Re: PSI70 quick note on Carl Jung

'quantum mechanical' expression via 'ontological design' will be
considered 'witch-craft' (like holly - wood), unless better sense-making is
available for the incredible minds, who are otherwise equipped (and
unencumbered) to 'do the work' required, to figure it out...

with the support of their 'elders' (akin to indigenous considerations,
therein).

On Sat, 22 May 2021 at 07:38, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I've left the list without redaction, somewhat hesitantly yet - more minds
> the better, so a redaction of opportunity isn't a coherent approach.  i
> also note, a core 'trustworthy' frame that is inclusive to; melvin, nathan
> and kingsley, is useful. (imo); particularly at this 'web standards' level,
> which interacts in-turn with internet governance; that had implicit
> requirements, for 'more voices', etc.
>
> I have concerns that the term SII is too easily confused with SSI which
> has, in my opinion, a very different meaning...
>
> notwithstanding the importance for me to start on the (incomplete) 'dead
> list'[1] i felt melvin's ability to simplify a 'step forward' with respect
> to a 'temporal web'[2], taking into account prior notes made over the past
> few months, still enormously progressive[3]...
>
> There appears to be 'growth pains' that are not simply individual in
> nature; but moreover, institutional with respect to 'internet
> governance'[4].  people need to be safe, when illustrating via heart -
> their hopes for (our) future; particularly given, the various fields people
> 'come from' as to unite and engage in a 'shared body of work', that seeks
> to deal with - new science for some, perhaps old  (poorly exploited
> science, for others)..  therein references[5] requires times, for the
> uninitiated; and there's a temporal 'game' at play...
>
> peace being the goal.  a beneficially defined 'knowledge age'[6] being
> part of the intended 'optimistic theory'???
>
> yet - the structural codification; would be built, by those like melvin,
> implemented in wide-spread tooling such as the examples provided by
> Kingsley (who has provenance, way back); as to produce a coherent
> inferencing pattern, that's able to be built on a 'best efforts' basis,
> etc...
>
> As such;  whilst this is a 'stretch' of what and how these sorts of CGs
> work (notwithstanding the points about 'open-stack'); gotta start,
> pragmatically, somewhere - i'm hopeful, this might bring about - a step
> forward. (pragmatically, etc.).
>
> TCH.
>
> [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rww/2021May/0010.html
> [2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rww/2021May/0006.html
> [3] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rww/
> [4] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rww/2021May/0167.html
> [5]
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSv0NLSCEYo&list=PLCbmz0VSZ_voTpRK9-o5RksERak4kOL40&index=6
>
> [6] https://medium.com/webcivics/a-future-knowledge-age-2e3f5095c67
>
> On Sat, 22 May 2021 at 07:16, Timothy Holborn <timothy.holborn@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Paul,
>>
>> The RWW work is presently working on provenance / temporal factors; which
>> i am sure you'd be supportive of defining.
>>
>> without knowing whether your post 'hit the list', this email should
>> ensure it does so..
>>
>> as noted: https://www.w3.org/community/rww/ is the 'join' link...  its
>> uncomfortable to note, what should go without saying; that, you're all
>> welcome (and desirably asked to) join the list...
>>
>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rww/2021May/0167.html speaks
>> to a linked idea....
>>
>> therein;
>>
>> [11] https://www.internetsociety.org/chapters/resources/open-internet-standards-chapter-toolkit/
>>
>> [12] https://open-stand.org/
>>
>> [13] https://www.internetsociety.org/chapters/start/
>>
>> a potentially 'leverable' methodology...
>>
>> TCH.
>>
>> On Sat, 22 May 2021 at 07:11, Paul Werbos <paul.werbos@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Thank you, Timothy, for your hard work on one approach to what I call
>>> Sustainable Intelligent Internet (SII,
>>> http://www.werbos.com/How_to%20Build_Past_Emerging_Internet_Chaos.htm).
>>> SII is certainly a very important strategic goal important for all of us, a
>>> goal which NO ONE group on earth is completely on top of yet. (If I had to
>>> name just one group today, I would mention www.millennium-project.org,
>>> Jerry and James... but I will keep trying to help in figuring out who needs
>>> to talk to whom about what.)
>>>
>>> TODAY, I have been working to try to update ANOTHER important part of my
>>> new web pages:
>>> http://www.werbos.com/mind_brain_soul.htm. If Filezilla works as well
>>> as we hope, the two essential slides will be visible there by this weekend.
>>>
>>> This is an important INPUT to SII, because building truly brain-like AI
>>> (AGI) requires the technical knowledge in the brain part. Full empowerment
>>> of humans, and sensitivity to humans and nature, requires tricky but
>>> important knowledge discussed in the brain and soul, and soul, parts.
>>>
>>> But yes, the basic SII web resources call for broad and open
>>> collaborations, and I applaud you for working on that. Now we others all
>>> have important roles to play, as you say...
>>>
>>> Best of luck,  Paul
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 21, 2021 at 1:54 PM Timothy Holborn <
>>> timothy.holborn@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> FYI.
>>>>
>>>> Via the RWW[1] (read write web) list; it seems, we've started on trying
>>>> to figure out[2] the qualities required for the 'next web', a 'temporal
>>>> web'[3]...    complex stuff. we need more minds involved than those more
>>>> simply interested for the purposes of vending software, or more simply from
>>>> an Information sciences perspective...
>>>>
>>>> Link to join is[1].  ontological design takes alot into account[4].
>>>> Melvin[5] is 'chair' (an incredible mind); i've started working on how work
>>>> may be made sustainable for people working in the interests of humanity[6]
>>>> (not companies / 'legal personalities'); therein point made about
>>>> https://open-stand.org/ or means to support 'free will', by (ICT)
>>>> design...
>>>>
>>>> Cheers.
>>>>
>>>> Timothy Holborn.
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://www.w3.org/community/rww/
>>>> [2] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rww/
>>>> [3] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rww/2021May/0006.html
>>>> [4]
>>>> https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLCbmz0VSZ_voTpRK9-o5RksERak4kOL40
>>>>
>>>> [5] https://melvincarvalho.com/
>>>> [6] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rww/2021May/0167.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 3 Jun 2020 at 01:14, Deepak Chopra <nonlocal101@chopra.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>>  https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/chopra/article/A-New-World-Needs-a-New-Worldview-15307491.php
>>>>> <https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/chopra/article/A-New-World-Needs-a-New-Worldview-15307491.php>
>>>>>
>>>>> *Deepak Chopra MD*
>>>>> 7668 El Camino Road
>>>>> Suite 104-612
>>>>> La Costa, CA 92009
>>>>> Tel: 760-494-1625
>>>>> *www.deepakchopra.com <http://www.deepakchopra.com/>*
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *
>>>>> <https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/deepak-chopras-infinite-potential/id1453873374?mt=2>Apple
>>>>> iTunes
>>>>> <https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/deepak-chopras-infinite-potential/id1453873374?mt=2>
>>>>> Spotify
>>>>> <https://open.spotify.com/show/6vmzEzFNe4z4FEbVs31cDj?si=KWcNuZEQSsCmR6yZfkSUKg>
>>>>> *
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jun 1, 2020, at 5:27 PM, Shiva Meucci <bmeucci@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> 
>>>>>
>>>>>> Is that true. actually?  How would that work for organisms other than
>>>>>> viruses?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Brian, I couldn't find what you are quoting so I'm a bit out of
>>>>> context. But it seems (I think) they might either be talking about genetic
>>>>> therapy or Horizontal gene transfer
>>>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horizontal_gene_transfer> which are
>>>>> closely related topics. (Please excuse me if I cover something you find
>>>>> trivial)
>>>>> Viruses are just hackers. They invade a host cell and then insert
>>>>> their code into the cell's machinery that is reading it's own code. This
>>>>> causes the machinery to just start doing the viral "command set" instead of
>>>>> the normal DNA set of commands. However, this is usually done by clipping
>>>>> and inserting new instructions into the existing DNA which is being read
>>>>> like a ticker-tape.
>>>>>
>>>>> <image.gif>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Currently we use this ability viruses have, to select a place in a set
>>>>> of genes and add new code, or clip out sets of code, or both. This is
>>>>> generally how "gene therapy" works. Gene therapy is difficult because we
>>>>> take out the viral machinery that causes the virus to self replicate, since
>>>>> that's generally destructive to the cell. So we have to make all the
>>>>> helpful viruses ourselves.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately it's quite likely that some people will believe they
>>>>> know the "right" changes to the human genome that "need" to be done and
>>>>> create a virus that does just that which will sweep through the human
>>>>> population. The only hurdle is to make it such that the gene therapy virus
>>>>> you create still has the self-replication ability but somehow does not
>>>>> cause the host significant determent. This is a fairly easily solved
>>>>> problem I proposed one (of many) solutions to years ago. I even named it a
>>>>> "gene-sweep virus" for the purpose of sci-fi. (I won't elaborate here)
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately with the terrible ideas of one-gene-one-effect still
>>>>> present in genetic theory, anyone attempting such a thing at this stage in
>>>>> our knowledge would just unleash hell on humanity. Genetic information may
>>>>> code for single proteins at single places but each of the structures encode
>>>>> multiple sets of information that play roles in widely divergent biological
>>>>> functions. You could find a gene that seems to cure rheumatoid arthritis
>>>>> and by implementing the change something as seemingly unrelated as altering
>>>>> the way vitamin D is processed and/or a thousand other seemingly unrelated
>>>>> things. There's an interdependence to multilayered data systems that most
>>>>> people apparently can't grasp and if we take the simple straight-forward
>>>>> simple coding perspective we have now, we'll continue to fail at gene
>>>>> therapy. (while having just enough success to fool us into thinking we are
>>>>> progressing)
>>>>>
>>>>> However, in the wild, through the many processes of horizontal gene
>>>>> transfer there can be aspects of interaction between hosts and viruses that
>>>>> might lead to the emergence of semi-symbiotic relationships between hosts
>>>>> and viral agents in viral attempts to survive against immune systems. Some
>>>>> benefit can be conferred to the host and improve the survival of the virus.
>>>>> This can be expressed as picking up genetic structures which are beyond the
>>>>> "replicate me" code that a virus has, which an immune system might
>>>>> recognize as friendly and therefore act as camouflage for the virus ...or
>>>>> an innumerable number other interactions which result in additional
>>>>> beneficial code being transferred with the viral code.
>>>>>
>>>>> So in the natural world the emergence of viruses which cross the line
>>>>> from simply parasitic towards symbiotic are a natural expectation of
>>>>> evolution and therefore we could see strange things like improvements to
>>>>> radiation resistance start to crop up across species via the suite of
>>>>> horizontal gene transfer mechanisms. Such a thing might actually happen in
>>>>> the next 50-100 years as the magnetic pole shift that is pretty rapidly
>>>>> occurring right now disturbs our magnetosphere and exposes various
>>>>> populations to radiation.
>>>>>
>>>>> The vastly multi-pronged and slow multi-generational approach used by
>>>>> nature has a robustness that might fool humans into thinking they could
>>>>> replicate some of that beneficial outcome but what is vastly more likely is
>>>>> horrific repeated pandemics with an extremely high likelihood of near
>>>>> extinction of mankind. Making humans more radiation resistant for the
>>>>> coming pole shift events might be one of those "good intentions" that would
>>>>> probably just pave the road to hell.
>>>>>
>>>>> So when they say "vehicle of choice" I would hope they mean the choice
>>>>> of nature, and not humans...
>>>>>
>>>>> Best,
>>>>>
>>>>>  - Shiva
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Jun 1, 2020 at 12:59 PM 'Brian Josephson' via Biological
>>>>> Physics and Meaning <Biological-Physics-and-Meaning@googlegroups.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> > When a survival advantage is discovered (such as antibiotic
>>>>>> resistance in a strain of bacteria), that beneficial gene can be
>>>>>> transferred in various ways across many species, but for maximum impact
>>>>>> over great distances, viral transfer is the vehicle of choice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is that true. actually?  How would that work for organisms other than
>>>>>> viruses?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Brian
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > On 1 Jun 2020, at 18:05, Deepak Chopra <nonlocal101@chopra.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > FYI
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/chopra/article/A-New-World-Needs-a-New-Worldview-15307491.php
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > Deepak Chopra MD
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -------
>>>>>> Brian D. Josephson
>>>>>> Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of Cambridge
>>>>>> Director, Mind–Matter Unification Project
>>>>>> Cavendish Laboratory, JJ Thomson Ave, Cambridge CB3 0HE, UK
>>>>>> WWW: http://www.tcm.phy.cam.ac.uk/~bdj10
>>>>>> Tel. +44(0)1223 337260
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>>> Groups "Biological Physics and Meaning" group.
>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it,
>>>>>> send an email to
>>>>>> Biological-Physics-and-Meaning+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web, visit
>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/Biological-Physics-and-Meaning/EA68E16B-C229-41CC-8DCB-708405938130%40icloud.com
>>>>>> .
>>>>>>
>>>>>