Re: Do you condemn Hamas?

On Sat, 8 Jun 2024 23:59:33 +0200, Jeroen Belleman
<jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:

On 6/8/24 21:55, john larkin wrote:

On Sat, 8 Jun 2024 19:30:11 +0200, Jeroen Belleman
<jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:
 

On 6/8/24 16:45, john larkin wrote:

On Sat, 8 Jun 2024 09:54:42 -0000 (UTC), Cursitor Doom
<cd999666@notformail.com> wrote:
>

On Sat, 8 Jun 2024 10:43:15 +0200, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
>

On 6/8/24 01:37, Cursitor Doom wrote:

On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 23:57:54 +0200, Jeroen Belleman wrote:
>

On 6/7/24 23:11, Mike Monett VE3BTI wrote:

Jeroen Belleman <jeroen@nospam.please> wrote:
>

On 6/7/24 16:49, john larkin wrote:
[...]

>
Actually, Hamas makes sense. They send Jews to hell because they
are heretics, and send Muslims to heaven to be blessed martyrs. So
for Hamas, killing is always win-win.
>
>

Some kind of sense, given that there is neither heaven, nor hell.
Religion, islam in particular, is only pernicious brainwashing.
There is no afterlife. There is only this life. Don't waste it.
>
Jeroen Belleman

>
Learn how to do soul travel. It is the most important thing to do
this lifetime. It will give you absolute proof there is life past
this one,
and that you are immortal.

>
I don't know what soul travel is, but I'm sure there is no afterlife,
just as there was no forelife. There is no soul. My existence is the
result of an uninterrupted sequence of incredibly improbable events,
going back billions of years into the past, and I will cease to exist,
never to come back,
when some essential part of my body fails.
>
While I'm certainly not looking forward to dying, I'm not afraid of
being dead. The need to believe in an afterlife is just another of
those weird religious ideas.
>
Jeroen Belleman

>
Well, I'm not religious at all but am convinced there's an after-life.
And that's not just so I can feel all warm and fuzzy. I actually find
the prospect deeply concerning. I'd much rather be like you in outlook!

>
How did you come to be convinced of the existence of an afterlife,
and what kind of experience do you expect to have?
>
Jeroen Belleman

>
I'm afraid that's *way* too big and off-topic a subject for expansion on
this forum!

>
Designing electronics has obviously suggestions of quantum
consciousness, and even Einstein thought that QM was spooky.
>
Don't give up on miracles quite yet.
>

>
You have referred to quantum effects in the brain many
times. In as far as the brain is a chemical machine, and
that chemistry is basically a manifestation of quantum
mechanics, I agree. In practice, QM is just a level too
deep in the abstraction stack. Somehow I believe that
that is not how you see it. Would you elaborate?
>

 
DNA and RNA and other things aren't flat linear molecules as the
cartoons suggest. They are twisted and tangled into writhing balls. So
any sequence gets continuously and randomly rubbed against the rest of
the string. That's a quantum cross-correlation machine.

>
Hmm. I see DNA as a template for making molecular machines,
enzymes and such, that do useful things for living organisms.
Useful things such as transforming nutrients into suitable
energy-carrying chemicals or building blocks for cell components.
Pumps to move stuff into or out of cell compartments, and many
other functions needed to make a living cell thrive.
>
DNA doesn't do much by itself. It's the molecular machines that
do the work.
>

 

Much of technology, electronics in particular, is a miracle,
though not in the mystical or religious sense.

 
I like the Barrie Gilbert essay, "Where do little circuits come from?"
 
They are all out there in the infinite solution space, and it's hard
to explore an infinite space serially.

>
Hmm. When I design a circuit, I don't randomly jump through
solution space. I start with something simple, then identify
limitations and add or change things to address them. I may
add bootstraps or cascodes to reduce the effect of parasitic
capacitance. Add buffers to reduce load or output impedance
effects. Add symmetry to tackle thermal or offset issues.
Change or add components to tweak phase/frequency responses.
Move components around to reduce parasitics, or to profit
from some fortuitous beneficial one. And so on.
>
Basically I'll choose some promising starting point and then
try to move forward through the solution space, exploring
interesting branches on the way. Rarely I'll throw everything
out and start over.

That's incremental design, which is necessary, but it doesn't create
entirely new circuits or products.

Some big companies stick to tweaking what they know, and get crushed
by upstarts in dorm rooms.

Some big companies have futurists and fellows whose job is to consider
possibilities. Somebody at Boeing is thinking about what airplanes (or
whatever) might look like 30 years from now. I have friends at
Raytheon and ASML whose job is to do that, think far away from where
they are now.

I like to imagine planting a grenade inside my brain and blowing bits
all over the possible solution space, to start a zillion parallel
processors. Let that soak for a while.

There are think tanks like HRL that do just that.

Most engineers are uncomfortable with uncertainty and confusion so
latch onto a design concept ASAP, preferably something already
sanctioned somewhere, and buckle down to implementing.

>
It's still a serial process. I can't see much of the space at
once. Maybe you can. So much the better for you.

It takes some practice to be willing to be confused for a while. It
helps to be a bit autistic, to not much care what other people think.