singularity – Page 13 – Maverisk / Étoiles du Nord

Schrödinger’s accountant

After all the news about accountancy being a sector where all sorts of changes would have to be imminent or happening in order to save anything of the trade (sic, more than it would be a profession that it isn’t!) as in the main news if you noticed and also in yesterday’s post and before on this here blog, this sentence is generally considered to be too long.
So, whether change would Happen or not, I’d wanted to add just a little thingy:

Pretty sure that Schrödinger based his theory that a cat can be dead and alive at the same time on his own experience working in a cubicle. — the dead author (@thedeadauthor) October 26, 2015

Which triggered me to think how this relates to an (‘any unparticular’) accountant. Would the CPA be a cat, hypothetically capable to change (be alive) but when asked, immediately not ..? Would asking over and over again, just be kicking against …

Similar to, as posted before, a long long time ago in a faraway land:

Oh, of course: DACcountantcy

Was reminded by this seer peer (no typos) in a casual remark that DAOs (DACs) may change quite a bit about the world as we know it. “DAOs are a game changing invention enabling a new model for human collaboration. #blockchain #C4ACC” (© him) — but apart from human collaboration (note the pejorative weight of the early ’40s this stil carries with it even today, in continental Europe), also the value of Trust in singular persons may shift.
DAOs then being of course, of course, the element I forgot to mention in my roboccountant post.

So, with this one linked in, now all the elements of that post make sense. In which the ensemble may have surpassed me. Or:

[Materially a circle, to any human accountant and dress codes displayed, are of the apparent relaxed Big4 dc’s of today; DC]

Lanier will Boomerang on you

Those of you who are in the know, are in the know about my tendency to favor proof of Lanier’s thoughts, when not if dystopian…
And then, there’s Boomerang‘s org model.
14.000 creatives, all vying for a handful of odd jobs. Showing that this kind of dismal disruption can happen anywhere …

Oh well:

[This not even referencing the hugeness of the failure, even; sculpture garden, DC]

Your enhancement needed, again

Yes, enhancement needed and you are in the same sentence. Because in the back of your head, you know you need it.
And, in particular, you know you need it for the below post, which is a plain repost of an earlier one here. But that’s because I am serious about the elaboration of the ideas depicted (huh, not much more than that, yet!) into a sort of mapping thing by which one can categorise new developments but also point at pitfalls, roadblocks (not yet in the pics), et al., by which one can track developments in areas, sectors etc., to see where they’re heading.

The post on which I ask for your serious comments, then:
”
I have a number of pics for you… As it stands, I haven’t been able to find sufficient time to write out all that I wanted to have depicted… Meaning you’ll have to do the interpretation yourself. Like, e.g., after reading Chris Anderson’s Makers. Or, see where blockchain’s DACs will strike.
Or, I will return to describe the bits and pieces in detail.

But for those worth their salt, the interpretation of the grand overall pic will be a trifle, and the same to comment. The keyboard is yours …

[Being the full overview mentioned]

[Starting (!) with the big corp world that domimates the business press]

[And some things about the battle in the middle, with all the pressures from all sides]

[Plus of course the small-scale stuff from Makers — not all hosanna]

[The kicker, on the joblessness]

Romantic (Star) Wars

Ah, the romance! That will be proven to be the basis for the Star Wars movie (original one, the rest is after(sic)thought; also, future tense, as we near the future of Back To).
Since the many that say it so much clearer than Yours Truly, e.g., in this concise piece: When AGI / ASI (Don’t know when or rather if ever we would have a clear distinction between the two; re Asimov’s shorthand for magic) takes over, the ultimate control humankind had always sought over the universe, will flip to ultimate non-control. When hybris strikes, it backfires into annihilation.

Which is where the original SW was wrong in painting a picture as if some outpost could hold out against the Empire, being the ultimate Rationality that by time of making the movie, couldn’t be explained on screen (sic) other than through extreme unemotion(al characters). The ultimate emotion, love, resisting being razed off the face of the universe and conquering in the end. Yeah, right.

Or we start the Sarah and John Connor saga today ..?
The trick being the ultimate trick is so very much 100,000000….% effective, or the same, ineffective. How good is humanity so far, in achieving the former in stead of the latter ..? Proof, however anecdotal…?

Well, let’s not dwell on the negative and keep the rosy blue pill outlook:

[Dunno what this does here. Just a pretty ballroom; Palazzo Nicolaci, Noto]

Is the Valley over the hill ..?

This, about real estate. How some current wave of innovation is in its tail stages, like this. Is that bad, or is it a sign of health to enter the unhealthy stage ..? Riddles…
Or rather, it’s about how the dam break of the app effect gravitated to the black hole of Mountain View Et Al. But the wave of innovations that it spurred, or had spurred before and in parallel to it, too, now pulsars its way to other places as well, into the ‘outer space’ that the world is. As the collective built stuff that is unbound geographically, so the development (capabilities) spread as well. The ‘placelessness’ of the innovation is pulling ahead for real, finally. New (?) economies (China, India, Latin world) may have bigger natural language and native (sic) market areas, and the vast unrealized talent pools [I don’t mean the tiny fraction of happy few that transfer to CA but the other 99,5% as well]. Where the latter, in CA, natively there, may have lost steam, handicapped by the head start (law) in e.g., education and through the rising overhead of non-productives, the consumerists burden. And awaiting Schumpeter’s triumphant return.
So, the real estate might not matter too much, soon. All will be free to travel, anywhere, much more often, and still be innovation-productive. Ah, the ideal!

[Yes you figured that out correctly… Marzamemi again]

The definitive Top 2000 of 2015, already

Which of course isn’t; it’s the Top 2266 for one thing and Definitive is slightly understating it.
And yes, it is downloadable in plain Excel, for your own tinker and play, in this file; checked and clean (no subversive content).
Next, a few little notes (repeated from last year):

“That’s odd! The usual numbers 1 to 50 aren’t where they’re ‘supposed’ to be by common standards!” Correct. Because I‘m ‘Rekt. The list is mine; why put the Mehhh songs high up there? They’re in there somewhere, but its my list, my preferences..! yes I do like some almost-forgotten songs better, sometimes much, much better, than the expired old hands.
Especially.. see the notes, when the clip (much) enhances the song(s). Wouldn’t that mean the song in itself isn’t fully complete ..? No, it means in (since) the age of video, songs with clips (‘integrated’) can much surpass mere songs by themselves, for a cubed sensory experience.
There’s more than 2000 yes. Because, already after the first 500 or so, determining the relative rankings becomes awkward. Hence, the cut-off would be random …! (why not 2048, that would make more sense in this digital (i.e., binary) age).
If you would still have some (preferably wacky) songs you miss, please do comment them to me. I’ll see whether I’d want to include them still, or not. Hey, it’s my list so I decide, geddid?
The actual end result order is far from definitive (sic). It depends heavily on one’s momentary temper and the memories that spring to mind like Proustian madeleines. And on one’s ability to hear quality. Such is life.
When dabbling with the Excel file yourself, feel free to play around with the ranking mechanism. What worked for me, was to first split the songs into bins of about 250 size (designate some song to be in the first bin that will end up being ranks 1-250, another song to bin 5, which is around the 1000-1250 mark, etc.), then sizing down bin 1 etc. to 8 smaller bins. Then, numbers 1-50 get a personal treatment one by one to their end rank, the rest gets (got) a random allocation within their bracket. After this, sort and re-apply number 1-whatever. Through this, actual intermediate bin sizes aren’t too important.

Then, as a long, very long list. With a Moar tag otherwise it would be ridiculous… [i.e., for the complete list in the post, follow the link:]

Continue reading “The definitive Top 2000 of 2015, already”

1	Hustle	Vann McCoy	Yes, the original
2	Easy Livin’	Uriah Heep	To power it up
3	Heart Of Gold	Neil Young	Hits the heart
4	Hide and Seek	Howard Jones	Same, if you listen well
5	Peter Gunn	Emerson Lake & Palmer	Just for the intro alone
6	She	Elvis Costello	Personal nostaliga
7	White Room	Cream	Nicely powerful, doesn’t wear out too easily
8	74-’75 (+Video)	Connells	The video sublimates the message
9	Windowlicker (+Video)	Aphex Twins	Incomplete, as a work of art, without the video
10	Nice ‘n Slow	Jesse Green	Calm down again
11	One Of These Days	Pink Floyd	Hidden pearl
12	Smoke On The Water	Deep Purple	Of course
13	The Man With One Red Shoe (+Video)	Laurent Garnier	Incomplete, as a work of art, without the video
14	You’re So Vain	Carly Simon	I think this song is about me!
15	Dancing Barefoot	Patti Smith	Hidden treasure
16	Right Here Right Now	Fatboy Slim	Oft forgotten, defined an era
17	The Great Gig In The Sky	Pink Floyd	Appealing complexity
18	All I Need	Air	Mindfulness in musical form
19	Dream On	Aerosmith	Heartburn
20	You Got To Fight For Your Right to Party	Beastie Boys	Appealing. Simply that.
21	California Dreamin’	Mamas & The Papas
22	Whole Lotta Rosie	AC/DC

Ambient Intelligence where is it ..?

Similar to the question two weeks ago about the whereabouts of smart dust, here now the opposite (more on that below): Where has all the Ambient Intelligence gone ..?
And I don’t mean Smart Dust of some kind that the Release of Colorado has dwarfed some niche markets elsewhere (it hasn’t, I gather?), but the dust of nanobots that could be sprayed around just anywhere and drift in the wind, as hard to detect, spread-out snooping devices. Either for the good, puffing around IoT-sensor en masse, or for the bad, (video)eavesdropping invisibly, undetected.

Ambient Intelligence then would be opposite as it would deliver seamless Intelligence of the Watson^3 kind, AGI or ASI, to just where you would find yourself in need (as detected by that intelligence before you realized it) e.g., in the form of hyper-personalized ads. When you walk by a store front window. So you’d be enticed to buy more, more, more. Yes it’s sad but that’s the most clear example that everyone apparently needs; anything more complex is too much asked of your dumbed-down, numbed, nerve center that exist for the pleasure of your iSomething these days.

Before I turn sour: The idea gained traction some five years ago. Where is it; in hiding? In some black programs by DARPA, Fubbuck, Big G et al. so much out of sight we have no clue of the massive budgets being spent to gain control over us all ..? Just a shout-out for your pointers.

And:

[Hard work and easy living, side by side, better not mix]

Chronology of the birth of the information society ..?

A shout-out for pointers; as Chris Anderson noted in Makers, Western society had a breakthrough in the … 18th ..? century when patents were invented.
As they signified the realization that intellectual ideas, innovations, are actually things in themselves, existing outside of physical reality. As first step on the road to Singularity. [Oh, philosophers already had the nous idea and maths; but those alien ideas didn’t get the societal traction that inventions did … (?)]
Notwithstanding (heh: ) that patents might go the way of the scaffolding under an arch: once the keystone is placed, the scaffolding can go. Once the Information Society stands on its own, patents may go ..!?
And, there’s a separate? line from ‘programming’ labour into machines powered by humans through implementation of tools etc. (spears and onwards) via ‘programming’ through implementation of machines proper, to programmable machines, to general purpose programmable ‘computers’ and now in some catch-up wave, taking all of IoT on board and moving waaay past, into programmable human minds (psychology-as-a-science driven brainwashing; was around since the dawn of time, now can be done still buggy, somewhat (sic) reliably), past humans into Watson And Friends. With such brain (sic) power, who needs friends ..?

But this all was just some ad lib rambling. What I am looking for, is actual studies into these phenomena, preferably not Hegel-oriented… Any ideas, pointers?

And this:

[Oh the days of Machine… Amsterdam]

Growth / disruption

I have a number of pics for you… As it stands, I haven’t been able to find sufficient time to write out all that I wanted to have depicted… Meaning you’ll have to do the interpretation yourself. Like, e.g., after reading Chris Anderson’s Makers. Or, see where blockchain’s DACs will strike.
Or, I will return to describe the bits and pieces in detail.

But for those worth their salt, the interpretation of the grand overall pic will be a trifle, and the same to comment. The keyboard is yours …

[Being the full overview mentioned]

[Starting (!) with the big corp world that domimates the business press]

[And some things about the battle in the middle, with all the pressures from all sides]

[Plus of course the small-scale stuff from Makers — not all hosanna]

[The kicker, on the joblessness]