Treewatching

Huntsmen call us goblins still.

If you can get yourself into a liminal state, I recommend trying this simple exercise. Along the spectrum of experience, it might fall somewhere between active imagination and day-dreaming — a bit like cloud-watching… or more hard-nosed people might call it pareidolia/apophenia. I think it’s probably better not to overly judge or conceptualize it ahead of time. Just see if you’re able to enter into the experience, and hold it for a moment. My thesis is that by repeatedly doing this, you might be able to tune into “natural transmissions” which were occluded/overlooked previously, or which your consciousness wasn’t able to demodulate before because it lacked the inner listening linkage.

Anyway, sit and stare at some trees “as a mass”. You could probably do this closer up with branches, but I’m testing at a distance. So sit there in a liminal state and “stare at the trees,” eyes slightly unfocused. It may be that as the wind moves, you will begin to see “shapes in the trees.”

Perceived shapes may include: faces, figures, etc.

A site with a lot of pop-ups has a quote by random doctor or other expert about the phenomenon of pareidolia:

β€˜But our findings suggest it’s common for people to see non-existent features because human brains are uniquely wired to recognise faces, so that even when there’s only a slight suggestion of facial features the brain automatically interprets it as a face.

Which, “if you think about it”, is exactly what Google Deep Dream does:

It searches out, and actively fills in figures, faces, bodies, etc as it tries to make sense of images.

So, whether this should be considered a “feature or a bug” of HumanOS, it definitely appears to be a thing.

The funky part, for me personally, was that yesterday I did this and saw for a moment the image of what I only knew from random visual references: the image of a ‘thai angel.’

Along the lines of this:

Which I knew nothing about, then looked up later online to find out is a kind of multi-cultural mythological creature across South Asia, the kinnara.

“In Jataka No.504, we have the autobiography of a Kinnara who describes the Kinnara class as ‘human-like the wild things deem us; huntsmen call us goblins still.’ The Kinnaras can sing, play the flue and dance with soft movements of the body.”

So they’re described here as something between human, animal and monster — depending on the position of the observer. In my case, the “soft movements of the body” seem to be the dancing of tree limbs as the wind passes through them…

Whether or not kinnara exist objectively, or the human mind ‘deep dreams’ them into existence via evolutionary invocation is kind of a moot point for me. It’s part of the Spectrum regardless, and a phenomenological manifestation of the same underlying Unified Field.

In one of the Castaneda books, there exists a curious encounter with what the perceiver takes to be a dying animal, but which on further reflection is just a dead branch. Don Juan, a probably made up shaman invented by the author, says:

So part of me wonders, if one can dwell with these images as they pass before your eyes in a waking liminal state, what other mysteries might you be able to see into?

Alternative Phonetics – Modernizing The Amateur Radio Alphabet

Here is the traditional NATO Phonetic Alphabet.

It is often used when giving your call on the amateur bands to clarify letters that may sound alike (“b” and “d” for instance).

 

 

We here at the Anthourian Technoloyg Club areΒ working on a more modern version of the alphabet that might appeal more to ‘millennials’ and other folks interested in the Ancient Spectrum Arts.

I know, for myself, I’d much much rather throw out: Wizard Internet 5 Hypogeum E-Meet Reiki on the local nets.

Here is our proposed list. If you would like to contribute to the public discussion and offer your own suggestions, you can comment on the pull request here

A – Anthuor 🦌
B – Broccoli 🌳
C – Coven 🍯
D – Dongle πŸ“Ÿ
E – E-meet πŸ“©
F – Frodo πŸŒ‹
G – Gazebo πŸŽͺ
H – Hypogeum β›³
I – Internet πŸ’»
J – Juicero πŸ‰
K – Kimchi πŸ”₯
L – Lunar πŸŒ“
M – Mystery βš—
N – New Wave 😎
O – Oculus πŸ•Ά
P – Portal πŸ•³
Q – Quasi 〰️
R – Reiki πŸ™Œ
S – Sauerkraut πŸ₯—
T – Tarot πŸƒ
U – UFO πŸ‘½
V – Vinegar 🍷
W – Wizard 🎩
X – X-Files πŸ‘©β€πŸ’Ό
Y – Yeti β˜ƒοΈ
Z – Zune πŸ“±

Operating radio controlled models in Canada questions (ham radio)

Wondering about these radio controlled model questions on the Canadian amateur radio basic qualifications test (screenshot from hamstudy.org):

From what I understand, licensed operators can operate radio controlled models above 30 MHz, and I think you don’t need to transmit your call sign even.

Not super sure how this works, but I found this interesting forum conversation about RC aircraft flying vs. drones.

There are different criteria, as I understand it, for operating drones in Canada than for what a licensed ham can do above 30 MHz. That said, I’m not at all clear on the distinctions myself. A user of that forum writes:

“I do not fly Drones, doing so would imply that I am breaking Transport Canada’s rules of operating a remotely piloted model aircraft. I fly radio controlled airplanes, I follow TC’s rules and regulations and those of MAAC’s”

Drones are kind of interesting, I guess, though I’m a little over it — mainly because it’s like another goddamned thing to have to buy. But I’m wondering what the legal definition of “remote control models” is in Canadian regulations…

More specifically, what about radio-controlled virtual models?

eg, models that only exist in a computer which is linked to a radio receiver, and do not physically fly around in space.

It seems like these have less risk of real-world damage, for one. Like Transport Canada rules such as the below would have no bearing:

“Transport Canada’s announcement of interim regulations for drone use will impact model aviation enthusiasts across the country that are flying any model aircraft between 250g and 35kg. The regulations place restrictions on how high model aircraft can be flown, and minimum distances from people and buildings when flying that will severely limit how and where people can enjoy the hobby. The announcement states that not only must recreational users put their contact information on drones, but also that they may not fly higher than 90 metres, within 150 metres of buildings, vehicles or people, or within 9 kilometres of the centre of any aerodrome.”

Further, if RF control of virtual models is allowed, perhaps there is room also for abstracting what those models are exactly. eg, models which are not representations of aircraft, but which are behavioral models or assignable/mapped function sets. eg, triggering macros on my networked computer over RF.

Maybe I’m making this too hard though, and there is already an appropriate band allocated for transmitting short distance control data (over a home or farm-based network)… I’m not sure how to begin looking this up…

Obsolete Technician’s Guild

Have had this idea for years, a semi-post-apocalyptic (quarter-lyptic?) secret guild of roving repairers, of non-descript people going about inscrutably, making strange, out of date, useless or impossible things come back to life, to work again, or begin anew. An obsolete technician’s guild…

Do you have a drawer full of remote controls and strange wires you don’t know what to do with? Contact your local OTG chapter. It may be you.