[Noisebridge-discuss] usb 'dead drops' at noisebridge?

Mitch Altman maltman23 at hotmail.com
Thu Nov 4 05:56:26 UTC 2010


I don't think I'd, personally, be very comfortable with integrating machines directly with our bio-electro-chemical selves (though, if others want to try it, I'm certainly not averse to that!).  I was actually thinking of some new way of using devices that somehow make more intuitive sense, going along with how we interact with other things in our environment.  Typing on keyboards or staring at screens has so little to do with the zillions of years of evolution that preceeded the few decades that we've been playing with computers.  There's got to be a better way.  And, perhaps, as you suggest, Rameen, the computers themselves need to become more closely related to things in our experiential universes (being less either/or oriented).
 
Mitch.

 


Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2010 09:18:20 -0700
Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] usb 'dead drops' at noisebridge?
From: emprameen at gmail.com
To: maltman23 at hotmail.com
CC: noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net

This makes sense. To understand the 1's and 0's quality computers takes most brains a lot of getting used-to. Obviously neither our brains nor the universe we live are dictated purely by existance or non-existance; by only on or off. Perhaps if we added an imaginary number to the equation. Something that let the millions of years of evolution have more of a hand in the programming and logic that we try to create. Like an intended quantum influence... or something reactive to human emotions or out-put... 
I've heard that human electrical response is similar to High/low switching states, but our bodies seem to be able to change and choose responses. We can learn muscle memory based repetition and experience and even self-programming like watching someone do a dance move. What if our computer got to choose where and how to send signals instead of being fully pre-programmed. Maybe it can get programmed through experience and time, instead of an initial birthing process with no flexibility due to necessity for stable coding and output paradigms. There would certainly need to be a feedback mechanism.

 Perhaps the key to your idea, Mitch, is to give our computer some senses and needs, instead of using our own senses and needs which create a definitive, structured program loop, with nothing left for nature to tweak.
These program loops are extremely useful, but I can only imagine that if Mitch got his way we'd probably integrate more intimately with our electrochemical selves. 




On Mon, Nov 1, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Mitch Altman <maltman23 at hotmail.com> wrote:


I wish I *knew* what it was about.  It is, at the moment, really in the realm of wishes and fantasy on my part.  
 
We somehow have followed a path of following using keyboards and screens and mouses to interact with computers, with software that is written to somehow make the best of this.  We can do incredible and amazing things with things as they are.  But, if we take a step back and take a look at where things stand, you'll have to admit that even the best written software is incredibly tedious (at best!).  For instance -- think of your favorite program.  What steps do you need to take to get the ideas in your mind to be expressed through that software?  We can get really good at those steps (and we do!).  But, what if those steps were more intuitive to someone who hasn't practiced those steps for as long as us geeky people have put into them?  What if they somehow fit into the way we've lived life for the last zillions of years of evolving on the planet?
 
Like I said, these are totally vague, and abstract, thoughts at the moment.  Of course, there are invasive means imaginable, such as electrodes in our brains, but maybe there are less intrusive measures, too?  But, in any case, whatever all ways we could possibly come up with, what could it be like if there were some way(s) to interact with powerful computing machines in ways that weren't so damn cumbersome and tedious?
 
There's got to be ways to get beyond this current computer paradigm of keyboards, screens, pointer-devices...
 
Mitch.
 
 

 


Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 09:45:01 -0700

Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] usb 'dead drops' at noisebridge?
From: emprameen at gmail.com
To: maltman23 at hotmail.com




What is this about? What do you mean a different computing paradigm?  This is something I'm extremely interested in, but I feel like it has a lot to do with physics and biology and chemistry which I only understand at varying basic levels. 



On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 10:42 PM, Mitch Altman <maltman23 at hotmail.com> wrote:


> Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2010 00:01:56 -0500
> From: rubin at starset.net
> To: maltman23 at hotmail.com
> CC: noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net 

> Subject: Re: [Noisebridge-discuss] usb 'dead drops' at noisebridge?
> 

> Mitch, you could just not run Windows and then be about 99% ahead of the
> Trojan curve. :)

As it turns out, I've never had a trojan, virus, worm, or any other unwanted software on my computer.  So, regardless of OS, I'm 100%.  :)
 
I really do hate all operating systems ('cause they all suck -- really, they do).  And, since I need to use Windows to run the free, yet Windows-only proprietary software that is needed to develop various microcontrollers I use, do I really need to install another OS just so I can appear to not use Windows (which I already paid for anyhow?).
 
As powerful as these computer-thingies are as they currently exist, my dream is that we can develop an entirely new computing paradigm that has much more to do with the way we evolved over the last 3 million years than this bizarre way we use keyboards and screens (and mouses -- which I avoid whenever possible).  I wish I had some concrete ideas on how to proceed to make that a reality.  But, for now, I'll just let it keep seething in the background of what's left of my mind...
 
Mitch.
 

_______________________________________________
Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss



 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20101103/dc129843/attachment-0003.html>


More information about the Noisebridge-discuss mailing list