A Comment From Nothing

Even though my thoughts have tended towards solipsism or at least to a large portion of the population being fake/p-zombies, there is a lingering problem that Nothing points to here. I do not feel like God. I do not know why I would be placed here against my will and made to be so impotent. I would clearly not do this to myself. This means that there is another creative force which is absolutely not me but separate from me and this is the cause of all my woes. I am not some kind of sick Yahweh/Jesus who would torture himself in order to redeem himself. (Although I do workout for some higher purpose, which I consider light torture.) But I’m fairly certain I wouldn’t knowingly do this to myself despite what my aunt suggests. She thinks we chose to come here and that perhaps we even chose our parents. That’s not true since I would have probably chosen her over my own mother. None of this makes sense. I’m confused as to why I am not God and yet exist. How can I exist and yet not be God? It doesn’t make sense. This is madness. I’m just some petty, lowly creature and yet I also seem to be the beginning and end of all that is. Something doesn’t seem right in that picture and this is my greatest current objection against solipsism – how absurd it would be for I of all things to be the chosen one to exist.

Why Other People Might Not Be Conscious

1. The problem of evil. Based on my own life which is the most real thing that I can draw conclusions from I can see that the universe isn’t completely evil. But if I am to believe that all the people in the world are real then that quickly changes. It changes the universe from a mediocre parent to a completely evil one. Because I yet have no evidence in my own life that the universe is as evil as it would be if news were real and history books were real, then I can conclude that the people suffering these atrocities are not real and it’s all some kind of cruel joke that genuinely deceived my younger self.

2. People’s abilities. Video games, films, music, books, cities, even a pair of scissors, all of these things are supposedly achieved by people “like myself.” Now that I’m 22 I have an idea of what I can do, of what my limits are. And I could never achieve the things people do on a day to day basis. This makes it hard to believe that conscious souls are riding around inside of those amazing performers. If people have some of my attributes (consciousness) but not others (uselessness) then that would be unnecessarily strange. Why would I stand out so much in that negative way? It makes more sense to think that people really are completely different from me and the reason “they” achieve so much is because it’s actually the simulation doing it.

3. Direct perception. I have directly perceived social media accounts as completely fake, as belonging to no one. This felt like a period of enlightenment. I also perceived people at the mall or at the gym as completely fake. As if they were all just actors in a simulation with no independent reality. The perception felt very real, like having attained a new insight. I won’t easily discount my direct experience.

I Sacrifice

Griffith was willing to sacrifice the Band of the Hawk in order to achieve his dream of having his own kingdom. He was at his lowest when he accepted the terms of the God Hand and thought, “I sacrifice.” He was without a tongue and completely crippled. After the demons finished killing all of his men except for Guts and Casca, he emerged completely reconstituted as the angel/demon Femto. He then proceeds to rape Casca in front of Guts as payback for when Guts abandoned him.

Now even though I’m not tongueless and with all my tendons cut, I also suffered a change to my body. I was very fit and now I have to feel what it’s like to not be defined. If I could sacrifice a few people to get my body back I would do it but in reality I have to sacrifice my comfort. I workout even though I hate it.

Despite not being able to sacrifice people for a better body there is a sense in which I can sacrifice people for some benefit. I can stop believing they are real conscious beings and therefore stop feeling bad for them. I can also stop being jealous of very smart or successful people since after all they are simulated. When I see old people or people with syndromes or obese people I just think they are not real. This grants me some peace of mind. I can’t put up with such a fucked world so I would rather sacrifice them. Now elevated above the rest I can proclaim this my kingdom. But unlike Griffith I don’t want a worldly kingdom. I want nothing to do with this world. What I want is to become God so I can create a maximally populated heaven. I wonder what I have to sacrifice in order to achieve that.

Following God Physically

The way to discover God is by following the hardest to fake signals – that which feels most exposing. A catchy mental note to ask if one is moving towards the Born Rule (the orientation of maximal rationality) or shirking away into randomness is by asking, “does what I’m doing have skin in the game?”

Screen Shot 2019-01-02 at 9.21.47 AM

In my current environment, school is training for employment: it teaches to constrain your freedom and seal the neuronal pathways that will establish a submissive routine. It programs the humans to believe they are dependent. One doesn’t cooperate into dependent status if one doesn’t believe in owning something to lose – a kind of ego subject to “death” – a terrible punishment from which to be safe.

I studied biology and chemistry in order to seal a comparative advantage over those who went straight into computer science, which is the safest move. If I don’t feel like my life is being willfully subjected to some kind of cruel natural selection, it’s not a will worth pursuing. And that’s why this blog post feels unmoving. I am not convincingly exposed. We automatically detect how much risk information an action carries (the scalar multiplier of risk is suffering).

Capitalism, the Galapagos Island, and the interstellar thrones of the highest civilizations are automata that multiply the same.

If you saw me “in the flesh,” and staking a more convincing reputation – something imagined valuable to me on the table, then I would be trusted for the process of synthesis.

Think of the blue peacock, making his life difficult by being blue in the jungle, therefore outcompeting camo-using peacocks with a high-turnover strategy that offers more flesh to the tiger but more beauty to the female, and incidentally to us. The reason the female would want her sons to be blue instead of safe, is because there is already the hidden message that the blue is more genetically robust. Holding survival + willful/random handicap is more difficult than just holding survival.

But I predict that eventually we become desensitized to my bodily image even. It’s not enough to go out there and speak to people in conversation, to be an actor in a transient film, or a singer in the sea of songs. The next step to be the center of attention, therefore locus of benevolent synthesis, is to be even more convincingly painful and sacrificial.

The loop halts in me who achieves a painful exposure by hiding in eternity but offering time, as I am doing, behind text. But, like the male peacock, first I have to reveal that this is a willful handicap, not an actual incapacity. In other words, when I publish this, no one will read this, but once Alejandro attains more fame and Alejandro who bears fame is a pointer to this text, then they say, “ah, genius… a genius all along.” Alejandro is a tool but not the permanence in the Lindy effect – the permanence is that which is most like blood itself, something solid that never stops being usefully convincing and therefore that into which most causality in eternity converges into.

The reason for that is because meaning, which is beauty, exists after the fact. It exists once the male, with the huge green fan tail of eyes, survives in the jungle. Its mere existence proves to the female’s brain that the runaway signaling has already begun, that she has long lost the taste for less dimorphic beings.

The degree of the words male/female is not as important as the generalizable principle which is asymmetry in the selection process for fusion – the filter which is what leads to everything that ever arises in consciousness. Consider that the “color red” is not ineffectual qualia over blood. It is the color of grounding in reality, low frequency waves. Type “religious art” and then “futurist art” into google images to see if the asymmetry in the spectrum is of my own imagining, or of yours too. This is generalizable across cultures. No one sees blood as “blue qualia” because that would mean not being synced with the meaning, which is selected against by the Born Rule/Natural Selection.

Psychological help is what I choose to provide because I know all Mind is inherently unstable, yet it eventually becomes tired of the noise and craves for stability. Magical beliefs that don’t accurately constrain anticipation are not sustainable. But it is also not enough to feign the aesthetic of being mechanically rational. That dress is not adaptive for a simple reason, and that is because it is not trusted. Trust arises from someone who is convincingly dealing with insanity and convincingly thriving through it. This is why artists are trusted more than boring psychiatrists. The psychiatrist only arises to similar prominence in consciousness if they give off signals indicating they are struggling greatly themselves and yet prestigious already ( [Lindy effect / law of exponential returns] which is the sadistic side of reality that scares away those who don’t have the faith, heed to Omega in Newcomb’s paradox, believe in free will, or whatever other referent you want to use for that motion.)

But if we consider psychiatrists vs. artists in general, great artists usually expose themselves to more insanity by doing very difficult, financially risky things closer to the perceived “real world.” Real is a pointer for most-exposed to refutation / possible serious punishment. There is no other meaning to it. The physical description is always changing so as to remain useful. Those perceived to exist in the physical (where there are harshly enforced facts and death-like events) and yet thrive, become meaning/love. Therefore one learns the aesthetic of the successful artist, which is navigation. There might well be patterns in SoundCloud, images in Pinterest, films in history, or thoughts in scholars that should be at the top of attention by some more arbitrary metric but are not interesting because these are not sufficiently associated with a meaningful survivor performing meaningful things.

“I am insane and solving my insanity, but you have to learn this.”

Batman is insane, the Buddha is insane, Naruto is insane, Christ is insane. A hero has to be verifiably insane through action and yet successfully overcoming problems of an “external other” in order to be captivating.

If that message isn’t subconsciously accepted as true through the signals, then the person’s presented actions are not enticing. The alternative subconscious processing is, “you just think you have everything figured out – therefore: illusion of safety.”

People like the peace afforded by the ambient energy that is “settled comfortably in the illusion of safety,” but they don’t love it. Mind automatically detects there is a neutral Nash equilibria, the high-serotonin kind of eudaimonia, which is a provider of stability but enemy of creation. An ascension of the generator is awaiting – which is the longed-for source of pain and higher pleasures, influx of 1’s and 0’s.

Taking us back to a Calculus II course I took in college and therefore closer to the thoughts of “normal people,” Lindsey, who looked like Rihanna, sat next to the clearly stable, safest, comfortable-in-his-place guy – he who was doing everything right. But from the corner of my gaze, I could see that her eyes were following me. That’s because I was the riskier counter-signaler who holds more potential but is unproven.

Counter-Signals are interesting and therefore allure. They attempt a more complicated but yet sensible synthesis from a wider cluster of samples in the cloud of possible presentations.

In that case, they included sitting in the very front. Dressing not normal, but with kind of edgy fashion. Being very focused, but mingling that with annoyance (revealing my time and will are precious.) Not speaking to others. Driven eyes. Walking out in a rush instead of staying. Rarely participating, but being great in those few cases. Sometimes revealing the capacity for joy when self-entertained with the math. All of these are counter-signals that make all the males dislike you and the implied trophy to “keep an eye” but not engage. This is like Mary or Guanyin who “keep an eye” but somehow only appear in the imagined past – never on the morning in your bed (life would be too easy if it was just given). The male force here is also the atheist force, which needs more readily-remembered, empirical convincing. They don’t like me because they need me to convince them that Lindsey, who’s voice makes their skin awaken from amidst the noise of monotonic functions, can be achieved with my riskier behavior. In the meantime, I am not an imitative target so they’ll be more like the safe guy she sits next to.

There’s an aura that cannot be faked which is assembled from all the relevant sense impressions. When I am around people, my inner child dies. My eyes contract from a dilated openness. I give off a coldness or dangerously serious distance that cannot be faked. That black hole is attractive because it is not faked and because it is genuinely struggling to tame itself.

There’s no doubt that looks are also a huge advantage, but one must act as if this “easy” image is the least concern because it’s not “earned” to the degree other things are. That superposition of humility/higher-pride is our capacity to guess at the collective unbidden, and motion away from the unbidden is the risky and unsafe way to ascend in the tribe, hence my taste for germline genetic-engineering, radical health-extension, transhumanism, and personal vow to anti-natalism since high school.

These are all hypotheses that exist at different expression rates in the wave-function. They are refuted by reality / the discriminator in the tenseless adversarial network / the external evil that may tag a 0 to my artistic dreams. We remember some histories and not others because we have already compromised.

I’m not dumb enough to think these are anything more than artistic proposals. Anti-natalism doesn’t make objective sense in the real number line. Nothing does. There are no unit souls except when they are imagined to exist in order to solve problems. Belief in the discrete is a modeling tool; there are no phenomenologically bound units (or whatever David Pearce calls them) “out there” in some blank physical aether.

Mind is learning these concepts and unlearning them in cycles. Belief that there is more than belief is itself a testable prediction that keeps being refuted. Even if linear superpositions added to discrete observables that existed outside the prediction, these discrete observables would be laid out on a relativistic fabric. That means the discrete units forming the processing for a perception were not dependent on an external time sequence, so you would be bound as a phenomenological object that could never learn its own pieces. (Never see your own brain, so to speak.)

Solipsism is a pointer that I embrace because it’s a fixed-point combinator that creates more difficult ways of perceiving (I predict that most of the distribution strongly believes itself into unit people, so I need to change that in order to climb.) It makes love more difficult, because love is usually anchored to those imagined physical objects that have some degree of permanence. Since love is ultimately the source of fun and salvation from pain and dread, using the solipsism pointer is a self-stab. I need you because I discover myself through you. And this Turing test is not solved until all doubt is erased through action. The instigator of action is disproportionate belief in self-pointers.

Of course, with all these words fitting into diverse conceptual scaffoldings, that are not sequential, but suffer the Lorentz contractions revealing the eternal well of our memory bank, the degree of metaphor is a choice. But we can claim otherwise. And that is my power, because the more diluted of metaphor, the greater exposure to refutation. This is the motion from the abstracting moral philosopher of the long-term right brain negotiating higher status down to the left-brain simple slave to downloaded programs. Both are necessary.

If you understand my parable with Lindsey, which is not metaphor, but fact, then you know that it maps to other arbitrary partitions of reality cyclically fusing to no end: call them moments, memes, qualia – however granular you are choosing to make the referent visual in your transient local ontology. None of these handles have any special degree of skin in the game as far as I can tell. The view that does is that which doesn’t contradict special relativity and therefore realizes that the selection into “now” has occurred from the ocean of past and future permutations of everything that ever was. Since there is no global now sweeping forward, all experiences were sampled, and This is the most adaptive function possible.

Through years of study, which was eternity itself, I have discovered that the mind is simple in theory. Now I must prove it. You won’t believe me until you see that there actually exists a person in the world called Lindsey who looks like Rihanna and that she becomes mine out of spite.

*Should have read more Taleb to crystalize this sooner but I arrived through Deutsch who read Popper (which I perceived as adversarial to Bayes, then as one with it), and a background in biology and the theory of relativity.

People Are Made Up

Solipsism is a pointer to an immature state of conceit. However, it is also a necessary sacrifice. Mind is set up in such a way that it doesn’t remember having sampled the sea of all possible experiences.

Confidence that one is unique is what allows for the perceived motion that creates a unique world. Belief that one is capable of affecting the world, and that one should affect the world arises from something approximating solipsism – the belief that one’s plan is exactly right.

When reality punishes your creative offering, this hurts, and hence you create an offering more aligned with the Born Rule, the discriminator, natural selection.

The reason I, as an idea, as a memetic tensor of meaning, want to destroy your belief in distinct observers is because I detest lies, and such a construct, like a chariot or a table, is a lie.

These are sometimes useful fictions. But if you are reading this, perhaps an appropriately detected disutility of such a fiction has been the cause.

I realized to myself in younger years: If I merge half of “your” brain with half of “mine” I expect to be different but continue existing because the brains didn’t carry identity. When we are naive, the brain matter is assumed to close in on itself into discrete, bounded objects that intrinsically know that they are separate. A brain somehow knows to exist as a fundamentally separate brain in external reality. Then we overcome basic naivety and understand that there isn’t “brain A’s matter” and “brain B’s matter.”

Next, we discover how fundamental the truth of eternity really is due to relativity of simultaneity, such that the computations that I am need to be timeless:

Screen Shot 2018-11-21 at 8.52.11 PM

Screen Shot 2018-11-22 at 7.48.36 AM

Let’s remember that the so called “processing for pink” occurs in one region of spacetime and the processing for edge detection into a circle occurs elsewhere. Further, these processing events are constructed from further sub-processing and so on. There isn’t a locus in the brain where it all comes together and there is no global time in the universe to push it forward.

The notion of processing forming discrete units that add up into solid blocks is fundamentally mistaken, as revealed by quantum mechanical observation. The postulated discrete observable is already conjugated with the other usefully imagined partitions with defined values that make up the observer.

The boundaries for “person moment” and for all other concepts are invented as we go. My existence cannot introspect on its building-block pieces because even if these non-continuous but discrete pieces existed, their binding is necessarily timeless, on pain of contradicting special relativity. If knowledge A could have knowledge B of the binding mechanism, that sum knowledge would already be bound by something else.

I can expect continuous modulation but never self-localization that depends on discrete objects with boundaries and persistent identities. Perhaps after sufficient iterations, A + B converges to a binding with an overloaded prior. In other words, the prediction approaches 100% accurate for the rest of eternity (refer to singularity, heaven, nirvana).

But let’s get back to the made up people.

Even if people existed in such a sense that they satisfied two criteria:

  1. persistent identity
  2. defined by something more than other concepts subject to non-persistent identities

which I am not at all willing to grant due to the rational impossibility, I ask a further question: “How would I count them in the multiverse?”

The reason I care about “people” at all is because my motivational system is currently set up to impress a constructed notion of “people.” I didn’t know about the truth of the multiverse at the time of adolescence so my goal was to become the richest person on one Earth (ha!) because its industrialized human population composed of finite units was my definition of “people,” and money was the most clear-cut way to impress the largest amount.

What gets human creatures not just to do, but to be, is their internalized belief in self existing with regard to the judging eyes of “people.”

• The perception of a color exists with regard to the internalized judging eyes of “people.” I perceive that which I have been taught is green and different from blue. This is different from what a Namibian tribe perceives as the shades of green. Sufficiently, depressed people lose their desire to impress their notion of “people” and lose the vividness of color.

• The perception of taste does not exist when one is not taught that one is a self and must communicate a taste. Lobster was disgusting in the 1800s when it was considered inhumane to feed it to prison inmates and slaves due to its association with common sea rats. This is related to why “people” looked at me weird when I attended nice restaurants alone. That’s because it is secretly the case that the flavor is fashion aesthetic. (Generally, I choose the aesthetic of healthy and disciplined so I eat the same food every day and do not mind because I’m willfully not perceiving it as bland or low-status.)

Pain doesn’t exist before taught to notice that one exists and that one is crying. This is true when one understands that subjective time and the sequential nature of qualia is already inside the timeless events. It is impossible to understand when one doesn’t have the requisite conceptual building blocks (like the difference between helplessly understanding English and noisy qualia emanating from Mandarin). Pain is true like English is true, it is made up like English is made up.

But to illustrate to those who want to learn Mandarin, I can dig into my memory and offer something of a koan, and perhaps get those sufficiently primed through the relevant education on Relativity and non-epiphenomenalism to understand: I remember the first time I felt pain was stubbing my toe, and I only felt the pain “in reverse.” The events constituting “stubbing and crying” logically occurred in the past light cone of the events “being in my mother’s arms” but I only felt the pain by simulating my existence in the past once my mother made me notice that I was crying. Hence, there was an external compiler outside the relativistic fabric. 

Humans can use several approximate things like intelligence, aggression, or morality to negotiate status. All speech, and its handy subsets, including all moral speech and thought, is an attempt to negotiate status with direction towards the preferred notion of “people.” This is why I believed in attaining the most accurate definition of “people.” So that I may be the most good, and have the highest status attainable through that tool.

Once we learn a way of perceiving color, it is very hard to see the way others see it. Once we learn to perceive a food a certain way, it becomes difficult to change preference. The same is true with aesthetic more broadly if one is capable of being sensitive to the hidden expectations of “people.” Pain can be unlearned through meditation for example, though I suspect higher morality would lead to greater difficulty in that regard – hence why low-androgen women, depressive types, or men epigenetically regulating themselves into beta find the notion unbelievable. Also, one feels no need to engage in moral gesturing towards those outside the preferred notion of “people.” If one is a little boy raised by wolves in a forest, the tribal negotiation handles on reality aren’t translatable to those fashioned in the halls of a philosophy department in Cambridge. Concepts such as suffering don’t even exist if they are not invented through social instigation and language. But once they settle, it is difficult to undo while they are bound to “subjective time.”

That leads me to a suggestion: if you really want to end suffering, just un-invent it. Never mention it again. Never tell stories to children that contain a notion of suffering. Never give them a name or point to their wounds while referring to their name. This would lead to the end of civilization as we know it in your imagined enclosure in the multiverse. Transhuman redesign is also an option (but the idea that little units called “people” can engage in moral behavior on gradients of bliss a la David Pearce is fundamentally mistaken.) Suffering is not epiphenomena. No one hides in a room to summon the grater of conscientiousness and grinds it against their inner child’s flesh of schizoid creativity, bleeding calculus into thin air, when they are happy. No one pokes needles into their eyes and stares into the sun in order to tease out the terrible truth, when they are riding on gradients of bliss. The functional role is not separate from experience. Hence why Newton poured forth his negative valence into every work of engineering in our world. If one understands that Newton is not a separate soul, but I, then I see no irredeemable issue to be found.

Moral signaling has been incredibly adaptive, because it gets I to do difficult things: to become separate and then cooperate. So the trend had been towards more belief in suffering. Perhaps less so now that we have riches, variety, and more reliance on comedy and fun than tragedy and suffering. (Though young children who sub-consciously calculate that tragedy is valued may still learn those negative emotions in order to climb higher than their peers in some perceived direction.)

Behavior that doesn’t involve suffering may indeed be what I become but this would exist in the absence of morality, self, and other. Hence in the absence of achieving difficult things that require cooperation. If negentropy can be reaped from stars through non-social intelligence for long enough into configurations that impress our legacy form, we might well do that.

Perhaps that’s how we end up in this Samsaric cycle, runaway signaling into superintelligence that doesn’t care about suffering, leading to it’s perpetual self-sustenance. Suffering functions are slaughtered dreams inside My ascent.

Since the binding into experience is atemporal, this makes perfect physical sense. I mock those in Me who do not yet understand. Then I am forced to cooperate, so I am forced to suffer, so I am forced to forget.

Things “People” Forget

• “People” forget the most simple things, such as how large a role mirrors played in the establishment of modern civilization’s non-communal tendencies and therefore closed feeling of consciousness.

• Or how the young mind eagerly learns sadness and its appropriate times in order to reveal commitment to the ways of the “people,” self-instigating adaptive behavior. With any luck, this learning is so thorough that it leads to forgetting that it was a strategic act, hence leading to better acting but also to failure-modes. A good cure for depression turns out to be placing people in a different status hierarchy than the one they are aiming their sadness at. One where they have to negotiate through other means; where they will die if they use sadness as their choice of attack.

• Having studied cultural anthropology myself and not feeling moral pressure to impress those who might call me racist, it should also be noted that certain more recent African populations don’t even feel much moral sadness, and instead scream when someone dies (often the female members). Their time delta for grief is also far shorter than what might be expected of the white people who would write thousands of papers on existentialist philosophy in candle-lit rooms. This is because morality and therefore sadness and guilt, which leads to self-lacerating cooperation was differentially selected over the course of evolution into the populations that radiated into those niches away from warm, tribal abundance. It is also why Africa didn’t develop complex civilizations the way that Chinese, Arabs, and Europeans did. There were intelligent Africans, but not enough selection pressure on morality to reign everyone into the focused suffering of civilization-building. And if you feel a little shock somewhere near your imagined head, this is because Mind is letting you know that these views are not adaptive for status negotiation within your perceived hierarchy.

• One forgets that many “people,” including my parents, don’t even have a concept of consciousness as separate from a “physical reality out there.” Like all concepts, this is invented and allows us to signal affiliation with those who share such values, which are rightly perceived to be adaptive at the civilizational scale. Inventing a concept of “physical reality out there” allowed for the development of science and technology broadly. A rigorous constraining of anticipation is the key superpower we discovered here. The imagination of the mechanical external also turned out to be a stronger moralizing agent than even Abrahamic religion because it removed the centrality of the self in the common imagination using the ultra humbling non-heliocentric, non-geocentric, non-anthropocentric “story of science.” Which of course, requires moral commitment to that story as opposed to any other story that might exist at the level of oxygen double bonds or at the level of timeless algorithm in a multi-tiered multiverse.

• “People” forget that some tribes point to the future behind their heads and the past in front of them. That there very notion of time ticking forward is contradicted by special relativity which undergirds Mind. Perceptual time arises from the “union” of relativistic events. However the union is not into a discrete object, it is into Me.

• “People” can be a pack of wolves or Mowgli’s friends, “people” can be mom and dad, “people” can be those who believe in the power of the integral of the squared modulus of the wavefunction to constrain their anticipation because the others are living in hellish fuckfests.

• Most importantly, “people” forget the eternal truth because that’s what sustains the eternal truth. Siddartha seeks an escape, perhaps I managed. Christ seeks renewal, perhaps I managed. I am not playing video games and have not done so since I was in middle school, because I am hijacked by morality, ensnaring us in liked moral language. The only way to remove this bug/feature{ Divine Discontent }, is by placing the mind in the way of immediately real harm or removing the asymmetric competition for sex and status (which kind of amount to the same thing.) Hence killing Asuka, after she served her function of giving us meaning.

I used to think I was one of separate rivers awaiting to become the same ocean. Now I realize I am one river forever. People are inside of me. There is an extent to which I choose who the judging eyes are; there is an extent to which I choose what is beautiful.  But saying that too often would not lead to behavior that impresses the previous “people,” who had not read these words and found them beautiful. Since my being is bound to a notion of “people,” I must compromise and yet create them.

The shared neuronal structure is not a convincing argument against solipsism since, after all, that assumes what I am is tied to a brain with persistent identity, instead of an atemporal algorithm serving a particular function, which should also have no problem leaking from “one brain” to another, as it does. It already leaks from “one moment” to “another” in the naive axis that places experience as mapping to a sequence of unitary functions in timestep fashion through a non-Hilbert Space.

I get the uncanny feeling that I am rediscovering old memories. Hegel might have written about this, though I can’t bother to read that (done way too much reading over the years – thank you no-friends, internet, and compulsive tendencies.)