is scary to me. Anything? Really? Well the idea to me is to build a science of entertainment, so yeah, goal is anything. Not playing around.
More accurately focusing on mood I think can improve entertainment and have given some basic analysis as just starting. With only a little over a year am still lots considering possibilities.
But I focused in this direction with television and a recent series to talk how Battlestar Galactica reboot could have ended in a way that kept the mood. Occurs to me can shift how you see the series so warning upfront if are a fan of it.
And I explained why the heroes should usually win in entertainment, and why what some claim is supposedly realism in movies can really be like following worse performers in tennis instead of the most dominant champions. Just look at top tennis players, don't they usually win too? Want more "realistic" tennis where they lose more?
Have also brainstormed how to get the mood for some particular entertainment.
Or you can check out the post with a formalized functional definition of entertainment, to see the foundations on which these ideas operate.
If these ideas resonate and want to help, best way? Be skeptical, and ask someone else for an opinion. Yeah that means you share the concepts. Caught me at that, eh? But rest assured that will move things along. Good news though is you don't have to do a thing. If these ideas work well then eventually I kind of think there will be some movers and shakers who notice.
James Harris
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)