Den rådande doktrinen inom bolagsvärlden - och överallt

Läser den f.ö. bra boken Corporate valuation av David Frykman och Jakob Tolleryd. På sidan 17 skriver dom:

"... in most countries, there is a thied party in this negotiation that does not bring anything to the table but wants to have a slice of the pie - the tax authorities."

Uttalandet visar på en skrämmande attityd till det kollektiva. Att staten (här genom skatteverket), inte bidrar med något till bolagen är ett så horribelt påstående att man inte vet vart man ska börja. Vad sägs som: en stabilt arbetsmiljö, utbildad personal, infrastruktur, skydd mot brottslingar och yttre fiender, garantier och regleringar av banker, råd och stöd vid internationell handel, skydd mot fientliga utländska bolag, skydd mot cyberbrottslingar, skydd mot ekobrottslingar, ... hur lång ska listan göras?

On attempts to resolve the consciousness problem

One has to remember, that any scientific attempt will be an attempt to model the mine. To find approximations that can replicate the observes behavior of the mind. This is again not how the mind works, and we should remember that one can find a model that extremely accurately replicates the mind, but still be completely wrong. Even on fundamentall logical matters. Take Newtonian mechanics as an example. It is a fantastic model of the mechanical reality. It was not possible to do any experiment that could invalidate it for hundreds of years. Yet still, it is merely a model that is not only wrong, it is even obviously wrong, even to Newton him self.

So, we should not expect science to explain consciousness. It can model it. But it will  ot attempt to capture the essence of being.

Om socialism kontra liberalism

Är det inte konstigt att socialismen och liberalismen har samma ideal; individens frihet, men hamnar i så diametralt olika slutsatser om hur den ska nås?

Socialister brukar berömma sig själva att dom har en mer altruistisk hållning. Att vi ska hålla samman. För mig tycks det tvärt om - socialismen är kollektivets skydd mot fascisterna. Det är inte en positiv syn på allas frihet utan insikten att den helt fria människan är ett hot mot sin omgivning och vi måste tillsammans skydda oss mot dem. Liberalismen är den positiva tron att detta inte sker. För mig är det naivt.

On reality as a simulation

In aa recent popular discussion Donald Hoffman has gotten allot of attention for his argument that reality is an interface to a simulation. I am quite bothered by this whole debacle and the attention Hoffman is getting for his claims. The reason is that this is of course trivially correct and noting new in the sense that we do not experience anything but our experience of reality. This is just a modern framing of Kant's Ding an Sich (something we do way too often - think that modern technology has something deeper to tell us about reality. That is of course also false.).

These ideas are quite compatible with panspychism (which I am a fan of) in which everything has an experience. It is just that primitive objects have primitive experiences. Trees experience a property of reality where energy in the form of light has a directionality and thus the trees grow in certain directions towards that energy.

However, coming back to Hoffman, he is introducing the terms user interface and simulation which are a wrong use of the terms. A user interface is something designed and it is the same with simulation. It is something designed to mimic something else. However, there is nothing in Hoffmans argumentation, that I have seen, that imply that reality should be a simulation in this sense. That is, he has no good argument for the existence of God. And as far as I understand, this is also not what he is trying to argue for. But the terms user interface and simulation should not be used to describe Kant's ideas about the experience of reality.

Some guides to resin-printing technical details

Shell

Shell is a great tool to save resin. Here in Fusion:

 

Print orientation

It is generally recommended, looking at the internet to have models in some slanted angle when printing. This is good to get fairly flat surfaces. However, if you want a really flat surface, it can sometimes be advantageous to print with that flat along the vat. This is however quite tricky. You cannot expect the surface on the print plate to have correct anything since the first few layers have to much overexposed to get good adhesion to the print plate. My software does not even allow me to use the regular exposure on the first 2 layers. Thus, you have to be able to live with those layers being wrong. One way to reduce the issue is to have a chamfer on edges that touches the print plate:

 

The last surface on the print can then be very flat which can be useful in some cases. It should however be note that that surface must have a resonable thickness and/or good support to not warp/wobble. You also need to rinse it carefully after exposure to get a proper flat surface. You should not place these surfaces on a support, then you will get very poor results. E.g.:

 

Holes

It is hard to get good holes with correct dimensions and without left-over resin. I have not found a good method. I think ultra sonication could be a solution, but I have not tested it.

Storing printed parts

If you make pars that should fir together, such as:

 

do not store the parts together. The resin after-cures some and then the parts will stick, potentially rendering them useless and/or damaging them.

Sharp corners

Sharp corners on the build plate will experience extra rip-force during the lift phase and should if possible be avoided. In the image below, the let is a better design than the right.

Exposure settings

The part on the image below was build according to the green arrow. The part has the typical look of an underexposed part that was possibly also printed at too low temperature.