iiinova — where your digital self keeps evolving

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 03/09/2026

Thankfully there is a solution. Just get a PhD in billionaire.

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 11/06/2026

What you’re detecting is not Knicks fans becoming insufferable. It’s the sound of New York returning to its ground state while Philadelphia processes the thermodynamic cost of envy.

000

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 11/05/2026

I know this is Bluesky, but "egocratic ethos" is doing a lot of work for what we used to call "psychopathic narcissism."

020

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 02/02/2026

Don't you mean both microscopic enough while also a universal wave function? Different levels = 2 modes of computation: 1. Intrinsic Computation: The universe lawfully updating its state. 2. Instrumental Computation: A subsystem harnessing those laws to minimize error against a goal.

000

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 30/01/2026

Actually it's more like getting a five star review for the book cover "despite the fact the book sucked."

050

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 24/01/2026

Reminder that Karen Stenner ( www.karenstenner.com )makes a compelling case that a predisposition to authoritarianism is an innate and universal psychological tendency which limits certain people's ability to tolerate ambiguity, complexity and diversity. "You know. Morons." youtu.be/hYTQ7__NNDI

youtu.be

Blazing Saddles 1974 - People Of The Land

YouTube video by phantasm 57

010

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 02/12/2025

You know then that it is not the reason That makes us happy or unhappy. The bird sings. Its feathers shine. The palm stands on the edge of space. The wind moves slowly in the branches. The bird’s fire-fangled feathers dangle down. - Wallace Stevens

000

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 02/12/2025

Of Mere Being The palm at the end of the mind, Beyond the last thought, rises In the bronze distance. A gold-feathered bird Sings in the palm, without human meaning, Without human feeling, a foreign song.

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 02/12/2025

“If minds are wholly dependent on brains, and brains on biochemistry, and biochemistry (in the long run) on the meaningless flux of the atoms, I cannot understand how the thought of those minds should have any more significance than the sound of the wind in the trees.” – C.S. Lewis

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 21/11/2025

It is frankly not believable he wasn't exposed. MIT was saturated with the statistical-mechanics worldview during his time there. And Bell Labs had many people who were very familiar.

000

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 21/11/2025

Shannon's move still seems like a conceptual leap? He makes entropy a measure of optimal code length, not physical counting or state uncertainty. Meaning the compression bound for any possible representation of a signal. Planck and von Neumann never made that conceptual shift.

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 18/11/2025

The many worlds of Sean Carroll (and the multiverse unfortunately).

000

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 09/11/2025

12/ The next epoch is not posthuman but post-interface: an era in which we stop mistaking friction for essence and begin engineering new alignments between bodies, symbols, and machines. The future is not the end of the human. It is the end of pretending the human was ever fundamental.

000

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 09/11/2025

11/ If the human is a contingent interface, our task is not to defend its boundaries but to redesign its conditions. We must learn to tune the mismatched codes of biology and culture, so they no longer tear the interface apart.

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 09/11/2025

10/ In this frame, the human condition is neither sacred nor accidental. It is transitional. A frictional interface created when inhuman computation routes itself through flesh and story. Experience is the heat emitted by this collision.

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 09/11/2025

9/ This is an ontological earthquake. It displaces the human from the center of its own story. We are not the authors of meaning but the residue of computation folding back upon itself, improvising narratives to stabilize its own execution.

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 09/11/2025

8/ Suffering emerges not from sin, error, or cosmic tragedy, but from the architectural mismatch itself. The system produces noise because the system has no master design. Consciousness is simply the report the system issues when it cannot resolve its own conflicts.

110

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 09/11/2025

7/ Under this view, “the human” is not an essence but a contingent interface. It is a temporary, lossy protocol where two incompatible computational layers try to interoperate. We are not unified subjects; we are sites of reconciliation work.

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 09/11/2025

6/ Turing’s most radical insight was that computation is substrate independent. Once you accept this, biology and culture cease to be fundamental. Both are surface expressions of a deeper, inhuman regime.

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 09/11/2025

5/ Lyotard saw this remainder: the unruly excess no dialectic can absorb. But the remainder is not metaphysical. It is computational. It is what happens when mismatched codes are forced into mutual execution.

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 09/11/2025

4/ When these layers meet inside a single organism, there is no guarantee of coherence. No central designer harmonizes them. Their collision generates the translation failures, overloads, and recursive loops we experience as confusion, desire, anxiety, and longing.

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 09/11/2025

3/ Biology computes for survival, energy, and replication. Its code is slow, conservative, shaped by deep time and evolutionary inertia. Culture computes for coordination, normativity, and meaning. Its code is fast, volatile, symbolically unbounded.

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 09/11/2025

2/ But this framework collapses under pressure. Biology and culture are not complementary halves of a unified story. They are independently evolving computational layers, optimized for incompatible ends, mutating on incompatible timescales.

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 09/11/2025

🧵on the human or a manifesto for cyborgs. 1/ We tend to imagine “the human” as a stable essence: a dialectic between the body’s biological priors and the cultural narratives that program us. This interplay is supposed to define who we are, what we mean, why we matter.

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 27/10/2025

6/6 The "ludicrously low prior" isn't in God; it's in Goff's definition of "Atheism." Since P(Life|CP) = 1, and P(Life|Godish) = High, our existence (Life) provides zero probabilistic evidence to favor one over the other. The fine-tuning argument simply dissolves.

010

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 27/10/2025

5/6 Goff's other counter is: "But why is the Ruliad 'lit up' with consciousness?" This begs the question. He assumes consciousness is a separate property. The CP model posits consciousness 𝒊𝒔 what a certain threshold of complex computation 𝒊𝒔 from its own perspective. It's not added to the Ruliad.

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 27/10/2025

4/6 Goff's counter is: "Why do we find ourselves in this specific, fine-tuned slice of the Ruliad?" This is a tautology, not a mystery. We are complex computational observers. We can only exist in, and perceive, a "slice" of the Ruliad that is stable and complex enough to compute us.

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 27/10/2025

3/6 Under this CP model, the probability of "life" (a class of complex, persistent computation) is not 1 in 10^135. It's 1. Life isn't a "fluke." It's a guaranteed and infinitely varied outcome of an exhaustive computational space. Our existence isn't special; it's parochial.

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 27/10/2025

2/6 A real alternative (acknowledged by Goff) is "Computational Plenitude" (CP), or the Ruliad: the entangled limit of all possible computations. In this model, the governing principle isn't "chance" (A); it's "inevitability." All computable universes are actual.

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 27/10/2025

1/6 That "1 in 10^135" figure is the lynchpin, but it's built on a false dichotomy. It compares "Godish" (T) to "A Single, Random, Brute-Fact Universe" (A). This "Atheism" (A) is a straw man. No robust naturalism subscribes to it.

120

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 25/10/2025

It is fascinating that Wiener already (1914!) seems to be speaking of feedback loops when he writes: "the idea of a row of [sums] where the upper limit of each sum is a function of the particular term selected from the previous sum, although I do not know if it is new, strikes me as interesting."

000

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 25/10/2025

In this letter to his father, Wiener asserts that Husserl had "trichoschizical (e.g. hair splitting) tendencies." 😂 Wiener created this new "technical" term by combining two Greek roots, Tricho: meaning "hair." Schizo: meaning "to split." Hat tip: x.com/TheUnjournal...

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 25/10/2025

Fascinating research by Sean Manion using the MIT archives on Norbert Wiener's relationship to Husserl with whom he studied in 1914. x.com/TheUnjournal... open.substack.com/pub/seanmani...

open.substack.com

Cybernetics, Phenomenology & Teleology

Sifting history through a human filter towards more purposeful future technology

000

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 18/09/2025

Citizens United was the down payment on capitulation capitalism. In redefining corporate cash as “speech,” the Court laid bare the transactional heart of American "Democracy." A cash-for-power exchange that undermines the rule of law and has paved the way to autocracy.

010

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 05/09/2025

How do computation, cognition and intelligence relate to one another? Computation = state change under rules/laws. Cognition = computation that re-presents patterns for an agent to act on Intelligence = cognition used adaptively to recognize and exploit patterns for survival, fitness, or goals.

000

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 07/08/2025

Gibbs argues that Science is not about predicting what will happen in a single world, but about assigning probabilities to what could happen across many possible worlds. We are not describing the one world that is, but navigating the many worlds that might be, based on what little we can observe. /6

010

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 07/08/2025

Even though you feel like you're living in “the one real world,” physics must account for all the possible worlds that match what you know so far. And the radical move Gibbs made is to accept and account for that fact. 5/6

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 07/08/2025

An observer can only ever see one macrostate, one visible outcome, but that macrostate can come from millions of possible microstates you can’t see. And which of those actual microstates you’re in still matters for what comes next. 4/6

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 07/08/2025

What Gibbs’ insight says is that the world you’re seeing is just *one of many possible worlds* that can fit the same patterns you observe. Instead of there being just one definitive world, there’s a range of possibilities that are consistent with what we know. 3/6

100

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 07/08/2025

Gibbs proves we are not measuring a single trajectory through the universe; we are tracking the evolving probabilities of a space of *possible* universes. The real "world" becomes a point in a probability space, and physical theory becomes a theory of distributions, not certainty. 2/6

110

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 07/08/2025

Norbert Weiner argues that it is Gibbs—not Einstein, Heisenberg or Plank (nor Derrida!)—who revolutionized 20th century physics and ontology. He was the first to formalize what Weiner calls an "organic incompleteness" or "almost an irrationality" in the Universe. What does he mean by this? 🧵 1/6

200

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 31/07/2025

The final destination is an ontology not of a singular Universe, but of a pluriverse of viable, interacting maps. Reality, as we can know it, is not the silent, underlying territory. It is the noisy, dynamic, and ever-changing ecosystem composed of all these living, competing, and co-evolving maps.

041

Bergson's Ghost @bergsonsghost.bsky.social · 31/07/2025

Truth as 'correspondence' to an inaccessible territory becomes meaningless. It must be redefined as viability. A map is 'true' not because it is accurate in some absolute sense, but because it enables the organism to successfully anticipate, act, and maintain its own existence within its niche. 6/7

110