I would say no, unless there were similar phenomena documented in a statistical majority of known species and also maybe only if a statistical majority of ants experienced this. It sounds like its super rare.
Still, human mill, culture mill, economic mill etc. Brain exploding slack emoji. Favorite HN post of the week.
Now, you ask everyone around you about what the puzzle looks like. And they are all certain about what it looks like when it's finished, despite the fact that you know they haven't spent nearly enough time looking in the box, or the pieces, and you're pretty damn sure it's not a picture of your loved ones burning, a giant man creating smaller men, or nothingness.
And you start to talk with other people who don't believe in these solutions. They have their own ideas about the puzzle. The vast majority of them think the idea of a pre-solution is the problem. If only those who have been working on their own sections piece by piece were allowed to work together with their work corroborated by other piece-by-piece sectioners, without pre-solutionists telling them what it looks like, it'd be put together by now. You think this is the right course of action going forward. So you dabble in doing your own piece-by-piece work, keeping up with the latest pictures of the latest additions to different sections, published and funded by the people who originally sat you down at the table.
And everything is fine. For a while. Then you begin to see that the sectioners' works are being used to justify new pre-solutions by onlookers that aren't compatible with each other. Some sectioners are just producing pictures of themselves and their funders. And you realize that this just doesn't make any sense. None of it makes any sense. Not the pre-solutionists, not the sectioners. It's all a giant question with no authority and no one seems to realize how insane and un-ending the whole process is. Then you pick up a piece that changes everything. In it you merely see the Self and your own reflection in it. But it changes everything.
You look up from the table and see through eons. You see everyone who has ever been sat down at this puzzle table. You see the same people wearing different costumes as the endless passage of time flows. You see the same puzzle processes and sections arising, maturing, then being scattered. You notice this and infinite other things, lost to the ephemera of cognition and memory. Then the pieces fall into place in your brain. And you see that it isn't a puzzle. It was never a puzzle. You realize in your vision that there were countless people throughout time who stood up from the table. And they saw a door and went through it. And came back. And they said in exaltation in the plurality of dialects and tongues that this is not a puzzle. It is a map. A map to exit the room. These chosen few make a new map of the room, offering it triumphantly to the rest. Some see it and in turn stand up and leave the room to go outside. Others follow. But the stream of people slows and stops. The map is left, abandoned by those who followed it to those that didn't or couldn't. And those remaining beings slowly rip it apart, piece by piece, to fit in their view of the puzzle until it too resembles... a puzzle.
You proceed to come down from grasping this piece, realizing the truth of what you have seen; That this in fact a massive collection of old, incomplete maps, made puzzles by mankind, all showing the way to a door that leads to outside the realm of the puzzle. So you stand up from the table, go to the exit, and open the door. And there it is. Outside. The Sun. Indescribable to anyone who has been left inside the cave their entire lives. This is so apparent to you that it is the very definition of self-evidence, bound with knowledge ascertained by pure observation. And you realize that nothing, absolutely nothing can erase the certainty that outside and the Sun exists, having been there. You now have a decision to make. In an act of compassion, you return to the room and proceed to draw yet another map for those left behind...
Note: If you enjoyed this story, you may also enjoy an old blog post of mine on the same topic: http://perpetualhum.blogspot.com/2015/04/pragmatic-philosoph...
Technological Slavery: The Collected Writings of Theodore J. Kaczynski, a.k.a. "The Unabomber" -- A Harvard-educated mathematician terrorist presents a lucid neo-Luddite manifesto. It doesn't take a cool-headed logician to appreciate this work. Draws heavily from the works of Jacques Ellul, but presents Ellul's ideas in a quintessentially American manner, without the obfuscation required of French philosophy. Yes, he's a convicted murderer, yes, he was a subject of MKULTRA, but even so, the perspective of a Harvard-educated psychedelic terrorist should alone be worthy of a lookover (he doesn't receive any proceeds from sales). If you prefer French philosophy or a pacifistic author, replace this with The Technological Society and Propaganda: the Formation of Men's Attitudes, both by Jacques Ellul, tackling the same subjects (mostly).
Management of Savagery: The Most Critical Stage Through Which the Islamic Nation Will Pass by Abu Bakr Naji -- This is the playbook that was used for establishing the Islamic State. Its philosophy isn't unique to Wahhabist Islam, however. It's like the anti-Embrace-Extend-Extinguish philosophy. It's disruptive innovation for religion. In short, it has three stages: first, destroy the social contract and return to a Hobbesian state of nature. Second, reestablish the social contract with your team in control. Third, use this island of order to expand outwards until your goal is reached (in this case an Islamic Caliphate).
Suicide Note by Mitchell Heismann -- Mitchell Heisman shot himself on September 18, 2010 in Harvard Yard as ”Experimental Elimination of Self-Preservation,” according to this work that he published posthumously. Possibly, along with Kaczysnki, the best illustrator of G.K. Chesterton's assertion that "Imagination does not breed insanity. Exactly what does breed insanity is reason. Poets do not go mad; but chess players do. [...] The madman is not the man who has lost his reason. The madman is the man who has lost everything except his reason." This is his, nominally rational, defense of suicide against what Heismann terms viviocentrism. It is an experience, if nothing else.
Two picks that dovetail together exceptionally well and equally magisterial in their respective wheel-houses:
First, the Master and His Emissary by Iain McGilchrist -- Why is the brain divided? What if modern consciousness as we know it only emerged during the Axial Age? The differing world views of the right and left brain (the "Master" and "Emissary" in the title, respectively) have, according to the author, shaped Western culture since the time of the ancient Greek philosopher Plato, and the growing conflict between these views has implications for the way the modern world is changing. The first half is pure neuroscience, the latter half teased-out implications of the former. It is a brilliant work.
Second, Debt: the First 5000 Years by the late David Graeber -- What is the historical relationship of debt with social institutions such as barter, marriage, friendship, slavery, law, religion, war and government? Why do we keep debts fuzzy with friends, but settle them immediately with strangers? What exactly is money?
I imagine that the processes noticed by both McGilchrist and Graeber are interrelated in profound ways (i.e. the dual advent of physical currencies and complex civilizations incentivized profound shifts in cognition, arguably in favor of disembodied abstraction and decontextualization, creating in its wake what is termed "mental illness").
And why not? A final choice: The Kingdom of God Is Within You by Leo Tolstoy -- "The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow-witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him." When Jesus says to turn the other cheek, Tolstoy asserts that he meant to abolish violence, period. A favorite quote: "The attitude of the ruling classes to the laborers is that of a man who has felled his adversary to the earth and holds him down, not so much because he wants to hold him down, as because he knows that if he let him go, even for a second, he would himself be stabbed, for his adversary is infuriated and has a knife in his hand. And therefore, whether their conscience is tender or the reverse, our rich men cannot enjoy the wealth they have filched from the poor as the ancients did who believed in their right to it. Their whole life and all their enjoyments are embittered either by the stings of conscience or by terror."
Not including IP and TCP overhead, the Scuttlebutt handshake is 340 bytes, each message in a box stream is 35 to 4130 bytes, and the box stream finishes with another 34 bytes. There are two box streams for every Scuttlebutt communication. There are also RPC messages sent in the box stream that are a minimum of 9 byte header and 9 byte goodbye.
Transmitting a single post containing the text "Second post!" takes 563 characters, not including the handshake, header, footer or encryption overhead.
The web and social networks are far more data intensive today than low bandwidth modalities can support, especially long distance, low power RF links that would be rapidly saturated.
Restricted length text a la Twitter might be manageable. Encrypted high fidelity blockchain social networks? Not a snowball's chance in hell unless so few people are using it that nobody is saturating the link.
Edit: In North America for LoRa there are 64 125kHz uplink channels, 8 500kHz uplink channels, and 8 500kHz downlink channels. This should give you an idea of how little capacity there really is.
You are correct that images, encryption, and blockchains are outside the scope of what a constrained connection can sustain, but that's a bit like saying "We can't power an industrial economy on consumer-owned 100 watt solar panels" which while true, misses the point.
Yes, if you're using court etiquette protocols to transmit data, you're going to incur very large amounts of overhead.
If you're using insecure low-sophistication protocols in sparsely populated areas (e.g. flyover America), then the possibilities are much more expansive. Yes, the latter by definition isn't commercially nor urbanely (viz. pertaining to densely populated cities) viable, but for certain demographics that's a feature, not a bug.
A single second of transmission (i.e. ~6kb) is about 1,500 characters in UTF8, assuming no overhead. With an average of 6 characters per word, that's still 250 words per second, more than ample for human communication.
Emacs is a keyboard macro editor stuck in a mouseless era where Lisp Enlightenment was still a thing. It's great, but it's niche. Most people don't actually want or need that (or to be more specific, they don't know that they need or want it).
The way to directly grow the user-base is to get the general population on board Emacs first, then evangelize for the idea underlying open software afterwards.
You do that by solving the problems that they already have more efficiently than their present solutions. Org-mode really nailed it in this department. I switched to Emacs for org-mode, but stayed for vanilla Emacs and EXWM. If Emacs were just Emacs, I'd probably be using a different editor. Without definitive hooks, Emacs is esoteric, opaque, and frightening to the general population, if they know about Emacs at all besides vim's evil rival. They just don't need Emacs in its current state.
What they do need is something that makes it trivial to automate the dumb and repetitive tasks that they have to do every day on a computer using a browser. This is no longer shell or plaintext processing for the majority of non-IT users. It's interfacing with GUIs. They need middleware to automate interfacing with kludgy enterprise software. They need middleware to speed up internet browsing.
If Emacs were a blank slate project today, fulfilling the same type of needs, I could see it being a mashup of EXWM, Selenium, and AutoIt. Its killer features would be a guarantee that the same controls (that the user selected from a common set e.g. Microsoft Word, Firefox, Vim, Emacs, etc.) worked functioned between applications. Having the ability to record mouse and keyboard macros without ever needing to see a line of code, but also providing the ability to drive using the DOM, OCR, or whatever niche smart interface is needed would be a second killer feature. These coupled with the already standard Emacs and EXWM features would attract a ton of new users that would actually have a compelling reason to learn how to use it and then later adopt to the Emacs paradigm.
EXWM is already 70% of the way for a minimum viable product for something like this. It just needs to be bundled with more mature macro tooling beyond 90s relics like xdotool and xautomation along with a distro with sane defaults. Having a single abstraction layer to control everything from userland on through web platforms would be a dream for accessibility and returning a semblance of control to users.
Deleted Comment