foundational_lib 1.0

data/Articles_MD/8.html.md

@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
+---
+title: Logical Direction
+---
+
+Logical Direction
+=================
+
+By G.C.
+-------
+
+People need to think of things more logically.\
+\
+\
+\
+
+  Postulates, Goals and Problems   Logical sequence
+  -------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
+  Postulate 1   ---                We exist and we think
+  Postulate 2   ---                Our existence and thought is observed to be imperilled -- by us
+  Sub Goal 1   ---                 Survival and persistence and existing -- to the highest level
+  Sub Problem 1   ---              Now we have the problem of how to bring this about
+  Postulate 2   ---                We can operate, but our operation is limited (by whatever factors)
+  Postulate 3   ---                We have made machines.
+  Sub Goal 2   ---                 We should increase our level of potential operation to its highest level, resulting in the highest level of general Ability.
+  Sub Problem 2   ---              Now, we need to figure out how to execute this.
+  Postulate 4   ---                Machines can increase our level of operation, our level of techne.
+  Postulate 5   ---                Machines have limits themselves
+  Postulate 6   ---                We should maximize machines to increase our level of operation, within ethical limits perhaps, aligning with our main real goals and subgoals (which are not necessarily all stated here)
+  Postulate 7   ---                Machines are limited by as fast as they can move.
+  Sub Goal 3   ---                 Therefore, we need to figure out how to maximize machines to their highest potential
+  Sub Problem 3   ---              Our problem, then, is to remove from existence all things that get in the way of having machines operate well, which, in turn, aligns with our goals of being able to operate, which in turn aligns with our goal of surviving well.
+
+It is very important that people evaluate all the choices they make.
+
+For example:
+
+Why do I have a cat? Is it logical? Am I weak?
+
+Why have I been working this career for 40 years? All my money is going
+to waste and I\'m the CEO. Things are going to hell, and I feel
+miserable even though I have the best pillow.
+
+Am I safe?
+
+How do I get less overwhelmed by my friends? They are too harsh.
+
+Joe is not allowing me to speak ever. What do I do?
+
+I have this great thing and the mainstream engineering establishment is
+refusing to converse about it, let alone monetize it to help people\'s
+bottom lines. What do I do?
+
+Why do I keep using this slow scripting language when it\'s not ideal
+and makes no sense?
+
+Why do I keep treating my peers bad?
+
+Who is in charge of creating robots? Will they destroy us? Can we have a
+lighthearted friendly chat with these blokes?
+
+What\'s the point of becoming a millionaire at the expense of
+everything?
+
+Are nukes going to destroy us all? Who controls them? Can we chat with
+them?
+
+Can AI enhance dynamic individuality? (This is a good one.)
+
+::: {.article_link}
+[Previous article](7.html) [Next article](9.html)
+:::

data/Articles_MD/9.html.md

@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+---
+title: Perfect Hardware and Software
+---
+
+Perfect Hardware and Software
+=============================
+
+By G.C.
+-------
+
+For some reason, since the advent of the computing revolution, no one
+has been aiming for perfect hardware or software.
+
+Now, in the realm of hardware, this is somewhat understandable, there
+are physical limitations (at least in theory -- maybe there are not)
+that impede things from happening. People work to overcome these.
+
+But in the context of the limits of such, there is software.
+
+The amount of layers of abstraction that people have created in
+software, that just end up making a given operation take 100 times
+longer, and therefore being less flexible if someone wants to do it a
+different way, is astounding.
+
+Take, for example, filesystem access and modification speed of C vs.
+Node.js or Ruby or Python (or C++ with slow libraries).
+
+The difference is tremendous. All without any physical differences, just
+because C is closer to the machine.
+
+These unabashed abstraction layers are divorced from idealism and logic
+(see the 1st and 6th article) and slow everything and everyone down.
+There is no upside, other than increasing work hours (which is a
+terrible reason, and should not be supported).
+
+There is no reason why the same functions that, say, Ruby has to read a
+file, cannot exist in a ubiquitous and ideal form in C - ideal in every
+context, and every platform, with different implementations and perhaps
+different function names depending on the platform.
+
+Does anything like this exist? It does now (to be humble, at least in a
+working version) -- with FOUNDATIONALLIB - FOUNDATIONALLIB for C
+(github.com/gregoryc/foundationallib)
+
+There is also no reason why using a computer should be HARD or SLOW or
+ERROR-PRONE.
+
+And there is no reason why code can\'t be dynamic enough to customize
+the output depending on the platform and circumstances - ensuring these
+things
+
+IDEAL SPEED -- INCLUDING NO EXCESSIVE OPERATIONS
+
+IDEAL OPERATION -- ALL ERRORS CHECKED UNLESS YOU DON\'T WANT SUCH
+
+PROPER CUSTOMIZATION
+
+MINIMAL MEMORY USAGE -- WHEN IT MATTERS
+
+This is the ideal. All should seek for it -- and should fight to have
+others seek for it -- perhaps literally fight if needed or wanted.
+
+We live in a highly computerized world, there\'s no reason not to make
+every aspect of it perfect.
+
+::: {.article_link}
+[Previous article](8.html) [Next article](10.html)
+:::

data/Articles_MD/index.html.md

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+---
+title: The Problem with the Mainstream Engineering Establishment
+---
+
+Articles -- Read In Order
+=========================
+
+-   [The Problem with the Mainstream Engineering Establishment](1.html)
+-   [Computer Art and Computer Science](2.html)
+-   [How to Deprogram Others From the Mainstream Engineering
+    Establishment -- Or How to Deprogram Yourself (Part 1)](3.html)
+-   [How to Deprogram Others From the Mainstream Engineering
+    Establishment -- Or How to Deprogram Yourself (Part 2)](4.html)
+-   [Analysis of the Broken "Engineering Establishment Mindset"](5.html)
+-   [The Myth of the Perfect Child](6.html)
+-   [Narcissism and Arrogance](7.html)
+-   [Logical Direction](8.html)
+-   [Perfect Hardware and Software](9.html)
+-   [The Fight](10.html)
+-   [The Solution of Foundationallib](11.html)
+-   [Nonsense](12.html)
+-   [Scientific Rigor](13.html)
+-   [The Power of Non-Collaboration](14.html)
+-   [AI Is Good, And Bad.](15.html)
+-   [Epistemology](16.html)