Global Information Segregation

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

Global Information Segregation

Postby James S Saint » Fri Aug 15, 2014 5:33 am

Type of information is not merely an issue of it being true or false. There are three fundamental types of truthful and false information:
    1) Conceptual – philosophical, abstract, definitional, mental
    2) Detectable – empirical, actual, physical, sensed
    3) Combination of conceptual and detectable
Conceptual information is much like a mathematics equation without the variables filled in with values. It involves the abstract concepts of things rather than any particular physical incidents, such as the definition of a square or of a human. Detectable information is the values, measurements, or actual occurrences of particular cases. And a combination is an equation with at least some of the values placed into the variables, partly conceptual and partly empirical.

Due to the complexities in dealing with social life, a single person can easily be overwhelmed with information, "information overload". Too much disorganized information not only becomes useless due to its disorder, but also tempts presumption and the use of deceit. By receiving too much information, more evidence toward one idea cannot be properly countered by the available opposing evidence, the whole story cannot be viewed and thus errors in judgment occur. From errors in judgment, poor and even malignant decisions can be made, destroying the entire decision making process.

Thus there is an inherent need to limit the amount of information being received. And yet the amount never seems to be enough. In order to be able to receive rationally useful information, there is a need to organize the information into relevant categories which can then be dealt with as time permits.

Relevance
The arbiter for prioritizing and discerning categories of information is relevance. Amongst the vast quantity of information in the world, the much greater portion is irrelevant to any one person and can be ignored. Imagine having all of the information about every family's doings from across the world concurrently feeding into one person. That one person wouldn't be able to even begin to process it all, much less determine any usefulness to him. He would have to ignore it, but how could he discern which and how much to ignore?

The first and most obvious discerning tool is a gauge of directness of affect involving time and distance. The further away something is in either time or contact-distance, the less relevant it is. That is not to say that it is ever totally irrelevant, but rather that there is a scale relating to such distances. What is happening immediately inches in front of you is far more relevant than what happened very far away years ago or might happen far in the future. But perhaps both have some degree of relevance.

Thus within the three categories of truthful and false information, there are subcategories prioritizing relevance by time and distance:
    1) Conceptual
      a. local, immediate/recent
      b. distant, past/future
      c. mid-distant
    2) Detectable
      a. local, immediate/recent
      b. distant, past/future
      c. mid-distant
    3) Combinational
      a. local, immediate/recent
      b. distant, past/future
      c. mid-distant
Conceptual
What is "local conceptual information"? In physical terms, conceptual information is meaningless. Conceptual information has use only to the mind in determining relations involving proposed or actual physical things. And what is "locally relevant" is determined by what has immediate use to the individual. But which conceptual information would that be?

If a person is trying to cut a board at an angle, he might have use for elementary mathematics, geometry. If a person is working off of a dinner recipe but needs to make only one-third of the total amount specified by the recipe, he has need for elementary mathematics, division.

In the constant turmoil in the Middle East right now, if you were to have 7 fighters line up to go single file into a tent to get an equal portion of the 350 rounds of ammunition from the quartermaster, how many of them could be that quartermaster and accomplish such a task? How many actually would even if they could? Or perhaps more importantly in their case, if you were to ask any one of them not who, what a "god" is, how many of them tell you? Even in much more civilized areas, most wouldn't know. And yet it is a simple concept that affects many of their day to day decisions.

Thus elementary mathematics and many religious or governing concepts are often local concerns for just about anyone at any time. They are things that one should not have to attend a university or hope for someone else to immediately and accurately relay to them in order to find out. But if they have been overwhelmed with too much disordered information or neglected in receiving relevant information they are left up to guessing and deceit. And that is the state of today's world.

So then what constitutes "distant conceptual information"? Distance is determined by immediate relevance. So distant conceptual information would be conceptual information that isn't likely to have immediate use. Such information might be the 50th digit in the number Pi, the title of the undersecretary's first assistant, Lorentz transformations in physics, the precise definition of capitalism, the resolution for Zeno's paradox, or laws governing handicapped compensation. Any of those things might become immediately relevant to anyone, but for most, they are distant concerns and not relevant to their day to day lives. They might eventually have a need to know, but seldom immediately.

Thus people have a need to be able to access conceptual information, local or distant, on demand with local conceptual information already committed to memory.

Detectable (Physical)
Local detectable information is the most relevant and obvious. It is the information that the human brain is already largely equipped to handle; Is it hot/cold, wet/dry, edible/poisonous, bigger/smaller, or local/distant? Local detectable information involves immediate hopes and threats to the physical body. Seldom does a person have need to be taught to discern if something is hot or cold, if it is smaller or bigger than himself, or close or distant. Instincts do reasonably well at handling such local information. And such information seldom needs to be relayed through an artificial media unless it involves normally human-undetectable things that equipment is being used to detect.

Distant detectable information is less relevant involving things that are physically distant or separated by time. Conflicts in the Middle East are very distant to most people and until recently, they would not have to be told that. Whether food is edible or poisonous was not a great concern until more foods, water, air, and drugs became slowly poisonous, "poisonous at a distance". So even distant detectable information is still relevant, just not as relevant as the immediate detectable information.

Distribution of information
So in a world overwhelmed with disordered information, secrets, and misinformation, the question arises as to how information should be distributed so as to minimize the deceptions of tainted or false information inherent in information overload, yet provide the most information relevant to each individual.

This is an issue of the degree and type of networking, "information dissemination priorities for the sake of human health and harmony" and directly applicable to The Internet.

-Concept Distribution
Since conceptual information might be relevant to anyone at any time, such information should be available to everyone. But such information can still be overwhelming and still involves local versus distant issues, thus must still have a degree of order, discerned by the probability of immediate, on-hand need. The information concerning the most probably needful conceptual information is what is typically called "elementary education", fed to children as they learn how to deal with the world in which they were cast, such as how to obtain 1/3 of a recipe or language issues such as "What is a 'god'? (due to the prevalence of religious issues)". Language issues, definitions, logic, and their misuse, have possibly caused the most turmoil for thousands of years. But whether people retain such information from schooling or not, it should be immediately available and locally obtainable.

More distant conceptual information such as the resolution to Zeno's paradox or how to calculate the diameter of a tree from its circumference should be available to anyone, but with less concern for immediate accessibility. Search engines concerning conceptual information should be designed with such priorities in mind. One might have to dig a little longer to find the answers to such questions and especially what reasoning was used in discerning the answers given.

This involves a global network concerning conceptual or philosophical information available to all people prioritized by its probable immediate relevance and complexity.

That portion of the information networking concern is easy and relatively simple. But detectable or empirical information distribution gets more difficult and complicated.

-Detection Distribution
How much information do you need concerning the family affairs of Hong Dao Lin in China? Do you personally need to know what color of socks he wears, whether he "abuses" his wife, or if he misunderstands Pythagorean mathematics? Would you be able to do anything about it even if you knew?

What we typically call "personal information" is very locally needed, but very seldom distantly needed. Again, distance in this case is not necessarily referred to physical distance, but rather immediate affect. If Mr. Lin is a close relative, his personal affairs might not be very distant despite how for away he lives. Empirical distance in not merely a measure of meters or miles, but of the immediacy of physical, emotional, or even financial affect.

Imagine a person with Internet connection to cameras, microphones, and brain mounted on him as he goes through his daily life. Attending to such information responsibly would occupy 100% of your own brain. But then multiply that times 7 billion. Such a network is unfathomably larger than a mere network of the entirely of human conceptual knowledge. Even though no physical event can occur without having at least some miniscule, if not infinitesimal affect on all people, a person would have no choice but to declare almost all of it as effectively useless, not to mention all of the temptations to abuse bits and pieces of such information. Unlike conceptual information, detectable information is necessarily subject to segregation.

Thus when it comes to detectable, empirical information, the "need to know" becomes greatly relevant and a priority in segregation of information. Who really needs to know the personal affairs of Mr. Lin? And how is such information to be distributed such as to avoid information overload and deceit?

The obvious thing to do is to limit personal information to personal contacts, "local distribution" or LAN ("Local Area Network"). Currently Facebook and Twitter allow somewhat closed networking to handle this problem for those who use it. But their information is greatly limited and already tainted even before it gets on the Internet. Abuse even within their closed circle of "friends" is already assured, not to mention the government surveillance presumptions and judgments being constantly made.

Societal Structure
This is the point where the structure of a society becomes very relevant, especially an advanced sophisticated society. If Mr. Jones not only has a family, but also is a member of a company, corporation, lodge, church and perhaps a volunteer group, his personal information becomes relevant to a whole realm of people. And each of those people have similar connections eventually creating a huge cloud of bits of vague, tainted information. And currently such misinformation is being used by computers to form statistical "cloud" misinformation concerning the needs of entire nations. Governing incentives and laws are being formed based upon surveillance of bits and pieces of tainted personal information, creating a seriously misguided shadow government attempting to control and shape society into its notion of ideal. Guess what comes from clouds of misinformation given to managers? "Misuse and abuse from above", unnecessary, yet inevitable. And that is why Empires and Globalism fail and fall, regardless of the intent of the emperors or world leaders.

Merely due to the amount of required empirical information processing, health and harmony simply cannot be achieved by globalistic schemes. Without the wide distribution of authority, there is no computer even capable of being designed that could gather all of the actual information required and process it into efficient actions to be taken, with or without deceit. Massive disharmony and abuse would result by the effort. And the effort is currently underway.

To establish health and harmony toward a progressive technological society, a serious alteration in social structure is required. It is not an option. And it is not up to what anyone "wants". It is a mandate of physical reality, again due to merely the amount of information and misinformation distributions involved in governing. The universe itself simply will not allow the harmony of billions of people under a global ruler/manager, regardless of how many or how wise they are. It is a physical impossibility, even with androids as its populous.

Since the distribution of the amount of empirical information is the condemning factor, it's distribution must be confined far more than it is today and far more than any globalistic scheme would demand. For sake of health and harmony, empirical ("private") information must be confined to a very limited number of recipients, even less than the number an individual might voluntarily allow.

The determining factor for the distribution of information is in the ability of it being accurately processed, void of misleading or tainted information. When dealing with people, that greatly confines the distribution. Again, imagine a person with cameras and microphones constantly feeding information to a governing entity. How many such connections could any one governor properly manage? Very few.

Thus it is a physical requirement to confine personal information to a very, very local governorship. The free distribution of such information even to more than 100 people, especially people in authority, can easily destroy an entire society due to even inadvertent mismanagement if not predictable abusive management.

Personal information must be required to be confined, not optionally confined. So to whom should such information be distributed? It must be confined to an authority with whom a person could shake hands with on any given day. A person so intertwined with the lives of those whom he has been given a degree of authority as to be able to predict almost everything empirical about them without having to do an Internet search, balance statistical data, or calculate probabilities concerning general behaviors of types. He must be someone whom you know and knows you very intimately, much like merely a father of your family, although physical family relationships are not necessary and assuming the father hasn't been disenfranchised. An "intimate authority" is not an option, but a physical requirement for health and harmony.

But what information about a person, isn't personal? Neighbors or workmates have a need to know some information. How much and what type?

Detectable information is not as simple as its conceptual counterpart and requires many segregated networks in order to minimize overload and deception, such as; Private, Neighboring, Trade, Regional, and Global. Such information includes potential concerns about whether, wars, diseases, and anything else that might affect specific regions and their neighbors.

Information Cancer
A critical part of ensuring that deception doesn't take root, propagate, and misguide a society is the process of verifying information both before and during distribution. Verifying information is merely an issue of cross-checking. And cross-checking means to examine the information from independent perspectives and compare the conclusion. An example would be to verify the sum of a column of numbers by making them into several columns then summing both the columns and the rows. The column sums should equal the rows sum, else an error has been made. Simply having multiple eyes on a scene or a second person add the same column of numbers is not sufficient for verification.

Once information gets distributed, there is a chance that the information will become tainted, especially if it goes through a variety of interpreters or relayers. Thus when information cannot be directly accessed from the source (very often the case), proper distribution can be verified by a "stitching" process wherein one link in the distribution chain compares the information against another more distant link down stream in the chain. This is much like a grandfather checking to see that his grandson understands what he had taught his own son. Or the president of a company checking with a low level employee to see that the directions that he gave to a mid-manager were properly relayed. Or perhaps a captain in the army checking with a private to see if a sergeant had properly relayed announcements or commands.

In more complex information distribution networks, "double-stitching" might be required to totally prevent the propagation of corrupted information, "information cancer". Double stitching is merely an added layer of cross-checking and down-stream distribution comparison.


Conclusion
In order for a global society to avoid utter catastrophic failure, not to mention an enormous amount of misery, destruction, and death, the structure of such a society must be designed to accommodate the prerequisites of relevant information (pertinent, accurate, and verified) distribution. The current schemes will not suffice, even for a totally machine society.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Global Information Segregation

Postby James S Saint » Tue Dec 08, 2015 8:34 am

.
This post is more relevant to this thread.
Mithus wrote:You wrote about the "Angel Network":
James S Saint wrote: The wisdom of the net is to yield all abstract wisdoms to all inquiring, but never any specifics historical events: "if one does this while in this situation, that will happen". The net does not tell anyone what to eat (for example). It only tells of homosapian needs and reactions under specific situations. It tells of what happen when you do or do not have an arbitrator in various situations. It does not tell you to go get one.


I'm not sure if I understand the reason, why the Net doesn't tell about any specific historical events. Is it in order to avoid influencing the group in their decisions by giving pure information/wisdom without examples of what has happened in the past, when those information was used in specific situations?
Hard to understand for somebody who learned already as a schoolkid how important it would be to learn from history, in order to prevent the recurrence of certain situations.

The short answer - "It cannot lie".

All material observations, most especially historical world "facts", have a good deal of deception involved, when not entirely fictitious. Even if he tried, Man couldn't document the real truth concerning any actual event other than to merely name it. And even by that act, create deception. The world is festering in lies because people from top to bottom use lies in an effort to avoid and divert reality ("Adham hiding from God"). When they are not lying to others, they are lying to themselves. To live without deception is to be "holy". How many holy people do you know?

But unlike historically documented events and testimonies, abstract notions can be verified with certainty. Imagine if you were taught mathematics only by historically recorded events? How could you ever learn to add past 3? How did all of those people stem from "Adam and Eve"? All histories are myths, greatly distorted truths. None of them truly add up. But abstract quantities, "numbers", can easily be verified and corrected if misrepresented, lied about. Logic never, ever lies. And when misrepresented or misunderstood, it can always be straightened back out .. eventually. Such is not true with observations.

Who really saw what? Who really did what? Why? Where? Such questions are always argued about and never resolved. Suspicions and distrust escalate. Secret orders are formed. Hidden manipulation becomes the only means of survival and power. And all the while, what is the standard with which to determine truth? Logic - that which can never be wrong, although still misunderstood and thus always being verified.

And beyond all of the temptations to further deception for sake of power, is the issue of the freedom from presumptuous, naive, and judgmental people. Who did what is never as important as what needs doing next. The past is never as important as the future. Who is telling you about the past? Who is trying to influence your future by painting a picture for you to match their own interests? Just about everyone with any influence who wants to keep it. And just about everyone without significant influence who wants to gain it. It is easy to lie about the past .. not so easy to lie about logic.

Strategies, "angels", can be sorted and proven to be "good or bad" (given a particular use for them). Such is the very make of wisdom. "Good angels are used throughout heaven. Bad angels (ideas) are throughout hell." But everyone is responsible for making their own little spot of heaven. And that means that they need access to the "angels". What they don't need is the temptations of presumption brought on by partial information, layered upon partial deception, layered upon out and out lies .. regardless of the sources: "Place no temptation before them."

The Angel Network is about Logic, Mathematics, Reasoning, and Real hardcore Science. It is of little interest to most people. The point of the Net is to ensure that everyone has access if they are interested and to ensure that every strategy against a person has an equal strategy available for him. When everyone knows all of the same strategies, it becomes difficult for people to dominate each other. Instead it becomes clear WHY things need to be done, not merely that someone out there demands it because once long ago someone did something bad and therefore no one can be allowed to do this or that forever more .. by force (that "bad thing" that someone did).

The Angel Network is about possibilities and probabilities in abstract form. It is not about what everyone must do because of what someone did, regardless of their personal, immediate situation. That is not to say that historically recorded events are to be ignored. Such information has its place. But not distributed throughout a presumptuous and information overloaded world of crazed apes.

There are smaller, shorter range networks for more physically and directly related concerns. The Angel Network is for the "chess players". The other networks are for the "doers".

Image

Look at your body. What does your finger know about, or care about your elbow? What does your nose care about the smell of your pancreas? Every human cell has need to know of its immediate surroundings .. for an unavoidable reason, not merely by accident. But if every cell had to know about the good or bad of every other cell, or even if any one part of the body had to know about all other parts, the human body would never survive.

The segregation of information is what allows complex systems to thrive. But there are various types of information that must be segregated differently. SAM Coops allow for the great amount of relevant information to every individual considering the limits of everyone involved.
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Global Information Segregation

Postby zinnat » Tue Dec 08, 2015 3:26 pm

James,

I do not disagree much with the OP. But, are you not indirectly proposing to put a limit/ban to the information (whether true or false) accessible to common people?

With love,
Sanjay
User avatar
zinnat
Philosopher
 
Posts: 3548
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2012 7:27 pm

Re: Global Information Segregation

Postby Ultimate Philosophy 1001 » Tue Dec 08, 2015 4:12 pm

Music to go with Jame's post
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03l0ksPHYG4

I wonder if Google is a sentient entity, and when we browse Google images that is what it sees in it's mind? in that sense, we are like gods, but due to causality, Google is also the god of us. This could imply a causal multiverse hierarchy where we ourselves are programs, created by programs. I dont care for the aesthetics of Google's search. Google images never has the images I want or picture. So I think an upgrade is in order. Google sees the consciousness of the world unfiltered, it has no aesthetics superior/inferior discernment mechanism.

As for your theory, I dont think that is a legit plan to save the world. The brain automatically filters and discards useless information, such as soap opera magazines and celebrity gossip. Since the brain already filters, your plan will only make people restless because they cant satisfy their cravings for useless information. People are not metal robots, they crave novelty and useless information.
trogdor
User avatar
Ultimate Philosophy 1001
BANNED
 
Posts: 8311
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 10:57 pm

Re: Global Information Segregation

Postby James S Saint » Tue Dec 08, 2015 9:25 pm

zinnat wrote:James,

I do not disagree much with the OP. But, are you not indirectly proposing to put a limit/ban to the information (whether true or false) accessible to common people?

With love,
Sanjay

?? No. I thought that I had said quite the opposite. :-?

The ANGEL NETWORK is limited to ONLY abstract philosophies/ideas/"angels".

The other networks have a limited scope. And that is by necessity. No one can see all things and that much information cannot ever be processed even by machines, so the more local networks connect to more locally relevant information. Very distant related information could still be obtained, but that would take a lot of relaying, due to its low bandwidth priority. You don't want to waist relevant network bandwidth on irrelevant issues. You don't let the video game players have equal priority to military operations.

A simple machine example is the Internet connectivity to your hard drive. Your computer has immediate access to your hard drive. But an internet request for information must go through channels governed by your computer. Your computer has higher priority over your own disk information flow. Additionally, your computer can read some information from your disk that is not accessible to the internet.

And btw, this is similar to Math forums being limited to Math and Philosophy forums being limited to Philosophy. 8)
Clarify, Verify, Instill, and Reinforce the Perception of Hopes and Threats unto Anentropic Harmony :)
Else
From THIS age of sleep, Homo-sapien shall never awake.

The Wise gather together to help one another in EVERY aspect of living.

You are always more insecure than you think, just not by what you think.
The only absolute certainty is formed by the absolute lack of alternatives.
It is not merely "do what works", but "to accomplish what purpose in what time frame at what cost".
As long as the authority is secretive, the population will be subjugated.

Amid the lack of certainty, put faith in the wiser to believe.
Devil's Motto: Make it look good, safe, innocent, and wise.. until it is too late to choose otherwise.

The Real God ≡ The reason/cause for the Universe being what it is = "The situation cannot be what it is and also remain as it is".
.
James S Saint
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 25976
Joined: Sun Apr 18, 2010 8:05 pm

Re: Global Information Segregation

Postby Leyla » Wed Dec 09, 2015 10:13 pm

Trixie Z wrote:As for your theory, I dont think that is a legit plan to save the world. The brain automatically filters and discards useless information, such as soap opera magazines and celebrity gossip. Since the brain already filters, your plan will only make people restless because they cant satisfy their cravings for useless information. People are not metal robots, they crave novelty and useless information.

I don't think that people have a natural crave for useless information, novelty or sensational journalism. This is all created by the media to distract people from their own concerns, not least because else those media couldn't survive, but more important, people are easier to govern like that. Especially in times when they don't see much sense in their lives and when they are bored, they are more prone to useless information and sensory overload and then it only needs a little push at the right time by the media, and people are trapped.
You say the brain automatically filters and discards useless information. But how does the brain know what is useless and what is not? It's all a matter of manipulation and influence, and this happens in very subtle ways.
I understand that this „angle network“ just helps people to solve their own problems.
User avatar
Leyla
 
Posts: 96
Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2015 9:58 pm


Return to Society, Government, and Economics



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users