[Emanation]

It doesn't compress jack fuck all. There is no black board sketch. Specific qualia have a higher cortical resonance, due to overarching reinforcement over time, and they are picked out.

Calling that compression is like calling a string search for the word 'it' compression. Of course, it's not even a string search, all the little unnoticed things still produce some kind a response, and thus changw in the brain structure, memory, might as well call it noise at some point due to the lack of neurons that give a fuck.

It's idiotic.

The more a single stream of information is focused on, the greater degree of resonance that may occur with less endowed qualia (slow down, notice more shit due to neuro-satiation).

Garbage pop article.

[Ezku]

I do often share this sentiment, even if I’m not in agreement with your tone. But I’m curious —

  > Specific qualia have a higher cortical resonance, due to overarching reinforcement over time, and they are picked out.  
  > The more a single stream of information is focused on, the greater degree of resonance that may occur with less endowed qualia (slow down, notice more shit due to neuro-satiation).

How did you come upon these conclusions, or this framing? I’m surprised, because what you’re saying meshes well with some details of a model for the neurophysiological basis of conscious experience I’ve been working on… and I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone else point out these exact connections before.

For all I know this could be general knowledge in some community; or something believed widely at one time, now discredited. I’m operating in a vacuum and have been putting things together from what to me appear to be first principles. I might be reconstructing common knowledge, or just unknowingly restating things I’ve unconsciously absorbed in the past… The potential for which bothers me now that I’m seeing your comment.

Where’s your perspective coming from? :) Pointers to your sources would be much appreciated.