virus: Question, meme mutations and their "crossover" + "sex"

Chitren Nursinghdass (
Fri, 06 Jun 1997 13:29:19 +0000

Pharmakon sez :

>And don't forget virii's ability to MUTATE with each new infection. That,
>to me, is the beauty of it all. Or at least the beauty this beholder's
>(mind's) eye, anyway.

>just a thought!

I think there's are many modes of transmission :

Let's take an original meme : "I WILL LOVE"

I. Syntaxically correct whereas semantically ambiguous
(hidden meme in the meme, a virus of the meme, a cyphered meme)

can be interpreted thus :

1. A sentence where the action (TO LOVE) in conjugated in the future.
2. WILL as a verb itself (present tense of TO WILL) acting on the noun LOVE.

Think about this : is the result the same ?

I think it's the same if the person uttering the sentence speaks the truth
and will act
accordingly (strange phenomenon, no ?).

II. Syntactically induced variation, copy is syntactically incorrect :

"I WILL LOVE" becomes "I WILL NOT LOVE". Happens by a transmission error,
(with intent from medium) or not.

Now one meme becomes its opposite by mutation. Bear in mind also that in a
memeset where
all is inverted, the original semantics are recovered !

This brings me to a certain type of robustness to errors like say :

copy is : "I WILL LIVE" instead of "I WILL LOVE".

Now, in memesets where LIVE and LOVE are the same (through empiric
observations ?),
the orignal syntax AND semantics are preserved.

Reminds me of binary transmission fault tolerance transmission and reception

And reminds me of this as well :

Now, if each fundamental meme has a pair, or opposite or a construct like
the one here:

fmeme1 (NOT fmeme1),
fmeme2 (NOT fmeme2),

Then if all "fmemes" can be linked together in a certain type of coherent
serial logic,
the "NOT fmemes" will form a certain negative print for the fmemes series.

Now in a certain "open mind" memeset, these two chains cohabit, if they separate
and one side is transmitted to another meme set, then by a type of semantic
reversal, the
original side is recovered.

Sounds familiar ?

Let's code fmeme1 by A, (NOT fmeme1) by T, fmeme2 by C, (NOT fmeme2) by G.

You can imagine mechanisms by which a two series of fmemes crossover as well,
inducing variation.

<AHA ! There you are again, ssssseeee, I can sssssseee ssssseeeeeexxxxx

Shut up, snake.

But how do you call the thrill when finding somebody with the same ideas or
even drastically different ones ? I'm sure there are chemicals produced in
greater quantities in the brain during these moments.

MemeseX ?

Incidentally, there is no sexual difference or is there ?

I think :

For men with open minds, there is hetero_memesex and homo_memesex because
they give
equal credibility to the ideas of man and women.

Most men as studies show give little or no credibility to the ideas of women.
The achievements of a female are ascribed to luck, but not to her abilities,
whereas the achievements of a male are ascribed to his abilities.

A failure for a man is perceived as harsh luck from males and a failure for
a female is perceived as a lack of capability.

How terribly unjust don't you think. Incidentally I'm male. But isn't it
unjust ?

Therefore I declare the following : in the pre-sented terminology, all
mysogynous men are homo_memesexual : they exchange their memes with men, because
they don't give credibility to women.

Men with "open-minds" are bi_memesexual.

Same applies to women as well.

Henceforth, one who judges on sexual morality at the gene or phenotypic
level will
be judged the same way at the memetic level.

How terribly just, don't you think ?

Richard, will you write Book II (The Return of the Mind Virii) with me ? ;>