Thoughts: The Difference Between WANT and LIKE; WANT_A and WANT_T

Here are my thoughts from another blog. Sorry, they're messy. All of this, my friends, ALL OF THIS is part of the big picture, the BIG CIRCLE, the BIG IDEA, the Master Idea. This needs to be edited.
________________________________________________________________________________

The Difference Between WANT and LIKE.


"there's a difference between WANT and LIKE.
the difference is, WANT means that a person will get what they are seeking.
if you WANT something, you WILL GET IT.
if you don't WANT something, you will NOT get it.
however, just because you WANT something, doesn't mean that you will LIKE the process it takes to get it.
so i WANT to get this stuff done, however, i don't LIKE the process i have to go through everyday to even start on finishing a project.
also, if someone doesn't LIKE the process it takes to get something, their body might adjust and NOT WANT what they don't like anymore.
but then there's the theory that what you WANT cannot be changed and is set at birth. so, we might THINK that we WANT something, but if we never get that something, then we never WANTED it in the first place.
so we can never NOT WANT something, because that would denote that there is a choice, which based on the theory, there isn't.
we can only GET what we WANT, although we may or may not be aware of what we actually WANT.
WANT is complex. it needs to be studied more but on a scientific terms, it can be described as a predisposition / genetics / heredity (i think) and on a more metaphysical level we have studies such as Numerology which basically say that there is a 'constancy' in the universe, that is similar to, of course we have the Master Idea to go along with that."

________________________________________________________________________________

WANT_A and WANT_T.


"i think there are two different types of wants
what we think we want, and what we actually want
WANT_A
WANT_T
WANT_T is based on everything that we've actually felt through any of our senses, since conception.
i.e., we can never WANT_T something we have never felt before.
WANT_A is a powerful force that forces us to get what we WANT_A even if we are unaware of what we want. WANT_A is a want that goes along with the constancy of the Universe and it is what we have always wanted since the beginning of time, even in our past lives.
it is possible that WANT_A == WANT_T, however just because WANT_T exists doesn't mean it is equal to WANT_A, therefore WANT_T might never be realized.
furthermore, WANT_T is based only on what we've experienced since conception, so we might THINK we WANT something that gives us a feeling, but in all actuality if we ever got that feeling it is possible that the feeling we thought we wanted is a totally different feeling from what we actually get or what it actually is.
hence, we can think we want something, but thinking to want something can equal thinking to want something else, but it isn't something else because we don't know it."

Very awesome if I say so myself. This just proves that what I am talking about is so magnificent, it protrudes into everything that we do; it proves that it exists and that it IS everything that we do... Would like to make a video or something... like I said, explaining it in person on a dry erase board is a lot easier for you to understand than reading it off of my blog.

-XJ

Project N: 'See' the Numbers Around You

This project is specifically for 'xTroller' devices (xTroller description at bottom, scroll down).

"In the future if Nintendo will still be investing in research and development, the company may possibly have a new type of controller. The 'xTroller' is an innovative type of controller I conceived that is controlled partially by how player's brain waves react to stimuli and the motion of player's eyes during game play. I'm not talking about a freaking huge 3D headset like back in the 80's. I'm talking about a semi-transparent visor that fits to your right ear. It's as slim as a credit card about 2-3 in. long and 1/4- 2 in. in height that displays a separate part of the game the player is playing on a flat screen in the visor itself. Being that the visor is semi-transparent, the player can actually see the t.v. and the content on the visor, creating an interactive window. This would be great for multi-player challenges, because then the video screen on the t.v. would not have to be split, as it is in many scenarios."
-XJ Hall, 01.04.2010

I have work to do, but here is the gist: Project N will allow the user to visually see the numerical representation of the objects or figures in the space around or in front of him, specifically within the window or viewing range of an 'xTroller' device. While the 'xTroller' takes in information, it analyzes the graphical data and computes an output number. If the content being analyzed is language oriented, i.e. text, a type of OCR will first be used, followed by the numeral calculation.

Project N will be able to pick objects out in the scene, including text, and compute the equivalent number according to Numerology, and at least 2 other standard modes of number calculation.

This is interesting. For the first time, users will have the ability to calculate Numerology in fast, real time from actual objects in the room around them. They will be able to 'see' the numbers...!

...

In addition to analyzing graphical data this could be enhanced by including the numerical calculation of SOUND data, i.e. speech recognition, frequency recognition, etc.

-XJ

Rhetoric: You can't lose at a game, unless you choose to play it.

Real life lesson people. Whoever is out there. I enjoy what I do. I don't expect to be payed.

They were right. I can't win that game. It's rigged. It's been rigged before I started playing.
I lost. They win.

Perhaps there is something beautiful that comes from defeat; A struggle, lost of words, however emotional, is transmuted into another element, and ingrained within the flower that blooms after its fall.

This rose, this thing, that might happen in the future, it's a beautiful thing... but I cut myself on its thorn in order to have it.

And that is a price I am willing to pay.

http://youtu.be/oRJdwTlxaU0

-XJ

Current Projects: Make This Room 'Mini-Game'

Powered by HTML5 and Flash technologies, user will be able to control the cursor via face direction, which happens to be surprisingly more stable than eye tracking. Future implements might include the addition of eye tracking but as of right now, the program runs pretty smoothly, so we might not mess with it.

In addition to face direction tracking we have sound recognition, or the recognition of commands created by the user. This gives each user the opportunity to create voice commands unique to their voice.

The 'mini-game' is just a simple display of the potential power of combining forces between two different styles of technology, i.e. the techniques for enhancing user-interaction.

Deadline is May 29th. We're half way finished. Although it is not cross browser tested, if you have a modern browser you should be able to see what is finished up to this point:

http://www.xjhall.com/makethisroom.html

-XJ

2 Brief Thoughts: The 'Immaterial' Idea and Reincarnation

Sorry just drank some energy drink so felt like making this pretty... haha okay

IDEA

...all this numerology stuff, it reminds me of two things.

─────────────────────────────────────────────

 ■ a past thought, just maybe a split of a second: can we not

    change time...? are people's destinies decided before they

    are even born? is there a universal order...?

 ■ another past thought before i realized the Master Idea: we

     are ideas before we ever become materialized. That is,

     before i knew myself, before i will ever know anything

     about myself, the 'idea' of me already exists. my 'idea' is
     shared with other's 'ideas', like 2 over-lapping circles so we 
    'know' each other before we ever know each other: our ideas 
     merge their compositions on a sub level that can't be detected.
     that is why some people seek out certain types of chara-
     cteristics in others and why, arguably, what we want in
     life or the relationships we obtain is something that cannot
     be changed. furthermore, because the material is based
     on an 'immaterial' realm that is always constant and 
     invariable, we can say that the basis of 'reincarnation'
     and numerology correlate with this very idea. the ultimate
     realization is knowing that if 'i' am an idea and 'she/he' is an
     idea then we both came from somewhere, i.e. the
     Master Idea... more on this later.

─────────────────────────────────────────────

-XJ

Thoughts: 'Feelings'

"People will forget your name, they'll forget your face, but they won't forget how you made them feel..."

I was searching around my house the other day for several minutes looking for something. I was oblivious to being oblivious that I didn't know what I was looking for. How can a person not know what they are looking for? Isn't that a paradox or something along those lines...? How can a person know what word they want to use but not remember it....? I think the answer is: people are lead by their feelings, under the surface, first, before logic on the surface. The 'feeling' of finding my keys, or just the feeling of the keys, is what animated my body to do what it did.

This is very interesting, I wonder if these 'feelings' are acquired by contact with everyday objects and how...? I mean, could a person pick up a 'feeling' just by looking at an object, does the person have to be in the same room...? If a feeling is under the surface first, can it be manipulated...?  Can these 'feelings' be synthesized...? What role do they play in Image Projection...?

Also stemming from this, is there a larger 'feeling' that we are unaware of that drives us to do things...? If we associate 'feelings' with events, will we be able to be retro-associative and find out what someone has experienced via the 'feeling'...?

Very interesting...

"You can forget a word, you can forget what something looks like, you can forget what happened to you, but you won't forget how it makes you feel..."

-XJ

Image Broadcasting / Projection: Intelligent Images

Not very well written. This idea is just another part or add-on to the Image Projection Theory (XJ Hall) explained in my previous posts. I'm planning on using these ideas in some interactive CG, although, I doubt that something effective could be achieved if it were limited in scale, considering what it entails.

I just thought of something while walking to Walgreens this morning. I was in my thoughts, thinking out loud as usual, and I was thinking, 

"Stop thinking out loud, pretty soon you'll start to think out loud and you won't even know it." 

Anyways, I was sort of wondering if I was ever going to have the efficacy of mind I had earlier in my life that was due to several factors including the medication I was on, and I concluded that I probably wouldn't and that I would fade into 'the grey' and be forgotten. But based on my previous thoughts, that is ultimately incorrect. 

Why is it incorrect? Well, first off, we can argue no one is ever truly 'forgotten'. We die but the effect we have on the network is bigger than what we would imagine or are able to recognize, at least by the untrained eye. You can see in my previous notes that I argue that a person lives on through their works, whatever those be. It can be mentoring someone, it can be a piece of art, it can be music or their profession. The person puts a piece of himself in everything he produces and that part of the person can be identified years after they're gone. If you've read my Image Broadcasting Theory you know I argue that people project motives that are picked up and transferred from one person to another. These are ways that people are not forgotten, even if we are unaware of their presence.

But this is not the point. I was talking out loud, 

"Yes, we all live on, none of us is forgotten. But it's not like we really do live on, because the part of us does not resemble our animated selves, unless it was intelligent..."

Intelligence...? Intelligence in a projection...? Okay, before you say that is an awesome idea, I just saw Prometheus (the movie) the other day which had the same sort of idea that I had years ago, which is similar to this idea. So, I'm no genius. But the good news is my idea is a different take.

Basically, the gist is, via Image Broadcasting we will be able to project an image that is interactive, i.e. has intelligence. In order to do this, the projection would probably stem from multiple outlets and be condensed into one experience for the user. The experience can be short and quick, or can span days and across spaces. Remember, Image Broadcasting Theory says that the Image that is being broadcast or projected can be diffused into the network but focused back into its original state. In order for the user to refocus the image into one he would have to be connected to the nodes projecting each separate part .

The intelligent projection is not singular, i.e. there are more nodes than one projecting the image via multiple outlets. There are real world examples of this today, probably not intentional, which is why I deem them 'natural projections'. 'Artificial projections' are engineered to have a specific certain effect on the user or target audience.

Soon, when I actually start working with this Theory, we will be able to tell if we can project intelligent images via the network and have people interact with the plurality of it. We could affect billions of people via this. The very exciting thing is that, because of intelligence, the image will change according to the users' reactions to it. What could this be used for...? Lots of stuff, really.

-XJ

Brief Beef: Systematic Mass Influence / Control of the Real Social Network

Sorry, I'm a little bit tired so I am just going to write the gist of the idea. I think this idea is up there, not too up there, but a good one among other ideas. Will rewrite, but for now...

Here are my original thoughts...

"all of the voices in our heads may be saying different things but they come from the same place. it's an idea that's broadcast...
analogy: like how each of our iphones displays the web but the internet is where the source is. get it...?
what if someday we could prove where the voices come from we can follow the trail to the source. it will no longer be a matter of conjecture
see, each of our t.v.s has something different on, but none the less they all broadcast a purpose, even if we can't make sense of it
what is the purpose of the Master Idea...? and can it be changed / influenced by humans...?
could humans one day control the Master Idea in a systematic way as to affect the network of billions for beneficial causes
we could connect to each humans mind through their 'voice' in a target audience group. the voice wouldn't say exactly what we want...
it'd say the 'gist' of what we want because it is interpreted by the user / target's mind only. consequently the message could be rejected"

Additional beef:
"It's like the roots of the trees or the tributaries of a river, our minds, they all go back to the source..."

Now, I'm not saying that the Master Idea is physical, although, at this moment, that is what I believe (I may be wrong). I'm saying that when we find IT, IT will be able to be studied and controlled / used for various purposes... This isn't meant to sound magical or fantastical at all, but, if it exists, as I believe it does, it is something that should be considered a very powerful instrument for the coming new age.

The future is not technology, it's how we use it.

(more on this later... tbc.)

-XJ