Dan Parker wrote:

>  Their hit counter would measure this as much as letter to the editor
>  in terms of overall acceptability.

Exactly. Neither the hit counter or the letter are any good. What is needed is a
continuous feature extraction method.

>  Ingrid looks to have some good concepts, but its still dependent
>  on education

For an Ingrid based economy, or any other brain like electronically measured
economy, to work it would have to be part of a self directed operating system.
The banks of today maybe such an example but with a nanotechnology based
delivery system in the offing, you're wrong to think that education will
continue to be a threshold impediment.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

"J. Maxwell Legg" wrote:
>
>  Dan Parker wrote:
>
>  >  >  My concept of using Ingrid
>  >  >  to track past the local store is to put a subjectivity and a variable
cost
>  >  >  element into the equation.
>  >
>  >  I don't think the variance would have to be mapped to the individual,
>
>  If it isn't mapped to the individual and then able to be passed into > 
>consensus, you have a dictatorship.

The individual still has exactly the same power, only it is not exposed
to
the dictatorship type.  If they do not get an item, or choose not to
get an item from the store, it is reordered or not reordered according
to their decision.  The only difference is they are not targetable
by those who might have access to the info and agendas to push
something,
one way or the other.

>  Take, for example, the market place for news on the internet. No price is set
>  for the news, yet if I detect the source is a propaganda tool for an
>  organisation that I dislike then my barrier-action is to delete its bookmark;
as
>  I did this morning to the New Zealand Herald. This didn't even leave a mark
on
>  their corporate windscreen.
>
>  I would much prefer to make my objection known to the organisation in a way
that
>  would allow the objection to be recognized, if it weren't already.

Their hit counter would measure this as much as letter to the editor
in terms of overall acceptability.  A real education of course is
what is really lacking imo, in that the News will continue to sell
well to those that think there is real info there.

> Ingrid
>  as an ideal means of evaluating the pros and cons of entities which make up
both
>  our private and public spaces. Anything less isn't trustworthy, imo.

I don't see any one tool or school of ideas as being the answer.
Ingrid looks to have some good concepts, but its still dependent
on education ie. If you did some profiles on what people thought of
money now, you would get something like a profile of how to best
accomodate Santa Claus, done by five year olds.  A community of ideas
would come up with overall better concepts imo, in this case.

Dan

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

Dan Parker wrote:

>  >  My concept of using Ingrid
>  >  to track past the local store is to put a subjectivity and a variable cost
>  >  element into the equation.
>
>  I don't think the variance would have to be mapped to the individual,

If it isn't mapped to the individual and then able to be passed into consensus,
you have a dictatorship.

Take, for example, the market place for news on the internet. No price is set
for the news, yet if I detect the source is a propaganda tool for an
organisation that I dislike then my barrier-action is to delete its bookmark; as
I did this morning to the New Zealand Herald. This didn't even leave a mark on
their corporate windscreen.

I would much prefer to make my objection known to the organisation in a way that
would allow the objection to be recognized, if it weren't already. I see Ingrid
as an ideal means of evaluating the pros and cons of entities which make up both
our private and public spaces. Anything less isn't trustworthy, imo.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

"J. Maxwell Legg" wrote:

>  Stopping the tracking at the local store is the fundamental cause of the
English
>  disease, i.e., putting things out into the economy at a fixed cost and then
>  relying on 'depreciation man' to sort out the mess.

I don't see the relationship Jim.  A store reorders now based on what
an individual purchases.  There is no relationship between fixed
cost, and whether the individual purchasers ID is passed onto the
next level of the supply chain.  The fixed cost is dependent on
obsolete economics either way.

I think some buffering is needed so the control freaks don't use
the individual tracking mechanisms in ways we probably haven't even
dreamed of.  Its a safety feature, whose operation drawbacks are
non-existent or negligible imo.

>  My concept of using Ingrid
>  to track past the local store is to put a subjectivity and a variable cost
>  element into the equation.

I don't think the variance would have to be mapped to the individual,
since a hi-tech economy would already look after anyone who needed
health subsidies or whatever.  I'll stick with Douglas and his
"the cost of consumption is production", which would have to measured
as closely as possible to align with known science to enable an
optimized sustainable economy.  Digital info products should be
virtually
free, and for transportation reasons would fit more with your
idea of cyberspace communities, as opposed to physical ones.
Need both new economies imo, for the time being anyway.

Later
Dan

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

Dan Parker wrote:

>  Just as the idea space in a brain is not physically local (only the
>  basic functions), I think it would be a fatal mistake to insist on
>  tagging everything to the individual.  For one thing, do you think
>  the powers that be care that you know it is they who are monitoring,
>  and possibly eliminating, things they disagree with?  Plus, try
>  following
>  such a web, and you'll have time for nothing else.  There is no

I would rather Ingrid do the following and leave me free for other pursuits.
And, yes, I do think the BTB can only operate behind a veil of secrecy a la the
Bilderbergers, etc.

>  operational reason for individual tracking, and every reason against
>  it according to all of history.  The material goods only have
>  to be tracked as far as the local store, and there is no valid reason
>  for tracking any information goods to the individual.  It'll just

Stopping the tracking at the local store is the fundamental cause of the English
disease, i.e., putting things out into the economy at a fixed cost and then
relying on 'depreciation man' to sort out the mess. My concept of using Ingrid
to track past the local store is to put a subjectivity and a variable cost
element into the equation.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

"J. Maxwell Legg" wrote:
>
>  Can you dig it when 'One Less Hero' says:
>
>   "In some of the most important aspects of our lives:
>
>       Wealth is a zero-sum game.
>       The more others have, the less you have.
>
>  Things. Like the land you are on, the home you live in, or even the air you
>  breathe. (Limbaugh's having apoplexy. He practically shouts on his program
that
>  wealth is not a zero-sum game.) Property and land are the classic examples of
>  the zero-sum nature of wealth."

If wealth was a zero-sum game, negentropy would not be possible.
I would change the land, labour, capital considerations of
material wealth production to knowledge, energy, materials,
space and time (an expanded formula of material wealth creation
equals energy applied negentropically to spacetime).  Win/lose
is often really lose/lose (less than zero sum)
even under the current rules, where
people who have everything in a material sense are often
desperately unhappy (ie. Sonny Von Bulow, Christina Onassis,
maybe O.J. Simpson etc.)  That is, there is a spiritual
wealth consideration missing from the system constructed
by the retarded economic giant of usury.

>  I counter with a question:
>
>   "When the real estate agent says, "They ain't makin' no more land," is he
right
>  or wrong and is my putative future of virtual reality and mind uploading a
>  tragedy or a hope?

As the population is declining in all wealthy countries, the
per capita effect on land would be that more is available.
Unfortunately,
short sighted neo-Mathusian financial practices are ensuring a
burgeoning population elsewhere, and immigration problems.
(Not the immigrants, but their reasons for immigrating).
Mind uploading is a fascinating subject, but without dealing
with the current problems, I think if the project is successful,
there will be a whole bunch of crazy people running around the
telecommunications infrastructure playing the same stupid power
games, until that space gets wrecked too.  It's really a mind
problem, not a physical problem for humanity imo.  Obsolete
alpha ape impulses means that toxin release valves and nuclear
technology are situated in a monkey cage for the time being imo.

>  As such I'm confidently entering an appeal to get the government to seriously
>  consider Ingrid as a lifetime cure for my Ingrid aggravated autistic
condition
>  and at least permit me guinea-pig access to a postdoctoral fellowship
position
>  in cognitive neuroscience.

Under a sane economic system, such personal work would be open to
all.  There would probably be about a 10 hour work week to help the
machines provide an abundance of basics and then some for all.

>  One of my questions is:
>
>  Would Ingrid safely reduce levels of consumption to a thin film of
satisfaction
>  covering everyone's wants without all the less desirable unexpected
consequences
>  of Khrushchev's past?

Well if consumption was broken down according to its scientific
effects on sustainability, people could have all they wanted
of many products (especially info products ie. digital games,
programs etc.)  An accountablility structure would ensure that
a great dictatorship will not be allowed.

>
>  In another technical post for "Grids-In-Motion", what I'm suggesting is that
>  each of many grids on a particular subject could be looked on as a qubit
>  (quantum bit) where the act of measuring (or collapsing) of the quantum bit
is
>  done by finding the position within a sequential register of grids for a
unique
>  incoming signal and then maybe activating the nearest neighbours to that
feature
>  amongst the grids where it was found to be significant.

I don't understand all you are saying Jim, but it sounds like
this could be a promising tool for an informed populace to make
decisions that do not adversely affect the populace in other
areas.

>  Earlier in my political hat, I thought out loud to Lloyd Miller...
>
>  Why couldn't world wide legislations be introduced so that there is some sort
of
>  two way hyper-linked binding on the data records of whereby the new Intel
Chip
>  ID is used thus enabling the user to track who (or what program) has made use
of
>  this number?

Just as the idea space in a brain is not physically local (only the
basic functions), I think it would be a fatal mistake to insist on
tagging everything to the individual.  For one thing, do you think
the powers that be care that you know it is they who are monitoring,
and possibly eliminating, things they disagree with?  Plus, try
following
such a web, and you'll have time for nothing else.  There is no
operational reason for individual tracking, and every reason against
it according to all of history.  The material goods only have
to be tracked as far as the local store, and there is no valid reason
for tracking any information goods to the individual.  It'll just
result in a whole bunch of well-intentioned people, who have
power as a result of thinking in alpha ape ways, trying to
procreate their throwback customs into others.

>       It does this because increased space expenditures provide
>  purchasing power for consumption that makes available previously
>  unused resources out of the unused American productive capacity.
>       This unused capacity exists in the American economy because the
>  structure of our economic system is such that it channels flows of
>  funds into the production of additional capacity (investment) without
>  any conscious planning process or any real desire by anyone to
>  increase our productive capacity. It does this because certain
>  institutions in our system (such as insurance, retirement funds,social
>  security payments, undistributed corporate profits and such) and
>  certain individuals who personally profit by the flow of funds not
>  theirs into investment continue to operate to increase investment even
>  when they have no real desire to increase productive capacity (and
>  indeed many decry it). In the Soviet Union, on the contrary, resources
>  are allotted to the increase of productive capacity by a conscious
>  planning process and at the cost of reducing the resources available
>  in their system for consumption or for the government (largely
>  defence).

The decentralization helped the U.S., but another important factor
was that Russia often gave real wealth to other countries, whereas
the U.S. pretended to help them, and then drained their resources
as payment for the interest on money created from nothing.  This
factor may have been even more important that the obvious
shortcomings of the excessive USSR centralization.

The whole thing is a moot point anyways, since production capacity
is only limited by environmental sustainability now.  Some (ie
Social Creditors) think this has been the case for about a
century, and its only what they call the 'sabotage' of the
financial powers, that has kept shortages alive.  Because of
the rule of ruthlessness, the financial power has had to ignore
the environment except for its own selfish ends, while
harming the intelligence of the general populace, and making
it mathematically impossible for them to truly develop the
need ethics (ie. never enough money for everyone to pay
all the interest due).


Regards
Dan Parker

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

Can you dig it when 'One Less Hero' says:

  "In some of the most important aspects of our lives:

      Wealth is a zero-sum game.
      The more others have, the less you have.

Things. Like the land you are on, the home you live in, or even the air you
breathe. (Limbaugh's having apoplexy. He practically shouts on his program that
wealth is not a zero-sum game.) Property and land are the classic examples of
the zero-sum nature of wealth."

I counter with a question:

  "When the real estate agent says, "They ain't makin' no more land," is he right
or wrong and is my putative future of virtual reality and mind uploading a
tragedy or a hope?

----------------------

As background to this longwinded post, I'm throwing in the following from my
trash bin (I trash God :^\) and would like to discuss the following excerpt from
Dr. Carrol Quigley's book "Tragedy and Hope", with respect to Ingrid's (or
better) dataspace requirements and maybe new type of economic ceiling.

To those who don't know me well and dislike my politics or my economic being
displayed on these fora, I'm more interested to explain that, I'm using Ingrid
in my quest for mind uploading but have found governments unwilling to use my
example.
As a consequence I've had to concentrate on the permission problem thereby
imposed.

Luckily I still want this and chose Ingrid to attack on both these and other
fronts; - assuming "Grids-in-Motion" which is a parallelized neuro-economic
model using Ingrid that is not based on financial capitalism and actually can
fly.

As such I'm confidently entering an appeal to get the government to seriously
consider Ingrid as a lifetime cure for my Ingrid aggravated autistic condition
and at least permit me guinea-pig access to a postdoctoral fellowship position
in cognitive neuroscience.

-----------------------------------

Later in this post, when reading how Quigley shows two types of economic limit,
I want you to realize that both the U.S. and Soviet systems were based on a
double entry bookeeping system that may not be as reductionistic as Ingrid.

One of my questions is:

Would Ingrid safely reduce levels of consumption to a thin film of satisfaction
covering everyone's wants without all the less desirable unexpected consequences
of Khrushchev's past?

--------------------------------------------

In another technical post for "Grids-In-Motion", what I'm suggesting is that
each of many grids on a particular subject could be looked on as a qubit
(quantum bit) where the act of measuring (or collapsing) of the quantum bit is
done by finding the position within a sequential register of grids for a unique
incoming signal and then maybe activating the nearest neighbours to that feature
amongst the grids where it was found to be significant.

Now, there's going to be a great deal of latency involved in getting the
activation to spread throughout a mesh of grids and in some cases there will be
grids, which because of the Wavelinking path the activation takes, that will be
activated more than once within and allowable time frame. The entangled path so
formed would trace out a sort of goal seeking and provided there were
superordinate grids available to handle contingencies what I think you would get
is starting to be brain-like.

See my Wavelink in the papers at:-

http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~income/wavelink.html

I contemplate that for a new row or column to be added to an existing grid there
is a method of doing a linear interpolation to find the new feature's
approximate position within the grid. If the feature's positional (loading) is
assessed to be
insignificant that grid is passed over and doesn't spike onto others as
described above. Those grids that do cause a successful spiking can later (in a
sort of computerized version of dreaming) be fully reprocessed to remember the
transient feature. And so it goes, but it's a life's work, and though I feel
others will probably eclipse me with very simple switches, a goodly sized grid's
complexity is not to be under estimated as a switch.


---------------------------------------

Earlier in my political hat, I thought out loud to Lloyd Miller...

Why couldn't world wide legislations be introduced so that there is some sort of
two way hyper-linked binding on the data records of whereby the new Intel Chip
ID is used thus enabling the user to track who (or what program) has made use of
this number?

Could it be then made a felony to possess a user's ID without that user having
unfettered rights to know, by clicking on it, where it has been used? Later on
in return for the use of this Chip ID and the requisite disk space given over to
this hyperlinking, the user could be in line for lifetime producer accounts and
a shareholding in the data warehousing operation thus drastically reducing the
transaction overhead.

Someone please check out my paraphrase of this at http://listen.to/jimekus and
inform David Brin, "here we come!"



---------------------------------------------------------------------

TRAGEDY AND HOPE Chapters XIX-XX
by Dr. Carroll Quigley
ISBN 0913022-14-4

Page 1204
      When Khrushchev renounced the use of both nuclear war and
conventional violence, and promised to defeat the West by peaceful
competition, he was convinced that the Soviet Union could out-perform
the U.S. because it could, in his opinion, overcome the American lead
in the race for economic development that the Socialist way of life
would become the model for emulation by the uncommitted nations.

Page 1213
      In other economies, when additional demands are presented to the
economy, less resources are available for alternative uses. But in the
American system, as it now stands, additional new demands usually lead
to increased resources becoming available for alternative purposes,
notably consumption. Thus if the Soviet Union embraced a substantial
increase in space activity, the resources available for raising
Russian levels of consumption would be reduced while in America, any
increases in the space budget makes levels of consumption also rise.

Page 1214
      It does this because increased space expenditures provide
purchasing power for consumption that makes available previously
unused resources out of the unused American productive capacity.
      This unused capacity exists in the American economy because the
structure of our economic system is such that it channels flows of
funds into the production of additional capacity (investment) without
any conscious planning process or any real desire by anyone to
increase our productive capacity. It does this because certain
institutions in our system (such as insurance, retirement funds,social
security payments, undistributed corporate profits and such) and
certain individuals who personally profit by the flow of funds not
theirs into investment continue to operate to increase investment even
when they have no real desire to increase productive capacity (and
indeed many decry it). In the Soviet Union, on the contrary, resources
are allotted to the increase of productive capacity by a conscious
planning process and at the cost of reducing the resources available
in their system for consumption or for the government (largely
defence).
      Thus the meaning of "costs" and the limitations on ability to
mobilize economic resources are entirely different in our system from
the Soviet system and most others. In the Soviet economy, "costs" are
real costs, measurable in terms of the allotment of scarce resources
that could have been used otherwise. In the American system, "costs"
are fiscal or financial limitations that have little connection with
the use of scarce resources or even with the use of available (and
therefore not scarce) resources. The reason for this is that in the
American economy, the fiscal or financial limit is lower than the
limit established by real resources and therefore, since the financial
limits act as the restraint on our economic activities, we do not get
to the point where our activities encounter the restraints imposed by
the limits of real resources (except rarely and briefly in terms of
technically trained manpower, which is our most limited resource).
      These differences between the Soviet and American economies are:
1) the latter has built-in, involuntary, institutionalized investment
which the former lacks;
2) the latter has fiscal restraints at a much lower level of economic
activity which the Soviet system also lacks.
      Thus greater activity in defence in the USSR entails real costs
since it puts pressure on the ceiling established by limited real
resources while greater activity in the American defence or space
effort releases money into the system which presses upward on the
artificial financial ceiling, pressing it upward closer to the higher,
and remote, ceiling established by the real resources limit of the
American economy. This makes available the unused productive capacity
that exists in our system between the financial ceiling and the real
resources ceiling; it not only makes these unused resources available
for the government sector of the economy from which the expenditure
was directly made but also makes available portions of these released
resources for consumption and additional capital investment.


Page 1215
      For this reason, government expenditures in the U.S. for things
like defence or space may entail no real costs at all in terms of the
economy as a whole. In fact, if the volume of unused capacity brought
into use by expenditures for these things (that is, defence and so on)
is greater than the resources necessary to satisfy the need for which
the expenditure was made, the volume of unused resources made
available for consumption or investment will be greater than the
volume of resources used in the governmental expenditure and this
additional government effort will cost nothing at all in real terms,
but will entail "negative" real costs. (Our wealth will be increased
by making the effort).
      The basis for this strange, and virtually unique, situation is to
be found in the large amount of unused productive capacity in the U.S.
even in our most productive years. In the second quarter of 1962, our
productive system was running at a very high level of prosperity, yet
it was functioning about 12% below capacity, which represented a loss
of $73 billion annually. In this way, in the whole period from the
beginning of 1953 to the middle of 1962, our productive system
operated at $387 billion below capacity. Thus if the system had
operated near capacity, our defence effort over the nine years would
have cost us nothing, in terms of loss of goods or capacity.
      This unique character in the American economy rests on the fact
that the utilization of resources follows flow lines in the economy
that are not everywhere reflected by corresponding flow lines of
claims on wealth (that is, money). In general, in our economy the
lines of flow of claims on wealth are such that they provide a very
large volume of savings and a rather large volume of investment, even
when no one really wants new productive capacity; they also provide an
inadequate flow of consumer purchasing power, in terms of flows, or
potential flows, of consumer goods; but they provide very limited,
sharply scrutinized and often misdirected flows of funds for the use
of resources to fulfill the needs of the government sector of our
trisectored economy. As a result, we have our economy distorted
resource-utilization patterns, with overinvestment in many areas,
overstuffed consumers in one place and impoverished consumers in
another place, a drastic undersupply of social services, and
widespread social needs for which public funds are lacking.
      In the Soviet Union, money flows follow fairly well the flows of
real goods and resources, but, as as result, pressures are directly on
resources. These pressures mean that saving and investment conflict
directly with consumption and government services (including defence),
putting the government under severe direct strains, as the demands for
higher standards of living cannot be satisfied except by curtailing
investment, defence, space, or other government expenditures.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

"María José Moreno" wrote:
>

I think it would be easy to make a Spanish (or other language) versions of
Ingrid.

Would you like this?

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

Hi Bob,

I got the code out of the bottleneck of the old DOS 640K limit. There's now a
decent output back onto the end of the input file,
as you saw. For large grids there's an interesting on screen inspection of
anomalies there's some HTML linkages for those who
want to embelish their grids. The documentation is current and comes packaged in
the 591k download file. Lastly the code is
within reach of an easy conversion to VB6.0 as soon as I can get the developers
kit.

At the moment there is a compiler available if you want to play with the source
code. To get the Ingrid kit and compiler,
subscribe to the download instruction area at:

http://www.egroups.com/list/ingridoo

Bob, later on I'd like to chat about the Slater element distances that are input
into the PCA routine. They give, in the case of
large grids, quite a different treatment than does say XLSTAT. On inspection I
felt Ingrid's results were better but I'd like to
document the reasons.

Regards,
Jim

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

Jim,

I hope things are going well for you in this new year.  Seeing your posts
prompted me to ask you how does Ingrid 98 differ from Ingrid 96 which I have
already downloaded.


Regards,


Bob


------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

I'am full proffesor of psychiatry and medical psychology of Faculty of
Medicine of Cordoba (Spain). I'am very interested in Rrepertory Grid,
for this reason I'am grateful for you wellcome to groupe.
I'am sorry my english¡


------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

VERSION, 8.13
Form 1 School Subjects
Sally Legg
  1  5 01-22-1987,D,N,N
  14 Subjects
  14 Factors
'                MANUALLY ENTER THE SIX LINES ABOVE AND VIEW THIS FILE IN FIXED
FONT
Englsh English Literature
Music  Music Lessons
Maths  Mathematics
Social Social Studies
Scienc Science
Classi Classical Studies
PhysEd Physical Education
Relign Religion
Health Health
Drama  Drama
Comput Computing
Art    Art
Cookng Cooking
Sewing Sewing
'                A BLANK LINE HERE SERVES TO TERMINATE THE MANUALLY ENTERED
COLUMN LABELS. DO NOT USE COMMAS.
NtLern Need to learn more
Copyng Lots of copying to do
NotExp teacher explains badly
Boring Boring
Compli Complicated
StuTea Stupid Teacher
Intrst interesting
NicTea Nice teacher
Fun    Fun
MeaTea Mean Teacher
Creatv Creative
EsyLrn Easy to learn
Reward Rewarding
GoodAt Good at this subject
'                PASTE SHORT + EXTENDED LABELS + FULL TABLE DATA FROM WORD,
EXCEL, ETC.
       Englsh Music  Maths  Social Scienc Classi PhysEd Relign Health Drama 
Comput Art    Cookng Sewing

NtLern         4  3  3  2  4  2  1  2  1  3  3  2  4  3   Need to learn more
Copyng         2  5  2  3  3  4  1  3  2  3  2  2  4  2   Lots of copying to do
NotExp         1  4  5  4  4  2  1  4  3  3  4  1  3  3   teacher explains badly
Boring         4  5  5  5  5  5  1  5  1  5  2  1  4  2   Boring
Compli         3  4  5  4  5  4  1  2  2  2  4  2  4  2   Complicated
StuTea         1  1  1  1  4  4  1  5  2  3  4  1  4  3   Stupid Teacher
Intrst         5  5  5  3  1  2  5  3  5  2  5  4  3  4   interesting
NicTea         5  1  3  5  3  5  5  1  3  1  2  5  2  2   Nice teacher
Fun            3  2  1  1  1  1  5  1  5  3  5  5  4  4   Fun
MeaTea         2  5  4  2  4  2  1  5  4  5  3  1  4  3   Mean Teacher
Creatv         4  4  1  1  1  1  1  1  5  1  2  1  1  4   Creative
EsyLrn         4  1  2  2  1  2  1  3  3  3  2  2  1  1   Easy to learn
Reward         2  2  2  2  1  1  5  1  5  1  2  4  1  4   Rewarding
GoodAt         4  3  3  3  3  3  4  2  5  3  3  5  3  4   Good at this subject
  0    <---       ANALYZED FLAG: SET TO ZERO IF ANY CHANGES ARE MADE ABOVE HERE
or to omit LOADINGS

|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                           INGRID ANALYSIS SYSTEM                            |
|_____________________________________________________________________________|
|                                                                             |
| Analysis of a  Decision  Grid named  Form 1 School Subjects  Completed by   |
|  Sally Legg  on  01-22-1987 . The grid was formed by evaluating  14         |
| Subjects  in terms of  14 Factors  using a  70 % significance factor.       |
|_____________________________________________________________________________|
|                    |
| Option Required  SAVE
|____________________| 1  |-----------------------------|
                           | Adjust Parameters           |
                 2  |-----------------------------|______|
                    | Enter Factors               |
          3  |----------------------------------------------------------------|
             | Analyse Grid              The analysis gives the               |
   4  |----------------------------|     following information:               |
      | Plot Loadings              |   a) Summary of Scores                   |
      |                            |   b) Similarities                        |
      |   Horizontal Component     |   c) Component Analysis                  |
      |   Vertical Component       |   d) Percent Contribution to Components  |
|---------------------------------|   e) Plot of Major Dimensions            |
| Grid Name [.txt]   GRID22.TXT   |__________________________________________|
|_________________________________|


|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|SECTION 1: Summary of scores for Factors                                     |
|______________________________________|--------------------------------------|
                                        |         Average            Percentage|
                                        |           Score  Variation  Variation|
|-------------------------------------||--------------------------------------|
| Interpretation                      || NtLern    2.64      13.21     3.81   |
|  The Factor which discriminates     || Copyng    2.71      14.86     4.29   |
| most between the Subjects is        || NotExp    3.00      22.00     6.35   |
|  Boring  followed by  Fun  &  Nice  || Boring    3.57      39.43     11.38  |
| teacher . Little discrimination     || Compli    3.14      21.71     6.27   |
| between the Subjects was exhibited  || StuTea    2.50      29.50     8.52   |
| in terms of  Good at this subject   || Intrst    3.71      24.86     7.18   |
| &  Easy to learn                    || NicTea    3.07      34.93     10.08  |
|                                     || Fun       2.93      38.93     11.24  |
|                                     || MeaTea    3.21      26.36     7.61   |
|_____________________________________|| Creatv    2.00      30.00     8.66   |
                                        | EsyLrn    2.00      12.00     3.46   |
                                        | Reward    2.36      29.21     8.43   |
                                        | GoodAt    3.43      9.43     2.72    |
                                        |                                      |
                                        |                                      |
                                        |                                      |
                                        |______________________________________|


|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|SECTION 2: Summary of Scores for Subjects                                    |
|______________________________________|--------------------------------------|
                                        |                   Percentage         |
                                        |         Totals   Variation           |
|-------------------------------------||--------------------------------------|
| Interpretation                      || Englsh      3.71      6.96           |
| The  Subjects  for which the        || Music       4.71      7.70           |
| strongest responses were given in   || Maths       1.71      5.68           |
| terms of Factors is  Physical       || Social     -2.29      4.98           |
| Education , followed by  Health  &  || Scienc     -0.29      7.62           |
|  Art . This does not mean that      || Classi     -2.29      6.63           |
| these Subjects are necessarily the  || PhysEd     -7.29      13.56          |
| most important but they are the     || Relign     -2.29      8.28           |
| ones that  Sally Legg  feels most   || Health      5.71      10.80          |
| strongly about.                     || Drama      -2.29      5.27           |
|_____________________________________|| Comput      2.71      4.20           |
                                        | Art        -4.29      9.89           |
                                        | Cookng      1.71      4.07           |
                                        | Sewing      0.71      4.36           |
                                        |                                      |
                                        |                                      |
                                        |                                      |
                                        |______________________________________|


|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|SECTION 3: Similarities between Factors                                      |
|_____________________________________________________________________________|
|                   Boring -90 -26  51 -88 -80  51  67  61  48 -53  23 -32  09|
|                       Fun     06 -34  69  70 -51 -51 -58 -24  51 -16  32 -05|
|                           NicTea -90  33  47 -61 -38 -04 -31  08 -48 -15  10|
|                               MeaTea -47 -53  71  50  23  33 -20  41  14  06|
| NOTE: Values                      Reward  83 -43 -65 -62 -62  61 -53  44 -11|
| range from +99 to                     GoodAt -62 -53 -48 -35  44 -54  48  09|
| -99 with +99 meaning                      NotExp  33  59  23 -13  27 -08 -18|
| identical, 0 meaning no                       Copyng  48  33 -42  29 -05 -22|
| relationship and -99 meaning                      Compli  57 -23  12 -20 -25|
| opposites. With 70 giving                             NtLern -24  23  00 -08|
| significance.                                             Intrst -59  55  12|
|                                                               StuTea -27 -05|
| The most highly positively related                                Creatv  21|
| Factors are  Good at this subject  &                                  EsyLrn|
|  Rewarding . This means that the Subjects                                   |
| that have high  Good at this subject  are also                              |
| high on  Rewarding  & vice versa. The opposite                              |
| condition applies to  Fun  &  Boring .                                      |
                                                                               |
                                                                               |
                                   ____________________________________________|


|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|SECTION 4: Slater related inter-Subjects distances =PCA input                |
|_____________________________________________________________________________|
|                   PhysEd  64 -53 -52 -36 -46 -32 -15 -29 -29  12  13 -04 -02|
|                       Art    -37 -44 -23 -36 -23 -03 -13 -13  16  19  06  16|
|                           Scienc  28  30  06  25  28  42  39 -45 -07  04 -16|
|                               Relign  53  08  13  05  28  16 -33 -03  08 -23|
| NOTE: Values                      Drama   17  16  11  45  16 -19  10  17 -04|
| range from +99 to                     Music   29  08  21 -07 -12  11  07 -03|
| -99 with +99 meaning                      Maths   45  18  11 -23  00  14  05|
| identical, 0 meaning no                       Social  13  45 -24 -02  02  16|
| relationship and -99 meaning                      Cookng  25 -19  19  40 -03|
| opposites. With 70 giving                             Classi -37 -09 -02  05|
| significance.                                             Health  44  14  05|
|                                                               Sewing  42  14|
|                                                                   Comput  06|
|                                                                       Englsh|
|                                                                             |
|                                                                             |
|                                                                             |
|                                                                             |
                                                                               |
                                                                               |
                                   ____________________________________________|


|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|SECTION 5: Underlying Components of the Grid.                                |
|_____________________________________________________________________________|
|                                                                             |
| There are  13 components underlying the grid and their relative             |
| importances are as follows:                                                 |
|____________|-----------------------------------------------------------|____|
              |      COMPONENT            PROPORTION        CUMULATIVE    |
            |-----------------------------------------------------------|_|
            |          1                  47.08              47.08      |
          |-----------------------------------------------------------|_|
          |          2                  18.09              65.17      |
        |-----------------------------------------------------------|_|
        |          3                  11.67              76.85      |
      |-----------------------------------------------------------|_|
      |          4                  6.15              82.99       |
    |-----------------------------------------------------------|_|
    |          5                  5.50              88.49       |
    |___________________________________________________________|







|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| SECTION  6: Component 1's Subjects that are [not=+/-] Factors               |
|                                                                             |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Subjects               PERCENTAGE     Factors                    PERCENTAGE |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  PhysEd Physical Educati - 23.88 isn't Boring Boring               + 20.53  |
|  Art    Art              - 16.82  is   Fun    Fun                  - 15.73  |
|  Health Health           - 13.60  is   Reward Rewarding            - 15.22  |
|  Scienc Science          + 11.76  is   MeaTea Mean Teacher         + 7.05   |
|  Relign Religion         + 9.85   is   NotExp teacher explains     + 6.11   |
|  Drama  Drama            + 4.48  isn't Intrst interesting          - 6.02   |
|  Sewing Sewing           - 3.38  isn't Compli Complicated          + 5.58   |
|  Classi Classical Studie + 3.31  isn't NicTea Nice teacher         - 5.08   |
|  Music  Music Lessons    + 3.00   is   StuTea Stupid Teacher       + 5.01   |
|  Maths  Mathematics      + 3.00  isn't GoodAt Good at this sub     - 4.49   |
|  Cookng Cooking          + 2.96   is   Copyng Lots of copying      + 4.43   |
|  Englsh English Literatu - 2.58   is   Creatv Creative             - 2.57   |
|  Social Social Studies   + 1.04   is   NtLern Need to learn mo     + 2.17   |
|  Comput Computing        - 0.34   is   EsyLrn Easy to learn        - 0.02   |
|                                                                             |
                                                                               |
                                    etc., For all significant combinations     |
                                   ____________________________________________|


|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| SECTION  7: Component 2's Subjects that are [not=+/-] Factors               |
|                                                                             |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Subjects               PERCENTAGE     Factors                    PERCENTAGE |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  Classi Classical Studie + 19.06  is   NicTea Nice teacher         + 39.04  |
|  Social Social Studies   + 16.86 isn't MeaTea Mean Teacher         - 19.95  |
|  Health Health           - 14.99  is   Creatv Creative             - 15.66  |
|  Music  Music Lessons    - 10.69  is   Fun    Fun                  - 7.88   |
|  Sewing Sewing           - 8.87   is   NotExp teacher explains     - 4.96   |
|  Comput Computing        - 6.39   is   Intrst interesting          - 4.22   |
|  Art    Art              + 6.25  isn't StuTea Stupid Teacher       - 2.85   |
|  PhysEd Physical Educati + 4.26   is   Boring Boring               + 2.69   |
|  Englsh English Literatu + 3.27   is   Compli Complicated          + 1.46   |
|  Relign Religion         - 3.14   is   Reward Rewarding            - 0.97   |
|  Drama  Drama            - 2.46   is   NtLern Need to learn mo     - 0.18   |
|  Scienc Science          + 2.09  isn't Copyng Lots of copying      - 0.15   |
|  Cookng Cooking          - 1.11  isn't EsyLrn Easy to learn        + 0.00   |
|  Maths  Mathematics      + 0.56  isn't GoodAt Good at this sub     - 0.00   |
|                                                                             |
                                                                               |
                                    etc., For all significant combinations     |
                                   ____________________________________________|


|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| SECTION  8: Component 3's Subjects that are [not=+/-] Factors               |
|                                                                             |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Subjects               PERCENTAGE     Factors                    PERCENTAGE |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  Music  Music Lessons    + 25.53 isn't StuTea Stupid Teacher       - 36.08  |
|  Maths  Mathematics      + 18.13  is   Creatv Creative             + 18.80  |
|  Englsh English Literatu + 13.55  is   Intrst interesting          + 16.46  |
|  Cookng Cooking          - 7.36   is   Fun    Fun                  - 8.70   |
|  Relign Religion         - 7.12  isn't Compli Complicated          + 7.00   |
|  Social Social Studies   + 6.27   is   Boring Boring               + 5.79   |
|  Drama  Drama            - 6.00  isn't NotExp teacher explains     + 3.12   |
|  Comput Computing        - 3.46  isn't NicTea Nice teacher         + 1.47   |
|  PhysEd Physical Educati - 3.15  isn't EsyLrn Easy to learn        + 0.64   |
|  Art    Art              - 2.91  isn't Reward Rewarding            + 0.53   |
|  Classi Classical Studie - 2.33  isn't Copyng Lots of copying      + 0.48   |
|  Scienc Science          - 2.08  isn't NtLern Need to learn mo     + 0.37   |
|  Health Health           + 1.69   is   MeaTea Mean Teacher         + 0.32   |
|  Sewing Sewing           - 0.43  isn't GoodAt Good at this sub     + 0.24   |
|                                                                             |
                                                                               |
                                    etc., For all significant combinations     |
                                   ____________________________________________|


|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|SECTION 9: % Contribution of Subjects & Factors to Components 1 & 2          |
|_____________________________________________________________________________|
|                                                                             |
| Subjects                % IMPORTANCE   Factors                 % IMPORTANCE |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  Physical Education         18.44      Boring                       15.58   |
|  Health                     13.99      Nice teacher                 14.51   |
|  Art                        13.89      Fun                          13.55   |
|  Science                    9.08       Rewarding                    11.27   |
|  Religion                   7.99       Mean Teacher                 10.64   |
|  Classical Studies          7.69       Creative                     6.21    |
|  Social Studies             5.44       teacher explains badly       5.80    |
|  Music Lessons              5.14       interesting                  5.53    |
|  Sewing                     4.91       Complicated                  4.44    |
|  Drama                      3.92       Stupid Teacher               4.41    |
|  English Literature         2.78       Good at this subject         3.25    |
|  Cooking                    2.45       Lots of copying to do        3.24    |
|  Mathematics                2.33       Need to learn more           1.62    |
|  Computing                  2.03       Easy to learn                0.02    |
|                                                                             |
                                                                               |
                                                                               |
                                   ____________________________________________|


  GRID22.TXT   01-22-1987    Form 1 School Subjects                  Sally Legg

        |-------------------------------||---|---------------------------|
        |                               || 2 |                           |
        |                               ||___|                           |
        |               *MeaTea.        ||         *Creatv               |
        |                               ||                               |
        |                               ||                        *Fun.  |
        |                *NotExp.       ||              *Intrst.         |
        |                 *StuTea       ||                               |
        |                               ||                       *Reward.|
        |__________________*Copyng.ern _||____________*GoodAt.___________|
        |   |              ------------ |*EsyLrn      --------           |
        | 1 |            *Compli        ||                               |
        |___*Boring.                    ||                               |
        |                               ||                               |
        |                               ||                               |
        |                               ||                               |
        |                               ||                               |
        |                               ||                               |
        |                               ||                               |
        |_______________________________||_____________*NicTea.__________|

                             press F3 or 0-9 or P/p


  GRID22.TXT   01-22-1987    Form 1 School Subjects                  Sally Legg
         MeaTea.                                           Creatv
        |-------------------------------||---|---------------------------|
  NotExp.                               || 2 |             Health.       |
        |                  Music        ||___|                            Intrst.
  StuTea                *               ||      Sewing.                   Fun.
        |                                Comput                          |
        |                               ||                        *      |
        |          Relig Drama          ||              *                |
  NtLern                   Cookng       ||                                Reward.
  Copyng.                               ||                       *       |
        |__________________*___*________||____________*__________________ GoodAt.
        |   |              -   -        |*            -                  |
        | 1 |            * Maths        ||                                EsyLrn
        |___*                           ||                               |
  Boring.        Scienc.                ||     Englsh                    |
  Compli                                ||                         PhysEd.
        |                               ||                    Art.       |
        |                               ||                               |
        |                               ||                               |
        |                      Social.  ||                               |
        |_________________ Classi.______||_____________*_________________|
                                                         NicTea.
                             press F3 or 0-9 or P/p



        |||||||||| ||      || |||||||||| |||||||||| |||||||||| ||||||||||
            ||     |||     || ||      || ||      ||     ||      ||     ||
            ||     ||||    || ||         ||      ||     ||      ||  98 ||
            ||     || ||   || ||         ||      ||     ||      ||     ||
            ||     ||  ||  || ||         ||||||||||     ||      ||     ||
            ||     ||   || || ||    |||| ||   ||        ||      ||     ||
            ||     ||    |||| ||      || ||    ||       ||      ||     ||
            ||     ||     ||| ||      || ||     ||      ||      ||     ||
        |||||||||| ||      || |||||||||| ||      || |||||||||| ||||||||||

        T  H  O  U  G  H  T     P  R  O  C  E  S  S  O  R        Ver. 8.d

        |---------------------------------------------------------------|
        |  COPYRIGHT. 1979-1999  Jim Legg  credits for published work   |
        |  commercial royalties  =1% net=  $200k to Dr. Slater's estate |
        |  or else GNU licenced  FREEWARE  For development sub-licence  |
        |  see the HELP URLs http://come.to/ingrid or                   |
        |             http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~income               |
        |                18 Domain Cres, Muriwai Beach                  |
        |  mailto:          Waimauku R.D.1, Auckland                    |
        |  income@...    NEW ZEALAND 1250    ph/fax +649 4119699 |
        -----------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

To download Ingrid98.d you need to be subscribed to:-

http://www/egroups.com/list/ingridoo


In Ingrid98.d the expanded labels are stored to the right of the row data for
easy identification. These expanded labels can be
entered here into the text file and when it is later saved by Ingrid98.d these
expanded labels are added to the initial group of
short labels.

      This allows you to cut & paste from Excel a table that contains both row
and column labels and data as well as expanded row
labels to the right of the data. Expanded column labels still need to be
manually entered.

      The procedure for preparing an Ingrid text file using data from Excel is as
follows:-

      (1) Select the cells from your spreadsheet to include row and column labels
and data.

      (2) Paste this selection into Word and then select and make a copy in Word
of just the column labels. Then convert that new
table to text and use 'paragraph marks' to separate the cells. Copy these column
labels to the Ingrid text file that you are
preparing.

      (3) Next select just the left-hand row labels and repeat the previous step
to copy these column labels to the Ingrid text
file that you are preparing.

      (4) Next select the entire table and convert it to text using a 'space' as
a delimiter and then copy the entire block
(including the rightmost column of expanded row labels) and put this into the
Ingrid text file. You then need to add a single
blank line to separate each section of the Ingrid text file.

      (5) After ensuring the header of the Ingrid text file correctly shows the
right number of rows and columns, run Ingrid to
process and re-save this this file.


Also as from Ingrid98.d pressing p or P will increment or decrement a scrolling
list of row and column labels and expanded
descriptions. For each pair of row and column labels, that are displayed at the
bottom of the plot, there is signed cell value
and identification markers showing the exact position within the plot of the
pair of features. For large grids this makes for easy identification of a
feature's exact position within the plot. If 'P' was
used to pause the toggling labels then 'p' can be used to increment just the
selected list. If toggling is then resumed by
pressing Enter (see the animation above), the display will pause again when a
suspected anomaly is found by comparing an
'off-signed' cell value with the grid's range of values. For this reason it
might be required that you might need to press hard
on the 'Enter' key to return to the main menu. Alternatively if you press 'P'
until neither list is selected pressing Enter
twice will suffice to return to the menu.





F9 VBDOS

This command takes you back to VBDOS, where only F1,F3,F4,F9 &F10 are enabled in
Ingrid98.6 and as of Ingrid98.d calling any
other function from the VBDOS interface will give an error and abort the
program.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

Harald Seelig wrote:
>
> Hello,
> Here is what I have been trying to figure out for a few weeks:
> How can grids of different individuals be compared? And what about grouping
and
> sampling  grids?
> My suggestion is that there is a possibility to sample grids by
> modifying the gridmethod and using appropriate statistical methods. But not
> having read all of the theoretical issues that support the background ideas
and
> ideals behind PCP I`m not sure if modifying the gridmethod wouldn't lead away
> from the initial ideas.
> Because of this, the first thing that needs clarification is: Is a grid that
> could be compared (1:1) to another still 'a grid ` or is it (only) a special
> sort of Osgood's semantic differential?

Maybe so, but if the input for the 'other' grid came not from different
individuals but came from a similar source then it may have an ability
to be compared. The other grid wouldn't need to be 1:1 because there
would be little point in repeating the same exercise from that source.

There is no statistical theory that I know of for this assumption and it
is only a hunch of mine based on the fact that eigenstatespaces *do
exist* and that when very different statespaces are compared there is
often no likelihood that there will be any commonality or translation
from one to the other. There is however, lots to be said for the fact
that if disparate grids are produced from the same milieu that reflects
a common eigenstatespace then there only needs to be sufficient 'locking
points' within various components to get a form of syncretistic
interpretability, but the subject matter of each grid can be quite
diverse.

In my experiments I've used mainly my own constructs as the 'statespace'
and collected a number of grids on different subjects. Some of the grids
are from other sources but reflect cultural superstates of which I am
but a part and so I have included them.

My procedure requires that I intuitively 'lock' certain similarities
between the grids and plot the components so that these commonalties
roughly line up. This might require reversing the normal dimensionality
of the components in the plot, but such alteration provides me with a
meaningful reflection. I'm working on an algorithm to automate this
search path and this would hopefully be able to look for commonality
between grids of different individuals.

During this development I have modified my Open Source Ingrid software
to allow for a dynamic HTML mapping of layered grid images directly to
the Internet. I did this HTML stuff as a form of feedback and I treat
such layered multi-media grids as artwork. When the images become too
complex I will bifurcate certain grids into different projects. As well,
when completed these internet topics are laid out in an archetypal
fashion and reduced to a linear script of bookmarks. An example of such
an exercise entitled "A Meat-Ethic of Trashumanism" is linked from my
homepage.

Later on, it is my hope to be able to use an immensely large collection
of grids to filter new features so that the new feature will not only
subtly alter appropriate existing grids but will ultimately trigger a
gross course of action which would be determined by a significant
register of entangled grids collapsing to a specific set of components.

Naturally, even without the jargon, all this will be as hard as building
a quantum computer, but unlike you, I'm into my third decade of thought
on this subject.

I hope this helps.

http://come.to/ingrid

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

Brian Kennedy wrote:

> Any demand for a commodity that is not accompanied by means
> of payment is imaginary demand. (all other types of "demand"
> not accompanied by means of payment would be burglary,
> robbery or fraud etc., all of which are unacceptable and
> unlawful). In reality the "means of payment" is the "real
> demand" that constitutes demand and must be something
> tangible, produced by human exertion, or the human exertion
> itself accepted as a service performed.

Ingrid is distributed as a piece of software code that is capable of
linking and drawing inferences from a resultant space of
imaginary(complex) numbers. There certainly seems to be a demand for it
but there is no means of payment required.
Unlike the common commodity that dollars represent, this software
provides an information processing ability that doesn't require parity
relationships beyond an immediate focus.

Using this software one is certainly capable of justifying their
requirements without once referring to a price system. One justification
for this level of complexity is that it is needed to break the enormous
stranglehold that price relationships have over our modern world.

btw, to argue that this software is or isn't capable of totally
replacing the price system one needs to use and understand this
software. It has no price and so far conventional economics hasn't been
able to thwart its Open Source development.

http://come.to/ingrid

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~income/tutor1.htm

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

copyright dates from a commercial contract with the principal component analysis (PCA) pioneer and statistician, the late Dr. Patrick Slater in NZ, 1980.

This 1987 tutorial consists of a guided tour through one of my many examples. The example chosen is of a grid that my daughter Sally did then. It was her first attempt at using INGRID and she chose the subject matter herself. The grid extracts the features of her relationship with her learning environment.

I showed her how to draw the grid on a piece of paper and to write down her school subjects (as elements to be studied) across the top. I then told her how to elicit her concerns, factors etc. about each subject, namely to choose pairs or triads of subjects at random and look for either main differences or similarities.

Click here for Ingrid's Main Menu

For example, I'm tossing around an idea right now that I hope will interest many. I'm considering embarking on a novel use of PCP to construct an Ingrid skin to learn and hopefully predict the activity of a computer screen. I hope to plug Ingrid98.6 (VBDOS)  into a live real media feed from my second PC. Most of the link I have and not much software is needed.

Ingrid needs to receive the screen changes as small as a 32x24 pixel image and then perform a Principal Component Analysis on each. I suspect there will be many linear optimizers but in effect a near perfect match should be able to be found and a list of suggested threads to follow. (If you'll allow me, I'll wander off on a tangent for a moment with some new found jargon: what I'm suggesting is that each grid on a particular subject could be looked on as a qubit (quantum bit) and the act of measuring or collapsing of the quantum bit is done by finding the position within a register of grids for the incoming signal and then activating the nearest neighbours. When this works it should be easy to simulate a hyperdimensional transaction card interacting with a global quantum computer.)

Later on some form of manual linking to low level remote control algorithms will be needed and that should be the macro builder's job. These and other focussed timings, along with random noise generators, etc., should include the users own elements and constructs which go best with the screen generated components thus creating a form of zoom macro. In other words your search engine will always be turned on.

The development equipment needed for anyone to follow this research is a no brainer. Just get two Pentiums and in one put a PAL/NTSC Video Mate and in the other put a video capture card; - preferably a TV/Video Combo card because these come with a Remote Master; - which is cunningly used on the second PC. Remote Masters have simple interfaces which will form the non-linear feedback part of the Ingrid autopilot plug-in. Think of it; - parallel quantum processing for the people instead of money! If you already have this AV stuff then a network costs nothing to install; - but even better if you have a LAN and mice in hand. There is more information available from my personal homepage at:-

On another aside, it was here in the mathematics that back in 1978 it was obvious to me and others that the significance factor of sqrt(1/2) could be used to raster(vt. color) out the features that were being insignificantly applied and send them through the 'black hole' to other grids until getting refracted.

Also at that time in 1978, I intuitively knew how to make a concept computer behave exactly like a 1998 photonic computer. Furthermore, as I've been publishing this idea to the copyleft crowd for some years now, I feel my branch of Ingrid is a rightful prior art to the photonic computer being only now patented in 1998; - twenty years later. It is for these and associated reasons that I invite the League for Programming Freedom at the MIT AI unit to use this evidence in their TEST CASE fight against the software patents in photon chips, recently obtained by  Northwestern University.

http://come.to/ingrid

OPEN SOURCE:-

The Ingrid Custom Marketer,
The Ingrid Racehorse Analyser,
The Ingrid Sharemarket Researcher,
The Ingrid Screenwriter,
The Ingrid Neural Network,
The Ingrid Match Maker,
The Ingrid Surf Reporter,
The Ingrid Barter Processor, etc.)

1--Improved 3 dimensional Graphics to display 3 components on the screen at one time.

2--Zoom and Rotate to explore grids further.

3--Flexible transformations of objective data into graded assessments.

4--Specific interpretation text and methodologies.

> I would like to see a web application developed around the Ingrid
> concept but maybe taken to a screen saver acting as a parallel
> processing node.

1. Work with INGRID98.6 VBDOS code

2. Convert vbdos to vb5.0 doing renaming and REMing out the UI.

3. Going back to the vbdos code and make prepatory changes.

4. Build 1st VBA for Excel UI.

5. add a little polish and documentation, menus, etc.

6. create and test 1st Active Server Page interface.

7. complete packaging.

8. beta test.

9. create VBS/.asp version.

10. create Java version.

"The fate of this work illustrates its argument"

KA wrote:

> Of course.  Anyone who's taken even an introductory statistics course
> knows that numbers can be 'massaged' and manipulated to read however one
> wants to read them...
>
> As Mark Twain is reputed to have said:  "There are lies...then there are
> DAMNED lies...and then there are statistics..."

For a long time I've thought about what would happen if all the billions
of assessments, statistical studies, polls, legislation, treaties and
even contractual exchanges could be integrated via the net so that their
correspondences and assumptions could be tested not only by anyone at
all but also by the resultant integrating analyzer itself. As well, it
appears to me that such an open system would allow for plasticity by
keeping everything open for revision and allowing new forms of personal
meaning to be continuously expressed. Furthermore, if each cluster were
grided in such a way as to facilitate a quantum well it would offset the
plasticizing reactions of other associated clusters and in no time at
all you would have a distributed artificial intelligence capable of
maintaining a balance of conspiratorial power equal to all governments
everywhere.

The Ingrid Thought Processor is being developed as an Open Source
Development Project just for this purpose and let me repeat: "There is
no form of qualitative information that could not be treated as
multivariate coded information and quantified by this process. The use
and interpretability of Ingrid does not require any assumptions of
sampling or distribution: It simply gives a visualization tool that can
help the process of understanding by taking the appropriate category
loadings from the output and connecting the category points to the
object points."

It is in the process of arriving at an understanding that these neuronal
connections can automatically induce inferences. These inferences are
re-expressed throughout the net in a series of superordinate
constructions such that they form a consensual medium albeit one that is
grounded in daily human life.

http://come.to/ingrid

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

> It you want a hundred dollars in cash, what do you do? You go to your
> bank teller and ask for a hundred dollars. The teller will simply look
> up your bank account balance. If there is more than a hundred dollars on
> your account, you will be debited by the amount and given the cash you
> asked for. If your balance is not large enough, you will get an
> apologetic smile or some other cryptic message, perhaps even a receipt,
> but not the money.

Believe it or not in bygone ages it was this linear arithmetic of adding
and subtracting, which was all that could be accomplished back then,
that tendered to the lowest common denominator of human economic
behavior. However, given today's technology it is possible to sum things
in a non-linear way, e.g., this feedback coming via a hyperlinked
eigenvector to subscribers of Ingrid's software development forum.

The hyperlinked information thus provided will merge with society's
previous money columns to represent an intrinsic plastic scale, and thus
they cannot be appropriated. These non-negotiable, non-inflationary,
moneyless records of will will form the basis of future economics.

"Ingrid is already being used in the world's largest connection machine,
made with optical computers and optically connected quantum computers.
It's just that it's in a future where consensus reality converged with
foresighted reality." - KM

http://www.newsbytes.com/pubNews/123239.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

In effect now is another listserve here called
ingridoo that is used for downloads and offers a
software updating service by email. Downloads will
soon be only available via egroups and moderated
subscriptions to the automatic download listserve
is now available at:-

http://www.egroups.com/list/ingridoo

      (cut & paste to browser)

This means there is now a fully restricted downloader list. In effect each
branch of Ingrid
that makes its way from ingridoo will have been
originated by a member of ingridoo.

All downloads currently fully distribute on a
single diskette complete with training manual and
examples.

Would someone grid this policy and/or create a
poll to continue to restrict downloads of Ingrid
to registered email addresses only. This doesn't
mean your email inbox will be flooded with
downloads because you can select web pick up only.

Happy Holidays.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-group home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

The ultra long tutorial that was up on my Ihug
website has been split into six fast loading and
more manageable parts. This will probably lead to
the subject matter of the tutorial becoming
dynamic as to what the user is doing themselves.
In other words my daughter Sally's grid22.txt will
be replaced by the users own data.

To do this one needs to program VBDOS to output
GIF images and to modify an HTML template. PLease
load my world view at the following URL for an
example and BETA test the function keys at the
bottom to see this new tutorial.

http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~income/ekus/religion.htm

TBA: I'm also working on registering downloads from a new egroup called
ingridoo.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-group home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

Hi All,

I had thought that the Poll results offered by egroups.com would have been
sufficient to be used as input when midified into an Ingrid .txt fle.

The two polls so far show differing formats. The second poll "Nth Korea..."
doesn't show the names of the voter like the "Party..." poll did. I was hoping
to use voters as grid elements. The "Nth Korea..." poll allowed for a multiple
choice responce and maybe that's why the results exculded the voter details.

Ah well, back to the drawing board.

Any polling suggestions on how to collect grid data?

------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-group home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

Here are the results of the vote:


Friday, 12th
		 income@...

-----
See the results at http://www.eGroups.com/vote?vid=ingrid

------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-group home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

Here are the results of the vote:

1. 2=No way, the Queen would have told me if it were true. 	 1
2. 4=Are you saying that Ingrid would parse like a North Korean? 		 1
3. 5=I have read the Juche idea and think an AI could act like that. 		 2


-----
See the results at http://www.eGroups.com/vote?vid=ingrid

------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-group home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

By a way of an invitation to a unique group, I submit the following for
possible enumerated feedback:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Albright talks of economic reform and the benefits of foreign
investment, loans and aid and the need to protect a system based on a
money-go-round. I say, this is all underhanded humbug.

When will these CFR people wake up to the fact that their money system
is at heart the world's problem? This fact should be recognizable if
only by CFR's total lack of questioning about the system itself. Such is
their faith in capitalism that they abdicated their reason to a rule of
law which tacitly forbids such questioning. When will they realize that
all their other lofty goals are meaningless without allowing for the
timely death of an ill begotten money system? A simple answer is never.
Yet money's replacement embodied as meaningful recognition in immortal
superintelligences will (yes - everyone who wants will have one) in one
swoop, with ultimate flexibility and finesse, retire this old and
exhausted government species.

To others or groups that maybe developing ideas in a like-minded money
retirement arena, I say. "Get in touch." Who else is just not
put-off-able by the CFR trap? But guess what, even organizations like
the Santa Fe Institute should know exactly what I'm talking about but
haven't got the collective cojones to put their employment status on the
line.

This is all bad news for the folks at the State Department as their
job-scared mentality will keep them in denial. It takes people to land
The Ingrid Thought Processor onto fertile minds, so please, come and
have your say in the Ingrid project to develop an anticipatory
politicized AI.

To such an end, I've set up this open list which, as it happens, suits
my goal of eventually witnessing the end of the national security state,
by fostering hope that a globalized world of anticipatory digital
coinage can happen. This ingrid@egroups.com is developing software
specifically for this purpose. However I don't want to put off anyone by
my overt display of political activism and say only that anyone can
pursue their own open source development of a new Ingrid skin, all the
while, by making use of this group's goal of gaining an automated
understanding of threads.

Already I'm testing the RSVP system via ingrid@egroups.com to act as
input to a future Ingrid Screen Saver project. The first test issue was
whether North Korea is an AI. (Don't want to tread slowly on this screen
saver idea, however in no way do I intend to subvert the facilities at
egroups.com or elsewhere and if necessary a moderated overt awareness
may have to prevail.) But for now, there is going to be at:-

http://www.egroups.com/list/ingrid

an open named group of eigenstates that represent the membership's
info-nudist views, while allowing for consensus and dissent. As an
example, my own philosophical eigenstate is shown at:-

http://listen.to/jimekus

Join only if you want your opinions to be taken seriously by a system
that sums things in a non-linear way and anticipates automagically. As
well, forward this post to a friend.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-group home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

As a budding conspiracy buff, your job
should you choose to accept it is, using a
scale of 1 to 5, comment on what chance you
give of there being an AI at the heart of the
North Korean Government.
----

Please select one or more of the following:

    o 1=Kim Il Sun is God.
    o 2=No way, the Queen would have told me if it were true.
    o 3=I have no opinion, but would like to know more.
    o 4=Are you saying that Ingrid would parse like a North Korean?
    o 5=I have read the Juche idea and think an AI could act like that.


by going to the following Web form:

    http://www.egroups.com/vote?id=914126532449

Thank you!

------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-group home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

file:///C|/Public_html/Ingrid/nthkorea.html

------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-group home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

To start an online Ingrid mediation I propose a survey. After reading a website, I came across the Juche idea from North Korea. Besides being such an abominal idea for a species to hold, I counter by holding that the language used reminds me of an AI primitive such as a Chomskybot.

As a budding conspiracy buff, your job should you choose to accept it is, using a scale of 1 to 5, comment on what chance you give of there being an AI at the heart of the North Korean Government. e.g.,

5=I have read the Juche idea and think an AI could act like that.

4=Are you saying that Ingrid would parse like a North Korean?

3=I have no opinion, but would like to know more.

2=No way, the Queen would have told me if this were true.

1=Kim Il Sun is God.

Anyone have suggestions on how to feedback answers to Ingrid such as using web-counters or mailbots and how to java the data into an executable? If such a feedback loop were made, I would if needed re-calculate the grid in question and then use it to update a Binary Decision Diagram. Your choice of 1 to 5 (or none of the above) would take you to the next question that depended on your previous answer.

All, what is the best time to have our next party?  Thanks!

----

Please select one or more of the following:

    o Friday, 12th
    o Friday, 19th


by going to the following Web form:

    http://www.egroups.com/vote?id=913988142372

Thank you!

------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-group home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~income/examples.htm

------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-group home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

last updated December 18, 1998
copyright dates from a commercial contract with Dr. Patrick Slater in NZ, 1980.

HISTORY: "On Monday 8th June 1987, Look out for INGRID. This is a locally developed package that author J. Maxwell Legg describes as a THOUGHT PROCESSOR. The result of 30 man years of research and development effort, this decision support system is now becoming available on the humble PC. Previously it was developed with mainframes in mind, as it required all of 256K to run! So whether it's using selection criteria for decision making, choosing where to have your holidays, deciding what new career to take, or just plain crystal ball gazing, this will have something for you."

- IBM PC User Group News by Terry Bowden - - New Zealand -

MAKING DECISIONS WITH INGRID

INGRID is a method designed to help you think about a decision problem you are facing now or you anticipate you may be facing in the future. It will help you clarify your problem during your interaction with it, and it will probably point you on your way towards a solution.

INGRID has no knowledge about the world of your problem apart from what you tell it; so, all the knowledge about the problem you want to consider with INGRID will have to be elicited from you.

In 1964, the Medical Research Council awarded Dr. Slater a grant to continue the development of programs and provide a service for qualified psychiatrists and psychologists in the UK. In his later years further development of Grid Technique was carried on by Dr. Slater in the general clinical area of `conflict'.

Read TUTOR.HTM. This covers the actual operation of the program.

OPEN SOURCE:-

1--Improved 3 dimensional Graphics to display 3 components on the screen at one time.

2--Zoom and Rotate to explore grids further.

3--Flexible transformations of objective data into graded assessments.

4--Specific interpretation text and methodologies.

the Ingrid software will need to satisfy the motives of developers who have interests in statistics, constructivism and artificial intelligence.
>
> http://come.to/ingrid
> for lots and lots f interesting challenges to:-
>
> 1. Modernize the code
> 2. develop a parallel version
> 3. politicize the code
> 4. develop wide applications
> 5. provide value added streams

> I would like to see a web application developed around the Ingrid
> concept but maybe taken to a screen saver acting as a parallel
> processing node.

My plan is to:-

1. Work with INGRID98.6 VBDOS code

2. Convert vbdos to vb5.0 doing renaming and REMing out the UI.

3. Going back to the vbdos code and make prepatory changes.

4. Build 1st VBA for Excel UI.

5. add a little polish and documentation, menus, etc.

6. create and test 1st Active Server Page interface.

7. complete packaging.

8. beta test.

9. create VBS/.asp version.

10. create Java version.
 

'INGRID' can be used to solve practically any complex decision making problem.

D E C I S I O N M A K I N G : -skip

In Marketing: For evaluation of a range of marketing strategies in terms of the effects of each.

In Personnel: In deciding between a number of potential people for promotion in terms of their characteristics and qualities.

In Industrial Relations: To Evaluate the possible solutions to an industrial dispute in terms of the effects of each solution.

In Market Research: In assessing a range of products in terms of their characteristics.

In Investment Decisions: Evaluating a number of stocks and shares in terms of the factors affecting their value.

P L A N N I N G :

O V E R V I E W S :

P R O D U C I N G M A P S :

T I M E L I N E S :

C O N S E N S U S / D I F F E R E N C E A N A L Y S I S :

Contact J. Maxwell LEGG

mailto: income@...

http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~income/makemaps.htm

------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-group home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/ingrid
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com

P R O D U C I N G M A P S : -skip

Contact J. Maxwell Legg

mailto: income@...

Ingrid is a rep-grid freeware offer to Kellian constructivists- who make
inferences about meanings by looking at the relationship between constructs.
Ingrid is not a dendritic pruning method but uses Principle Component Analysis.

Group Moderator: ingrid-owner@egroups.com

To subscribe, send a message to ingrid-subscribe@egroups.com or go to this
e-group's home page at http://www.egroups.com/list/ingrid