<plannedunfrontedmaterial>
Given intelligence is applied with entropy, the basis should then give that when it is more distributed it is useless. This therefore implies that the feared brain drain which concentrates intelligence into a focused area is a good process. Still, to create a useful concentration which lowers the entropy of an area requires the increase in entropy elsewhere, thus the loss of intelligence from where they are being absorbed
Therefore, we need to stop trying to stop brain drains and let the intelligence focus itself into a giant laser beam that will blow up Earth with spiky hot meteors
</plannedunfrontedmaterial>
<bastardlymaterialthatdragsthepreviousmaterialwithittothefront>
Now then, I will
silently pay my meme debt
(You really shouldn't read these things, I'm sure they're bad for your health)Five years ago I was 11. I was entering G6 which means I was still in my long period of drone. I had premature obsessions through G6 which were of basic philosophy, classical music, any child TV show, couldn't sit through a movie, read fiction and played video games, didn't really look at life, was for the Green Party
A couple years later I was sick of philosophy because I figured it was all just jaw jabber, I was listening to squeaky MIDIs, watched Opera, could sit through a movie if ordered to, wasn't reading too much, was spending time with GM more than playing video games (besides a bit of SNES emulating), saw life as dying but no reason to pout, and was for the Green Party
(This may seem like a dark age, but I also found the internet and Wikipedia. So I sat around learning)
Now I'm interested in reading about philosophy and from that developing my own philosophy, listening to techno that isn't MIDI, TV is boring, I'll watch a movie even if it isn't a comedy (Then again, science fiction movies are still comedies), been reading again (More variety, like nonfiction), have spread my language knowledge to a variety of languages (Foundational knowledge, I'm not really one to write Lisp or Haskell code, but I understand their basis. Lisp also was a good introduction to functional programming and I've further found that beauty in Python. Anyone who reads these unfronteds already knows how often I learn a new language. As Tom said "You're learning a new language every time I talk to you, slow down"(In reply to my learning Javascript for Project Parallax(I ended up teaching him a few things about how Javascript's functional paradigm, since it has first class functions))), see life as the instantaneous beauty of entropy, and am for the more humanitarian environmental parties (Like the NDP). Oh, and I actually look into what I believe in now
Oh, and religion. Atheist, but I've been a bit more agnosticly atheist recently
@Sk8=Hobbies are for people who need to do more work
</bastardlymaterialthatdragsthepreviousmaterialwithittothefront>
You don't really "use" or "concentrate" intelligence, since it is a term used to describe the capacity for learning above and beyond normal level.
Ser & Juju: Here's my view, and since I'm physicsly impaired, no equations. I'm not going to adress entropy as a measure, but rather increasing entropy as a process. The good old SLOT (Second Law of Thermodynamics) indicates that entropy in any isolated system is bound to increase. If we are dealing with an intelligent individual as a system, then by extended definition, unless they receive intelligence in some external form (interpretations debatable), their intelligence is going to deteriorate, become inefficient (unapplicable) or randomised ("let's talk about penises!") with time.
Ya, I'd pretty well agree with you on the discussed points then
I'm atheist in that I believe everything can be explained through consistent physics. I do not believe a God can be supernatural, though perhaps supernatural to our view of naturalWhere's the "agnostic" part in that? It's more of a deism or an (p)a(n)theism with a naturally defined "God" to me.
I suppose you could say that, but I'm more explaining the part of it against atheism. I'm quite convinced that there isn't some sentient being who caused everything. But I can't be sure of what I can't be sure of, and I can't be sure there isn't. I can be sure that no religion has it right on what this hypothetical sentient being's will is though
pandimensionalism ftw!
Being isolated (in a way) with a large group unintelligents would cause the randomisation effect to occur. And isolated societies have shown redundancy, as seen by how much of the same stuff Asia and Europe found on their own
That's called convergent development. It's probably better to compare the New World and the Old World since we can't be 100% sure what was and was not transferred between East and West.