Great! No app plans at the moment for GCP2, but that may be in the future.
Let me know if anything develops on that front!
I signed up to be a RNG host but haven’t heard anything back. Usually how long does the application process take, do you know?
Hey, great that you applied, really appreciate that! We are still waiting on our first big shipment of RNG’s, so it may take a few weeks for people to hear back.
I just got my acceptance email and purchased one of the RNGs. Will any of this project be open sourced?
That’s awesome that you got it working, and I love the videos. It puts a personal touch to have a user make the video. We may even want to link to them on our website at some point, if you are open to that.
Regarding open-source, we definitely plan on making the data available, and I am inspired by your request to discuss with the developers about an open-source codebase. We are generally a collaborative non-profit.
Pretty cool! I got mine also but haven’t powered it up since I need to wait until I travel to my other home. Excited for it.
@nplonka I’m more than fine with you linking to the videos.
Looking forward to whatever collaboration we can all do going forward.
How many RNGs are on the network at the moment?
Over 160 RNG’s currently online… and growing! Expecting this number to double within the next month or two. (Note: One device has 4 RNG’s)
I sent a mail through the Contact Us form on the gcp2.net website but no one has replied.
I was wondering if there’s any plans on releasing info on how we can access the network’s raw data in realtime? Is anything open-sourced at the moment?
I created a couple of social media channels for anybody to talk:
Reddit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/GCP2/
Telegram Group:
https://t.me/+QgGYRZeUm65kZjI1
@WanderingIshiki Thanks for your interest, and sorry for the slow response. I just got your email as well. Thanks for starting up those channels.
Currently we are pretty focused on getting the network up and running and on testing, but any preliminary analyses are welcome. There is already plenty of data.
Yes, we are planning on making the data publicly available, it will take some time but we are hoping in the next few months. Meanwhile, I sometimes transfer over a chunk of data to researchers. So far that is just internal, but I can check if I can include you.
I have raised the idea of open source code with the development team and they are open to it, and it is still under discussion.
Great! Thank you.
Looking forward to seeing the project’s evolution.
I’ve thought about this subject quite a bit the last few years. Unfortunately I don’t think effect size is enough on its own, as people can do all kinds of spectacular things but the average person seems to be put off by the least amount of effort.
If someone could guess a coin flip 3 or even 4 times in a row, that would be a neat trick. But 7, 8, 9, 10 times in a row? That would be a magic trick deserving of media attention one would think.
I say this and then I think about Scott’s paper where he pulls numbers out of thin air to win a 3 ball lotto ticket. Despite being super excited about this and telling tons of people, I think the idea of intelligence gathering via ACE is just too foreign for most people to be able to identify with.
My answer, as usual, is to gamify the training and practice of ACE/MMI. This is sort of a challenge on the scale of “make math fun” (which I am sure lots of people here believe math is fun, but no amount of math could convince most people of that.)
With games we have competition, sharpening of skill, rewards, and the ability to look back on previous progress to keep us motivated to keep practicing.
Games also have the wonderful effect of suspension of disbelief, something I believe is most important when training ACE/MMI. I have often been practicing some psi game or another, when my results veered into improbable for a significant amount of time, only for me to get excited and ruin my flow to have it all come crashing down (as it does.) I believe that competition and some kind of “story” can help focus the mind in the sort of internal space required to “flex” these kind of muscles.
So while it would be nice to be able to flip a switch with MMI, or win a horse race, my gut instinct is that training anomalous cognition is more akin to training martial arts, laying tissue paper over tissue paper year after year.
So my answer is basically, more tools to enhance the skills required, more community, more competition, more rewards, and more feedback in general.
I agree; much higher effect size alone will not interest most people, except the (very) few who really want to apply it in an application to achieve an advantage in their business/personal efforts.
I spent years thinking, ‘if only I could get the effect size to xx%, people will finally notice.’ This was clearly not the case. I had a group of students at the University of Florida analyze and test some applications, including the number picking program. It turned out they were uninterested unless they could win millions of dollars with virtually no effort. Winning $500 in a pick 3 lotto game was just not enough “to get out of bed for.”
People only play games they enjoy playing because the games are well-designed, engaging and require certain skills that clearly increase with practice. People want to have a feeling of accomplishment as part of their game playing enjoyment.
Even so, I am working really hard to reach my next milestone of increasing effect size by a factor of 10, which would bring it up to 10-50% (depending on individual skill level). At least it will be easier to make applications or games that have a very noticeable response to mental intention.
Agreed, like martial arts is a years long journey, so is training in MMI. I do however see the “feedback loop” of games being an interesting approach to help people train their skills. Just like gamers spend time and effort to level up in whatever game they’re playing.