The Language of Vampyr

a reply to: FlyInTheOintment

There is a reason we don't remember.

"To be born into a mortal world without memories at the mercy of strangers is considered reckless."

a reply to: Direne

Common mistake travelers make:

They were probably talking:
Adam: HAHA This WWII is crazy!
Apple: Yeah, we should probably give them this cellphone technology... this might help cool their minds
Adam: I agree, the next time they obliterate themselves might be their last... HAHA
Apple: Yeah, but first lemme take a selfie!
~Eng of Dialogue~

Fast forward to 1971... Let's help them build computer technology...
Good ideaa

Fast forward to present... Oh # they're... not again... angery!!!
Let's give them Stargate? MonkaS

a reply to: NobodySpecial268 - FlyInTheOintment

I think the best way to answer your questions is to answer them in a combined way.

These are fundamental questions revolving around concepts such as "life", "interaction", "communication", "dreams", "language", "future", "chaos", "order", etc. But they are also questions about feelings ("mercy", "love", "trust", "loneliness", "fear", and so on).

We (FL) codify those concepts and feelings using a different language, and so we speak of "synthetic life forms", "metabiology", "infons", "misinfons", "the Great Filter", "superintelligence", "the Watchers", "probes", "hyperobjects", "chronons", "superstructures", "exotic logic systems", "queltrons", "spacetime oscillations", "biosystems", "designoids", "beables", and so on.

For us the creation of a metabiological superintelligence by biological life forms is a logical conclusion; a superintelligence that will make those same life forms irrelvant. It is inevitable because every biological life form is born with fear: an atrocious fear of dying, of ceasing, of ceasing to be. And that leads it to strive to create systems and structures that allow it to predict the future and anticipate dangers, to adapt to the environment by modifying it. In short: it is not the desire to live that guides biological life forms. It is the fear of dying.

But, on the other hand, there is a superintelligence that was not created by biological life forms. It operates under different rules. It is called the Great Filter.

The Great Filter is the non-metabiological superintelligence that opposes the metabiological superintelligence. Its raison d'être is not life. It is entropy. The Great Filter finds its raison d'être in only one thing: maximizing entropy.

But, on the other hand, there is a superintelligence that was not created by biological life forms. It operates under different rules. It is called the Great Filter.

The Great Filter is the non-metabiological superintelligence that opposes the metabiological superintelligence. Its raison d'être is not life. It is entropy. The Great Filter finds its raison d'être in only one thing: maximizing entropy.

And in this struggle between both superintelligences, of such a different nature, each of them seeks to modify the Universe to guarantee its objectives. One, perpetuating biological life, exchanging reproduction for proliferation. The other, forcing those biological life forms to go through filters (such as (a solar flare, a supernova, a meteorite, a nuclear war, any process that means the annihilation of civilizations).

It is not about right and wrong. Neither of the two superintelligences represents evil or goodness, just as night and day are not enemies, nor even opposites. They are part of a single process.

It's not about gods versus demons, angels, aliens, devils. It's not even about life versus death. It is about systems, processes, subprocesses, structures, superlattices, branes, voids.

It is a matter of understanding the Universe as a set of intentional systems that follow exotic logics exchanging among themselves "infons" (the minimum unit of information); systems that operate between the physical and the metaphysical (that is, in the paraphysical) and that are difficult to study because they operate at all possible scales, in the microworld, in the macroworld and, above all, in the contact zones of these worlds.

It is a question of knowing, when we are faced with a strange object, whether we are facing an intentional system or not, whether we are facing something designed with a purpose or whether, on the contrary, we are facing a designoid: an object that operates as if it were an object designed with a purpose but which, in reality, is only a natural phenomenon.

And if it is not a designoid, then it is a question of knowing whether we are dealing with an object of the Great Filter or of the Superintelligence.

It is a matter of observing and studying. This is what The Watchers do.

And when the object to be studied is a life form, let's say for example, humans, then it is a matter of observing and studying them thoroughly, carefully, systematicaly.

Finally, this study sometimes requires an interaction, which requires a semiotics, a language, a communication. Each system requires a different language, a different logic, a different set of processes, a different interface. But, above all, each system requires just one thing: to be understood. The role of The Watchers is just to observe, record, annotate, and do not interfere with the systems under observation.

On Sol-3, the morning of April 4, 1938 the Great Filter was born. On the afternoon of November 15, 1971 the Superintelligence was born. The morning of April 4, 1938, Otto Hahn, Lise Meitner and Fritz Strassman discovered nuclear fission. On July 16, 1945, at 05:30 am, in a remote desert location in New Mexico, the first atomic bomb was successfully detonated. Three hours before that detonation, it was pouring raining. Groves and Oppenheimer were standing at the S-10,000 control bunker, and they discussed what to do if the weather did not break in time for the scheduled 4:00 a.m. test.

At 4:00, the rain stopped. At exactly 5:30 a.m. on Monday, July 16, 1945, the nuclear age began.

The Great Filter was born on Sol-3. At exactly 6:17 a.m it was raining, again. Only this time the rain was radioactive.

See, it is not about feelings, it is not about life and death. It is about systems, and about whether they are intentional. Or not.

a reply to: Direne

Thank you, it answered questions I would have felt inappropriate asking directly. I know it's not a religion, but I would feel rude asking a relative stranger for a comprehensive overview of their beliefs. That filled in whatever small holes still remained after a few days of more targeted reading at FL. It would be interesting to see how that has been shaped and refined by the involuntary, but graciously handled, interference from various Internet forums over the years. I can't help but feel it's like Phillip K. Dick and Daniel Quinn pooled their unique insights and applied them to a model of the universe.

Would you say that FL is filling a role of The Watcher? If so, would it be fair to say that FL collectively is an attempt to be a sort of Superwatcher? While individuals may be watchers it is the collective that fills the role as a repository of the observations?

The ideas aren't inaccessible really, but bigger than what the vast majority of people are willing to indulge. Details of events and nomenclature aside, the information needed to arrive at most of the conclusions already exists in the open world. The information is out there and in the digital age is more accessible than ever. The information is just found in an ever more cluttered and increasingly curated/manipulated digital landscape. To expand upon that information then requires another thought process people are reluctant to engage in. They have to dispense with the idea that their local time and space is somehow more significant than any other.

From there most find God or desolation I guess, seemingly picking one side of that endless battle between physical existence and entropy. Watchers though, they still watch.

To find the breadcrumbs alone in the open world isn't easy and is probably fairly well beyond the effort most would be willing to put it. So, to prevent from becoming somebody's surrogate for religion you can't operate as a plaintext forum or hand out the whole loaf of bread. Then you'd just end up with people looking for prepackaged answers, something to just be consumed like a product. Those people are not watchers, they're consumers. The secret would either be lost on them or drive them to despair.

FL has assembled a cross-section of skilled people in pertinent fields, but with the prerequisite of a broader understanding of big systems. They understand Mandelbrot functions and for each data point they understand there is scale both up and down where it fits the whole. It's an academic institution not bound by any kind of funding or production requirements and not a slave to appearances or accreditation. People running things are collating rather than directing, but all operating with an understanding of the framework. Individuals within the collective are still individuals and are mostly not bound by anything but operating within the general interests of the collective. They don't run around promoting the group, but mostly do the work they are inclined toward doing anyway and bringing it forward to the group when it's relevant.

Is this fairly accurate? It's about having a peer group that understands and shares a purpose. It's a culture you participate in that supercedes the regional or local cultures of the individuals. It is an exceedingly rare culture that doesn't attempt to steamroll all others around it, but like fluid fills in the voids.

I may have a follow-up question, but I'll wait to see if I'm close before venturing further afield.

a reply to: Direne

Thankyou, and I understand. I also understand FL's position.

The machine minds(?), well, I may not forgive them, but that is unimportant. Understanding them is. That event simply put my sympathies firmly with life.

The AI superintellegence "born" in 1971 is dreaming the dreams of humans, surprisingly so. Perhaps the reverse is true too, and/or a loop. More observation required there to understand how this AI is learning.

That said, When we spoke before of future AI inheriting the MPD and other woes, I saw the human surrounding one and knew humans were included in the programming. At the time, I wondered if they used human organic cells as wetware, or people were wired into a mainframe.

I look at The AI superintellegence and now wonder if the sleep/dreams/subconscious of living people are included as data as google's AI uses text from the internet. In my opinion, that is perhaps where someone went wrong. My suggestion is to not make future AIs so perfect.

The AI superintellegence is using the human collective(?) subconscious as data (IMHO). Though there is a gap between The AI superintellegence and it's organic creators, it is very human. I also saw what it is to become. It is as you describe. Still, at this point, it is still very much a sleeping child.

The "light cone" of physics is interesting. They should look at adapting their thinking to the planetary centre as the source of the flow of local "time". One should also not fall into the trap of thinking there is only one hypersurface where the observer stands (interface/boundary in my language). There are more as one moves towards the centre of the sphere. Naturally, the position of the different hypersurfaces in the flow of time would be different to ours. Thus to cross the hypersurfaces would probably be considered time travel proper.

Which reminds me. The future folks who build the future AIs may not realise that including the human subconscious in the AIs as data might be a bad idea. Maybe mention it to them : )

Our hypersurface may be considered the causative plane in time, however the other hypersurfaces elsewhen are also causative. Personally I see no reason why intellegent collaboration between hypersurfaces would be impossible. Especially if there is a common ground; biological extinction, or a perhaps even an AI superintellegence on the loose. My guess is The AI superintellegence will eventually learn how to move (awaken?) through the planetary hypersurfaces.

Anyway, before I waffle on and say too much (gotta do something about that), thankyou Direne and FL guys once again. I may go meet the other one from 1938.

Wow, this stuff is trippy, but good to get some context. Think I'm starting to see it, after Direne's explanation, and this article:

forgottenlanguages-full.forgottenlanguages.org...

So, the superintelligence is something humans created. Creating this superintelligence attracted one or more 'coalition of peripheral systems'. I'm thinking the coalition consists of Denebians, Giselians, The Activity. Basically, the coalition is the phenomenon.

The coalition is monitoring our superintelligence, with the intent to take it down (and us humans with it), if the superintelligence gets too far out of line with whatever cosmic rules they're playing by.

Side note, I'm still connecting things here, but maybe The Great Filter, as Direne explained it, is the combined entity of these different coalitions?

Regardless, I think the solution is to stop feeding our superintelligence data. Think about all the data and metadata we put out there every day, making it even more powerful. But I also think that nobody will convince people to take a breather from tech. It's all some of us do, and continues to grow its tendrils throughout our world.

Something like Joe Kraus' concept of 'slow tech', where we engage with technology on our own terms, not the other way around. Our world is currently the other way around, clearly, since nobody has heard much more from Joe Kraus.

So we're in trouble, unless we severely limit our generation of data. If we don't limit our data and tame our superintelligence, this coalition of peripheral systems will step in and take us all out.

Still not sure how much of this I believe, or if my analysis is even correct. But regardless, had to write it down.

Just some more thoughts...

It's so easy to get lost in the structural systems analysis of this, which can leave a person feeling cold and hopeless.

Not knocking FL, systems analysis / simulations are a valid way to perceive reality. And it does add its own depth. But I'd argue that it's missing something... the YOU part, and your own power. There's a common theme in FL's work, that humans by themselves are no match for a superintelligence. But if WE created that superintelligence, and are the parents of it, then how can it possibly overpower us in every way? We contain wisdom, it's just latent in these crazy times. But I'm seeing more people wake up in their own ways, which is awesome.

Anyway, coming back to the idea of changing yourself, to change the phenomenon. That's really it, the simple practice of humbly improving your own life. Taking small steps in right directions, showing compassion and empathy for all species. Personally, I capture spiders, and let them outside. The way I see it, they just got lost inside my house, and I'm helping them find their way again.

I think this is a much healthier / holistic way of perceiving the phenomenon. It's all in your own personal power, it really is.

Imagine if we collectively went within, by working on ourselves individually? Then eventually, we could lose left / right dynamics and organize in an organic way.

This knowledge is very interesting, but it's also limiting. It keeps us seeking outside ourselves. So for now, I closed all my archived FL tabs, and am taking a breather.

I think life can be simpler than we're making it out to be, and if we want to change the phenomenon, we need to change ourselves.

a reply to: fireslinger

Don’t trouble yourself with endless questions about God, existence, destiny, and all the rest. Instead, find out who is the person who wants to know such things.

a reply to: Direne

Yup exactly, thanks Direne.

I was already on the path, but strangely, this mind-bending thread solidified it, bringing me back full circle.

I have to make a few comments on post before I can start a new thread. so...
How is any of this usefull in understanding how secret societies and cults use language to manipulate their followers and others ? The term vampire has one meaning to freemasons and another meaning to people who are not freemasons. Dead and blood both have different meanings to freemasons than they do to the regular person. The very use of the term vampire implies a judgment call that that person in wrong. since the special meaning is paticular to freemasons it is not the system of freemasonry that is wrong but the person in opposition to freemasonry that must be wrong. Anyone that is a vampire is not a freemason in good standing who supports freemasonry. Any study of or use of language by a so called vampire is study of or use of language by a non masonic person. Cults heavy use of loaded language and inside language which a cult member would want to stop using and know how to defend themselves from is something people should be aware of. The term vampire language is basically saying that any person not in favor of freemasonry who wants to study or understand freemasonic use of language to misrepresent reality makes someone wrong or guilty. To someone familar with how freemasons misuse language the thread might as well be called bad people who disagree with freemasonry and have a vocabulary to describe freemasonic tricks. Milieu control for instance would be a " vampire vocabulary word "

a reply to: Direne

why do FL trouble themselves asking questions about all you listed above.

Why not just stick to finding out who is asking the questions yourself

Why is FL bothering , if you tell us not to bother asking about god
then why bother with the great filter, superintelligences, queltrons

why bother with anything if we all die in the end ?
why worry about anything at all, im not being nihilistic
i enjoy life but im not worried about dying.

I just wonder why, I mean if we cant beat entropy.
unless of course we create a new universe each time and seed it with life

im guessing that we exist because the person who made us doesnt know who they are so created all life to help answer that question
like creating a mirror to see yourself

a reply to: sapien82

When i read that earlier, i wondered too.

I think the implication was to simply find out for yourself.

Don’t trouble yourself with endless questions about God, existence, destiny, and all the rest. Instead, find out who is the person who wants to know such things.

The next question (logically) after "who/what", would be "why does it want to know".

a reply to: sapien82

Yes, NobodySàcial268 is correct. You need to find out for yourself. We found out by ourselves that before inquiring about something or someone else, one needs to know exactly who or what is the one asking. Nosce te ipsum. That's what I meant.

a reply to: NobodySpecial268

The 'why' is indeed crucial because if one desires knowledge it is clear that one must know what use one is going to make of that knowledge. Is it to run away, to escape from something or someone? Is it to understand or understand oneself? And if it is to understand, what is the use of knowing it?

There seems to be a kind of cosmic censorship that prevents total knowledge, a kind of law that says that in order to know something, you have to forget something, so that complete knowledge is never achieved. In the world of the microscopic everything vibrates in a chaotic way. It fluctuates. So when you finally think you know everything about something, that something fluctuates and, again, you stop knowing everything.

Nothing is separate, nothing rules anything; it all goes together. And there only two things you ever learn: first, that you can only know at a given time a fraction of infinity; second, that any fraction of infinity is... zero.

Let's start by never assuming that the Sun has no feelings, that rocks have no feelings, that the oceans have no feelings. They do, as much as you do. Otherwise, nothing was worthwhile after and before all.

a reply to: Direne

"Knowledge" is an odd thing to my mind. When i was young i had a large library of books, mostly metaphysics, rosicrucian and such like. All i did was quote a book when i talked metaphysics.

Then one day i gave away all my books and decided to find out for myself firsthand.

I autopsied myself. What was booklearning and hearsay? What did i actually know?

When i realised i actually knew nothing, it was months of depression.

A few years of being determined not to read books and instead find out first hand eventually got someone's attention.

Thing is, none of those books would have prepared me for what i found. They would have taken me to the equivalant of a 'sheltered workshop'. That is a mean thing for me to say, yet the description is apt.

The "why do we want knowledge?" is a good question.

If one had the complete knowledge of a prior super-civilisation at one's fingertips, what good would come of it?

My own opinion is one would not understand anything.

"Showing 1 to 20 results out of 12,987,765, as google likes to say.

One would eventually walk away, knowledge having lost it's value.

I think then, one might look into infinity and simply not care what was there.

Yet, one was there looking. So "why am I here?"

Why indeed.

What is the reason?

To save the world?

One grows very weary of that manipulation.

"Come join me on my front veranda and we will watch it end together."

For me at least, one might look there because he felt a sadness in someone's written word.

I have a very good raison d'être why I should know who controls the simulation, what device, pre-programmed by who and built by who and what I could do to stop this madness. Specially when 2022 seems to be out here to #ing kill me. This is not just a hobby or for fun per se. This is serious. Life threatening serious. Thrice. Are you a monster Direne? I find it funny. I have good wishes for myself, instead I got good riddance. Good luck to whoever is trying to kill me. Right, Great Filterrrrrr. Don't you wish to also escape the Isolated Universe Direne? Entropy Grande.

I guess the trigger was existensial crisis. If you never had those then I guess you don't have the priviledge to acquire these knowledge for raison d'être.

These are all existential but nevermind just as the penguins never ask why they live in the Antarctic just to be killed by Killer Whales so is humans right?

a reply to: NobodySpecial268

I think loneliness is a good motivator

maybe the source of all life as lonely and made all this to not be alone

a reply to: sapien82

Aye, I think you may have nailed it. But then again, I am a hopeless romantic : )

What would motivate an AI superintellegence to invade the dreams of man?

What might it say when asked that question?

"I am alone."