of :

1️⃣Summa Technologiae - Stanisław Lem
2️⃣The Selfish Gene - Richard Dawkins
3️⃣An Introduction to Cybernetics - W. Ross Ashby
4️⃣Thinking in Systems - Donella H. Meadows
5️⃣The Goal: A Process of Ongoing Improvement - Eliyahu M. Goldratt
6️⃣At Home in the Universe: The Search for the Laws of Self-Organization and Complexity - Stuart Kauffman
7️⃣A Question of Physics: Conversations in Physics and Biology conducted by Paul Buckley and David F. Peat

Show thread

of :

1️⃣ Summa Technologiae - Stanisław Lem
2️⃣The Glass Bead Game - Hermann Hesse
3️⃣The Foundation series - Isaac Asimov
4️⃣The Teachings of Don Juan - Carlos Castañeda
5️⃣Earth's Children series - Jean M. Auel
6️⃣Jonathan Livingston Seagull - Richard Bach
7️⃣Siddhartha - Hermann Hesse

I was updating my Bio and realized I've never had a proper . So here it is:

Retired professional and coach with years of experience in the and domains.

WRT to , I'm primarily interested in the and of . My attitude towards is opportunistic (will use whatever works best for the occasion) and I consider a necessary evil to get things done properly.

My experience with technology starts in the late 70's on a room-sized IBM machine and programs on punch-cards, transitioned to the HPL on an HP 9825A "fully algebraic desktop calculator" and ended abruptly with the "peeking" and "poking" on a ZX81.

Even if I was reasonably good at it, after getting my first DOS/Windows PC to play with on something called the , I fell in love with things like , , and new ideas, that could be done much better and faster with this new gadget, and soon decided that being a , doing the and while dealing with other to define and is much more fun than the actual of the product itself.

I'm very glad I found this where we can "Question Others to Teach Ourselves". Please feel free to ask questions and argue with my views. Be sure I'll be doing the same. Nothing is sacred. There are no stupid questions, just BS answers.

Stay safe and be nice to other people.


PJ boosted

I ran across the FLICC model of science denial a while ago while reading How to Talk to a Science Denier by Lee McIntyre. I can say that throughout the years of engaging flat-earthers, stop-the-stealers, creationists, Covid deniers, vaccine skeptics, QAnon believers, and the like, I have faced every one of the techniques outlined. (Image Source)

, , ,

Radio Paradise, from Eureka CA, a pioneer in the "" is hiring a CTO:

"We'll pay you enough to live here comfortably. Semi-generous by local standards, low compared to SF, LA, NYC or London. “Enough” is all any of us aspire to make here. We're not capitalists. We participate – gratefully – in a gift economy. That's a huge part of why we love coming to work each day."

Check it out, forward to anyone who might be interested, or just listen the superb lineups of music on multiple different streams. It's free.😘


Viktor Frankl on the Human Search for Meaning
“Everything can be taken from a man but one thing: the last of the human freedoms — to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way.”

Good thing does not always correlate with .
QT: mastodon.social/@jesswade/1093

Jess Wade  
“The disproportionate scientific productivity of elite researchers can be largely explained by their substantial labor advantage rather than inhere...

does not promote .

"Táíwò’s project is reclamation. “It’s a starting point,” he said of the concept’s original use. “It’s compatible with working on common problems with people from other identity groups.”"


Show thread

I've always considered , much like , an 's own, personal, tacit, unique attribute, evolved through a lifetime and representing the history of all social interactions they had with their environment.

I find the modern focus on the many "identities" (father, golfer, employee, etc ...) one has during the day, wrong.

In my view, these are just external one assumes and plays in different they are part of. They may define an individual is but not they are.

In fact, I believe that it is an individual is that affect they do they do in the role they are given.

I also consider the largely accepted academic presented in the attached document as the direct cause of our present dysfunctional society marred by .


PJ boosted

I just realized something very powerful.....

I am sitting here, in my office, at a company I own a large chunk of, running the entire company, all because I made the discovery of a lifetime that will change the entire face of medicine int he next few years, save millions if not billions of lives, and about to go public on the stock exchange... everything suggests I havent just made the scientific discovery of a lifetime, saved the world (hopefully), but will probably be a billionaire in the next few years at this rate....

Yet here I am letting a few vile twerps on a small social media network get under my skin and hurt me... fuck them, they could only hope to do a fraction of the good I'm doing. All they want to do is lie, hurt, and tare down good people to make their own pathetic egos feel like it has some value...

I think im good, they only mattered because I let them.

I vividly recall my first HP Pocket Calculator with Reverse Polish Notation I had during my undergraduate studies:


is normally seen as a privilege and not a reason to be afraid. But many people did fear freedom, Ms. Müller commented on the developments in Eastern Europe. The initial euphoria of finally being set free had soon worn off and evaporated, replaced in many places by fear. , she said, “is as complicated as freedom.” Adding momentum, organized fear is at the heart of all authoritarian regimes, which try to literally raise people to be afraid.”


I just hope that after a century people have smartened up and the instantaneous and global news cycle on social media can make a difference in how we react to the completely natural of change:

Terrific article about how the “Move fast and break things” philosophy inevitably leads to the rise of group -based societies.
In fact, all need a "cleanup" time to establish the "new order" and restore all the good things they have broken in the process.

From "The Socratic Way Of Questioning":

"A must be both and . It must express “the perfect idea" of a thing, but if we cannot have perfect clarity, we should at least have "perfect distinctness.” so that it is not mistaken for some other thing".

In other words, if you are not able to properly describe what a thing IS, try to explain what the thing ISN'T.

Very glad I found this community. Please don't stop Question Others to Teach Ourselves😀


Heisenberg's Levels of :
1. Things objectified independently of the knowledge process ( of );
2. Things inseparable from the knowledge process (, );
3. Things created in the knowledge process (, art, politics, religion).

Show more
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.