Disqus - Latest Comments for digitalextremist

Re: You are a Social Network

digitalextremist — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 00:19:51 -0000

Writing on walls is important sometimes, like when they are orange walls and you have a lot of black markers to burn.

That aside, yes, the flat surface interface, 2D world is played out. It actually makes us dumber to some extent. Video is not just better because it is more personal, but because it uses all the dimensions of our present level of perception. When you add to that the limits of internet interactions and their overtaking and replacing previously valuable mainstay experiences, yes, balance is the primary factor to consider.

Re: Science and the Problem of Subtle Energy

digitalextremist — Sun, 04 Jan 2009 11:24:48 -0000

Gregory,

You suffer the frustration of observing the social media world a bit too close to the monitor some times, but other than that you are an essential element of this place.

You could not have put it better than the above. Let me point out a few supporting items and natural follow-ups to this gnosis:

1) The stance in nature designed to solve this problem is the female human being. Men tend toward linearity more than women, and yet women do not (always) fall into linearity to resurrect their man. They observe silence, knowing truth speaks louder, or they engage in service of an intuitive, surprising, original and unique nature which mystifies, distracts, usurps, solves. This is our mode today relative to mechanistic serial hyper-masculinity. I mention what I did not to single out women as "only" having this, or men not having it. I only mean it is native to women primarily, and for men it is an additional effort as we start from a different impulse.

2) Arguing the assumption is useless as you said. But to avoid watching at the monitor very closely with critique, oh, say on twitter, it is important to give the mind an alternative. This is not to displace meditation, but to mention that there are times when it is impossible. To fill that gap, we must see to it that we lead the charge into this female mode of being I mentioned. Your voice is already at work in this direction. As we follow the model of the dedicated wife, we build up the man and no incompetence in a man can out wit a true woman.

3) Calendrics widens the gap. We must push forward into a perpetual reminder of universality. The @kincompass bot, and many www.kincompass.com tools and other such synchronization means are simple to implement, even non-issues, but they free us from materialistic presuppositions. When we mark time by orbits of planets around stars, we are in the same mental area as scientists and material reality. This is not to say one is evil nature and the other is spirituality and subtle, that being "good." I only mean there are these two focuses. We need both, but we must only "look" to one. As we look to spiritual calendrics, science will be forced to move too, because we are the scientists.

4) Unsymbolized truth is the final and pivotal piece in the game of change. You go into language and I agree on the premise that semantic maps bind us. To overcome that, we are approaching a new angle on communication which uses both sides of the brain. It communicates in universes, galaxies, and solar systems. I will show you a demo shortly. That is the saving grace for both information systems and humanity in my view, because it removes excess that is set to be fatal right now. When communication on a level of angels is possible for man, heaven will be impossible to hide.

So it is a gender thing, metaphorically. And guess who has the kid?

Re: The Velocity of Ignorance, Social Media and “Citizen Journalism”

digitalextremist — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 20:37:00 -0000

I feel like I can stretch out and relax when I read posts like this, someone gets it too. That message, the signal we're sending out into the universe. Is it true? Keep it real yes, but is it also truth?

I recall mumbai in Tweetdeck. You are absolutely right. My thought was that in digest form, or word in a way that ranks as an emergency if I can impact it is essential; but I am giving birth to tomorrow as yesterday entails that, so why keep poking me?

Sun Tzu said war is deception and he meant it in a clean, non-vile way. We take the image someone else receives and give it our own self, our very essence, in what we take away from the picture, not what we add or that we give a signal at all.

Both in cleaning the story of unneeded grime and in giving actual "going forward" knowledge for the future, to deceive someone by tricking them into the right conception, bypassing your own defensive tendencies and touching the heart in another -- that is different from what I see. Sun Tzu would own every nation's infrastructure by direct imposition right now, and every institution now standing would be fallen cards.

So that is what I think about when I see a badge or a pass or access credentials, signal, noise, idea. Whatever authority exists goes out of its way to only reflect what is right, only behold what is true and transfer it by any and all means natural.

Re: Free Online Brand and Social Media Monitoring Tools

digitalextremist — Sat, 08 Nov 2008 05:36:04 -0000

I stand, reaching up to the stars with more yearning than confusion, wondering: Where are the easy-to-click links to these wonderful services?

I have links to other jmorganmarketing.com posts, yes. But the services themselves?

Re: Twiddeo: Me right now 2

digitalextremist — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 20:42:35 -0000

It's all about the running slide

Re: Conventional Wisdom Will Be Wrong

digitalextremist — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 18:38:02 -0000

http://digitalextremist.com/catch-22-sleep-life...

Re: David Kolby » Cooperation

digitalextremist — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 22:02:02 -0000

Seesmic video reply from Disqus.

Re: Conventional Wisdom Will Be Wrong

digitalextremist — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 09:24:07 -0000

Seesmic video reply from Disqus.

Re: Conventional Wisdom Will Be Wrong

digitalextremist — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 09:19:13 -0000

Seesmic video reply from Disqus.

Re: The Direction of Time

digitalextremist — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:52:33 -0000

Personality is a choice. If you are not personally in full personality, it would make sense that one perception would be pronounced over against another, specifically, personlessness.

Science is arrogant because it erases itself in the mirror. It is an observer but it has influence and it does not account for it in all ways at all times. In this case that is fully presented.

You are a person as I am. If I perceive a person it does not matter what you perceive. Really it comes down to that. My word against yours, which gets into the word, "word." It is the ultimate authority in the universe. It is my greeting and all-purpose word, because of that and because it is the English word for the word Logos which means Word in the supreme proof sense. It is logic, evidence, reason manifest. It represents the personality of the divine participant observer, who I personally know.

In my system design let it be no secret that I share ideas with the Logos, which is why you will see that in my "about" page on my web presence. Logos == Adonai. The Word is Supreme Lord. It two specific ways, which kill it on either end:

Logos == Adonai can mean:

1) Linguistics and etymology is ruler of conscious creation in a pre-penultimate sense, outside the looking glass.
2) Personal co-divine presence in humanity is manifest as the manifestation of universal, supreme human word.

"Manifest as the manifestation" comes from the ==

In Mayan, that symbol: = means manifestation. So == is manifestation of manifestation. It literally means Word is manifestation of manifestation of Lord. It also means, for insiders, The Word, is the quality of, the reality matching, Lord.

It unifies Greek, Mayan, Hebrew, and all other languages in the == symbol as a computer language element. That being true in C++ and PHP and other languages brings in all languages which can use C++ which includes English, and most other known peoples and is certainly not limited to what is true today only. So it is truly universal in premise and unhurt.

That is my personal paradigm, the story in my personhood that props it up like a tent is propped up vs. a sleeping bag can just be flat and out under the weather. Mechanical and inhuman or de-anthropomorphic is a choice just as joy and peace are choices, and wholeness and authenticity are choices, and consciousness or semiconsciousness, and that is not an area for pontification as I hear here, but for evidence as I give here. The co-divine participant observer is personal and I present myself as a conspirator of Its.

Re: David Kolby » 1M1P Launched, Video Posted

digitalextremist — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 23:29:01 -0000

Testing the unfinished davidkolby.com

Re: Wassup 2008, Viral Obama Video

digitalextremist — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 00:09:58 -0000

That has been running 24x7 as the leadup video for blip.tv

Re: Disqus | Michael Silverton | Palo Alto, California

digitalextremist — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 01:51:43 -0000

Seesmic video reply from Disqus.

Re: The Direction of Time

digitalextremist — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 00:46:31 -0000

Word. Tun spirals are like the core samplings of a tree, but with time - and the count is going down for individuals. There is the 360 community year, and there is the 260 day personal year which interprets the 360 day calendar, individual by individual. They turn on each other infinitely. Every 360 day period has many different divisions possible to check a different frequency or channel of change. Tuns, half tuns, quarter tuns, eighth tuns, etc etc there are many levels. The transformation is playing out in a descending pattern and accelerating. It spirals, hence the name, down a stairway. This is not something people pay attention to though, most people don't know. And those who do follow a universal calendar only watch the individual days, not the day in their own personal calendar. From the community perspective, the day goes up to meet the descending "real number" which is your personal calendar's day, which is really going down. So "you" are going down the stairs, and Earth and time and the universe and our experience are coming up the stairs. If that isn't significant and worth considering as interesting, I don't know what is. And to have that encoded in numbers? This needs to be further developed. The implication itself is so graphic and vivid that it looks like something more than postulates or theorizes something. It is like a video. Like, "this is what is going on with us:" (point to calendar).

Re: Meme? Get Meta?

digitalextremist — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 08:30:14 -0000

By the way, no, I have not! I would like to! Is it online somewhere for download, or must disparate commercial dissonance be waded through?

Re: Emergence

digitalextremist — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 07:50:02 -0000

Word! Great post! I challenge some of it in the post "The Direction of Time"

Re: Branching net-synapses

digitalextremist — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 07:17:30 -0000

Very good post. The only thing approaching interrogation I have is to put out an exception, or a modifier. Mind itself is the mediation itself, so there is no collective mind, that is not really a redundancy but an opinion of the nature of mind itself. It implies there is a form of valid mind which is not unified. This may seem correct, but it is only "the case," in the sense it is temporary.

As I realized, I focus more on seeing the spiritual implications and fundamentals of civilization where it looks like you, Kolby, my wife, and others in our group focus more on the physical manifestation of the spiritual reality. Both sides are essential, but one is characterized by suggestions and corrections (my side) where you guys see the direct and make the direct change.

With that said, from a spiritual perspective, the appropriate thing we must say here is that spirits are being mediated through mind. Not mind(s) but mind, which is not disconnected from itself. This mirrors the reality of the divine participant observer who volunteered to be in this position of putting out THE one mind, as the group mind, like shell accounts vs. isolated systems.

This helps you, it is not just a clarification, because the pivot point is "mutual benefit," in digital-native communities, which is short hand for effective shared interests, which is a desire-based word, which gestures to spirit which interacts with will. So it is important to point out that technology as well as space itself is a metaphor of mind, the mental, the cognitive, the intellectual. But that is just a canvas.

As this is realized, in the made-real sense, something really game changing will happen -- physical sense will become optional. Right now we need to be manifest in physical form in a specific location to enjoy an experience of a certain type, for the most part, and we value these experiences more, for instance, I value microbrew beer more than a blog post, more often than not. But that will not really go away so much as transform.

The cosmic human entity which we experience as limited will shift into unlimited primacy, once the story in the center of this unified being is "on." Right now it is "off" and so the center is rotting. When that happens, what we perceive to be solid and what we perceive to be vacuum will switch, I believe. I believe that what is vacuum now will become the primary material reality, and what is seemingly solid, will become vacuum in perception of the phenomenological.

So in that context, it is easier to focus on the change to spiritual than to focus on the technological accommodation of the physical, which is based on having the clearest understanding of mind and spirit, set against will and body, understanding each piece. Right now, we could be inhabiting all space and all time, especially what SEEMS to be vacuum but is really an area we have not subscribed to mentally, as a group. When that happens, everything we are saying now will probably matter very little, like an umbilical cord is discarded - and only dying races produce or preserve umbilical cords for extra powers after birth.

Re: Branching net-synapses

digitalextremist — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 06:53:10 -0000

You reminded me of a name with this post. Will direct-message it to you.

Re: Branching net-synapses

digitalextremist — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 01:47:56 -0000

Major Meme action going on here.

"The whole sky is out here."

Re: Offically entered the Cosmics …

digitalextremist — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 22:30:37 -0000

( congratz on disqus acct )

Re: Offically entered the Cosmics …

digitalextremist — Sun, 19 Oct 2008 22:27:20 -0000

Wow. That reads like a foreign policy for a nationstate, which is killer, but it also flows from a center which is very close to the metaphor itself. Exploring quantum interactions and substance characteristics is a great discussion of allegory.

When we zoom in far enough, there is vacuum, for lack of a better word: no thing. Is that neutrality coming in through a side door, or is perhaps neutrality itself the most pervasive military element in the perceived universe? Basically, space is winning over matter and the perception of having a solid-concrete sense of touch. Some argue the most profound expression of the creator is this sense of solidness. But is it true that this perspective that contains solidness as in touch sense reporting "hard object" in this space conquered and governed by "vacuum" is mental?

What is mental? What is a perspective it is mental and what is it if it is not mental? Where does judgment attach to the mind or is it embedded, or unconnected to mind at all? What is the individual agent, set against those who are not agents, perhaps people without perspectives? Also, of community tradition passed down in semi-volatile form through generations vs. quantum traits which seem to be more uniformed, what is their substance, if any? What is the basic unit of isness is the real question behind all this, when you get to the back of it all.

You have my vote on duality being a difficult to explain experience in a unified environment of harmony and seeming uniformity and self consistency, but is it truly duality, and what is duality? Does voting itself imply this duality if there is such a thing? Does judgment as you say create it if duality is a new position on the same events and states of being? Does judgment itself ever undergo judgment, and if it does, is that still duality, or is there something else going on?

Other than making my own head swim, my point is that points exist and they are neither neutral or perspective at the first, they are points. We have the ability to analyse analysis. We can live many lives inside one life. There is recursion and perpetual motion inherent to everything in life, and these different points do not argue, they triangulate. @silverton mentioned this in one of his videos where he starts to want to compare multi-channel digital-native humanity to locating epicenters in earthquakes to interhuman intimacy online. We view each other from many angles and do siesmic evaluations from many observatories to see the whole being as best we can digitally. This is another example of what we already do in being personal at all, and it is in fact what the divine participant observing is doing internally, right now, in and amongst its own individuals. While we do not share direct divinity, we share individuality which is a close second to divinity.

Silverton later asks if he seems to seek complexity for its own sake and I also want to avoid this, so my taking this line of thought is cautious. I mean that points of view themselves are not primarily perspective, and argument is not the necessarily supreme recourse for duality if duality does in fact stand apart from itself right now. Congruence is organic and pervasive for space itself, as it is for time, and matter on its lowest level. So I suggest that point of view, perspective, duality and the like facilitate community for individuals.

This is important because the divine participant observer in that case must not be only individual, but community, in order to truly be divine. My statement that positions are not only non-neutral but also not perspectives but are authentic personality centers and points of origin for life is to say that the divine nature already has this trait and we cannot do anything unwise like deciding how it behaves and what causes it, as if it had a cause at all, and as if the mental experience, when properly defined, somehow makes the material world the real thing to study rather than just studying ourselves directly by properly understanding the mental and material world, by way of perception and point of view: the highest most awesome treasure there is in the entire universe, so much so it stems directly from the essence of the divine nature itself.

To go for the gold here. I further reprimand the United States founding fathers and their disciples who make them demigods for mistaking union for unity, and confusing the American brand for what the universe already provides because the divine nature already requires it: individuality in freedom, imagination and love. All we need to do now is find out what we already are, not create identities on top of that, like land of the free. That is retarded. No other brand could be more foolish than a land of the free. That is like saying, I sell wet water. Or, come get life. Anyone who would hear that statement already has what is offered. This means it goes right to the most hotly debated question:

Eat this fruit and you will be like God

Am I not already like God? Is that a true implication which impels me to care at all about anything else said by this speaker offering me something, be it a symbolic scriptural food product or a mystical commercial trade item like propaganda, or some other perspective if my own perspective is not a perspective at all, but the presence of the individual universal divine participant observer experiencing my experiencing me.

So to finish off this, I really like what is going on here when it can go really meta like this and really discover the truth. I would dismiss neutrality and say that what is expected in the place of neutrality is wholeness which seems neutral but is not, it is both sides at once, all extremes and all details in one, but not neutral. Mostly I hope that rather than looking at material to know ourselves, that we know ourselves by material. This is a very nuanced thing, "to" or "by," it is like "at" or "via." Perspective only exists if I look AT not THROUGH. If my sight stops at the symbol and does not see the signal, I am not alive, therefore there is no duality, no neutrality, and no point. Literally, there is no point when all I see is a point and not what its meaning is in the full scope of life in the universe. That is my mind trying to hurt my love. It is a robber at theft in me.

Re: Offically entered the Cosmics …

digitalextremist — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 20:47:27 -0000

Good to see you posting Hannah!

You two need to register for disqus.com accounts one time.

Kolby, I guess the 1m1p marketing slogan works well right? "Infinite possibilities."

I am a very opinionated person perhaps, because I notice right away when someone edges me in so my view of life is cramped. What does America have to do with the Universe, or visa universa? You are right to say though that the so-called crisis is no crisis at all. It is the terror of being born. That cannot be national. Humanity itself is being born.

Really I think it is a move away from fundamentalism, which is really just lazy non-relevance, to spiritual authenticity as we see in Art of War and other texts. These other views are not national or time-tied but universal, fundamental in a totally different sense. But you are right though, "Americans" are unprepared for human individuality in a universal sense.

Re: Whipping boy?

digitalextremist — Thu, 16 Oct 2008 03:13:19 -0000

The 'analysts' are really operating on some twisted eyes here. The seesmic video workflow approach to crowd content is not really in the category the article seems to cram it into. So it's not only wrong, it is talking about another subject than what seesmic addresses.

Plus, predicting failures is not a viable use of time. It is taking time to undo what only individual work will prove: success. A lot of praise could be the cause of continued success purely because people welcome a new experience and discover that yes, it is a new type and shape of tool.

If seesmic fails and it is because everyone threw vegetables at it for months and abused users, then the cause for that is not whatever financial reason is being said - it is public hateworks. Whenever something is new, it is categorized wrong and underestimated.

Mad Love //de

Re: Warren Buffet Interview With Charlie Rose On Current Economic Conditions

digitalextremist — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 21:43:28 -0000

Very interesting perspective.

Re: With Immediacy But Not Land

digitalextremist — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 20:08:01 -0000

Meeting done and waiting for next.

Thinking out loud:

Software for community of 50-250, digital-native, multi-channel identities migrating through technology spaces together, as tangible action step.

Preparing in that direction, my mind goes right for the layers in between the community members which must be dissolved to have immediacy.

So there must be dissolution of the layers between individuals which means the community must be supra-national, based on individuality itself.

It is still however not a country, and not really a town, but more like a village, but its natives are spread out like data on an undefragged harddrive.

With the availability of digital space for the point of unification for the community which uses all available channels, we just need a "fort" program.

Not to protect but to collect and to provide a legitimate point of constitutional manifestation. That then is the distinctly "our" space for profile resting.

This is the city in the sky that people have predicted for ages, understood and put out as a video message, it's just the way it must be done. So bravo there.

The key to this development is the community size I believe. 50-250 or 500-5000 maximum I would say, per village, understanding our own limits.

We can be part of several villages, but each village I would imagine needs to have a reason why it exists rather than being another village.

The core paradigm or "central story" that has driven the very quick growth of this village for instance is your discussion with Renato.

So I think it is story + infrastructure = civilization, and opportunity + motive = village when we factor in how technology works.

Another key to this is the change in perspective from what may happen to what will happen. The community is assumed to exist or not exist based on participation of the individuals so there is no need for defense, no need for competition with other villages, and no conflicts with physical municipal layers initially.

Really good stuff. My notes are raw and mostly to myself. Definitely liking this. This to me is satisfied by the system I call Congruciv.

Mad Love //de