Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-users] Transcendental #new (was Re: why Pillar)
Wait a second here. Let's be clear. In your first paragraph you say no need to feel that I am censored or ostracized, then the second paragraph you censor me. Alright, I ask you all. Which meta-model is acceptable for practical work in my stack? I need a meta-model to describe it, or rahter anyone should be able to skin the meta-model they want and that makes most sense. These consciousness meta-models, or meta-memes, from religious tradition are well-defined models. Is the cellular meta-meme acceptable or is also the Mythic meta-meme? Or are both having no place here? This is Smalltalk to me and my practical use of it. It is directly related to interactive fiction, which was just posted about. I am not trying to be belligerent, nay defend myself from hypocrisy and secure my rights, here. So which is the acceptable meta-model? Regards, Robert Mythic Meta-Meme Cell MetaMeme CryptOCaps On 12/27/2015 12:49 PM, Johan Fabry wrote:
Robert, there is no need to feel that you are being censored for your spiritual and/or religious point of view and are being ostracized.
This being said, this is a mailing list with a relatively high amount of traffic as well as many subscribers, and because of this nature the conversations here are supposed to be of a more directly practical nature and straightforwardly related to Pharo. So I agree with the main gist of Benâs message (+ Marcusâ message of some time ago) and I am quite sure that many other subscribers to the list also do so.
So please keep your message on-topic, to assure a better mailing list experience for all.
Greetings,
On Dec 27, 2015, at 14:15, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
I must say as well, I disagree strenuously to the community were attempts made to classify spiritual and religious scholarship and commentary, related as it demonstrably is to meta models in Smalltalk, to be placed on the censorship list.
I strenuously object to these objections to the sciences of consciousness.
respectfully, robert
---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <---
Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
On Dec 27, 2015, at 15:18, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
Wait a second here. Let's be clear. In your first paragraph you say no need to feel that I am censored or ostracized, then the second paragraph you censor me.
You did not completely take into account my sentence. The second part says: "for your spiritual and/or religious point of viewâ.
Alright, I ask you all. Which meta-model is acceptable for practical work in my stack? I need a meta-model to describe it, or rahter anyone should be able to skin the meta-model they want and that makes most sense. These consciousness meta-models, or meta-memes, from religious tradition are well-defined models.
I have no opinion on this, this is a design question for your work, and not straightforwardly related to Pharo itself. In my opinion and apparently in the opinion of others as well, this is not a topic for this mailing list. Sending multiple mails to the list about it can be considered bad netiquette. ---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <--- Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
Hello Johan, On 12/27/2015 01:50 PM, Johan Fabry wrote:
On Dec 27, 2015, at 15:18, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com <mailto:robert.w.withers@gmail.com>> wrote:
Wait a second here. Let's be clear. In your first paragraph you say no need to feel that I am censored or ostracized, then the second paragraph you censor me.
You did not completely take into account my sentence. The second part says: "for your spiritual and/or religious point of viewâ.
I apologize, I do not understand your point.
Alright, I ask you all. Which meta-model is acceptable for practical work in my stack? I need a meta-model to describe it, or rahter anyone should be able to skin the meta-model they want and that makes most sense. These consciousness meta-models, or meta-memes, from religious tradition are well-defined models.
I have no opinion on this, this is a design question for your work, and not straightforwardly related to Pharo itself. In my opinion and apparently in the opinion of others as well, this is not a topic for this mailing list. Sending multiple mails to the list about it can be considered bad netiquette.
It is silly for me to ask for contravailing opinion but your position is medieval and anti-intellectual. You are imposing a false restriction and constraint on the potential of a dynamic meta system, which Pharo certainly is. Are you aiming for mimicry to bring Pharo to popularity and success or are you aiming for innovation. Why one over the other. My work lies within the circle of innovation, whether it sits right with or not. I will take Offray's suggestion to not torment the list quite so voluminously. I simply will not yield my various models. As well, I'll keep to to the devel list, so as not to scare any potential Pharovians. If you are lost by my analogies, please ask me questions. There is an untapped wealth here. They are models of consciousness, even if you are not conscious of it. My practical technical questions relate to representation of this in Pharo, using interactive fiction and immersive natural language processing. I do not know very much about this so I will need to ask questions as I get deeper into this aspect of my 9-layer architecture (9-layer burrito). I would think this would greatly interest a computer science department... -- Robert . .. ... ^,^
On 12/27/2015 01:50 PM, Johan Fabry wrote:
On Dec 27, 2015, at 15:18, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com <mailto:robert.w.withers@gmail.com>> wrote:
Alright, I ask you all. Which meta-model is acceptable for practical work in my stack? I need a meta-model to describe it, or rahter anyone should be able to skin the meta-model they want and that makes most sense. These consciousness meta-models, or meta-memes, from religious tradition are well-defined models.
I have no opinion on this, this is a design question for your work, and not straightforwardly related to Pharo itself. In my opinion and apparently in the opinion of others as well, this is not a topic for this mailing list. Sending multiple mails to the list about it can be considered bad netiquette.
I find it very unfortunate you sidestepped my question with a claim of not only no opinion, but that it has no place on this list. Intellectual dishonesty is a rather poor maneuver for one who claims to be of an enlightened tribe. I object on the basis of principle. So, I would extend you another opportunity, which are valid meta-models? Let's talk about meta-memes and meta-models within Pharo's creative space. Shall it be the military analogy, then? How unfortunate, I'd wish an alternative. Regards, -- Robert . .. ... ^,^
Yes, here we are, all three models. Just like we have a bunch of languages from around the world, my wish is to see many meta-models for my higher stack layers, as many would not understand one or the other and can, in fact, create their own model through which they control their interactions with the One distriubuted cloud image-based Metaverse. Let us aim high. So to Pharo: How can I do this multi-model interactions on a real system, through multi-meme interactive fiction? Do you know what I mean, then? robert Military lens Cell lens Vedic lens On 12/27/2015 08:55 PM, Robert Withers wrote:
On 12/27/2015 01:50 PM, Johan Fabry wrote:
On Dec 27, 2015, at 15:18, Robert Withers <robert.w.withers@gmail.com> wrote:
Alright, I ask you all. Which meta-model is acceptable for practical work in my stack? I need a meta-model to describe it, or rahter anyone should be able to skin the meta-model they want and that makes most sense. These consciousness meta-models, or meta-memes, from religious tradition are well-defined models.
I have no opinion on this, this is a design question for your work, and not straightforwardly related to Pharo itself. In my opinion and apparently in the opinion of others as well, this is not a topic for this mailing list. Sending multiple mails to the list about it can be considered bad netiquette.
I find it very unfortunate you sidestepped my question with a claim of not only no opinion, but that it has no place on this list. Intellectual dishonesty is a rather poor maneuver for one who claims to be of an enlightened tribe. I object on the basis of principle.
So, I would extend you another opportunity, which are valid meta-models? Let's talk about meta-memes and meta-models within Pharo's creative space. Shall it be the military analogy, then? How unfortunate, I'd wish an alternative.
Regards, -- Robert . .. ... ^,^
-- Robert . .. ... ^,^
participants (2)
-
Johan Fabry -
Robert Withers