Topic: Dank Bank Deposits - dank's soul is claimed! - New music Nov 30th - page 39. (Read 128919 times)

You do your think fgervais, I have spiritual insight from the universe about 2012, only recently at that.

Oh golly gee, more bullshit!

First, a quickie:



Since dank keeps referencing 2012, I've been using December 21st. December 31st is a perfectly acceptable substitute.

Oh, and dank, you realise that the whole 2012 thing is based, well, nothing, right? Calendars must logically have an end and the more reasonable people realize that what was probably intended was a addition to be added if and when they complete theirs.

The whole thing is a throwback to Y2K, where again nothing happened, but in that case there were little things like nukes, whole power grids and the banking system.

But hey, more fuel for your crazy fire, so I guess we'll run down the clock and laugh at you in due time.


You are so stupid it's not even funny. Let's look at your... proof.

Humans evolve with technology: Actually technology has outpaced human evolution on most fronts already. It takes whole teams full of people with IQs north of 150 (you know, for real) and a metric fuckton of tech to gain ever diminishing returns.

We can gather information faster (google): True, but then the much bigger problem of information management and triage rears it's ugly head, just as you so aptly demonstrate. There is also the whole issue of information pollution, but that'd fly right over your head if I tried to explain it, even if I try to dumb it down.

We can process information faster (your version): The physical act of typing shit is processing information now? Wow, you can't even keep you shit straight. Ok, ignore for a second that what you said makes no sense, kids type fast. So what? Muscle motherfucking memory. Repeat an action often enough and you get better at it. Tried knitting recently? I assure you your grandma is better at it then you.

We can process information faster (the non-moron version): Yes we can, but faster doesn't mean better or smarter. Cool, I can pull down the entire content of the library of congress in about 4½ days, and yes, ctrl-f'ing my way through is faster that looking up index cards, but at some point I can only read so fast, never mind comprehensibly read.

We can communicate information faster: Again, just because the local cell carrier upgrades their tower to 4G doesn't mean you get smarter.

Just for shits and giggles, let's look at your latest hilarious source:

Written in 2005, the article predicated that within 2-5 years, 2007-2010, we would:
- Make presentations to your clients or watch high definition TV with the image projected onto a wall with stereo sound from your cell phone.
Already in play in 2005

- Speak to prospective clients and work colleagues in their home language whether Cantonese, Russian or Arabic using simultaneous language translation.
Nope. Even chatting via Google Translate'ed text is horribly painful

- Utilise your computer to manage a myriad of gadgets around your home and office.
Uh, already in play in 2005? Also, in 2004 I already had a physical toy for my cell:
http://www.cnet.com.au/sony-ericsson-bluetooth-car-100-240000277.htm

- Speak directly to your computer and receive a reasoned reply.
Already in play in 2005

- Get your computer to do research on the internet for you.
Either already in play or still not realized, depending on your interpretation.

- Programme your computer to undertake a great deal of routine work that currently takes up a great deal of your time
I've been using macros since the 1990's.

- Attend virtual meetings without leaving your office.
1990's tech again.

- Provide your clients with face to face communications when they phone in.
1990's tech, and the videophone has been rejected by every major player since.

Gee whiz, amazing foresight that author!

As for the singularity event itself, at least in non-Mayan delirium, read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

Best estimates put the thing at still ~30 years into the future, also known as "flying car promises" range. You're the first I heard cross-reference 2012 and tech singularity events, and god damn it, I've read a lot of crazy people on the internet over the last 20 years.

Care to source your stuff, or is the fact that you can text faster than your grandma the essential of your argument?

Inb4Istaredintoamirrorandsawithappen

Where do the Incas, Mayas Egyptians Hindus and other ancient societies write that at this date something cataclystic will take place?
This time present some sources please becasue extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

That is bullshit as it has been shown that the ancient civs were very prolific at interacting with other cultures.
Again, you are replacing facts with what you want reality to be.

If the Mayans could predict the future, why didn't they see the Spanish coming?

Ancient civilizations weren't magic, they were ordinary people just like you and I (only less technologically advanced).

By the way, saying the world is going to end in 2012 because of the Mayan calendar, is like predicting the world ending on Dec 31 because of our calendar. The end date is when the calendar starts over. Or do you not know how a calendar works?

Except 2012 was also predicted by the Incas, Aztecs, Chinese, Egyptians, Hindus and other ancient societies, that were all completely isolated from one another.

But hey, what did they know?

LOL.,
That guy!

If it's an illusion it realy sucks.
And it's pretty consistent.
And do i get a hint of 'the comming of the end of the mayan calendar and the rapture in general' scam?

Give us an exact date so we can come back here and laugh at you....

Wait, what exactly are you saying will happen? Are we talking about your rockstar in three months fantasy, or have we moved on to some other crazy bullshit now? I want to be sure to laugh at you for the right thing.

This reality is an illusion, it's not our true reality.  We can leave it at that, we will see who is right later this year.

LOL.
You're full of bullshit fantasies.
Humans do not evolve because of technology. Not yet at least because we're working hard at understanding how the genes work.
If we could do more things in the same amount of time time would seem to go slower, not faster.

You can believe anything you want but that doesn't make it reality.
The experience of life adapting to your beliefs is a known illusion.
What happens is you 'believe' in things that are likely to happen, take on a different attitude to life because of the believe, and boom, there it is.
That's not realy believe, that's auto-programming your brain.
You basicly tell your subconcious to look out for clues that will help you achieve some goal.
You're actually putting your brain to work in the background.

Anyhow, i'm tired of explaining reality to you.
Go learn real stuff, because there is (and i'm not kidding) an incredible ammount of knowlege out there than you can not learn from believing in your own brainfarts. There is more knowledge than any single human can absorb in a lifetime and it is all realted to reality.

Humans evolve with technology.  We can gather information faster (google), we can process information faster (look at kids text compared to elderly), we can communicate information faster (internet).  This means we can enact more change in a smaller amount of time, literally making time go faster.

I believe we are evolving exponentially, if what one believes is true, it will happen (it has been happening for me, in my life).  You are free to stay in the lower frequency, if you choose.

I called it.  Dank is now arguing about what reality is.

What do you mean by exponential evolution?

Kurzweil talks about the general evolution of information systems, not humans.
If you'd understand anything about what he's saying you'd understand that humans are only a relatively short and straight line in biological evolution.
Human culture, however, is not limited by the informational constraints of biology and so can change according to the general increase in complexity of informational systems.
Or, to put it short, one informational mechanism leads to two, which leads to five, etc etc.

So in our case it's the 'evolution' of culture, not humans, that makes it exponential.
Humans (how they are built) haven't changed in at least 100.000 years in any meaningfull ways.
The information that enters their brains from the previous generations has. And that is mostly science nowadays. Most information culture deals with is in some way scientific. And that is exactly what kurtzweil is proposing. He says that there is this evolution of informational systems that transcends biological evolution. He states quite clearly that according to him this general evolution will soon outpace human evolution.
So the exponential graph you posted does not show human evolution.
Its related to a culmination of information systems into what he calls the singularity.

You should realy learn what it is about before you use it as something that you claim agrees with you.

Humans have been evolving exponential as long as we existed.  We are getting close to this point:



Just found that image trying to describe the point of growth, turns out the website is talking about the same thing.

http://www.futurewinners.com/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&cntnt01articleid=24&cntnt01dateformat=%25b%20%25d%2C%20%25Y&cntnt01returnid=70

Only single celled organisms and virusses are capable of evolution on the scale of weeks.
You propably mean something like 'learn' instead of 'evolve'.

Exactly, 10 weeks of exponential evolution.

Sure, but your original premise of being a well known musician by the end of 2012 is a bit.. uhmm. . premature.
For now you show no skills that would label you a musician. Never mind a 'highly known' one..

Yeah, I mean, you still have 10 weeks to go before that.

I mean, it takes time to learn an instrument.  I never claimed to be a master, at this point.