Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jacques Chitte who wrote (85671)	8/17/2000 7:33:06 PM
From: Frederick Smart	Respond to of 108807

Non-Definitions.... >>For a definition to exude anything but drag, it needs to be definite. This being so, I have two niggles with "viral" and nondefinitions. 1) Wouldn't "exponential" be an existing term to describe what I think (but can't be sure that) you're trying to evoke? 2) "Viral" is about subcellular pathogens. That's English. Imo trying to shoehorn another, nonbiological meaning into the term dilutes the language rather than enhances it. In my experience there is very little that hasn't been already crafted with existing, proper vocab and grammar that I need to say.>> LRRRRRRRR: Remember, I'm not into "defining" - if anything I tolerate the surface level part of the process and try to have fun. The word "viral" has been used in technology circles to evoke the word-of-mouth power that good ideas and energies potentially have in this virtual web/net-centric world that's forming as we type and share these bits and bites. "Exponential" is a bit foreign to me. Einstein may have a much clearer understanding of E= mc (squared) than I do. I try to visualize things. A lot of my ideas have very clear images and pictures which are very real for me, but I know must be crazy for others. When my wife asked me "what are you thinking?" sometimes the enormity of the visual image is so overwhealming that I just can't say anything. And then there's the obvious interpretation/assumption that can and does come up sometimes about me not communicating, shutting down etc. I prefer non-definitions. This is when I get to that state where the energy and ideas simply overwhealm any attempt by me or others to define/label, etc. When you enter this "zone" it's usually along the path of inspiration. I learn by risking, sharing and writing to others. I don't claim to know anything for I really believe there is so much we all simply don't know but can only discover by connecting, communicating, collaborating, cooperating with each other. I'm like the energizer bunny. Peace. .

To: Jacques Chitte who wrote (85671)	8/17/2000 9:29:16 PM
From: jbe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

Lather, Fred is clearly into "memes" aka "viral information" aka "mind viruses" (although some memetics buffs regard the latter as the antithesis/enemy of the former). Some "definitions" for you: google.com And for your entertainment, some wonderfully solemn gobbledygook on this general subject: pespmc1.vub.ac.be pespmc1.vub.ac.be maxwell.lucifer.com

To: Jacques Chitte who wrote (85671)	8/17/2000 10:36:50 PM
From: jbe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

Dear me! Is Frederick a membot ?? Or a memeoid??? Eeeek!! <ggg> From that list of definitions I just sent you, Lather: Infection 1. Successful encoding of a meme in the memory of a human being. A memetic infection can be either active or inactive. It is inactive if the host does not feel inclined to transmit the meme to other people. An active infection causes the host to want to infect others. Fanatically active hosts are often membots or memeoids. A person who is exposed to a meme but who does not remember it (consciously or otherwise) is not infected. (A host can indeed be unconsciously infected, and even transmit a meme without conscious awareness of the fact. Many societal norms are transmitted this way.) Again I say: EEEEEEK!!