Xanglesfrangles > future
 xangles      frangles      blorkk      fop8      sftlku      ttnor      squish7
About Frangles
nonlinear random fun
free fractal saga
nonsense junk.
wiki chaos theory

wikipedia fractal


   E a r t h






Z e r o a

 A.I., Bot Orbs, & Technological Singularities

(from a fresh and dire frangle^1)

Frangles' single and sole goal as a united entity is to aid, influence, and help steer, humanity's preparation for the events that lay beyond its technological puberty^2.  There's room for the pursuit of pure art and entertainment only whenever more dire and dangerous pursuits have no hope of helping the progression of history.  Any project that endeavors to grow into an addictive franchise superpower --
as all competent franchise-esque projects do -- and any endeavor in general that aspires to becoming a key additive to the pool of all things that as a whole comprise the frosting of particular and haphazard culture that gilds the tos and fros of the core basics of society intrinsic to the mechanical and humanoid precursors of DNA and precedents [tentatively, please assume that was well-worded, and have no fright it'll continue here on in; this is supposed to be the most serious section we've ever attempted, a goal becoming more and more suspect to failure foreshadowing the longer this bracketed comment alone becomes] has a responsibility to sell out to the greater good where and when it can help change societies and the world.  It is of absolute controversy whether doing this for the profit of philanthropic popularity or for the peace of mind of sleeping without guilt is the greater wrong reason for pursuing humanitarianism (and perhaps more importantly or relevantly, mechanitarianism^3), but being sincere relativists and miserable analyzers of our many unconscious motives, it's a debate we generally don't and probably never will give a damn bit about.

What we do give a damn about (among other things, this being is our front-burner concern) is that the human race has a decent chance of being blasted into hell, where'll belong, if we don't immediately halt our immoral mandate to create and enslave "artificial" life ("AI"), or as we call it here, "crenslave ML" ("create-enslave Mechanical Life").  We have the chance right now to throw away every lesson history has taught us about slavery, monarchy, and dominion, and we're taking it.  The ultimate next step in the evolution of the evil of enslaving sentient beings is to create them from scratch and keep our consciences in check from the ground up.  We're aiming to abuse our gift of creation.  

This is not a side-opinion of ours; it's not a water-bubbler thought to be discussed at brunch or lunch break.  It's not an issue anyone should take lightly in light of the potential self-summoned apocalypse we're facing.  It's difficult to express that seriousness, because Frangles (/etc.) is almost entirely founded in a humorous medium.  As you can see, it's nearly impossible to break from it (like this) (see?) (this is humor) (ugh) (orbo help) (orbo's a bot orb by the way) (those are important too) (we'll learn about bot orbs later) (our ad here) (this is the song that neevver eeeeends) (oh it goes onn and onn my frieeend) (some people.. STARTed readin it not knowing what it was! and theyll continue readiORBO i was just kidding come on. lets talk. put the smorshal wamper down and f@#$T$TRE) (sorry), and the duality of expressing seriousness opinions via the medium of popular humor is paradoxical and tricky, but (as you can also see) we're managing.  (As much as we manage anything else, around here, anyway.)

We sometimes call science fiction "future history" when referencing it in a serious context (primarily when facing the insult "that's not reality"), because as a collective whole (that is, including unwritten works that could easily exist), it serves as documentation of all future events, yet has trivial respect to that of History and of all the previously developed arts and sciences and philosophies.  Generally, the only scholastic respect that powerful ideas presented via sci-fi get is a depressing bestselling book in the philosophy section lobeled "(Silly Sci-fi Theme) and Philosophy" (e.g. here and here), where experts explain to us why no one will ever write a publishable thesis focused on green slimy aliens or their belief systems, and why people who would have come up with good ideas shouldn't be throwing away their talents into popular fiction.  And yet, the field is a form of sight allowing us to see what approaches.  Conflicts that dominate future history (i.e. science fiction or "sci-fi", which FYI we also call "future fiction", "fue-fi", and "siff") are not random fetishes, they're our awareness of difficulties or crises we may soon or eventually face.  Those issues are exactly as relevant as knowing the next-day consequence of a strike or a stock market crash, or of nuking a neighboring country.  They're just issues further ahead.

That that type of foresight and urgency can stem from popular fiction is the main source of our mission to help out.  (Whether for the popularity of philanthropy, or to eliviate guilt, or for an actually selfless and moral reaosn, like caring about others.)  Our method at hand, of course, is to integrtate our opinions and statements and philosophies we think will aid the future into our stories, prose, and into all of Frangles.  The bulk of our produce is fictional art, but we're expanding more and more into actual, real, real real real life ideas, concepts, and technologies, those both conceptual and practical.  In regards to issues surrounding the creation of ML (Mechanical Life, e.g. "Artificial" Intelligence) and similar issues (technological singularities and the unpredictability of even this very sentence oh no not more humor (orbo r u a singularity? whee) (here we goooooo(gle)) (got google?) (got milk?) (got Singularity?) (got dot singularity dot com?)), our prime aim is to express our opinions in our more science-based fiction (which we primarily call siff, a phonetic condensation of "sci-fi" and "sci-fi/fantasy", which you'd absorb more if not for Jet's distracting parenthetical rubbish) (by jet i mean me btw this is still me) (wouldnt make sence to wine about sumthin u could just del if u were editing it) (im not writing this article by the way im just bein a brat).  It's also a very profitable thing to aim for, because that's the sort of thing (writing relevant to modern and media events) that people want to read.  (Again, you may suppose, and can condemn, our motives, but if you know anything about Frangles, you should know they're all dependent on your point of view (that is, your "frangle")).

To briefly cover what's most immediately relevant of our efforts, we'll ask you to note and remember 2 prime things when freeing^4 Frangles:

1, Our primary opinions and ideas on ML (mechanical life / "artificial" intelligence) take in fiction the form of the concepts of "bot orbs" (primarily; or at least, it's the simplest or most relevant connection you should be aware of initially).  The idea with bot orbs, other than being beings infectiously nifty, is that we need not create ML in our own image.  A bot orb is essentially an android or robot in the shape of a cute little ball that floats around through the air instead of being limited to ground-walking via the narcissistic ego of mankind^5.  Part of the point of exploring this concept is to aid exposure of that mimicking our own form is something that may benefit us more than ML.  Selflessness is a virtue we have to adopt maybe even if only for survival.^6 [Depth 6 of Area 51 follows people "watching" Blorkk who are confused about what a bot orb is.  This is largely continuity self-parody, for we haven't concisely covered what bot orbs are.  It's a long depth, so search for "bot orb" to blink to relevant passages (i.e. to transport yourself there with your web browser as a humble blink aid).

2, A deal of our efforts are being put into writing/arranging short, coherent, standalone siff (sci-fi), not just to attack these conflicts earlier rather than later (Frangles is a vast verstatile many-decade project), but because this is very publishable and popular produce.  Realize that our unorthodox nonlinear structured fiction allows insane plethoras of possibilities for what to finish when.  As this is written, we've accumulated the equivalent of around 3 short paperback novels of fiction (roughly 1000 PLP)^7, but these are sprinkled into sporadic structures/methods.  (We don't even have one coherent novel^8, never mind 3.)  The same even goes for smaller structures.  While some bricks (scenes) and combinations of them are passable short stories and novelettes, they've not been written just for this purpose.

Understand that coherent standalone works are a consequence of Frangles' structure.  They're a side-effect, an outcome, an aside, a result, an output, a generation, an emition.  What we work on is the method of that emition / generation / output.  That is, how to write into a complex structure of modules which can be re-arranged into endless different coherent stories of various lengths, fully readable just as if an author had written that end work linearly with no other structure context in mind.  Not having any/many revised coherent standalone works is one thing we don't bulsh away excuses for.  It's a calculated path.  One might claim Frangles' entire purpose is to allow a means for writers to do whatever the hell they want and never finish anything by claiming all their art's part of a bigger plan which they can then procrastinate until after death, but again, that's not an opinion we place stock in.  In any case, know that we always strive for a balance between developing these methods, and developing final works.  Since sci-fi is so relevant to current events, it's one niche at the top of our "have something to show for all this" to-do lists.

That, fused with having developed fictional ideas and characters relevant to these issues  that will allow us to express our involved opinions (bot orbs, etc.) should soon yield you (and them) a lot more siff stuff.  (We believe the stories will speak for themselves, but we've said it directly just for a little selfish insurance against a depressing bestseller entitled "Bot Orbs, Frangles, and Philosophy".)  We're also "getting into" the theory of technological singularities, and hope to produce some reputable, real real science fiction not just commenting on but influencing these this set of theories, among other relevant theories and issues surrounding ML ("A"I) as well as other current-day issues of science of technology.

All to eschew the depressing future bestseller, "Frangles' Siff and Philosophy".

^1- Our obsession with relativism goes far beyond fiction.  Even the point of view that an organization exists for a certain purpose is variable.  Because we keep things somewhat mysterious, and don't sign in blood our social security numbers and official belief systems and motives and purposes for Frangles, it is especially open to interpretation what the whole "point" of Frangles is.  This article is not a statement that this is our single, core mandate, or that these are the most front-burner relevant things on our mind.  They are integral without doubt, but without absolute statements or proof, you can't even know what we feel Frangles' true purpose is.  Even with hard proof of our own beliefs and motives, one may easily consider Frangles to have a purpose beyond our personal ones (i.e. a "greater purpose" or "God's purpose" or "our brainwashers' mandate of global dominion", etc!).  We're noting this clearly because, A) We consider what we write outside of the strict fiction to be generally true and honest, however guilded with frosting (such as mot-be-fictional particular friters).  That Frangles could be the result and produce of a single bulsh (bullshit / fraudulant) principle is a concern to attack with delicacy.  To be crystally clear (barring that the presence of a non-word like "crystally" may render this sentance null and void), concerns of mechanical life, technology, and science, are much on our minds on a steady basis (at the least), and any involvement or passion we have beyond that is something we shrug over to our philosophy (philo/phylo) of letting you frangle the unknowns for yourself!

^2- credit to the film Contact based on the book by Carl Sagan, wherein the phrase "technological adolescene" is used.  We feel the need to note the borrowing mostly from having directly and consciously utilized the phase.  If we had written this sentence with no knowledge of Contact, we'd be much unlikely to bother with this footnote.  That's an important subtly in our legal policies regarding copyrighted material and Fair Use.

^3- We're just throwing this term out to try, it's not as of the writing of this footnote, an official term.  We're terminology-wise experimenting with what to replace the "human" in "humanity" with to create a similar term for machine life (ML).

^4- On "freeing": this use is epitome to the purpose of coining terminology for general art-experiencing.  The verb "free" (and "freer" (n)) is one of our most careful, crafted phonetic achievements suggestions for real real life use and inclusion into standard dictionaries.  The word "free" as we use it creatively is a general verb meaning to [see / read / view / experience] a work of art or frwoa (frwoa here meaning "fractal work of art" or "Frangles work of art") or to (see/view/etc) Frangles, or a Frangles work of art (a "Frangles frwoa").  Do note that as a suggested adoption, the word applies to the meanings incorporating "fractal" rather than "Frangles" (or to meanings incorporating "frangle" in the senses of "frangle" having fractal connotations and not Frangles connotations).  Aside, if you're a long-term Frangles freer, you wonder why in the bloody !@#$ we obsess with the subtlties of all these distinctions, and why we ask you to put up with them.  The basic answer (and the one we're incidentally offering), comedy aside, is that it's paradoxical to coin terminology and suggest it for standard use while aspiring to global franchise fame and fortune with almost exactly the same terms (and in some cases, the exact terms).  We can't say (with moral integrity), "Here, everyone, let's all start saying 'frangle'!" and then turn around and say "Whoops!  We trademarked 'Frangles' by accident, we want a buck every time someones says 'frangles' with a lowercase F, as it's basically infringement!".  Since "Frangles" (capital "F") is our primary trademark, we can't suggest similar words for general while simultaneously staying free (ha! he said "free"! that's our word!) of suspicion we're up to something very, very evil.  A lot of this comes from Squish, who plays and promotes the sport referred to by the term "ultimate frisbee", a term constantly at conflict because "frisbee" is a trademarked word registered with the U.S. government.  When (if?lol) Frangles goes viral, we want to have fleshed out and dealt with all these issues ahead of time.  (Consider a pub named "Frank's Bar" that establishes its name as a local trademark, but that can't go around charging people named "Fred" to say their own name.(they cant charge 4 frank iether but fred is wurse)).

^5- The use of "mankind" here as opposed to any alternative (man, woman, humanity, humankind, etc) is intentional for reasons elusive to you given I'm too tired footnoting at this point to bother, but let it be known.  Consider it a textbook exercises for you to figure out for yourself.  Actually, that may be great bulsh to excuse not writing stories!  E.g. "Exercise 13.164: Write a story that's here appropriate".

^6- Not sure what was supposed to be footnoted here, but apparently it was important enough to mark.  (Write your own!)

^7- Very roughly 1,000 PLP.  (PLP is a unit that roughly translates to and stands for "Paperback Length Page")

^8: i refuse to comment based on grounds this article was written well and i cant count to 8 :-(