Free Energy | searching for free energy and discussing free energy

News announcements and other topics => News => Topic started by: FluxAmps on May 14, 2009, 02:57:02 AM

Title: another strange story
Post by: FluxAmps on May 14, 2009, 02:57:02 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Sloot

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=A102402591EA03F4&search_query=de+broncode

dutch inventor found a way to code data in a way so all movies ever made would fit on one cd

due to a coding system that makes it possible to fit the whole content of lets say a book of 1000 pages in one number

1 day before he would hand over the code an would be a multimiljonair he died of a heartattack???, tom perkins(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Perkins)
 promised him to be the richest man of the world a few days before....

this whas in the dutch news back in say 2000

he had a test system with 30 movies on a 16mb card which you could watch simultaniously and scroll through at high speed as u liked.

the crown prince of philips, Roel Pieper(check wiki roel pieper on google) resigned from his position with philips to go on with this invention

till today a mysterie where the code is, the inventors room which used to be a chaos with a truckload of paper,
was mysteriouslty cleaned up 1 day after his dead?

did anyone notice how fast we can watch movies by utube these days, and how many simultaniously on a up to date computer
how many of us know what's really inside a processor
with this man's technologie your 10 year old processsor would be powerfull enough for the next 100 years

my suspision is this technologie is being used in little steps by the big companies, they just stole it!

Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: Opaka Lips on June 03, 2009, 02:33:04 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Sloot

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=A102402591EA03F4&search_query=de+broncode

dutch inventor found a way to code data in a way so all movies ever made would fit on one cd

due to a coding system that makes it possible to fit the whole content of lets say a book of 1000 pages in one number

1 day before he would hand over the code an would be a multimiljonair he died of a heartattack???, tom perkins(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Perkins)
 promised him to be the richest man of the world a few days before....

this whas in the dutch news back in say 2000

he had a test system with 30 movies on a 16mb card which you could watch simultaniously and scroll through at high speed as u liked.

the crown prince of philips, Roel Pieper(check wiki roel pieper on google) resigned from his position with philips to go on with this invention

till today a mysterie where the code is, the inventors room which used to be a chaos with a truckload of paper,
was mysteriouslty cleaned up 1 day after his dead?

did anyone notice how fast we can watch movies by utube these days, and how many simultaniously on a up to date computer
how many of us know what's really inside a processor
with this man's technologie your 10 year old processsor would be powerfull enough for the next 100 years

my suspision is this technologie is being used in little steps by the big companies, they just stole it!

I agree....truely "another strange story"
Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: TinselKoala on June 03, 2009, 04:18:42 AM
Uh-huh.

Here's my copy of "War and Peace" :   142.

And the Bible (King James version):     376.

I'm having trouble with the children's books, though. How can I tell "Dr. Seuss" ( 2 ) from "Peter Rabbit" ( also 2 )?

There's nothing inside those processors except some sand, rocks, glass, and little metal and plastic trinkets.

Seriously, it's funny how the story gets inflated over time, with additions and exaggerations, and "a friend who works at the police" or a "scientist" adds further uncorroborated details...

There weren't 30 movies that could be browsed on a little card; there were suitcases stuffed with tech; it was a pretty simple feat of compression when you get right down to it.

Clipped from a forum somewhere in cyberspace:
Poster A:
"The truth lies of course in the question what you are trying to code. Sloot never claimed he could code an infinite amount of movies into a 128 KB chip. The man has never said anything of the sort. Besides, there is no evidence whatsoever that Mr. Sloot claimed he was able to code an infinite amount of movies onto anything. Even better, Sloot has never referred to an "infinite" amount of movies in any documentation that he has left behind. What Sloot coded on his chipcard was nothing more than some security keys needed to jumpstart his application. The real work was done inside the boxes he took with him. Boxes half the size of suitcases and stuffed with microchips and IC's.

The truth about the Sloot matter is far more complicated than has been presented so far. I will gladly provide more info, depending on the reactions. Mr. Van Wijck here is regrettably on the wrong track. But Andries's reaction is of the destructive kind, suggesting Mr. Sloot was a fraud or a kook, and discouraging any serious debate. Mr. Sloot was neither. He really had something unique and could explain it to anyone intelligent enough to understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.10.187.124 (talk) 01:22, 7 June 2008 (UTC)"

Poster B:
"     If "the real work was done inside boxes half the size of suitcases, stuffed with [technology]", then whatever Mr. Sloot demonstrated in 1995 was not unique from a third-party perspective because it was no more impressive than a handful 1.5 Mbit MPEG-1 videos (Video CD, 1993) together with a laptop with either CD-ROM (1985, required 2x speed soon after) or a 2 Mbit Wavelan wireless device (1990) accessing the videos through a stream from a server. Robert John Kaper (talk) 02:39, 29 August 2008 (UTC)"

Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: Yucca on June 03, 2009, 04:54:37 AM
It may have been procedural descriptions of the analog function that describes the picture.

Here´s a demo using procedural description of complex things. The demo fits all of the following (video and music, plus 3d engine, plus video and audio renderer!!) into only 64 KB of program code:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svGk_pF67gc

you can download or view (on youtube) lots more 64k demos here, it´s amazing what a crafty coder can squeeze into 64k!:

http://www.pouet.net/prodlist.php?type[]=64k

edit: I am aware of information theory and entropy etc. but sometimes you gotta dream. a fractal contains alot of complexity for instance.
Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: Yucca on June 03, 2009, 05:19:21 AM
There's nothing inside those processors except some sand, rocks, glass, and little metal and plastic trinkets.

True enough TK, but there´s nothing isnside of us but a bunch of atoms and molecules either. A whole human can be described by 3.4billion base pairs, sounds alot but only equivalent to about 750MB, so you can get  about 6 people on 1 el-cheapo DVDR. Yet we assume we are more than just marionettes reacting to stimuli. We even think we can think!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_saUN4j7Gw&feature=related

Ahhh, gotta watch bladerunner again soon, it´s been too long!
Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: hansvonlieven on June 03, 2009, 09:06:37 AM
True enough TK, but there´s nothing isnside of us but a bunch of atoms and molecules either. A whole human can be described by 3.4billion base pairs, sounds alot but only equivalent to about 750MB, so you can get  about 6 people on 1 el-cheapo DVDR. Yet we assume we are more than just marionettes reacting to stimuli. We even think we can think!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_saUN4j7Gw&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a_saUN4j7Gw&feature=related)

Ahhh, gotta watch bladerunner again soon, it´s been too long!

WOW, I like this.

I will fit on a DVD with five other arseholes. Will I get to choose who those other pricks are, or don't I get a choice because I am so fucking insignificant?

What a lesson in humility!

I choose not to choose it.

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: Yucca on June 03, 2009, 04:12:33 PM
WOW, I like this.

I will fit on a DVD with five other arseholes. Will I get to choose who those other pricks are, or don't I get a choice because I am so fucking insignificant?

What a lesson in humility!

I choose not to choose it.

Hans von Lieven

Lol, maybe we could increase our significance by making six duplicate copies! Or maybe write hundreds of disks, each containing duplicates along with a touching biography and then post them out like AOL spam disks for safekeeping, jeez, the bins would be full of them! :D

As you've probably heard, many sequences are very common to all of us, and in fact common to most life. Also the genome contains massive amounts of safeguards and error correction codes, to try and ensure completely proper replication. Both these factors lend to large compression possibilities, I'm not sure how compressible lots of people would be, but I would suspect you could fit thousands, probably many more on a DVD.
Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: allcanadian on June 03, 2009, 07:00:27 PM
@Yucca
Quote:
"True enough TK, but there´s nothing isnside of us but a bunch of atoms and molecules either. A whole human can be described by 3.4billion base pairs, sounds alot but only equivalent to about 750MB, so you can get  about 6 people on 1 el-cheapo DVDR. Yet we assume we are more than just marionettes reacting to stimuli. We even think we can think!"

LOL, this is a commom misconception made by almost everyone. You make the mistake in assuming "we" are a static entity which could not be further from the truth. Like everything else "we" are in a continual state of change, "we" are dynamic. As such there is no storage media known that could ever record what we are to any degree because we are never the same as each second ticks by. You have also not fully considered what some refer to as the "me" and "I" scenario, consider what your friends and family think of "you". They may know your body or form, your habit's, like's and dislike's but do they know the intimate part of you that makes all your descisions?. Does your body make these descisions, LOL? If as you propose, that you could be recorded somehow then how can you account for the fact that you alway's have the option of "choice". A choice is the conscious effort of choosing one thing or another, but few have considered "what" makes this choice or "where" we percieve it as happening and that it has no set value until after the fact. There are two parts to "you", what you consider as "me" that everyone including yourself knows of (what you see in the mirror )and then there is the "I" part which only you can truely know. A thinking person who can seperate the "me" and "I" aspects of themselves may understand what they are, we are more than the sum of our parts, while the rest of the persons who only consider themselves as physical things are cursed to walk this earth in ignorance of pretty much everything around them.
Regards
AC
Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: innovation_station on June 03, 2009, 09:29:35 PM
@Yucca
Quote:
"True enough TK, but there´s nothing isnside of us but a bunch of atoms and molecules either. A whole human can be described by 3.4billion base pairs, sounds alot but only equivalent to about 750MB, so you can get  about 6 people on 1 el-cheapo DVDR. Yet we assume we are more than just marionettes reacting to stimuli. We even think we can think!"

LOL, this is a commom misconception made by almost everyone. You make the mistake in assuming "we" are a static entity which could not be further from the truth. Like everything else "we" are in a continual state of change, "we" are dynamic. As such there is no storage media known that could ever record what we are to any degree because we are never the same as each second ticks by. You have also not fully considered what some refer to as the "me" and "I" scenario, consider what your friends and family think of "you". They may know your body or form, your habit's, like's and dislike's but do they know the intimate part of you that makes all your descisions?. Does your body make these descisions, LOL? If as you propose, that you could be recorded somehow then how can you account for the fact that you alway's have the option of "choice". A choice is the conscious effort of choosing one thing or another, but few have considered "what" makes this choice or "where" we percieve it as happening and that it has no set value until after the fact. There are two parts to "you", what you consider as "me" that everyone including yourself knows of (what you see in the mirror )and then there is the "I" part which only you can truely know. A thinking person who can seperate the "me" and "I" aspects of themselves may understand what they are, we are more than the sum of our parts, while the rest of the persons who only consider themselves as physical things are cursed to walk this earth in ignorance of pretty much everything around them.
Regards
AC

NICE...

when will you know I   LOL

I LOVE IT!

TUNE UP  TUNE IT ...  OR DO IT AGIN....

IST!
Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: hansvonlieven on June 03, 2009, 09:52:39 PM
Lol, maybe we could increase our significance by making six duplicate copies! Or maybe write hundreds of disks, each containing duplicates along with a touching biography and then post them out like AOL spam disks for safekeeping, jeez, the bins would be full of them! :D

As you've probably heard, many sequences are very common to all of us, and in fact common to most life. Also the genome contains massive amounts of safeguards and error correction codes, to try and ensure completely proper replication. Both these factors lend to large compression possibilities, I'm not sure how compressible lots of people would be, but I would suspect you could fit thousands, probably many more on a DVD.

 Yep, just imagine, the whole fucking universe on a 1 terabyte hard drive. Now anyone who can afford a couple of hundred bucks for the drive can play God !!!!!
 
 Not bad for someone only worth 750 MB.  ;)

Hans von Lieven
Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: innovation_station on June 03, 2009, 10:08:10 PM

 Yep, just imagine, the whole fucking universe on a 1 terabyte hard drive. Now anyone who can afford a couple of hundred bucks for the drive can play God !!!!!
 
 Not bad for someone only worth 750 MB.  ;)

Hans von Lieven

i think you fail to see the reality here ... lol

NO BODY WILL PLAY GOD!! 

FOR THE ONES THAT THINK THEY WILL GOT AN EYE POPPER COMEING !!  LOL  ;) :D

THE HU-MANS PLAYED GOD ALREADY AND THEY FAILED!

LOL

BTW HU-MAN MEANS TV MAN LOL  :D  YA KNOW THE KIND GLUED TO THE FOOLS BOX !!

NOW DO TELL ME THE CRYSTAL SKULLS... AND THERE USE

B4 I TELL YOU HOW THEY WERE MADE ...  WICH YOUR WORLD FAILS TO HOLD EVEN THE TECK IN THERE HANDS TO DUPLICATE THEM OR COMPREHEND THERE USE ...

13 OF EM RIGHT .... 


WHO LET THE DOGS OUT ??!?!??

IST!
Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: TinselKoala on June 04, 2009, 04:25:55 AM
You can specify all the base pairs in my genome exactly, but you won't be able to specify, for just one example, the exact connection map of my brain using that data. You would need a lot more data about my environment and developmental history, and it's likely that the most economical encoding scheme for that information has already been developed--it's the brain itself. In this case any map would be even more complex than the territory.

Besides, the Sloot case is an old one, long explained: the small card held encryption KEYS in ROM, the movies and whatnot were stored in ordinary compressed formats for the times, on ordinary hardware. Sloot's algorithms allowed rapid UNLOCKING of compressed files. Not decrypting from incredibly compressed storage.

Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: Yucca on June 04, 2009, 10:18:42 PM
@Yucca
Quote:
"True enough TK, but there´s nothing isnside of us but a bunch of atoms and molecules either. A whole human can be described by 3.4billion base pairs, sounds alot but only equivalent to about 750MB, so you can get  about 6 people on 1 el-cheapo DVDR. Yet we assume we are more than just marionettes reacting to stimuli. We even think we can think!"

LOL, this is a commom misconception made by almost everyone. You make the mistake in assuming "we" are a static entity which could not be further from the truth. Like everything else "we" are in a continual state of change, "we" are dynamic. As such there is no storage media known that could ever record what we are to any degree because we are never the same as each second ticks by. You have also not fully considered what some refer to as the "me" and "I" scenario, consider what your friends and family think of "you". They may know your body or form, your habit's, like's and dislike's but do they know the intimate part of you that makes all your descisions?. Does your body make these descisions, LOL? If as you propose, that you could be recorded somehow then how can you account for the fact that you alway's have the option of "choice". A choice is the conscious effort of choosing one thing or another, but few have considered "what" makes this choice or "where" we percieve it as happening and that it has no set value until after the fact. There are two parts to "you", what you consider as "me" that everyone including yourself knows of (what you see in the mirror )and then there is the "I" part which only you can truely know. A thinking person who can seperate the "me" and "I" aspects of themselves may understand what they are, we are more than the sum of our parts, while the rest of the persons who only consider themselves as physical things are cursed to walk this earth in ignorance of pretty much everything around them.
Regards
AC

AC

Make no mistake I am not a reductionalist, I believe life is quite magical and special. I have an open mind and believe in many things others would consider "paranormal".

I was only stating that the machine (the computer) on which our software runs is just that, a machine, and that machine is described by the genome. TK stated that a computer is just silicon etc. And he was right, but it can be much more with software.

Of course what makes us interesting is our mind, our software, (without it we are just corpses).  Human software is exceedingly complex, and a result of lots of experiences as TK says. Whether the software can exist without the machine (in the psychic plane) I wouldn´t like to say either way with any certainty.

I guess you saw me as almost "blasphemous" by comparing a person to a machine. I made the mistake of saying "fitting people onto a DVD", I should of course said "fitting bodies onto a DVD".

A quick question, do you think that at the moment of conception, when the gametes first meet, do you think there is more to the new being than just its genome then?

Best, Yucca.
Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: Yucca on June 04, 2009, 10:30:30 PM
You can specify all the base pairs in my genome exactly, but you won't be able to specify, for just one example, the exact connection map of my brain using that data. You would need a lot more data about my environment and developmental history, and it's likely that the most economical encoding scheme for that information has already been developed--it's the brain itself. In this case any map would be even more complex than the territory.

Besides, the Sloot case is an old one, long explained: the small card held encryption KEYS in ROM, the movies and whatnot were stored in ordinary compressed formats for the times, on ordinary hardware. Sloot's algorithms allowed rapid UNLOCKING of compressed files. Not decrypting from incredibly compressed storage.

See above post. I should´ve said "storing bodies" not "storing people". Of course a person is more than just their body.

Back on topic:
RE Sloot, I don´t know enough about it to pass judgement really. Was it a lie that he had interested investors from fairly tech savvy firms, the scheme you describe is very simple, why would they pay for such? But then maybe they were only willing to buy his stuff for a relatively small amount.
Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: TinselKoala on June 05, 2009, 01:14:26 AM
See above post. I should´ve said "storing bodies" not "storing people". Of course a person is more than just their body.

Back on topic:
RE Sloot, I don´t know enough about it to pass judgement really. Was it a lie that he had interested investors from fairly tech savvy firms, the scheme you describe is very simple, why would they pay for such? But then maybe they were only willing to buy his stuff for a relatively small amount.

Nope, a person is "just" a body (including both substance and process). The genome specifies a "start point" if you will; from the instant of the first division of the fertilized egg onward, environmental variables (some random, some systematically varying, some constant) influence the product of the process started by information from the genome. The only way to duplicate -- or even encode -- the result is to duplicate the process. So the genome is not nearly enough, even to encode a "body" instead of a "person" as you say.

Consider the Star Trek transporter. It scans you down to the quantum level over a short time window and stores and transmits the information to a distant point where energies beyond our imagining reconstitute the matter, in exact duplication of the matter that was initially scanned, and due to the exactness of the information the Process (life, personality) is also reconstituted. The original, of course, back in the transporter room, is destroyed by the scanning process.
(You probably didn't realize that. They don't stress it at the General Products Corporation Transporter Division; it's bad for business. Fortunately their systems have very high reliability.)
Now, clearly there must be petabytes of information to be transmitted in such a process, and even a GP broadband subspace tranceiver would take a few femtoseconds to make the transfer, hence the need for fast and deep compression/decompression.

Would you take the trip, if the compression algorithm was the one Sloot used?

Or, would you take the trip at all? The first time is the scariest and most interesting from a philosophical point of view--especially if one is a materialist, as opposed to a dualist.
Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on June 05, 2009, 02:28:30 AM

Does this mean Scotty couldn't have been reconstituted after all those years trapped in the transporter data base ?

Regards...

Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: TinselKoala on June 05, 2009, 02:52:51 AM
Does this mean Scotty couldn't have been reconstituted after all those years trapped in the transporter data base ?

Regards...

Depends. I think in the old GP Model A, like in the original Enterprise, the energy from the total conversion of the original matter, in the scan process, was utilized to reconstitute the matter in the distant location. I think the information was "streamed" to use modern parlance, and those old transporters only stored the basic outline, not the entire Process. So if Scotty could somehow be reconstituted from that database, one would need to provide the energy, and also the product wouldn't be "alive" or "conscious" in the normal sense. It certainly wouldn't be Scotty.
But if he was scanned and stored in the improved GP ScanTransB, like in "Next Generation", only legalities would prevent his complete reconstitution. Of course, the Non-Inclusion principle of Paw Li forbids the simultaneous existence of more than a single quantum-complete Scotty at any given time, so the machine can't be used, for example, as a simple copier. Thank goodness for that--could you imagine the Spam???
Regardless, I think the database storage is incapable of simulating the Process (the Doctor notwithstanding) so any reconstituted Scotty would have no memories at all of time passing or of the storage itself.
Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: Yucca on June 05, 2009, 03:00:56 AM
Nope, a person is "just" a body (including both substance and process). The genome specifies a "start point" if you will; from the instant of the first division of the fertilized egg onward, environmental variables (some random, some systematically varying, some constant) influence the product of the process started by information from the genome. The only way to duplicate -- or even encode -- the result is to duplicate the process. So the genome is not nearly enough, even to encode a "body" instead of a "person" as you say.

Consider the Star Trek transporter. It scans you down to the quantum level over a short time window and stores and transmits the information to a distant point where energies beyond our imagining reconstitute the matter, in exact duplication of the matter that was initially scanned, and due to the exactness of the information the Process (life, personality) is also reconstituted. The original, of course, back in the transporter room, is destroyed by the scanning process.
(You probably didn't realize that. They don't stress it at the General Products Corporation Transporter Division; it's bad for business. Fortunately their systems have very high reliability.)
Now, clearly there must be petabytes of information to be transmitted in such a process, and even a GP broadband subspace tranceiver would take a few femtoseconds to make the transfer, hence the need for fast and deep compression/decompression.

Would you take the trip, if the compression algorithm was the one Sloot used?

Or, would you take the trip at all? The first time is the scariest and most interesting from a philosophical point of view--especially if one is a materialist, as opposed to a dualist.

OK, I stand corrected, again ::) Extraneous information enters the system the moment mitosis commences. So a genome can only describe a zygote at best. But then at what level of mitosis is a being considered to have a body?

I would take the trip provided my non sloot compressed pattern were stored safely for reconstitution should the transport fail. It´s an extreme test though, I´d probably transport a fly or something first. One thing I never understood about star trek transport. If a person could be scanned at the quantum level, every nuance of state recorded. Then surely as well as transmitting the data it could also be buffered in a large memory. So if anyone perished on an away mission they could just recall the last stored pattern. But they never do? Even though they speak of pattern buffers, they never recall from them. Whats up with that?

edit: Above already answered by TK. With that in mind, I wouldn´t transport unless I had no other choice, especially if it was a pioneering test to validate Sloot.
Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: TinselKoala on June 05, 2009, 03:18:56 AM
I'm told that it's a lot easier the second time.
 ;)

But I don't think I'd want to go the first time, either, unless the alternative death was a messy and painful one.
Of course, it could be terribly painful to be scanned, and the reconstitution could just leave that experience out, I suppose...but that would require the software to be able to instantly codec the traveller's internal coding, which is highly idiosyncratic to the point of uniqueness...(ever try to explain something to your teenage daughter, for example?)

Maybe that's where Sloot went when he discorporated--he was drafted by GP R&D.

Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: Cap-Z-ro on June 05, 2009, 03:57:33 AM

It wood seem the original Scotty would have to be in the unit in order to be reconstituted.

Otherwise Yar wooden still be stuck inside the black goo.

Regards...

Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: innovation_station on June 05, 2009, 03:32:00 PM
well another TRUE STORY .... :P

VIDEO KILLED THE RADIO STAR ....   HU-MANS ......

DO YOU HAVE EARS TO HEAR ....  1979 ORIGINAL DATE .....  HUMMMMM  ;)

THEY BUILT A TIME MACHINE ON YOUR TECKNOLAGY .....   


SO YOU CANT REWIND YOU HAVE GONE TOOOOOOO FAR



FOOOOOOOOLLLLLLLSSSSSSSSS 

WHEN WILL YOU BELEAVE   DUH!!!!!!!!

LOL

 8) 8) 8) IST!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKJHRisppCo

RUN 2NE!!

ODD MY POST 3030   Deltron 3030 - Positive Contact  ;)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oCXwl7XBiQ


000000OOOOOOoooooo  THE GRAND AWAKENING ...  8) 8) 8) 8) 8) 8)

WHERS ERF.... :D

IST!
Title: Re: another strange story
Post by: Yucca on June 05, 2009, 05:53:53 PM
I couldn't agree more!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKJHRisppCo

Great memories! But are they really mine? Probably not, probably nobodies. All just like tears in the rain.