Structures and Things

Consumption, loss and everlasting supply

The development of creation stems from the branches of growth, destruction, process, definition, creativity, need, desire, and consumption. We have been led and taught to believe that all of these things are somehow counter to living and the changing existence we refer to as life on this planet.

Building, machining, sculpting, forming, stacking, and bending materials to provide for human needs has existed as an activity since our inception. The world provides the necessary structure for us to achieve and strive. We excel in changing forms, from minute to minute and day to day. We create needs and demands to force our adaptation and maintained interest.

We are also taught that matter is neither created nor destroyed. However, contrary to that, we are presently taught that our resources are diminishing and that we consume too much, we waste energy, and that the planet suffers under the cycle of conversion from one form of material to another. It is more than likely that we create materials and products that greatly exceed the typical life-cycle of materials found naturally. The question becomes one of time and renewal.

In reality, energy and matter are converted, changed, merged, fused and expended in our lives. It is the process by which food is ingested, digested, and processed through the body system. This is the process for all living systems. We have unfortunately not learned the lessons of the millions of years of adaptive process developed by other systems on this planet. We create materials that cannot be processed effectively for their structure. We create foods that no longer provide any benefit to the body system. We create materials that are toxic to living species, including our own. We infuse our structures with materials that do not endure and require active maintenance.

Our process is developed by a variety of factors. Economy, availability, social demands, personal desire and profit. When balanced, these factors are not counter to viability, sustained progress and evolutionary product development. Counter to the belief in abundance and intelligent use, is the idea of loss. Loss is preceded by consumption and the perception that consumption engenders loss or lack.

What we have failed to learn is the entire process and consequences of our activity because we have divided the consequence from the utilization. There is no opportunity cost for having chosen one action, product or process over another. The creation process is allocated to one field, production to another, distribution to another, consumption to another, and waste management (post-processing) to a final. Each field lies separate from the other, and yet the actions of each is felt by the total population. We are not running out of anything. We are just not finding materials in the form that easily provides for our needs and rapid processing. We have water, metals, oil, wood, land, vegetation, air, and sunlight. They have not gone away.

The economic costs have just risen because we have spoiled the pot from which we take our needs for the appearance of success. Commercial success will not feed the soul, it will not house humanity’s continuity, and it will not purify our mistakes. No amount of perceived value, which is all the concept of ‘money’ is, will save us from our ignorance. It is a perception of value that is created by trust between ‘authorities’ and ‘consumers’ who deceive each other in to believing that each is in control of their economies. The true demands of the marketplace are often driven by locality and culture. Operating a successful venture depends heavily on sourcing, efficient processing, and a customer base that perceives value in your product and are willing to exchange their medium of value (money) for your labor and costs.

The new economy will be finding the means to process the materials and sources we have taken and converted. We are running out of virgin material, for now. The renewal process takes time and it seems we are too impatient to wait it out or to find alternate means for our success. We have been framed onto a runaway train, and mislead to believe that we cannot change direction. That is not truth. Change happens instantly. Change is choice. Choose with knowledge and understanding. You will discover an everlasting supply for generations to come.

The Structure of Structures

Structures are behavior deployed utilizing a strategy to optimize for interaction in a particular environment. In short, structures are made to survive. We often think of structures in terms of the physical objects in the world. These are buildings, organisms, vehicles, and the matter that make up the many wonderful elements that we are blessed with. It is truly a wonder to have so many differing structures that can be manipulated, combined, and placed together with such beneficial results to our own survival. We have other structures, discovered and re-discovered by humanity, that develop from our minds and varied experience. We have languages and the construct semantics that embody ideas, strategies and methods for expressing a behavior or desired response.

Language is perhaps our greatest structure. This single structure provides the means for knowledge to be leveraged among large groups and resources. We define a structure whose common understanding and expression provides us the foundation to our highest arts and methods. We develop codified actions, beliefs, and strategy for achieving reproducible results. This is our science. Science is an expression of a belief structure and is no more real than any other belief structure. Perception is a part of the belief structure, and with some structures we have developed a sense, sometimes a feeling, for what structures are correct and will be capable of enduring. Structures that ‘ring true’ will endure and survive change through their robust nature and adaptive qualities that encompass a vast range of demands.

Our structures must endure the environment, our use of them, and the challenges from competing structures that vie for position in our consciousness and social structures. They must contain principles that are functional, reproducible, and robust to perform in their particular environment or realm of action. We use language, symbols, and defined constructs to define what we feel to be truths of our experience. A ‘column’ behaves as such and exhibits the response mechanisms to the loading under which a column is defined and expressed. If it were to be and do otherwise, it would be expressed and defined differently than it presently is.

One of the weaknesses of language is the ease with which its meanings can be manipulated by cultural mandates that redefine fundamental elements that have the test of survival emboddied. We make way for these new expressions of our structure, our very foundation, by making commentary regarding the ‘antiquated’ state of a particular meaning. We often detract from the semantic strength of a structure by belittling it relevance. We ‘know better’ in the present. Most people lack the understanding of principles and forego any past knowledge for their present perceptions. They have not come to leverage the history of meaning. We build structures to endure. To do otherwise is a waste of our energy and resources.

The present adaptation and application of language looks not to the past, and only to the immediate future. Our goal seems to make meaning that is ephemeral and relevant to only a few individuals for the sole benefit of personal recognition. Our vast archive of structures need to be considered and incorporated into the future. We cannot be lazy or indifferent in our understanding of the many structures that have been utilized by humanity. Unique structures that embody fundamental principles have the potential to survive the many demands of the present social and environmental expressions.

Structures are our records and the embodiment of our many cultures. We cannot fail to understand what structure is and how to make a proper structure to define our human experience.

Software vs. Wetware (Thinking & Processing)

Is executing specific actions in a sequence (linear or parallel) the creation of life or a machine?

The algorithms that comprise most actions executed by machines and software are specific steps, actions, or decisions that cascade from a singular prior act. Some complex programming includes conditional response algorithms and multi-variable actionable activities. These are put in the programming to address complex data arrangements and actionable activities. Yet, when each of these steps is taken to its fundamental element, often a module, they are in reality fixed actions adaptable only to the value, class and the range of specified objects. It might be a simple matter of adding 2 + 2 and equating it to 4. But is it any different to add two apples + two apples and equating them to four apples? Context and object class must always be defined and actionable steps only occur when the criteria are met. There is no understanding of intent, higher principle, or fundamental concepts of action. Walking, moving, skipping, crawling, driving all relate to the principle of motion.

When we work with software, and sometimes when we work on software as a developer, we configure our actions and input to the software to match its needs and language. It will process our actions, decisions, and values much more quickly than we are capable of producing in a format that is able to be shared among individuals. It is often difficult to describe our thoughts completely to others, and yet the complete object is there built completely in your mind in an instant. No steps required. Software cannot ‘imagine’ a concept. Its strength is processing, limited only by the hardware that houses its intelligence. Is what the software does considered thinking? Is it capable of understanding our intent without explicit instruction or indication by value, action, or input? Software is capable of intent measurement based upon trends, statistical analysis, and pattern recognition. These are the tools we have given to it. This must seem like the software is thinking about what we are telling it. What about new patterns? New languages of expression? That capability to learn or adapt to these new elements and modifying its current algorithms seems to be at the core of thinking, as opposed to processing. This is where people seem best adapted.

We are wetware. Some people think this only refers to the matter between our ears. It is our brain that makes us capable of thinking. I would ask what use the brain would be if it sat in a jar rather than in our individual chassis? Much like a computer with no electricity. Dust collector. We try to emulate our decision making into a structure that is more capable of leveraging the element of time than we presently are. We encode this structure to act when information is received and to act, transform or evaluate the information for compatibility, compliance, and accuracy. The process occurs quickly and we therefore decide that it is ‘better’ than our abilities. We do not process direct information nearly as fast as a computer software program and the gap is increasing. The capability for ‘number crunching’ is exponentially increasing as new methods to maximize time and data manipulation are developed. We ignore our own development and methods. There’s not much money in making smarter people, just faster computers and better software. We must remember that computers will only be as good as we are. We construct the systems by which development occurs. We offer our methods, knowledge, strategies and experience in to the coding of the modules and algorithms. We know what to do with information, how to evaluate it, and what meaning it will have out in the real world of the wetware.

Inside the computer space of electricity, binary decision gateways, and process decision actions lies a world unencumbered by gravity, feelings, money and longevity. Electricity is the only currency, and constructs the only reality. Mimics are actual, resident in permanent memory until replaced, modified, or deleted. Reason is a decision gate.

People are capable of creation and mimicking as well. Our world consists of elements which we have no understanding or cognisance of. Those particles, elements, wave forms, energies and matters that pervade our space. We have many currencies and embodiments of our memories, beliefs and history. We call them buildings, temples, oral records, and writing. Our expression is redundant, robust and often ineffective. It is always being refined, replaced and recreated. So the question of methods comes to the fore when comparing software and wetware. Which is best and why?

We must remember not to abandon our own development for convenience. Time is an element that we personify. We clearly do not understand its full conceptualization or implication. Our perception is guided by concepts like efficiency, production, and value. Our lives are measured in meaning, value, and enrichment. Let us not mistake processing for thinking, and not confuse perceptions with our lives. We use the tools that we create to provide for our lives. We do not live to use tools. When you find software lacking in its responsiveness to your needs, then your only hope is wetware. Think about that and spend you time developing for it.