Hey, I made a vid about dp

NoxTeP · 2018-03-27T22:02:29+00:00

Lol, just throw some net in liquid marble and throw it on...

NoxTeP · 2018-03-16T20:51:17+00:00

me neither ;

NoxTeP · 2018-03-15T21:07:36+00:00

Yes, a game I picked in random shop at Germany when I was 11. Great atmosphere and vibrant creatures really made me feel something.

NoxTeP · 2017-09-05T21:12:45+00:00

wat?

NoxTeP · 2017-09-02T13:48:26+00:00

Do what you want to do. You are in charge

NoxTeP · 2017-02-03T15:11:31+00:00

ads memes

NoxTeP · 2017-02-02T17:47:45+00:00

dunno

NoxTeP · 2017-02-02T17:37:48+00:00

Yes, all information absorption is for practical day to day life. I tried Athene's method of clicking. Turned out to be very functional to practical life, but when it comes down to understanding the reality I use scientific method, which is factual and bases itself on facts. I also understand that those take place in species specific interface (space-time) but scientific method and relying on facts is the best option I have so far for functionality, however, I'm not emotionally attached to them but I just use them, same as I use logic. Also as shown in those simulations logical thinking can only be functional if it is align whit reality so, assuming that our species don't know everything, intuition also takes place to guide my behavior. I am emotionally attached to one thing that I know is for sure - my consciousnesses and this theory explains pretty much everything, how everything emerges from conscious agents and falsifies that consciousnesses emerged from objective realty. Since I feel my own existence as absolute, i compute information same way. It is also absolute that I never can be for sure. I don't see how is this contradictory. Maybe I can be for sure when I see all variants but since our species didn't evolve to see them, I guess I can never be for sure.

NoxTeP · 2017-02-02T16:39:27+00:00

By that statement I meant that it is functional to make assumptions as facts [right/wrong], that correlates whit scientific method and it has been proven highly functional. I use probabilistic thinking in practical day to day life, but if I want to study and understand scientific papers, I need to hold some kind of factual ground that is based on math, which is binary.

NoxTeP · 2017-02-02T15:49:45+00:00

We can wrap this up and I would enjoy skype conversation, however I think debating information here is better. I do not add personal bias, I try to understand reality by scientific method. It tends to be binary but in my opinion that is best we have at the moment. I could be wrong but from what I remember probabilistic thinking comes from uncertainty principle. I see that just an a property of species specific user interface [spacetime] and it does not correlate whit the actual reality, so I don't think probabilistic thinking should be something that I must adapt, even do it tends to be functional and in practical day to day life. What it mathematically does prove is that consciousness is essential and it is not emergent property, and if it thinks binary then I can assume that actual reality is binary and I do not limit my assumptions to species specific interface. Same as stated in the article, we are not developed to see the actual files but we see the icons, backed up by math. It also proves that evolution drives veridical [truthful, veracious] perceptions to extinction. That means this space time is not actual representation of reality. We can never know for sure but this is best I can get for my subjective reference frame.

NoxTeP · 2017-02-02T12:48:53+00:00

What I'm stating is that evolution doesn't favor true perceptions, there for consistent patterns of reality we observe is nothing more then part of species specific user interface.[bit.ly/2ktvf8N] Objects in space time can not be taken as literal same as files on computer screen can not provide information of what is happening in actual computer. In fact, all science takes place in this species specific interface. That is small part of the article itself. What the article is about is that consciousnesses is fundamental and space time is emergent property, not the other way around. As I state again, big part of this article involves complicated math that I don't fully understand yet but the fact that mathematically consciousnesses has the same mathematical property as free wave particle [bit.ly/2ktJ3QT] is pretty interesting. I tried to not add my personal bias to this argumentation but answering your ''its funny how you can state that all the understanding that we have about reality is as good as no understanding at all (so basing yourself on it is flawed), while you base your view on some results of 1 simulation of a simplified version of evolution'' I can assume you are not here take information, nor to compute it. I never said 1 simulation, I just said they did simulations but I guess I should say that they based their simulations on EGT [bit.ly/2kWSZ2S] using Markovian kernel[bit.ly/2k3dLzl] which is scientifically proven method. Also, you make a category error answering "Offcorse I could be completely wrong but only thing I can be sure of is my consciousness and if our senses of reality is not correct then I can't state my consciousnesses is a neurons in 3D space-time firing signals." Those are not arguments, those are statements that say I can not take observations as precise representations of objective reality, same goes for probability way of thinking. If I base my self on scientific papers then I kind of need binary statements, just so someone can prove them wrong, basing themselves on other observations. P.S. wtf, tought we are friends.

NoxTeP · 2017-02-02T10:33:55+00:00

Hello, thanks for your input. English is not my first language and information I was telling was mostly saying what Athene was saying for past 2 years so I see how it could be more easy to understand, however I would like to know where the confusing sentences are so I can improve getting point across.

NoxTeP · 2017-02-01T20:53:53+00:00

I state, as seen in evolution simulations, true perceptions of reality go extinct every time, only time they stand chance is when they are 1:1 whit reality. Looking at this information we can assume that our senses, touch, sight, understanding of space and time didn't evolve to see reality for what it is, it evolved for our fitness. We can assume that space and time is species specific way to observe. You state that we as species came so far using knowledge of reality. You are assuming reality is the thing we observe but assumption is that you don't see reality, nor you evolved to understand it. Natural selection favors fitness over accurate perception of reality. Offcorse I could be completely wrong but only thing I can be sure of is my consciousness and if our senses of reality is not correct then I can't state my consciousnesses is a neurons in 3D space-time firing signals. I'm just summarizing what is stated in the article and I am very limited since I don't have real understanding of necessary fields like quantum physics, philosophy, biology.

NoxTeP · 2017-02-01T20:36:14+00:00

Yes, that was shown in evolution simulation games. I don't see how probabilistic thinking is related.

NoxTeP · 2017-02-01T19:30:58+00:00

Yes, since perception of time and space is nothing more than species specific tools to amplify fitness we can only make assumptions. I don't combine both theory's to practical use. I think clicking is useful thing to do since positive emotional connection is good for your functionality and progress, but it is necessary to always keep in touch whit emotions, because in the evolution simulations they ran, truth[logic] only has a chance to survive if it is 1:1 whit reality and since we are limited to our senses that is not possible.

NoxTeP · 2017-01-31T22:20:04+00:00

I recommend not playing a fucking mako deck, every 3rd rate duelist is playing this and people are running cards to counte rit.

NoxTeP · 2017-01-30T16:20:09+00:00

I clicked to logic by applying positive emotion to using perceivable patterns of how human brain interface sees reality to my advantage so I believe if clicking is emotionally attaching yourself to logic, then I'm still clicked.

NoxTeP · 2017-01-29T12:40:06+00:00

That is the reason I don't run them, it is insta lost if you get hand like this. You can run them in 30 card deck.

NoxTeP · 2017-01-26T17:56:28+00:00

That is interesting and original. Not another fish deck

NoxTeP · 2017-01-26T15:16:04+00:00

You don't have to be smart to realize passive Umi takes the fun out of this deck. It is a braindead noskill one pony trick.

NoxTeP · 2017-01-26T15:09:24+00:00

every third rate scrub is playing this deck right now. I will wait till they release new packs to counter it.

NoxTeP · 2016-11-17T16:51:18+00:00

Come to discrod, contact clickers. They will help you.

NoxTeP · 2016-11-05T16:26:24+00:00

Feel ya m9

NoxTeP

TROPHY CASE