AHOY,
update; 04/13/12 07;40 hours, mostly grammar and context, that I did not high-lite.
update; 04/12/12 I've now combined what I feel is the best of the post on Strategy page site, my post on this blog and this page. This page like I said well be a work in progress. With all the copy and paisting the grammar is not as good as I would like, LOL.
AHOY,
"Engage" And lets go we're no man has gone before,
LOL. I'll be back here from time to time with more of my epiphanies...
GENERATIONS, STRATEGY'S, BLOCKS AND TACTICS
AHOY, I am going to attempt to make the case here that what
we are looking at in the evolution of Warfare, is a cyclic afar not a linear continuum.
I find it odd that those defining all these so called "generations of
warfare", usually do so based on a change in what I would call tactics.
Fallowed up by the statement that tactics are for the armatures. And like I have also pointed out in the past, go to the library and see how many books you can find on tactics. The word tactics is used in lots of titles, yet the material is strategies. Then note that you can find shelves of books on strategy. My point is if strategies were the most important element of warfare would the government make that info so readily available? I think not. I think all the books on strategies are nothing more than filibuster to waste everyone's time. Here with this post, I am sure I
could have done more research and provided dates and figures etc. to support my theories. However
IMO this is a big old can of warms and so I'll let this be my starting salvo.
As far as Strategies go I say ultimately you only have three
choices, one Overt operations, two, Covert operations and three, surrender.
With either of these you can be subtle or aggressive. With surrender it may be
that the new old saying of "surrender, surrender but don't give yourself
away" may be the source of the problem. That is to say, that people are
individuals free spirits and thus after the age of 20 or so they never are able
to fully buy into anyone else's ideology no matter how hard they try. There for
the old ugly head of change i.e. conflict, keeps raising its ugly head. Boardum
could also play apart i.e utopia is boring.
Anywho!
1st cycle IMO is
Man vs Nature and Creature; Starting with the Dawn of man, (however that took
place). I do believe in God, just not organized religion. I just cannot get my
mind around the image of a microbe crawling out of a pool of whatever one day
or night fallowed, 6 billion years later by a guy waving down a taxi on 5th
avenue in New York City. I forget the movie or show that I got that from but I
really like it. Here with this 1st cycle, just like with the three block war theory. I remind everyone
that even today you may find yourself in a survival situation i.e. living off
land etc. I would also suggest that Global warming is a cycle of this
reoccurring conflict.
2nd cycle IMO is
Man vs Man; this I well say started around the time of the advent of
agriculture thus giving birth to your four cradles of civilization. We have not
stayed so civil have we? LOL. With some men having lots of positions and others
doing without, greed or envy soon arrived, we have people taking things they
wanted or needed. And so those doing without began taking things they wanted. I
will include here the so called "1st generation of war" i.e. the "covet"
lol at Westphalia thus state vs. state monopoly on warfare. To me all manner of
changes occur here including the advances of many sciences, starting the
conflict of “Chruch vs State”. One major change was the industrial revolution
which IMO brought about the "military, industrial, Congressional, Complex i.e. "The MICC", thus mass
production of weapons and material. Thus IMO war as a business and a major
global export, with WWI, being the first example of how this enterprise could work. As far as WMDs go, I say these have existed ever since
man began using the same well to drink from i.e. Bio warfare became as simple
as someone throwing an animal carcass into the well. I don't know if it
actually accrued but there was the story of the British giving the blankets
infected with small pox to the Native Americans.. If it did not accrue IMO it
certainly would have worked that way. Here we also have the various economic
systems. I recommend the video "money as debt". You can find a link
to it on the starboard side of my blog. The bottom line to this film is that a
system base on consumption of natural resources is finite. IMO any attempt to
introduce conservation or recycling and alternatives makes for great theory
strategically, however tactically IMO no one well be the first to take a
serious cut in profits. Thus they are suggesting fighting a forest fire with a
bucket of water. Today I do not believe B.P. is serious with their latest feel
good commercial propaganda messages.
And on the financial systems. IMO all three systems,
Communism, Socialist Europe, and the so called free Capitalist here in the U.S.
have failed for the same reason. GREED! In Russia it was greed by the
officials. And imo Communism is the best and most fair of all and imo, that
system even under the corrupt Russian government, would have out lasted the
others, if it had not had to compete with the West, especially the U.S. in the
Cold war. The wealthy here in the U.S. were the ones that were to greedy and
killed our economy. Keeping in mind, imo (911) brought it all to a head much
quicker i.e. made those running things throw the book out, in public, thus
taking away the illusion of the so called white marketers having the moral high
ground.
And in Europe it was the people themselves i.e. wanting it
to good, too much vacation, too many benefits, not enough work. Along with
their own wealthy, getting caught up in our (U.S.) wealthiest ones, scams. Not
to mention they too had to keep up with the Jones (U.S.) and others too.
Now let’s talk population control, it has to be fixed i.e.
controlled or we are like people trapped in an air tight volt with only a small
hole providing air, if we let more in we suffocate quicker. With my one foot
equals a mile scaled visualization system I have looked at this, examples I
have mentioned before are that 3.1 million people can stand with in a one square
mile area with each person having 9 square feet i.e. one square yard to stand
in.
So my point is it is a resources problem not a space
problem. Like it was mentioned in one of Time Magazine's latest articles. With
the people living within the current density of NYC, everyone on earth (est. 7
billion) could fit within the state of Texas.
I well suggest that the Christians and this marriage issue
equals multiply, is to blame in large part. The government too with its more
benefits if you have more children. Here someone needs to say hay if each of
the parents (in case of divorce) cannot afford the kid, you don't have it. (No
I’m not “Chicom” I’m try common sense) The system I know firsthand is based on
promoting the family (i.e. trap) first and foremost. Real life example; I
worked for a company once and was the best worker they had ever seen. This in
my younger days. However when it came to getting a raise it was explained to me
that the other guy and his wife were expecting a baby so he got the raise. I
explained to that idiot manager, that he could find two or three other
"yes men" to take my place. Because I knew he wanted more people that
had "sold their soul" to the company store i.e. that the company knew
they had by the short ones. Like I've said this is a big old can of warms, I
could go no and no.
Like I said, I had originally posted all this on the "Strategy
page" site. And I had considered the "separation of church and state
to be the third cycle. However that like so much of the things I post was just
off the top of my head i.e. me shooting from the hip. I have not yet begun to
mastermind anything yet. I’m waiting for god to call the old man. Again here in my rush I imo sounded cold to say the least. I hope god gives the old man ten more years. And the way he is going only god knows. It's because of the old man working on his writings such long hours, that I don't have more time to work on the computer. LOL, more power to him.
Anywho! after giving it a micro second, lol of thought after
first posting, I realized the “Church vs state” conflict, would be just another
moment in the man verses man saga. Thus, I now turn my thoughts to, Separation
of Church and State; here we could start with the people in the old testament
choosing a King vs the Judges/priest. Or our forefathers leaving Europe to
start over and perhaps the Middle East is starting on such an experiment today.
Much like the Europeans being less religious than Americans now are. Or Mexico
is also a great example of this, Mexico city allows gay marriage. IMO I sign of
maturity on the part of Mexico's society.
IMO though, it seems the priest is never far behind and
people in general are week, so they flock back to there old ways maybe even
starting with the kings/presidents. That is to say for political reasons they
preach to the choir, and plant those seeds. Maybe we could start by realizing
that organized religion like career politicians are two major problems of the
so called "free world". Why not, keep it as an individual experience,
between god and you. If you would like to be a part of a theocracy then we
could provide a ticket i.e. Transportation to say Iran or the United Kingdom.
Or we here in the U.S. might find ourselves surrender to the christian's and
awaiting Armageddon, hoping they have it right i.e. gods is on our side as we
watch our porn and sports, behind our electronic security robots.
(notes to be added later, on U.S. forefathers and those types who traveled here. You see imo the people who want to claim that separation of
church and state was to protect the church, need to ask why it was not plainly
stated that way. I mean if it was just the sytle of the cross or the costums
that the English church clergy wore, that our forefathers object too. Why...
IMO, the vague wording was more of a compromise, those in charge of the Government at the time made to prevent a sheephood uprising, get the votes etc. )
3rd cycle of
conflict IMO maybe "man Vs Machine".
Note; from my original post on Strategy page.
AHOY,
I missed something here with my little epiphany. Let's look
at some terms and excerpts from "Time" magazine February 21 2011
issue. These are not presented in the exact order of the original article. And
have been edited or paraphrased to get to the points I wanted to make.
From the Time article...
"Organic
intelligence" O.I. and "Artificial intelligence" A.I.
"Singularity" is borrowed from astrophysics; it refers to a point in
space- time for example, inside a black hole at which the rules of ordinary
physics do not apply.
"Machinekind"
Computers are getting faster, faster--- that is, the rate at
which they're getting faster is increasing. True? True.
He (Mr. Raymond Kurzweil) knew about Moore's law, of course.
Kurzweil tried plotting a slightly different curve; the change over time in the
amount of computing power, measured in MIPS (millions of instructions per
second), that you can buy for $ 1,000. As it turned out Kurzweil's numbers
looked a lot like Moore's. They doubled every couple of years. Drawn as graphs,
they both made exponential curves, with their value increasing by multiples of
two instead of by regular increments in a straight line.
The curves held eerily steady, even when he extended his
backward through the decades of pretransistor computing technologies like
relays and vacuum tubes, all the way back to 1900. Kurzweil then ran the
numbers on a whole bunch of other key technological indexes the falling cost of
manufacturing transistors, the rising clock speed of microprocessors, the
plummeting price of dynamic RAM. He looked even further afield at trends in
biotech and beyond the falling cost of sequencing DNA and of wireless data service
and the rising numbers of internet hosts and nanotechnology patents.
He Kept finding the same thing; exponentially accelerating
progress.
"It's really amazing how smooth these trajectories are,
he says. Through thick and thin, war and peace, boom times and
recessions." Kurzweil calls it the law of accelerating returns;
technological progress happens exponentially , not linearly.
Then he extended the curves into the future, and the growth
they predicted was so phenomenal, it created cognitive resistance in his mind.
Exponential curves start slowly, then rocket skyward toward infinity.
Here's what the exponential curves told him. We well
successfully reverse engineer the human brain by the mid-2020s. By the end of
that decade, computers will be capable of human level intelligence. Kurzweil
puts the date of the Singularity never say he's not conservative, at 2045.
In that year, he estimates, given the vast increases in
computing power and the vast reductions in the cost of the same, the quantity
of artificial intelligence created will be about a billion times the sum of all
the human intelligence that exists today.
All that horsepower could be put in the service of emulating
whatever it is our brains are doing when they create consciousness- not just
doing arithmetic very quickly or composing piano music but also driving cars,
writing books, making ethical decisions, appreciating fancy painting, or making
witty observations at cocktail parties. They would take over their own
development.
Probably. It's impossible to predict the behavior of these
smarter than human intelligences with which (with whom) we might one day share
the planet, because if you could, you'd be as smart as they would be. But there
are a lot of theories to become super intelligent cyborgs, using computers to
extend our intellectual abilities the same way that cars and planes extend our
physical abilities.
Maybe the artificial intelligences well help us treat the
effects of old age and prolong our life spans indefinitely. Maybe we'll scan
our consciousnesses into computers and live inside them as software, forever,
virtually. Maybe the computes will turn on humanity and annihilate us. The one
thing all these theories have in common is the transformation of our species
into something that is no longer recognizable as such to humanity circa 2011.
This transformation has a name the "Singularity".
The difficult thing to keep sight of when you're talking about the
"Singularity" is that even though it sounds like science fiction, it
isn't, no more than a weather forecast is science fiction. It's not a fringe
idea; it's a serious hypothesis about the future of life on Earth.
04/10/12 Newjarheaddean's twist on things. I'll now coin my
own term i.e. not just "Machinekind" as Kurzweil suggest, but "Supremkind".
I think back to the movie Matrix (Revolutions) i.e. IMO
the machine may never be able to insert an actual "Ghost" i.e.
spirit. However it's software may find us humans to be the last frontier of the
unknown. And thus unlock the 90% of our brains we currently do not use. This
may enable the human mind with the abilities of levitation, telekinesis, ESP
etc. thus the old adage of "curiosity killing the cat" i.e. keys to
being supreme to the machines. For example taking them apart with our minds. We
could think the movie, "planet of the apes" only here it would be
"planet of the humans" i.e. gone " Supremkind".
To support my theory that all this conflict is simply cycles, I'll suggest that this cycle goes all the way back to the first tools used by man. And it could turn out that all those mysteries such as the Pyramids or Stone Hedge, turn out to actually be of our "Supremkind" ancestry.
To be continued...
" Give me a million dollars and I well change the world"
" When it comes to persecution and suffering that fairy tale about christ has not got (S) nothing on me"
" I well bet my lucky star" IKYG
G-day!
No comments:
Post a Comment