Silver Morning by Brian Eno

https://youtu.be/W4Ax7gAxDf8

Words are simple. But if you consider what they refer to, words are complex. See?

Maybe memories are actually really simple. Like the words on a screen. An arrangement of symbols, then a boatload of meaning and interpretation and rationalization. So all you need to do to make memories is to insert a few words. The brain’s “memory interpreter” does the rest of the work.

For example, we insert the words “brother appears”. Then, for the “new memory”, we reference your memories of your brother. His appearance and the sound of his voice. Then we contrive a narrative explaining why “brother” is at this place and time. Etc. Voila! You now have a memory of your brother standing there saying some stuff.

So to make a memory, it wouldn’t require a grand delicate manipulation of brainstuff. Just a simple thing.

The lead paint and the asbestos both served a need. For colored toys and insulation, specifically. And then we found a better way to serve that need. It isn’t a dumb need.

Don’t assume that everybody who sees things differently is an idiot.

Given its vast popularity, I expect that some would argue otherwise.

Call it “stories that people are taking way too seriously”. I’m sure that you can think of other stories that people take way too seriously too, that have nothing to do with religion.

I think that we might be seeing the power of propaganda there. Consider that the science of propaganda is very old. Thousands of years old. There’s population-control psychology there. It’s got hooks.

(On the flipside, imposing a set of rules for moral behavior is a good thing. People can be animals. And if you need to cite an old story about gods and wizards to give those rules some oomph then so be it.)

It serves a need. Get rid of the need and you’ll get rid of the religious bullshit. But if you get rid of the religious bullshit without getting rid of the need, some other kind of bullshit will crop up.

The center of the bell curve. The most popular of popular media. The true fast food. Probably not.

Because being rich frees you from many of the stresses and concerns that define the populace. Your tastes are different then.

The edger case? Sure. Good art is good art, no matter how rich you are.

But he runs a spaceship company. How many of those have we got?

Yeah, solipsism.

Consider that when you read, there are 2 sources of information, the arrangement of the words and the meaning of the words. The arrangement comes from the screen the meaning comes from you. Which is the bigger hunk of information?

That much is obvious.

I’d say that the important things are

1. That we swallow knowledge gained this way pretty much automatically. Like the default is to believe it or react to it, with very little filtering.

2. That it lacks indicators that might help us filter it. First-hand knowledge and tenth-hand knowledge look exactly the same.

Of course not. Why?

I’m talking about any statement about reality. All by itself. With no knowledge about the person who said it.

Thanks.

I imagine language with some new tags.

Tags like “original source” and “number of iterations from original source”

(“Iterations” probably isn’t the right term. If Bob saw it, then Bob told Sally, then Sally told Frank. Frank has “3rd iteration” knowledge. But what’s the better term?)

I mean if I tell you about the taste of a peanut butter sandwich, how do you tell whether I actually ate a peanut butter sandwich? Or I just read about a peanut butter sandwich??

That’s a damn good point. It could be chat bots talking to chat bots all the way down and we’d never know the difference.

This is a quality of the kind of knowledge we deal in here. Compared to first-hand experience, it is a lesser quality of knowledge. A trashy knowledge if you will.

I used to be very into Java and Kotlin looks nice. What’s your favorite IDE?

Is this some kind of metaphor?

But the format is open ass.