Neutrino internet part 2

( There is no part 1)( Really!)
I have been watching Feynman lectures and he is a real quirky and interesting person. One of the few scientists that accepts some humility that is deserved of all life. I personally realize that even if I were the stupidest person in the world , that would hardly be a basis to associate myself with some infinite temporal and spatial maximum. I suppose that is a technical way of saying that there are many things in heaven and Earth .....
I have also been watching lectures on Poisson, Bernoulli, Euler, Gauss, Calculus, Markov, astrophysics, and several other subjects at once. I get bored if I just do one at a time.
What I realized is that given [ my understanding of neutrinos ]=(B), that the probability of making [ a simple commercial transmitter - receiver ]=(A) is very high now. So, p(A|B) or the probability of A, given B.
What confuses me is the process that ensues once the device becomes a commercial reality. Clearly billions of dollars are spent to communicate information in a vast number of ways. It all depends on e-( electron) interactions with matter and that is fine, but I find the process is very wasteful and as it is structured, easy to manipulate and create an artificial scarcity that allows it to be used as a tool of corporation or state. Like slapping a data cap on the spoken word or books. You are allowed to say or write seven words per day ( or more likely you are only allowed to listen / read and obey ) and after that you are charged 10$ per word and if you refuse or use words we don't like then you can be neutralized in the fashion of whoever is the self elected regulator.
I had a thought and wished to explore it in print so I might consider it in context of the world as a whole.
So, I create a device that allows vast amounts of information to be transmitted cheaply from point A to point B without an agent and highly unlikely to be intercepted or spoofed, if it is done sensibly. Clearly this is not in the interest of those who tax, gain profit from,  and regulate the electron flow. I could imagine that some government might say, "We will give you the right to not be shot in the head in return for your invention.( or they might offer a 1% to me and 99% to them as my protector [sic])"  Since it might be considered a tactical military advantage. I could also say "I will give you the right to not be shot in the head in return for your keeping your hands out of my pockets." At which point I would be an enemy of the sovereign and a terrorist for threatening the government.  This is an interesting thing as the person who wishes to not be robbed of his property would be considered a criminal by those who would rob him. That certainly must be disingenuous on their part. To imply that the morally superior position is destruction of the capable to benefit the brutal is a sustainable mechanism is illogical. If you dispose of the cows that are even tempered and breed the aggressive, it would seem a simple case of animal husbandry and directed evolution to a very common , unenlightened, and violent end. It is self sustaining and grows as a power series. I assume that CA-MRSA is not an intelligent agent ( weak joke ) and it functions in this same way. It does not make any moral distinction on its expansion and cannot. To some degree this is comparable. Black Plague, MRSA, Ebola, Malaria, Hepatitis, AIDS, H5N1, and others may win and similar agents have in the past. You cannot count on the disease to cure itself. It seems that if you look from a historical perspective, you see that empires like disease will run their course, with or without treatment. It is perhaps the unavoidable biological tax in a closed system. I would think that living outside the petri dish would be more conducive to diversification and coherent complexity.


I suppose that the issue might be defused if the methods were common knowledge. 

It is not something that I intend to do, I just wanted to exaggerate and consider what happens when it becomes a reality ( lim as x-> ∞). At least at the moment there are bigger fish to fry. There are some other relationships that are implied by the factorial extrapolation of scientific analysis that have much greater value than a neutrino walkie talkie. I am sure it will eventually be discovered by others and then they can deal with the fact that it would only be profitable and advantage for a very short period of time. You would hardly sell more than a 100 of them before the design was being shared by neutrino net and it would certainly be an advantage for the individual. IDK, cooperation must be reciprocated and that requires an environment where scarcity or contrived scarcity does not exist. It won't resolve until humanity is free in space and time and that is what seems to be the best invention to focus on. When people are hurt, oppressed ,ill or starving  --- the idealistic principles that are the best approach to scientific advancement go right in the crapper.

I have developed some directed Markov systems and it is actually a little scary how well they predict things that you would think were purely stochastic. Putative, just wanted to use that word. Continued fraction expansion of numbers is very interesting. I think that Gresham College has some good vids on that.

Here is a link to YouTube EDUCATION. EDU - YouTube  . AFAIK, this is a new category and *Google* does some very "un evil" stuff quite often.

Data limited by the physical universe, no charge at all ( except equipment cost ) , sounds like Ham radio.