Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
Loading tagline ....

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                                                                 

Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register. Please log in or create an account.

Sexularity

 Tantric path to a technological singularity.
  (+18, -8)(+18, -8)
(+18, -8) 		  [vote for,
against]

Maybe the path to a technological singularity will be in networking humans together through their allready existing inputs and outputs to create a combined intelligence rather than in creating an artificial AI or in creating an artificial human interface. One possibility for natural mathematical communication between two individual humans would be to open up as high a bandwidth interface as possible while exchanging as little information as possible, and then let natural rhythms synch up with eachother. So two people could meditatively contact eachother as much as possible -- by singing unison tones, making eye to eye contact and physically sharing as many contact points as possible, but translate as little information as possible -- and wait for feedback loops to start on an unconscious level. Boy its lonely out here.

Variences between sung unison tones would create beats that could be used as a clock.

—JesusHChrist, Apr 13 2005

What, sort of like this? http://ofcs.rottent...&page=1&rid=1334439
search for "chunting" [calum, Apr 13 2005]

A bit about Technological Singularity http://www.kurzweil...ticles/art0092.html
[half, Apr 13 2005]

http://www.tantra.com/ [Susan, Jun 13 2005]

fund me http://www.kickstarter.com/
[JesusHChrist, Aug 25 2009]

[link]






       ?
—bristolz, Apr 13 2005
   

       This idea is either: a. very very far ahead of it's time. (I can see some weird merit on an ontological level)   

       or b. very very full of shit (knowing HB, more likely)   

       Thusly, I cannot vote for or against this idea.   

       There, I said it.
—Blumster, Apr 13 2005
   

       I had a rattling conversation about this only the other day.We concluded that it was a tremendous achievement![+]
—skinflaps, Apr 13 2005
   

       Let's begin at the beginning. What's a "technological singularity" and why would it be worth achieving?
—half, Apr 13 2005
   

       Wow. That is just so... I don't know what that is. [+] for sheer impenetrability.
—moomintroll, Apr 13 2005
   

       Whaddya say you and me go back to my place and creat a technological singularity...   

       Slap!   

       +, cause I'm actually gonna use it.
—daseva, Apr 13 2005
   

       Ohm .... you're getting sleepy ... Ohm ... you're getting sleepy ... Ohm ...   

       Freud was right.
—reensure, Apr 13 2005
   

       Love how you go digital in the last paragraph.
—Worldgineer, Apr 13 2005
   

       Sometimes ya gotta go digital to get the job done.
—half, Apr 13 2005
   

       I think you could use this as a pickup line, JHC. A little wine, some rocking, some crooning, some physical sharing of many contact points!   

       Ah, I see Romulox has the same idea. Hope that impenetrability thing turns out to be wrong, [Rom].
—bungston, Apr 14 2005
   

       A karass (to use a Vonnegut term) could attain this singularity over an internet link—using, say, a specific set of beat frequencies. The Monroe Institute does this every week with small groups of people (20 or so). Quite frequently there is thought transference and all sorts of other psychic goings on.
—ldischler, Apr 14 2005
   

       We are Borg.
—wagster, Jun 09 2005
   

       All your singularity are belong to us.
—Detly, Jun 09 2005
   

       I don't think a circle jerk is the key to achieving higher consciousness, but good luck...
—dbsousa, Jun 09 2005
   

       So, you're saying by having prolonged full-contact sex, our minds will become "attuned" to each other and we'll essentially become the same consciousness.   

       Even if this does happen (which I find doubtful, if only given that most people can't think productively when having sex), I don't see any additive intelligence ocurring here. Two people are thinking the same thoughts--but there is nothing to imply that this means double the intelligence, only one-half the independent processing of information.
—5th Earth, Jun 12 2005
   

       most people can't think productively when having sex because they don't slow down.   

       maybe the additive intelligence would come from each person beinig able to query the other's database at a much faster rate than they could by asking questions in English. (using whatever sensory or graphical language the body normally uses to converse amongst its different organs -- to converse with the organs of another body.)
—JesusHChrist, Jun 12 2005
   

       ffffoooorrrrrr iiiinnnssttaannccee dddrraaaawwww ppppiiicccctttuuurrrreeeessss wwwwiiiitttthhh ttthhhheeeee wwwwwooooorrrrdddddsssss. tttthhhhiiissss iiisss tttthhheeeee wwwwaaaayy tttooo llleeeaaarrrrnnnn ttttoooo ddddaaaaannnccceeee aaatttt yyyyoooouuuurrrr kkkkeeeeyyyy bbboooaaarrrdddd tttoooo.
—JesusHChrist, Jun 12 2005
   

       Easy there, [JHC]. I think you need a partner to do it properly.
—Worldgineer, Jun 12 2005
   

       For a moment [World], you were my partner.
—JesusHChrist, Jun 13 2005
   

       So...Baked?
—Susan, Jun 13 2005
   

       thwarted pineapple, shirley.
—methinksnot, May 01 2006
   

       I second that pineapple.
—zen_tom, May 11 2006
   

       Oh I see... it's a clock.
—RayfordSteele, May 11 2006
   

       Tis a beautiful thing. Neal Stephenson has a community called the drummers that practises this in "Diamond Age"
—BunsenHoneydew, May 11 2006
   

       And this brings us to my secondary point: Don't do acid. (+)
—Voice, May 07 2008
   

       //wait for feedback loops to start on an unconscious level//   

       If it's unconscious, then how do you know when it's happened, so that you can stop waiting? On the other hand, if you just wait indefinitely, then it could all just be a wind-up. And, as [RayfordSteele] said, a clock.   

       So, a wind-up clock ... which could perfectly well be shipped as a separate module, tantric sex not included.
—pertinax, May 07 2008
   

       With an earth population of 6.5 billion, that means we have tantric processing power of 6.5 gigachunts. Is that sufficient to achieve tantric singularity?
—luxlucet, May 07 2008
   

       It has a few flaws...like the second many of my co-workers are linked into the net...there will be an automatic collapse of the intelligence levels...and an ever growing...in fact growing by path of the famous parabolic curve...of instablity and chaos. After passing the point of no return, abject gloom will depress the system and constant bitching and complaining will very quickly bring the system to a tragically critical lack of energy. Any new, innovative ideas presented to overcome the slightest weakness and head off disaster will be immediatly shot down and criticised to death. Also, my co-worker's penchant for infecting others with their perpetual dismay will cause a chain reaction of failure that will rival the mass destruction generated by the simple waft of air started by the gentle flutter of a butterfly's wings in the Congo.
—Blisterbob, May 07 2008
   

       "...Open up as high a bandwidth interface as possible while exchanging as little information as possible..." Yep, sounds like a typical relationship, all right.
—Ander, May 07 2008
   

       Frank: Ohmmmmmmmmmmmm   

       Lily: Ohmmmm (giggle) mmmmmmmmmm(giggle,giggle)   

       Frank (whispering): Stop it, Honey. You're embarassing me.   

       Lily: I'm trying my best dear. This was not my idea you know. I wanted to go bowling with the Fergusons.   

       Martin: Uhh...excuse me...Can you two in the sunshine section please hold it down? We're really not supposed to......OH MY GOD, UNCLE FRANK, AUNT LILY. WHAT the ?@$%&% are YOU doing HERE!!!   

       [+]
—bneal27, May 09 2008
   

       Indeed [bneal]. Very Phillip K. Dick "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?"
—BunsenHoneydew, May 21 2008
   

       I'm pretty sure JesusHChrist meant this as a joke. But I think this is brilliant. Seriously. Here in the United States in the 21st century, we've become so sexually repressed that we can barely even talk about sex at all. People get shocked when they hear other people talk about it. It's not even considered "polite conversation" by some people, and it's usually left entirely within the realm of humor and jokes. But sexuality is a part of life. Every human is a sexual being. The birth of every single person in this world is a result of sex.   

       Tantra (in particular, neotantra) is NOT about "getting off" or "getting laid" or anything like that. It's an exploration of the sexual part of your own mind and the minds of others. It encourages you to find out what really turns you on and what really turns other people on. It encourages you to learn new ways of achieving sexual pleasure, and enrich your mind with that new knowledge.   

       "open up as high a bandwidth interface as possible while exchanging as little information as possible" "singing unison tones, making eye to eye contact and physically sharing as many contact points as possible" These are good points. Seriously. Most of human communication is non-verbal. Even when you're not exchanging any information in the form of words, you can still be communicating a lot through body language, facial expressions, non-verbal sounds, physical touch, eye contact, posture, position, and so on. This is true in any interaction between humans, not just sex. It's another thing that's never discussed much in the United States today, and it's something that most people today are not consciously aware of.   

       Also, if any of you have ever sung a song with a group of friends, I think you'd agree with me that it's a lot of fun. Not a formal performance on a stage, but just hanging out. In fact, when I'm singing in a group like that, I think the best part of singing together is the non-verbal parts of the songs. Singing together can create bonds between people. I've never tried singing during actual sexual activity, but music can definitely be used as part of the whole process of sexual arousal before the actual activity.   

       I think we, as a society, should bring sexual topics out into the open, and NOT just immediately dismiss them as "dirty" without a second thought. We should openly accept the fact that we are sexual beings, and not try to hide it. I think this kind of openness would go a long way towards making progress in society. It would encourage people to think in new and creative directions. It would increase the overall intelligence of society. [+]
—navigatr85, Aug 25 2009
   

       http://www.kickstarter.com/
—JesusHChrist, Aug 25 2009
   

       /Here in the United States in the 21st century, we've become so sexually repressed/.../barely even talk about sex at all/   

       What the hell are you talking about? Sex is everywhere, more so now than ever in recent memory
—afinehowdoyoudo, Aug 25 2009
   

       Perhaps navigatr, and everyone else who posted before him are actually a delayed expression of that dreaded Y2K problem.   

       How their message board idea from 1905 might have wound up here is a bit beyond my technical understanding, but I'm sure if some lovely lady were willing to open up as high a bandwidth interface as possible with our bodies natural ports, we could get it figured out pretty fast.   

       For this experiment, I'd suggest passing quite a bit more than "as little information as possible" through those input-output devices though...   

       God, I must be nearly as lonely as Jesus H Christ!
—ye_river_xiv, Aug 27 2009
   

       //What the hell are you talking about? Sex is everywhere, more so now than ever in recent memory.// Well, yeah, sex is everywhere, if you look at television, movies, magazines, MTV, and things like that. Actually, even in those places, sex is just suggested, not presented in a completely open way, because there are limits to what words and phrases can be used, and what can be shown.   

       But if you look at situations where you're supposed to be "polite", sex is still nowhere to be found. People can't mention it in job interviews, formal cocktail parties, classrooms, and so on. It's considered impolite to mention it when you first meet someone. Politicians get bashed for it. But job applicants, interviewers, people who go to formal cocktail parties, teachers, students, and politicians are all sexual beings.   

       "Perhaps navigatr, and everyone else who posted before him are actually a delayed expression of that dreaded Y2K problem. How their message board idea from 1905 might have wound up here is a bit beyond my technical understanding." Ummm, I'm confused. :) I think you're saying ideas like this have already been considered for the past hundred years or so, and, as a result, society has already become as sexually open as it needs to be. Well, yeah, it's become a lot more open in those matters, but I'd still say it's not open-minded enough.
—navigatr85, Aug 29 2009
   
      
[annotate]
   


 

back: main index
business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle