The one cool thing about the Pope selection process

Then why bother?

It's not an idea, it's a documented phenomenon in photography. I get that you've never encountered this problem and therefore doubt its existence; my response is you probably need to get out from behind your computer and out into the biomass and see for yourself.

And I repeat: being at an event and WATCHING A VIDEO of an event are not the same thing.

And it is important to note that if all of your attention is on a 4 inch LCD screen on which you are trying to capture an event, then you are experiencing the event as a photographer, not as a witness. A larger portion of your attention is on the operation of your recording device than it is on the event that is actually being recorded.

And as I said then, no it isn't, not until/unless it can be physically hard-wired into the human brain and its input processed directly by the brain itself. Until then it is merely another object that humans perceive, in which case, if all of your attention is on the operation of a recording device, then your memory of the event is partially limited to that which is captured in the recording device.

The specific reason you doubt this is that you've been sitting behind your computer too long and haven't actually gone anywhere or seen anything yourself. Get out into some biomass, go to a concert, watch some sketch comedy at Second City or something, then come back and proselytize some more.

 

I'm not blinded by anything, you're the one who won't even admit accelerated change exists. I'd say you're the 3rd or 4th most blinded person I've seen in this forum though I think you mean well. If you DID get it, you wouldn't be arguing about it. From what I see you guys are using some old, outdated arguments. As always, you'd rather stay comfortable with the status quo.

BTW I've posted on this subject in question long before the fact, you should look it up in the top 5 tech thread. Some good links there on extended reality/mind and distributed cognition and the like.

 

TYVM for your opinion, but I'm an outdoorsy, beach, hiking, fitness person myself. I'm very comfortable behind the computer or elsewhere.

And again you are wrong, you don't need to be wired directly to the phone for distributed cognition, or extended mind. You don't need a computer for this strictly speaking, but of course it's capabilities enhance it.

 

And this is where you keep. missing. the. point.

We do admit it exists. We just don't run off the deep end making unfounded assumptions that it's some kind of exponential curve that won't plateau.

 

I'm all for recording events, but I feel if it's something this huge, like electing a new Pope, somebody else will already be recording it. There are likely many people getting paid decent money to record it, and their versions will look a helluva lot nicer than what I could record on my phone.

So in this case, I'd put my phone down and watch the event with my own eyes. If I want to watch it again later, it won't be hard to find video of the event.

 

You actually DID say it did not exist...several times.

I also pointed out how exponentials can keep going and any plateaus are so far above what we have now they will make little difference to the end result. Those are concrete examples based on mathematics, but you choose not to believe them.

RAMA

 

Well you remember how maybe you or your friends wanted momentos from an event, or maybe your religious relative wanted them from a funeral or event? Well now you don't have to wait for the official documenter, you can capture it the way YOU want to and see how it matches your perception. Besides, I don't know about you, but I edit my own capture of reality, I don't exclusively look at my phone, therefore I get the best of both worlds.

 

You need to re-read my post and think.

Also, any luck figuring out that multiquote feature?

 

What I get from this conversation is that RAMA have rather a poor, blurry, shallow experience of reality, probably because he sees everything through the lens of the "singularity".

 

Unless you're working from a non-standard (or meaningless) definition of "distributed cognition," yes you do. They keyword there is distributed. You can put fifty different monitors in front of you and wire them to fifty different cameras, but your point of cognition is not distributed to any of those cameras, nor the monitors they are connected to. Your cognition is extended to the cameras through your eyes, the same way you would perceive any ordinary event.

You might as well suggest that contact lenses are a form of cybernetics; at least in that sense you could BEGIN to make a case.

 

No, what has been said to you by just about everyone is that a period of accelerated change -- i.e. Moore's law, which has never been in dispute -- does not logically suggest a permanent exponential growth curve. In every since case you have responded with increasingly more bizzare handwaves, including now:

Which you cannot POSSIBLY know, have made no attempt to demonstrate, and is actually demonstrably false due to the inherent limitations of quantum effects in solid-state electronics.

"Those" what? You didn't cite an example, nor did you describe the mathematics of it. Neither of which you actually have, because as you have said many MANY times, it's not that the evidence is actually compelling, you just FEEL really good about it.

 

Isn't there a term for having the Singularity as a religion?

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

aka "the rapture of the nerds"