cyber~Congress: The evolution of species: the Philosophy

After the last dev meeting @ #fuckgoogle on TG - https: // t. me / fuckgoogle, I have taken into account that people are interested in what we do beyond the scope of technology.

I guess that sounds a bit loud, but it is so - I am talking about the philosophical side of things, described here: https: // github. com /cybercongress /congress/blob/master/README. md

This readme, though a bit outdated, describes our goals and values, beyond the realm of code, though we view those things as connected.

@SparkyCloudy started a good convo about Panpsychism and whether or not plants can think and therefore control their private keys. We believe they can. We will prove they can.

Think about fungi and the railroad experiments…

In any case, I would like to create this thread \ topic for anyone wishing to discuss the “great deep”.

So feel free to jump-in/argue/discuss.

Please refrain from violence though =)

(Sorry, the spam system wont allow me to post links - im still a newby. Please enter them manually)

Thank you for inviting.

I like what Congress is striving to achieve. And let me criticize it a bit.
I’d like to touch more profound aspects, regarding some statements at " The evolution of species".

Let’s start. At the end of the day, trying to digitize all species we face with the fact that all of them already perfectly digitized and we just broke the perfectly constructed system.
About Free Will. I’am sure that our world exists just because of it. Every electron has free will. Should we ask the permission of every plant and rabbit to be digitized?
Should the new world we are trying to build have some notion of Panethic? There is nothing about it in the manifest. As for me, the phrases used there look a bit of threatening - “Integrate cybernomics into humans, robots, animals, plants and other thinking formation”. It sounds like invade with force. Overall I don’t like a style of the manifest it sounds like a manifest of some political party. The manifest of new world should sound like a Jazz or Rock-and-roll, not as a list of sometimes threatening and pathetic phrases.


Thanks again for your feedback. It is important in my opinion.

I guess each one of us has their take on this. So I’m going to leave mine below:

  • Criticism is good. It is through it that we strive to become better, grow, compete, learn
  • I do not believe that species are digitized today. I believe that we are misled to believe that the matrix is an - anti-utopia when it is - a utopia. The issue we do face is free-will and what type of matrix has you (corporations included, let alone the digital print that forms you)
  • The system is designed to perfection, agreed. The problem is not the construction. The problem is not the design of the big bang. They are fine and dandy. The problem is the lack of human strength in his current implementation to achieve certain goals. But only and only along with free will. That’s is it is up to them (the species - regardless of type) to choose what path to follow
  • I don’t believe we have free will. I have many takes on that. One here:

https: //serejandmyself. github. io/blog/2019/08/07/ The-anarchy-of-freedom.html

  • But let alone me, much smarter people have proven that we do not. Simply neurons. We do not control the feel of hot/spicy/cold, etc. Not in this realm.
    We are left with no decision of whether we feel pain or cold. Heat or compassion.
    The initial signal that our brain sends out is still not understood by science. It is a communicative signal indeed, but how it works - remains a mystery
    I have tried to open the importance of communication in my article above
  • The manifest does sound a bit crapy in places. I agree. It is not our final manifest. It is not our final “decision”. I believe that Congress does not control cyberd. This is important to understand. Congress is a member of cyberd
  • We are honest. We describe our desires, rather than hiding them behind masks as political parties do. We are open and understand that everything that we wish for, think of - can and may change through discussions like this one
  • I do not see that Congress = cyber, but merely an entity that launches the “beast”. It shall feed itself. It is an important note
  • We do have another manifest in preparation. Our big MANIFESTO. But it shall not simply be disclosed like that. It will have a twist. It is more insane. It is once again our belief and ours only. One shall have free choice of following it or not
  • Back to this manifest - I believe that it has a lot of places to improve. And I am loving this discussion as it lets me personally to understand what to improve (others may disagree of course)
  • I like the idea that a modern manifest should sound like jazz or blues, etc. I think maybe this is what we are trying to achieve by talking about all species being digitised. A unison of species. Where they all understand each other’s languages. But I believe that this can only be achieved through digitization. In another realm. Improving the system (I am referring to the human system, not the creation of the big-bang). As in moving to one type of communication signals which we certainly lack as of today
  • Allow me to say that the phrases aren’t meant to be threatening. They might not be perfect. You are welcome to help us via a Pull Request with your view, or maybe with a view of how to jazzify this. The congress today is merely a community of enthusiasts, but we hope for it to grow
  • I agree that it might sound a bit political at places. I hope that the intention here is to be anti-political in sounding political. This is how I understand it. It is the irony of being ironic if I may, the importance of being earnest
  • I hope that you can share your views further, so we can understand them deeper

I got your point. Agree that the thesis must be reformulated without ambiguities. I think it is more about opportunities for species, not obligations :wink: Can you propose alternative?

1 Like

Thank you guys for your willingness to discuss this topic.
Here are below my humble thoughts.

The philosophical foundation of the Universe and species transformation.

There is such notion as a Natural Transformation. Probably it rests in the foundation of our Universe. It plays a cornerstone role in mathematics and physics. What does it mean? For example, in mathematics, usually there are infinite ways to transform some object. But every object has some inborn properties; ordering, some defined metric and so on. From a bunch of all these infinite ways to transform object, if we use those that preserve its properties, they will be the most useful, and interesting in the sense of using in development that object. In physics it also works, the most fundamental principle of momentum conservation is also a consequences of natural transformation.

We live in the Universe that has inborn properties. We don’t know if our consciousness, took part in its creation (I believe that consciousness as a phenomenon is eternal and is common for all entities as a wave function in QM). Also as an axiom we accept that Universe was created without hostile intention to its creatures (or it should be demolished if not :).
At the end of the day, if we want to transform it for use, for fun and joy, we should do it in the Natural Way.

So here is a maxima I offer.

“Transform Universe in the Natural Way, for fun and joy to be jazzy and smile”

Concretely this statement

“Integrate cybernomics into humans, robots, animals, plants and other thinking formation”

should be transformed into

“Let’s make it easy and natural for all species willing to be a part of cybernomics”

By the way, I’m not a complacent idiot, and I understand that to change something, sometimes there is the only one way - to force, but let’s do it in the natural way.

1 Like

And there is also one big fault in the initial Mission document.
It’s too geeky. I am a geek and I don’t like there is nothing about Art and emotion expression in the document.
I couldn’t find any words about Art, and it’s a shame for those who read William Gibson.
There is nothing about transforming artistic ways of expression.
And we lost all nontechnical Art guys.
Art is an instrument of transforming and exploring not only human society but also a physical word.

1 Like

I agree about art. Art is something of a separate entity all together. We need to include it, agree :slightly_smiling_face:

I like it. Lets see if I can come up with something until the end of this week and make a pull request.
Hope others will like it and approve :star_struck:

1 Like

What about previous post?

I want to prepare a good answer for this =)

Just a thought provocative post.

The Bromberg Memorandum

  • humanity will be divided into two unequal parts;

  • humanity will be divided into two unequal parts according to an unknown parameter;

  • humanity will be divided into two unequal parts according to an unknown parameter, and the smaller part instantly and forever overtake the larger one;

  • humanity will be divided into two unequal parts according to an unknown parameter, and the smaller part will overtake the large one forever and forever, and this will be accomplished by the will and art of super-civilization, decisively alien to humanity.

That’s all.

1 Like

Its from Strugatsky, correct?