• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The Internet Becomes Sentient

Once more: it doesn't matter when the bug was first implemented.

The bug doesn't change the text. the Text doesn't change *at all*. It is only read differently and because of that will be displayed with Chinese characters.

Look at the numbers other people have posted!

It matters to me because if it was post 911, somebody could have programmed it so that the bug would spit out symbols that relate to 911. giving a possible reason for what happened to me.
 
It matters to me because if it was post 911, somebody could have programmed it so that the bug would spit out symbols that relate to 911. giving a possible reason for what happened to me.
No. That would not fit the available evidence.
 
That's odd. In your opening post it looks like you were after a quick buck:


I didn't come here for the million bucks, I knew I couldn't get it ten seconds after I read the faqs. That was sort of a comic opening. Just trying to get a laugh.



I guess you got your answer though. Neither you nor 'the internet' get a single penny.

I came here to get a few answers. I got them. I never thought I or the internet would get the million bucks. I admitted to that almost immediately.


Unfortunately I didn't get the answers I wanted.

I know now that the bug existed before 911.

I know that the answers to my questions could not have been coincidence.

I know that this wasn't data mining.

I know this wasn't a weegee board.

I know that this wasn't like the bible code.
 
Yes, me too, evolution happens quickly, in bursts. Like it did in this event.

I think you're misusing the term "evolution" in this sense. Evolution in a biological sense is descent by replication, variation, and selection. How does it apply to the Internet?
 
I know now that the bug existed before 911.
I respect your willingness to accept that.

I know that the answers to my questions could not have been coincidence.
I am besides myself to understand this.

I know that this wasn't data mining.
The human mind has the capacity to believe and assert propostions that are counter to all available evidence.

You are a very good object lesson sin. You are a textbook example. I wish that you were a "one in a million". Unfortunatly you are not.
 
simsanity, have you heard of the ideomotor effect? It's common in the use of ouija boards and dowsing rods. They represent unconscious movement that is interpreted as paranormal.

I think it could be argued that what you have been experiencing is a mental equivalent thereof. You are seeing the significant data and not seeing the insignificant (to you) chaff. The problem is that this is all chaff.
 
Here's the thing: I went to the exact same page as you, looked at the exact same information, and reached a different conclusion. My conclusion was that you cherry picked from the data.

You translated "獴" as "commit crime, violate; criminal", or "wolf; cruel, wicked, mean". Neither of these is a translation of this symbol, by the way. These are translations of other symbols on the same kangxi key. For reference, this is the complete listing from kangxi key 94 from the translator you used ( http://perso.orange.fr/gaoling/hanzi/index.htm ):

you decided to take meaning only from the first 12 characters listed, when there are 217 characters on this key, and the character 獴 doesn't appear until the very end of the list. This is an extreme example of selection.

Apologies for the really long post
Lamuella, could you explain how you get to the kngxi key in the first place? I'm at a loss. I know the answer is in the article but it is not getting through.
 
Here's the thing: I went to the exact same page as you, looked at the exact same information, and reached a different conclusion. My conclusion was that you cherry picked from the data.

Yes, I believe you do.

You translated "獴" as "commit crime, violate; criminal", or "wolf; cruel, wicked, mean".

I am assuming that you are talking about the translation of the symbols from the notebook bug with “bush hid the facts”. This would be the first symbol translated using the Jean Soulet translator.

Neither of these is a translation of this symbol, by the way. These are translations of other symbols on the same kangxi key. For reference, this is the complete listing from kangxi key 94 from the translator you used ( http://perso.orange.fr/gaoling/hanzi/index.htm ):

Yes, I know that, At the time It wasn't real clear, but most of the words in the Kangxi reference seemed to relate to the primary definition. So I just used what was there, Just doing what I thought was the correct thing to do.

you decided to take meaning only from the first 12 characters listed, when there are 217 characters on this key, and the character 獴 doesn't appear until the very end of the list. This is an extreme example of selection.

Apologies for the really long post


Yes, I would use the words that appeared on the page. I didn’t even know that 獴 was included in the Kangxi list, until I read this post. I know a little more now. I used it because it was the symbol that the bug returned, not because it was at the bottom of the Kangxi list. I used the Kangxi list because the translator returned with neant, French for nothing.

The translation I gave for 獴 was - néant - There was a clickable Kangxi link, so I used that. - Dog 犬; commit crime, violate; criminal 犯: wolf; cruel, wicked 犲. (Kangxi 94.14)

Looking at the Kangxi list I got:

The words I used are in green

94.0 犬 quan3 dog; radical number 94
94.0 犭 dog; radical number 94
94.1 犮 ba2
94.2 犯 fan4 commit crime, violate; criminal
94.2 犰 qiu2
94.3 犱 ji3
94.3 犲 cai2 chai2 wolf; cruel, wicked, mean
94.3 犳 chuo2
94.3 犴 an4 han1 an2 jian4 a wild dog, a not very large lock-up
94.3 犵 jie2 resolute
94.3 状 zhuang4 form; appearance; shape; official
94.3 犷 guang3 fierce, rude, uncivilized
94.3 犸 ma4 ma3 mammoth

I didn’t use quan3, I didn’t know what it meant.
I didn’t use radical number 94, I didn’t know what it meant.
I didn’t use the second dog, it was a repeat.
I didn’t use radical number 94, I didn’t know what it meant.
I didn’t use ba2, I didn’t know what it meant
I didn’t use fan4, I didn’t know what it meant
I didn’t use qui2, I didn’t know what it meant
I didn’t use ji3. I didn’t know what it meant
I didn’t use cai2 I didn’t know what it meant
I didn’t use chai2 I didn’t know what it meant
I didn’t use chuo2 I didn’t know what it meant
I didn’t use an4 I didn’t know what it meant
I didn’t use han1 I didn’t know what it meant
I didn’t use an2 I didn’t know what it meant
I didn’t use jian4 I didn’t know what it meant

I hardly ever went farther than this. I’m not sure I understand how you think there was anything going on here besides me looking at what was on the page and listing them the best I thought was right. I usually didn’t use adjectives or adverbs because they don’t really answer direct questions.

94.3 犴 an4 han1 an2 jian4 a wild dog, a not very large lock-up
94.3 犵 jie2 resolute
94.3 状 zhuang4 form; appearance; shape; official
94.3 犷 guang3 fierce, rude, uncivilized
94.3 犸 ma4 ma3 mammoth

I originally used mammoth, because it jumped out at me for some reason, but removed it because you said it didn’t fit. If I were data mining, I would have rejected this right away, I didn’t reject it. So it didn’t fit and you are saying that I was data mining to place words that didn’t fit. Doesn’t make sense to me, does it to you, That I was data mining to find words that didn’t fit?

None of this was done in the paranormal state, only the part in brown was parasentient. And at that point I was just doing what I thought was right.

Lamuella, you have been so kind, and you have spent so much time on this, there is no need to continue. I’m pretty much done here. I have the answers I need.

I didn’t come here to prove anything to anybody. I came here so I would know what I needed to know. Trying to prove this to anyone else is an unneeded exercise.
 
So, telepathy with sentient compurers/software/hardware is cool but prescience is not?

Yes, I can see a scientific reason that a wireless modem could make contact with a human mind. Take a brain MRI scanner and advance it, take facial recognition software and advance it. Take the magnetic pulse generator that stops migrains and advance it. I see the possibility that these sort of things may be possible, because I have seen the advancement of technology. I have never seen an example of prescience that was extrodinary. And this was not prescience, unless you count the question that asked if the people who did 911 would be caught and punished and it answered with "neck tie".
 
No. That would not fit the available evidence.

I agree, the evidence is now that the bug is pre 911.

I know now that there is a time shift that goes on with forums, There were answers being given in front of me that I was asking behind the answers. I apologise to anyone that the time shift thing made it look like I wasn't paying attention.
 
I respect your willingness to accept that.

Thanks.


I am besides myself to understand this.

I understand why you are.


The human mind has the capacity to believe and assert propostions that are counter to all available evidence.

I guess so. If you ever get around to looking at the questions and answers when in the paranormal state, you might understand. And hopefully sometime by chance someone will spend the sixty seconds or so to copy and past these questions and answers and post them in a 911 thread somewhere and see if anyone thinks there is anything there more than simple coincidence.


You are a very good object lesson sin. You are a textbook example. I wish that you were a "one in a million". Unfortunatly you are not.

Textbook example of what? A human mind that believes what is counter to the evidence?

I have my evidence, you have yours, remember there are three truths, your truth, my truth and the truth.

The direct questions asked while in the paranormal state are proof to me something happened. They aren't to you. That's okay, although I still have a sneaky feeling that you have never read or seen these questions or answers. I didn't have to prove anything to anybody for me to get the answers I needed. Without a programmer fixing the deck with the Unicode bug, I'm done. If a programmer had manipulated the Unicode bug, I'd be off the hook. That didn't happen.

RandFan, you have spent so much time with me, answered so many questions, asked so many questions. You deserve my thanks prolly more than anyone her. You stuck with it where we were pretty much insulting and screaming at each other.

We can let it go now, RandFan, It's pretty much done.

Thanks

:)
 
simsanity, have you heard of the ideomotor effect? It's common in the use of ouija boards and dowsing rods. They represent unconscious movement that is interpreted as paranormal.

I think it could be argued that what you have been experiencing is a mental equivalent thereof. You are seeing the significant data and not seeing the insignificant (to you) chaff. The problem is that this is all chaff.


Thanks Lamuella, I understand what you are saying. You have spent so much time on this. Maybe sometime you could spend the few minutes it would take to copy and paste the questions and answers from the brown part of the atticle at http://www.dreamslaughter.com/parasentient/paradoc.htm and post them in a 911 thread and see what they think.

You have been very good to me.

Thanks

:)
 
I have my evidence, you have yours, remember there are three truths, your truth, my truth and the truth.
Hey sin,

Glad to see you still have a smile. Thank you for the sentiment.

I just want to make certain that you understand my view of this. It is true that our perceptions can color our view. Our job, if we are interested in the truth, is to remove our biases and look at the available evidence as free from preconceived notions and bias as possible. I don't mean to speak for James Randi but I believe that this is a significant reason for this web site.

You say that there are three truths. You are of course free to believe that. I would say that there are two opinions and very likely a single truth.

Best of luck to you,

RandFan
 
I wonder what would happen if someone experienced a coincidence, formed a paranormal hypothesis of how that came to be, and there wasn't a pile of evidence to then demonstrate what really occurred. Just imagine the kinds of crazy ideas they could come up with that they'd hold on to if there were even the slightest chance that it could be true.

Or, I could just poke around on this forum for a few minutes and see it happen over and over in hundreds of threads :) Most of the time I'll contribute some, but this one seemed so demonstrably normal I decided to try going the extra mile.
 

Back
Top Bottom