Though I don't think it is possible for any computer system to accurately simulate me, it should prove reasonably simple to generate small portions of my imagination with a partial simulation.

Will you help me develop a protocol?

>>16695363 (OP)
The protocol is, first, get an extremely high resolution brain scan of yourself that includes all the cellular interconnects.
Then, make money off of having attained a scanner device capable of doing what cannot be done right now.

>>16695664
You're saying I can't use a pencil to make dots on a page

>>16695363 (OP)
Anyone remember when they did that with cats and found out that cats imagine people as giant cats?

>>16695683
you couldn't draw dots fast enough

>>16695829
It's my mind, keeping up with some other venue of time is up to my discretion.

>there are somehow (>>16695683) those typal ink on gradient from palette to trope which grant idler brush fair use as the tool cited surely implies resource partially constrains may paint freckles upon a character
Philosophical imperatives mediating generic verse for a simplest drawing reason get complicated way too fast, I have to assume automation can improve this process.

<u>

>you cannot count on a Fourier transform based brush forever
Actually I can:

>adds another Fourier transform
>adds another Fourier transform
>adds another Fourier transform
>adds another Fourier transform
>adds another Fourier transform
>add...

What else do we need other than generative imagery to have a revolution in free expression? Ergonomic advancement is second-order to art anyway, science just narrows the gap.

>>16695363 (OP)
Niggas will watch Lain once...

>>16700451
I support all efforts to watch Lain once.

First person experience can't be duplicated with a protocol.

>>16700476
Any complete duplication algorithm provably requires simulation. It isn't easy to recreate anything perfectly, which was my reason for adding 'partial' to the setup since otherwise it doesn't happen in this half of the century

>low affects
>high affect

I cannot reduce my imagination to a set of finite modes at this time, so the protocol will have to support at least this many distinct external concepts.

Awesome I just had a dream where there is a partial scientific explanation. Not really sure how but in the dream I "knew" (according to instinct or something?) how to circumnavigate this kind of locus, and when the conditions were right, it turned to an eye.

I hope darkness doesn't get a bad rap in human understanding, since people really like having dreams and have often wanted it in their rituals for entering a sleeping mode

>>16695363 (OP)
Just train an LLM on enough information about yourself.
Even easier, inject a shitload of your own thoughts in writing form straight into an already existing LLM's context window and watch the magic happen. I created an extremely accurate simulation of a conversation between me and my friend by just describing how we talk to an LLM and doing iterative steps like "no, we don't use that expression"; "his style is snarkier than that particular sentence" etc.

>>16703874
The design goal is to sidestep manual input with optimal precision

Yes, in theory, I could sustain indefinite work within the limit of a Cauchy interior, given any practical originality in my work, this overly binary mode of interaction is too sparse for effective competition. Having to retrain is exactly the step worth letting minimize.

>>16695803
>giant cats
idc what the science says, i call bullshit