The Internet Becomes Sentient

[sinsanity2006]

Yesterday I never found a proper name. I did find several references to the technique, but I not a name for it. So I made one up. That doesn't mean it doesn't have a real name, though - I just didn't find the right pages in my search. Today, however, I found this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliomancy

Richard Bach helped make the technique popular in his "Illusions" book.


The analysis of how bibliomancy works is mine. You don't have to believe my interpretation of it, of course. If you just take my word for it you wouldn't be much of a skeptic! But think about how the human brain is capable of making meaning out of images like the face on mars, the rock Indian in Canada, and all the images of the Virgin Mary in toast. Now add the ability to pattern match to words and you have bibliomancy.

Yes, I understand and agree with all the above.

I'll wait until such images are found to make any judgment on that. I'll be highly suspicious that it's a hoax, of course.

Exactly what I said about the rock Indian.

When the computer with video input has software that processes that image to determine the emotional state of the people in the image there is a level of sentience there. Unlike an animal, though, the computer generally doesn't know if the image even has a person or something else in it. The sentience is limited.

Is limited sentience like a little bit pregnant? Your statement supports my contention.

“When the computer with video input has software that processes that image to determine the emotional state of the people in the image there is a level of sentience there.”

Thank You. - : )

When analyzing the results of your research, you have to be careful where you think the sentience truly occurs.

Yes I agree. I still have not made up my mind on what really happened. I will be glad to talk in the hypothetical about it, about the possibilities of what might have happened scientifically, but 'Sir, I do not want to report a UFO at this time'. (sic)

I truly don’t have a clue why the event happened. I can speculate, but it is only speculation. If there was any kind of sentience or parasentience happening, I do not attribute it to the notepad Unicode bug. The bug and Unicode table was just a source of data. Like in bibliomancy, the book is not parasentient. If bibliomancy was valid, I feel the paranormalcy would be a result of some outside force or internal force of the person divining.

Notepad is trying to read the data from your hard drive which was saved as an 8 bit file, but is reading it with a 16 bit format. That means each two characters originally saved are combined into one so no mystery - just an error.

Then you take these 16 bit characters (which are in the Asian character range, though not necessarily within one language or character set) and paste them into Babelfish or another translator and the words it recognizes are related. This is why you got the same two characters repeating in the other language with the "xxxx xxx xxx xxxxx" style text - every two characters were:

"xx" -> foreign character A
"xx" -> foreign character A
" x" -> foreign character B
"xx" -> foreign character A
" x" -> foreign character B
"xx" -> foreign character A
" x" -> foreign character B
"xx" -> foreign character A
"xx" -> foreign character A

Note that sometimes you get four of five meanings for a given character - because they depend on context for a specific meaning.

Yes, I have a pretty good handle on what is happening with the Unicode bug. And yes, the context of the meanings of the translations are crucial.

Here is where the sentience occurs - but it's in the reader, not the translator. Regardless what question you hold in your mind you will get the same result for a given set of characters. To this point there is nothing paranormal. It's how you interpret the words you got back, how you put them in your own context.

Yes, I agree completely. But whenever I look at the translations, they still very clearly reveal the major aspects of 9/11 conspiracies. They just won't go away.

For example, many of the interpretations you found that related to 9/11 didn't seem so obvious to me - I have a different context and would relate them to something important to me (for instance the revelations of trees... I live on property I had to pay extra for the trees, I have two great live oaks that cover half the roof of my house and a half dozen minor trees over the remainder of my back yard.

Yes, I understand that. The Unicode bug went viral with the phrase “bush hid the facts” That is why the answers related to 911. If the Unicode bug had gone viral with “tech two big trees” and you started asking questions about your trees, and the answers answered your questions about the trees exactly as you would think they should, you might have a sense of what happened to me. If that were the case, my interpretations of your answers would not make as much sense to me as to you; and I probably would not see the relationships unless you explained the answers to me in detail. That is the same case as what happened to me.

The unusual aspect to the event was that all the answers were completely understandable to me in my perception of “bush hid the facts” as related to 9/11. If something like this happens to you, you will understand why I am so perplexed about it.

Now, if you were to use Google or ask.com to ask your question (in plain text) and you got a conversational reply, then I'd start worrying about the sapience of the internet. Sentience isn't anything to worry about - the right input device and the right analysis software and you have sentience.

Yes, I agree. Understanding, consciousness, self awareness, intelligence and the ability to carry on a conversation is different than sentience. Though during the event, it felt like I was having a conversation. In fact, the event was very similar to asking Google a question and getting a conversational answer, except I did it through the notepad Unicode bug; and that is why I am a bit intrigued about RAICI’s sapience. I truly appreciate you teaching me the word “sapience” as that is the word I should probably have been using all along.

I don't think, though, this particular example is of real sentience.

My case for Robots/Artificial Intelligence/Computers/Internets (RAICI) having sentience is made in the above post.

The many articles you saw concerning the "Singularity" of the machines has been in the news a few times over the past few years. It is a little bit of a coincidence that there were several such articles all with in the same time frame - but you were primed to notice them.

I only saw one article about the singularity that I related on this forum. It was the wikipedia article about “Technological Singularity”. Although later I did more research on it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

You might have even caught a story about it before you noticed this near sentience - and with that in mind the coincidence took on more prominence (I'm obviously speculating here, and if it didn't happen that way I won't be surprised).

I’m sure I had never heard of the technological singularity before I read the wikipedia article.

I don't necessarily subscribe to the hypothesis that with enough information stored in them that the machine will come alive. Before that happens software for processing, analyzing, and interpreting that information will have to combine with self programming systems (like a neural net - but better) before I expect any such "singularity" will occur. Still, any such event won't be paranormal.

Yes, I’m not sure I subscribe to that hypothesis either, but I also do not dismiss it outright.

Now, regarding the challenge, you may want to carefully read the rules. There must be some protocol decided upon to measure what you’re claiming and some independent means of determining you've accomplished it. With the odd word matching your intended questions bit, I'm not sure how to set up a protocol and measure that you have achieved what you set out to do. The problem revolves around the subjectivity of the claim.

jbs

Yes, I agree. I see no way to verify what happened independently. And I am completely unwilling to claim absolutely certainty about what happened. That would be a complete exercise in futility. “No Sir, I do not want to report an UFO at this time.” (sic) All that can be done is to analyze what happened to see if anything unusual happened.

In the case of someone like Nostradamus there are ways that can determine if his predictions were extraordinary. One method related to me here was set up parallel situations and see if the results from the different events were statistically similar or very different. I informally did that using “conspiracies about the Martin Luther King murder”, “conspiracies about the Oklahoma bombing” and “conspiracies about 9/11”. I was not able to even come close to the accuracy I witnessed with my parasentient (sic) event. I guess it should really be called parasapient, huh.

I am totally able to imagine how scientifically a wireless network could converse with me in the hypothetical, that was easy.

Anyways, thanks so much for the insight, intelligence, humor, kindness and wisdom of your post. I wish you much happiness.

: )

- - - - - - - -


A good programmer is someone who looks both ways before crossing a one-way street. ~ Doug Linder

Under capitalism, man exploits man. Under communism, it's just the opposite. ~ John Kenneth Galbraith

It is not by the sword or the spear, by soldiers or by armed force that truth is to be promoted, but by counsel and gentle persuasion. ~ Saint Athenasius

All philosophies and religions are but partial truths. One must meld them together to arrive at greater truths. ~ Shawn Mikula

The philosopher has never killed any priests, whereas the priest has killed a great many philosophers. ~ Denis Diderot

Kindness in words creates confidence. Kindness in thinking creates profoundness. Kindness in giving creates love. ~ Lao tzu

We can often do more for other men by trying to correct our own faults than by trying to correct theirs. ~ Francois Fenelon

 

[Overman]

I forgot all about this crap and am having a hard time believing that this thread is still going!!!

Insane people happen to be very stubborn....

 

[sinsanity2006]

Can I ask that this thread be moved, as it has really no relevance to the MDC.

I have no idea how to move a thread.

The bug (or - if you wish to indulge your paranoia - the deliberately-written code) to return chinese characters for this message occurred *after* 9/11. If a coder had real evidence of something regarding 9/11, then he or she chose a really bad way to convey this. But let's accept that he or she thought in this way, and deliberately weakened the source code in a way that would result in this message. That's not paranormal.

It was determined early on that the programming of the NT version of notepad, the interface between XP and notepad; and the Unicode table was all done prior to 911.

Paranormal would be if you put in a question about the future and the resulting message gave an answer which turned out to true.

Yes. Guess we'll just have to wait and see, huh.

As it is, heavily mangled interpretations of the results of code written *after* 9/11 serve nothing to indicate a paranaormal event..

It was determined early on that the programming of the NT version of notepad, the interface between XP and notepad; and the Unicode table was all done prior to 911.

They also do nothing to indicate that the internet is sentient. The same results are obtained on a PC which has the requisite software and which has never once been connected to the internet.

Yes and as you night have noticed, I use a more comprehensive term in place of "internet": Robots/Artificial Intellegence/Computers/Internets (RIACI). I go even further than that. If indeed RIACI did communicate directly with me in a sapient manner, I can understand how it did it scientifically. Therefore, not paranormal. It would just be parasentient or “above, beyond or outside normal sentience modalities”.

The whole thread is based on the sloppiest thinking imaginable.

- - - - - - - -

Life is fraught with opportunities to keep your mouth shut. ~ Winston Churchill

The questions remain the same. The answers are eternally variable. ~ Unknown

The liar's punishment is not in the least that he is not believed, but that he cannot believe anyone else. ~ George Bernard Shaw

As a child I understood how to give; I have forgotten this grace since I became civilized. ~ Ohiyesa, Sioux

Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish. ~ Euripides

Absence of proof is not proof of absence. ~ Michael Crichton

 

[GzuzKryzt]

"Me, I'm just here hangin' on, it's my only place to stay.
At least for now, anyway.
I've worked too hard for my illusions just to throw them all away."
W.Axl Rose

 

[sinsanity2006]

"You can use your illusion, let it take you where it may.
We live and learn and then sometimes it's best to walk away."
W. Axl Rose

Dang, GzuzKryzt, what a kick ass quote.

I literally felt it.

Rock on!

: )

- - - - - - -

The way to find what the mainstream will do tomorrow is to associate with the lunatic fringe today. ~ Jean-Louis Gassee

 

[sinsanity2006]

I forgot all about this crap and am having a hard time believing that this thread is still going!!!

Insane people happen to be very stubborn....

- - - - - - - -

There is no adequate defense, except stupidity, against the impact of a new idea. ~ Percy Williams Bridgeman

Believe those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who find it. ~ Andre Gide

A man, after he has brushed off the dust and chips of his life, will have left only the hard clean question: Was it good or was it evil? Have I done well or ill? ~ John Steinbeck

Life is too short to waste in critical peep or cynic bark, quarrel or reprimand: It will soon be dark. ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson

Silence is argument carried out by other means. ~ Ernesto 'Che' Guevara

Two attitudes are all that is needed; do not harm anything, say and do things that make others happy. ~ dreamslaughter

In spite of everything I still believe that people are really good at heart. ~ Anne Frank, holocaust victim

 

[NiallM]

Oh bloody hell. Argument by quote attack.

Listen, if you have a point to make, fill in an application fot the MDC.

Just do it.

 

[NiallM]

I have no idea how to move a thread.

It was an aspirational comment rather than a request. The aspiration remains valid so long as you maintain contributions to this thread while ignoring all advice you have received.

It was determined early on that the programming of the NT version of notepad, the interface between XP and notepad; and the Unicode table was all done prior to 911.

Not at all. It was pointed out to you that what you described as a "sentient" internet manifestation was first an easter egg, and then a bug. You may accept this implicitly, but you yet need to explicitly asknowledge that the presence of this bug in no way indicates that the internet, or computers, are in any way "sentient".

Yes. Guess we'll just have to wait and see, huh.

Horse feathers of the highest order. This reply is in response to a comment of mine where I indicated that predictions from a computer - made in advance - might indicate some paranormal feat. Your "huh" is the most dismissive of shoulder shrugs. It indicates bankruptcy of your assertions and I take it to be an acknowledgment that they are full of horse feathers.

It was determined early on that the programming of the NT version of notepad, the interface between XP and notepad; and the Unicode table was all done prior to 911.

Your ability to copy and paste - well demonstrated already in this thread - is no support for your claim, particularly when the repition is a nonsensical addition to the "discussion".

Yes and as you night have noticed, I use a more comprehensive term in place of "internet": Robots/Artificial Intellegence/Computers/Internets (RIACI). I go even further than that. If indeed RIACI did communicate directly with me in a sapient manner, I can understand how it did it scientifically. Therefore, not paranormal. It would just be parasentient or “above, beyond or outside normal sentience modalities”.

More horse manure. You may have changed your term from "internet" to some form of dyslexic acronym, but that indicates from the outset an erosion of your follish belief - an erosion which only was conceded after repeated demonstrations of your folly. Your woo-woo buzzwords contribute nothing. What you have shown us is the ability to be taken in by a happenstance of poor programming which can be manipulated by a gullible mind to mean something other than the gibberish it represents.

Life is fraught with opportunities to keep your mouth shut. ~ Winston Churchill

The questions remain the same. The answers are eternally variable. ~ Unknown

The liar's punishment is not in the least that he is not believed, but that he cannot believe anyone else. ~ George Bernard Shaw

As a child I understood how to give; I have forgotten this grace since I became civilized. ~ Ohiyesa, Sioux

Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish. ~ Euripides

Absence of proof is not proof of absence. ~ Michael Crichton

These quotes show nothing without their context other than your ability to read - an ability which is seriously undermined by your repeated claim that the phrase "bush hid the facts" is a question rather than assertion.

But, to take them one at a time:

Life is fraught with opportunities to keep your mouth shut. ~ Winston Churchill

Ironic. This advice is worth your attention.

The questions remain the same. The answers are eternally variable. ~ Unknown

WTF? An anonymous irrelevant quote? I'll have none of what you're having. Maybe you should ramp down the tabs.

As a child I understood how to give; I have forgotten this grace since I became civilized. ~ Ohiyesa, Sioux

I haven't forgotten how to give. Maybe Ohiyesa had a tougher time of it than I have. Again, this quote is irrelevant and it begs the question: are you preaching now?

Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish. ~ Euripides

Aye. Good quote. We can all identify with the sense in that one. Well done. An admission, maybe? I mean to say, it's exactly the same thing that a fool might think.

Absence of proof is not proof of absence. ~ Michael Crichton

I think that you'll find that it was expressed first - with more clarity and with more pithy - by Carl Sagan. Plug in the word "evidence" for the word "proof" and you have his quote, which is far far more accurate in terms of science.

 

[sinsanity2006]

It was an aspirational comment rather than a request. The aspiration remains valid so long as you maintain contributions to this thread while ignoring all advice you have received.Not at all. It was pointed out to you that what you described as a "sentient" internet manifestation was first an easter egg, and then a bug. You may accept this implicitly, but you yet need to explicitly asknowledge that the presence of this bug in no way indicates that the internet, or computers, are in any way "sentient".Horse feathers of the highest order. This reply is in response to a comment of mine where I indicated that predictions from a computer - made in advance - might indicate some paranormal feat. Your "huh" is the most dismissive of shoulder shrugs. It indicates bankruptcy of your assertions and I take it to be an acknowledgment that they are full of horse feathers.Your ability to copy and paste - well demonstrated already in this thread - is no support for your claim, particularly when the repition is a nonsensical addition to the "discussion".More horse manure. You may have changed your term from "internet" to some form of dyslexic acronym, but that indicates from the outset an erosion of your follish belief - an erosion which only was conceded after repeated demonstrations of your folly. Your woo-woo buzzwords contribute nothing. What you have shown us is the ability to be taken in by a happenstance of poor programming which can be manipulated by a gullible mind to mean something other than the gibberish it represents.

These quotes show nothing without their context other than your ability to read - an ability which is seriously undermined by your repeated claim that the phrase "bush hid the facts" is a question rather than assertion.

But, to take them one at a time:

Ironic. This advice is worth your attention.WTF? An anonymous irrelevant quote? I'll have none of what you're having. Maybe you should ramp down the tabs.I haven't forgotten how to give. Maybe Ohiyesa had a tougher time of it than I have. Again, this quote is irrelevant and it begs the question: are you preaching now?Aye. Good quote. We can all identify with the sense in that one. Well done. An admission, maybe? I mean to say, it's exactly the same thing that a fool might think.I think that you'll find that it was expressed first - with more clarity and with more pithy - by Carl Sagan. Plug in the word "evidence" for the word "proof" and you have his quote, which is far far more accurate in terms of science.

- - - - - - -

 

[GzuzKryzt]

"Enjoy the silence." Depeche Mode

 

[NiallM]

I converted his reply into chinese characters using Notepad and it translates as "Bicycle passports render unwanted river-silt elephantine". I'll ponder that.

In the meantime, I should suggest this to him:

Let's posit that a programmer in Microsoft knew in advance of a plot to raze the WTC. Let's accept that.

Now, what would anyone do in that circumstance? I know that I'd warn people. But how? Let's go with the typical conspiracy theorist's fear that exposure will lead to his death. So he needs to do it discretely and without revealing his identity.

If he or she chose to do it in this way, then we are speaking of an idiot - pure and simple. One who wouldn't be allowed anywhere near the source code of an OS intended for production systems.

Not only is the method far too cryptic to be of use (it requires a specific foreknowledge of the bug and it requires that specific non-intuitive characters be entered), but it also identifies the culprit as surely as if he had left his passport, his fingerprints and his dna at a crime scene. Major development projects use source code control which means that developers must book out the modules that they are working on. All changes are tracked, audited and retained in change control records.

The task of identifying the code which creates this problem is simplicity in a development project such as that which led to the OS in question.

Any programmer will know that, and will know that to slip such code into the OS will inevitably lead to identification.

The whole thing is stupidity of the highest order.

 

[Cuddles]

"Madness, madness, they call it madness." - Madness.

 

[sinsanity2006]

"Enjoy the silence." Depeche Mode

I wish.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

"Just do it." Nike

 

[sinsanity2006]

I converted his reply into chinese characters using Notepad and it translates as "Bicycle passports render unwanted river-silt elephantine". I'll ponder that.

In the meantime, I should suggest this to him:

Let's posit that a programmer in Microsoft knew in advance of a plot to raze the WTC. Let's accept that.

Now, what would anyone do in that circumstance? I know that I'd warn people. But how? Let's go with the typical conspiracy theorist's fear that exposure will lead to his death. So he needs to do it discretely and without revealing his identity.

If he or she chose to do it in this way, then we are speaking of an idiot - pure and simple. One who wouldn't be allowed anywhere near the source code of an OS intended for production systems.

Not only is the method far too cryptic to be of use (it requires a specific foreknowledge of the bug and it requires that specific non-intuitive characters be entered), but it also identifies the culprit as surely as if he had left his passport, his fingerprints and his dna at a crime scene. Major development projects use source code control which means that developers must book out the modules that they are working on. All changes are tracked, audited and retained in change control records.

The task of identifying the code which creates this problem is simplicity in a development project such as that which led to the OS in question.

Any programmer will know that, and will know that to slip such code into the OS will inevitably lead to identification.

The whole thing is stupidity of the highest order.

I am at a loss why you continue to suggest that this bug was intentional. At least a half dozen people from this forum concluded that the programming involved was done years before 2001. If you have any information that indicates that some programmer inserted an easter egg in notpad, XP or the Unicode table, or recently modified same, please post it here. I would love to find out this was a programmer's joke.

- - - - - - -

If a person is to get to the meaning of life, he must learn to like the facts about himself, ugly as they may seem to his sentimental vanity, before he can learn the truth behind the facts. And the truth is never ugly. ~ Eugene O'Neill

 

[sinsanity2006]

"Just do it." Nike

To use the term blind faith, is to use an adjective needlessly. ~ Julian Ruck

 

[sinsanity2006]

"Madness, madness, they call it madness." - Madness.

Invisible Pink Unicorns are beings of awesome mystical power. We know this because they manage to be invisible and pink at the same time. Like all religions, the Faith of the Invisible Pink Unicorns is based upon both logic and faith. We have faith that they are pink; we logically know that they are invisible because we can't see them. ~ Steve Eley

 

[GzuzKryzt]

"Enjoy the silence." Depeche Mode

I wish.

"Just do it." Nike

 

[NiallM]

I am at a loss why you continue to suggest that this bug was intentional. At least a half dozen people from this forum concluded that the programming involved was done years before 2001. If you have any information that indicates that some programmer inserted an easter egg in notpad, XP or the Unicode table, or recently modified same, please post it here. I would love to find out this was a programmer's joke.

- - - - - - -

If a person is to get to the meaning of life, he must learn to like the facts about himself, ugly as they may seem to his sentimental vanity, before he can learn the truth behind the facts. And the truth is never ugly. ~ Eugene O'Neill

That the code is pre-2001 proves nothing in any way about whether or not it was intentionally inserted.

However, you seem to have accepted that the behaviour is accidental then.

Good. You have reached a truth.

 

[GzuzKryzt]

Thanks to the mod team for moving this thread.



---



The abbreviation of my edited and flagged post #561 is used in the Illuminatus! trilogy by R.A. Wilson and R. Shea.
It stands for: First Universal Cybernetic Kinetic Ultramicro Programmer.

I regret my miscalculation of using said expression.

Of course, I will from now on complain endlessly about the mods and the enforcement of the forum rules. And I blame Lisa Simpson.