32 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
    1. easter island

      for - progress trap - archeology - Easter Island

      progress trap - archeology - Easter Island - The archeology tells the fascinating story of the progress trap that Eastern Island ancestors created. - Easter Island is desolate and only 64 square miles total - It is located 2,000 miles (3218 km) from the nearest landmass of South America - Archeologists trying to piece together the stone monoliths of Easter Island found pollen samples in the crater lakes on the island, proving that the place was once a thriving forest - By the time the first Europeans landed (the Dutch) on Easter Island, it was just grassy hills - How did it go from a lush forest land to a grass land? - The layers of pollen samples told a story - The aboriginal polynesians that the Dutch explorers encountered arrived about 1,000 years earlier - They cut down the forest, grew their population and used trees in many ways, including to transport the huge stone monoliths that paid respect to their ancestors - The original people multiplied then separated into separate warring tribes - The environment was devastated as the logging destroyed the forest and all the abundant ecosystem that provided for their sustenance - This created severe erosion and the soil became impoverished - The tribes collapses into warfare and cannibalism

      progress trap - Easter Island - Sumeria etc - lesson - don't romanticize our ancestors - Human groups have continuously sabotaged themselves through overexploitation and lack of foresight - Progress traps have been a constant part of our species for a long, long time

  2. Feb 2024
    1. Jan-Cedric HANSEN, Conceptualisations cindyniques de la guerre

      Résumé de la vidéo [00:00:00][^1^][1] - [00:31:00][^2^][2] :

      Cette vidéo présente les conceptualisations cindyniques de la guerre, une approche développée par Georges-Yves Kerven pour appréhender la complexité et la vulnérabilité des situations de conflit. L'intervenant, Jan-Cedric Hansen, explique les notions clés des cindyniques, tels que l'organisme, l'hyperespace du danger, les déficits cindynogènes, et les applique à l'analyse des armées et des États en tant qu'organismes cindyniques. Il montre comment les cindyniques permettent d'identifier et de cartographier les vulnérabilités masquées, de les classer selon une taxonomie, et de les prévenir ou de les exploiter selon les buts de guerre.

      Points clés : + [00:01:11][^3^][3] La guerre comme phénomène de violence en action collective * Définition de la guerre selon Kerven : un ensemble de situations possibles contenu dans une situation d'ensemble * Nécessité de prendre en compte un complexe risque-conflit-développement + [00:03:12][^4^][4] Les cindyniques comme sciences du danger * Étymologie : du grec kundunô, je mets en danger * Objectif : appréhender la complexité des situations dangereuses * Méthodologie : définir l'organisme, le jeu d'interactions entre un contexte, des décideurs, des acteurs, des organisations + [00:05:07][^5^][5] L'armée comme organisme cindynique * Application des cindyniques à l'analyse de l'armée en tant qu'entité coordonnée, placée dans un environnement, un contexte et un milieu * Utilisation de l'hyperespace du danger, composé de cinq dimensions : téléologique, axiologique, déontologique, statistique, épistémique * Identification des déficits cindynogènes, sources de vulnérabilité, à chaque niveau : global, individuel, inter-individuel, organisationnel + [00:13:00][^6^][6] L'État comme organisme cindynique * Reproduction de la même démarche au niveau d'un État, en relation avec d'autres États, alliés ou adversaires * Prise en compte des cindyniques du premier ordre (les cinq dimensions) et du second ordre (les combinaisons de deux dimensions)

      Résumé de la vidéo [00:15:00][^1^][1] - [00:31:00][^2^][2] :

      Cette partie de la vidéo présente les concepts de cindynique, une approche qui permet d'appréhender la complexité et la vulnérabilité des situations de guerre. L'orateur explique comment les cindyniques définissent l'organisme, le milieu, le contexte et l'environnement, et comment ils utilisent l'hyperespace du danger pour analyser les dimensions téléologique, axiologique, déontologique, statistique et épistémique d'une situation. Il montre comment les cindyniques identifient les déficits systémiques, individuels, organisationnels et les dissonances qui peuvent générer des situations syndinogènes, c'est-à-dire de danger. Il illustre son propos avec des exemples tirés de l'histoire militaire et des conflits contemporains.

      Points clés : + [00:15:00][^3^][3] Les cindyniques, une science du danger * Une démarche pour appréhender la complexité * Un organisme, un ensemble d'éléments coordonnés * Un milieu, l'ensemble des éléments physiques ou matériels * Un contexte, l'ensemble des circonstances médiates ou immédiates * Un environnement, l'ensemble des conditions sociétales ou éthiques + [00:19:19][^4^][4] L'hyperespace du danger, un outil d'analyse * Cinq dimensions : téléologique, axiologique, déontologique, statistique, épistémique * Chaque dimension interroge un aspect de la situation : la finalité, les valeurs, les normes, les données, les modèles * Chaque dimension peut être cartographiée et quantifiée + [00:24:00][^5^][5] Les déficits syndinogènes, des sources de vulnérabilité * Quatre types de déficits : systémiques, individuels, organisationnels, dissonances * Chaque déficit correspond à un niveau : global, individuel, inter-individuel, organisationnel * Chaque déficit peut être prévenu ou corrigé par des mesures appropriées * La conjonction de plusieurs déficits peut entraîner une situation de tension critique * Exemples de vulnérabilités masquées au niveau systémique, individuel, organisationnel et inter-individuel

  3. Dec 2023
    1. the idea of a game is really important and the rules of the game so what's happened is that to the extent that that we've we 00:39:33 have lost the common understanding of our reality then people start attacking the rules of the game and and that's you know going back to my work on conflict
      • for: adjacency - rules of the game - violence, dangers of not playing by the rules of the game

      • adjacency between

        • rules of the game
        • violence
      • adjacency statement
        • When people cannot agree on the rules of the democratic game, we are just one step away from violence
        • Homer-Dixon explores the relationship between environmental breakdown and violence in an earlier book
        • If you believe your "opponent" is not playing by the rules of the game, then they are outside the moral ambit of your community, and you can justify violence
        • Their status as a human being is no longer legitimate and they are dehumanized. Violence is now possible
        • Whenever a group feels another group is not playing by the rules of the game, it is a very dangerous situation as violence can be justified on these grounds
  4. Jul 2023
  5. Mar 2023
    1. Common sense is actually a pretty bad indicator of truth. Because of cognitive biases and preconceived opinions, ideas that sound right are often wrong. “Common sense is actually nothing more than a deposit of prejudices laid down in the mind prior to the age of eighteen,” Einstein presumably said.
  6. Aug 2022
  7. Sep 2021
    1. yourtopfile.info/android11

      After downloading a file from a website recommended by this webpage for Android 11: Google: "Failed - Virus detected" Microsoft Antivirus Defender: Threat Severe

  8. Jul 2021
  9. Jun 2021
    1. One thing that should be learned from the bitter lesson is the great power of general purpose methods, of methods that continue to scale with increased computation even as the available computation becomes very great. The two methods that seem to scale arbitrarily in this way are search and learning

      This is a big lesson. As a field, we still have not thoroughly learned it, as we are continuing to make the same kind of mistakes. To see this, and to effectively resist it, we have to understand the appeal of these mistakes. We have to learn the bitter lesson that building in how we think we think does not work in the long run. The bitter lesson is based on the historical observations that 1) AI researchers have often tried to build knowledge into their agents, 2) this always helps in the short term, and is personally satisfying to the researcher, but 3) in the long run it plateaus and even inhibits further progress, and 4) breakthrough progress eventually arrives by an opposing approach based on scaling computation by search and learning. The eventual success is tinged with bitterness, and often incompletely digested, because it is success over a favored, human-centric approach.

  10. May 2021
  11. Mar 2021
  12. Oct 2020
  13. Sep 2020
  14. Jul 2020
  15. Jun 2020
  16. May 2020
  17. Apr 2020
  18. Feb 2020
  19. Mar 2019
    1. making "The W WorldSafe for Democracy

      Echoing Woodrow Wilson's request for a Declaration of War in 1917, this statement makes the question of suffrage seem like a danger.

  20. Jan 2019
    1. we may credit Plato with demonstrating that mostquestions aren't really interested in responses at all; most questions simply wantan answer.

      They're traps!

    2. Instead, it might be productive not to think that we know what rhetoric is at all.

      It would also be more dangerous to say we know what rhetoric is -- to define it as one thing.

    1. You cannot assemble a list oJ neucra!Tacts wl:iidi every citizen in a secular society can safely learn as a fac-tual bible, a body of knowledge beyond cavil, which once-absorbed guar-antees public virtue.

      And if you try to, you're probably a fucking monster.

  21. Sep 2018
    1. The will to mastery becomes all the more urgent the more technology threatens to slip from human control.

      Mastery is a very interesting word here. It would be assumed that anything that humans have the capability to create we could retain mastery over. It is also interesting to consider the two meanings we could take from mastery. On one hand its that we are the masters or owners of that object, on the other it could be a mastery in the way a person masters a craft or a skill. So would this quote mean that compared to improving technology and the possibility of an ultra-intelligent A.I, our skill of creating technology would appear to be becoming obsolete, or does it mean the gradual loss of our control over technology? Either way it raises an important concern over the dangers of advancing technology and the ever looming possibility of an ultra-intelligent A.I.

  22. Oct 2013
    1. But we must beware of the man who abounds in eloquent nonsense, and so much the more if the hearer is pleased with what is not worth listening to, and thinks that because the speaker is eloquent what he says must be true.

      Danger of rhetoric. Reflects modern view of empty language