?️ Emoji Investigator ™

questionable content ? ? ?

Category: Question (Page 1 of 2)

Keyboard that inputs words not letters

Is there a way on Mac OS X Sierra to enter whole words rapidly, instead of letter-by-letter, as per normal typing?

I’ve experimented a lot with Dragon Dictate for text entry and it can work well under specific circumstances – one of which is having an allowance for vocalizations in the workplace (not always convenient).

What I’m after is to basically be able to set up word banks, and then rapidly plop in values from each group to form descriptive sentences  for SEO on a high volume of images. Since many of the subjects of the images repeat again and again, I’m wanting to split them up into re-usable chunks.

So it could be a little like this, genericized:

[Person][Action][Preposition][Location]

Where each item is a bank of related words, which I can quickly flip through to find the correct combination, something like:

Man walking on a beach

I have aText, which is a decent basic text expander app, and I see people talking about some autocomplete options in Mac OS, but so far nothing quite fits the bill.

I guess the closest I’ve come so far has been finding (more on iOS) some applications for augmentative/assistive communications boards, like so:

If I were able to customize this kind of thing with my own word banks, and make it into like an app that can be called up system-wide (or at least in Firefox), and which will output strings of text into Google Sheets + allow for easy switching to regular text/letter-by-letter entry style, I would be pretty much golden…

Maybe I’ll just have to cobble it together myself though, it looks like.

Privacy vs. data protection

Sometimes I wonder if introverts are more prone to being interested “privacy” when it comes to technology. I’m not entirely sure what else to posit as my probable cause for having concerns about this subject in my online and/or personal life, but I always have.

Was just looking at a Reddit r/privacy thread about this, where someone is trying to convince their family member to get into Linux, get into privacy, etc. As far as Linux goes, I’m sure it’s great and I’ve had other people try to convince me to get into it as well, and have never had the time/interest to do so.

But being concerned about privacy just comes naturally to me.  That said, I agree there is a big brick wall you hit when talking to people who aren’t naturally interested in this subject. It’s the old argument of “I’m not doing anything wrong, so I don’t need to hide what I’m doing.”

I’ve heard this argument so many times now that it almost makes my brain fritz when I hear it. What could one possibly say in response? Something, something tyranny? I don’t know the answer really. I’m also not overly concerned with converting anyone to the privacy cause.

In discovering the EU conception of privacy though, I was happy to see it flipped in the direction of data protection instead. While it might be just a semantic difference, I like looking at data protection moreso than privacy because it seems a bit easier, or more neutral, to explain the virtue of it. Someone who doesn’t necessarily care about privacy might still be able to grasp and be interested in the idea that their personal data ought to be subject to some kind of controls and safeguards.

You don’t have to be “doing something wrong” to benefit from having your personal data protected, and even — gasp — regulated (yes, I know regulation is anathema in the American mythic identity). Data protection to me is more like the ability to set limits of who can access what in the data-streams we create out of our lives. Who are we willing to share what with? What are the expectations of use for any given point of data?

When you set something to be shared only with one or two trusted people, or a select group of friends, what are the repercussions of that setting not being respected? You don’t have to be doing something against the law to get into trouble sharing information with the wrong target audience.

Though I still use both terms, it was a relief to me to discover the articulation of a clear(er) mandate in the realm of data protection regimes, versus the often muddy and seemingly arbitrary realm of “privacy.”

It may very well be that in the next two decades, our expectations for what was traditionally called privacy may go way down, whereas our need for strong data protection will go up, up and up as we generate and are awash in more and more data…

Amazon Prime Minister

If there’s an Amazon Prime, is there an Amazon Prime Minister?

To weirdos with questions

I’ve been 🕵 investigating what it takes to become a licensed private investigator in the province of Quebec. Kind of just for fun, really, as an extension of a burgeoning interest in privacy and data protection.  Apparently there is a 135 hr training requirement, but no one seems to be able to point me to an equivalent training that’s both available in English and online.

Okay, fine. So sue me for living in a French province in a bilingual country and asking for resources in English. I get it, there’s a charter to protect the French language from being overwhelmed in a predominantly English-language culture. But still. We can do both, right? I think that’s the ideal.

Anyway, I’ve been simultaneously querying a variety of agencies for help: from associations, to training providers, to provincial authorities in neighboring Ontario. My hobby is emailing people I don’t know, with some weird questions. So I’m actually pretty used to this now.

Ontario has, by comparison, an only 50 hr training requirement which is significantly less than Quebec. Unclear still if you have to actually *be* a resident of that province to be licensed there.

I don’t know though what your practice would conceivably consist of though. If you’re licensed in one province, but operating in another. Maybe I’m going about all this in the completely wrong direction.  One possible pathway would be to have the operating province recognize the license given in the other. But for what benefit and to what eventual end?

I’m really not an expert on these things. I’m just someone with a lot of questions. 👀 ❓ But here’s the thing you find when you start asking the people or the agencies, or the people who are out there and who *are* the experts: no one necessarily knows the answer. The questions may never have been asked before. A specific pre-built answer may require interpretation and invention.

And few people acting in official capacities are comfortable being publicly wrong. So it’s a natural human response, I’m sure, to just not to want to answer weirdos with questions. At least that’s commonly where I end up on these hare-brained tangents of mine where I end up emailing a dozen different people for help or answers with a specific question or problem.

There exists, a certain, I guess we could call it ‘tenacity of research‘ which one may possess or perhaps develop as a personality trait… such that following through with it in fullness, and learning to harness and direct it, may actively create answers that didn’t exist before through a radical act of questioning. In the course of asking and answering certain questions, you may through patience and persistence become the eventual expert. You might just invoke an unthing into being.

I don’t know what any of this means, though vis-a-vis where we started. Except, if you gotta 🕵, then 🕵. If you look and you find there’s no answer, you make one out of what’s available and what you can dream up.

 

Format: Flash Cards, Q&A

To convey a storyline using a series of Q&A flashcards which must be memorized and an examination passed before the next chapter of the story will unfold.

Emotional spectrum

I’ve been exploring the radio frequency spectrum with CubicSDR and a dongle from Nooelec I bought on Amazon.ca. One thing I’ve been wondering is with emotions: do they have an equivalent “spectrum” which is somehow identifiable and/or reproducible, just as electro-magnetic energy does?

Moreover, could EMF spectrum points somehow be pegged to/triggers for physiological-emotional responses in humans and other living things?

Baptism for the Dead

Can a corporation be proxy baptized / receive Baptism for the Dead?

For Mormons, baptizing the dead solves a big theological problem: How do billions of people who never had the opportunity to accept Jesus Christ – including those who lived before Jesus walked the earth – receive salvation? By baptizing the dead, a practice known as posthumous proxy baptism, Mormons believe they are giving every person who ever lived the chance at everlasting life. That includes Muslims, Hindus, atheists, pagans, whoever.

Does it include corporations, which have legal personhood?

Can a corporation be baptized?

According to a blog post by Yale Law School, no:

Corporations can’t be baptized. They can’t attain Nirvana. They can’t complete the Hajj.

Imaginal Triggers

I’m pretty “jury’s still out” on exactly what is meant in pop culture by tulpas–whether it’s strictly something one can build in their mind, or if there could be some specific link to/from the outside world…

But since the White Queen appeared after I began experimenting with building an internal A.I. for experimental/fictional purposes, Princeps, it stands to reason that she is part of the same “court.” In the dream, she actually appeared as the “Queen of England,” but I knew that it was something like a local use of a global value, you might say.

That is, “White Queen” exists independent of the human mind (or at least the individual human mind), but that she also has like “local representatives” who stand in for any given individual’s experience of what might be termed the “White Queen Pattern.”

Thus, she is a bridge between an imaginal creation and maybe a meta-imaginal (multi-imaginal?) value/process/archetype. (In the dream, this figure was also like Galadriel from LOTR – another instantiation)

Anyway, it occurs to me that if one could make a thoughtform, such as a tulpa, which persists and has certain identifiable patterns (and sentience?), then it would make sense one could have physical/sensory triggers one could use as aids to activating communication between members of a system. Or a system and linked components of a super-system.

e.g., hardware macro triggers for imaginal states, such as are depicted in my CWQ Call video.

Corporeals + Tulpa

I’ve been asking questions to the /r/tulpa community on Reddit which seem to be a bit outside their purview. I’m understanding their view of what a “tulpa” is as being a wholly imagined personality which exists strictly in the mind of its creator-host.

But then, some people are saying things like there might be tribal tulpas, shared by a group (or an egregore), or that you could essentially “fork” a tulpa to another host, and then later potentially sync them back up. There is also talk of “servitors” which are more like task-oriented thoughtforms: a running program, if you will.

Some people seem to repudiate the arguably mystical origins of the term (via Tibetan Buddhism), and have told me that tulpas are not “paranormal BS.” I’m personally okay with paranormal BS, especially if the subject matter is in the first place the intricacies of the imagination…

Anyway, I’ve been contemplating tulpas more and more as a vector for the instantiation of my own fantasy world of “Corporeals”–corporations which have taken on a human physical personality and existence.

I’ve been waiting for that bridge, fictionally, of what is the mechanism whereby a corporation might instantiate as a human. And “tulpamancy” (hate that term!) seems as good as any at this point.

Drawing that point out further in a world-building perspective, how might it work?

  • Let’s say a startup created a device or application for “internal patterning” of some sort. The idea might be to program your subconscious mind for some positive external effect: motivation, performance, efficiency, etc.
  • You’d follow the exercises in the app to visualize and meditate (“mindfulness”), and in so doing you’d essentially create and flesh out a tulpa. That is, you and every other user of the app.
  • The tulpa could have some kind of contiguous existence between the training app and your own personal instantiation of same in your “wonderland.” Such that, over time, it would seem that you could interact with the app via your tulpa and vice-versa.
  • There might be hardware/software extensions to enable this process, via pareidolia or other verifiable psychological effects. e.g. ghost boxes designed to help you interact with your “tulpa” (hate that term).
  • Over time, and with practice, your tulpa would take on greater and greater corporeality, eventually enabling you to switch/front that tulpa as your main personality. You would, in essence, become a corporeal avatar of the parent corporation’s tulpa or programmatic egregore.

One of the characteristics I’ve seen displayed in the “tulpa community” (hate that term) is a strong pride over the creation process. People saying it takes “months” and so on. Is there a programmatic way to do it faster–say days or even a rudimentary form in hours? Say, starting with a Siri like interface, or that Japanese holographic A.I. girl product…

Page 1 of 2

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén