Panopticon tesseract and the introspective self-disassembly of ubiquitous surveillance: machine intelligence does seem to find itself haunting these paraconsistent problem spaces.
When presented with an enigma, I find it most instructive to find ways to augment – not diminish – the signal of antinomy. That is, let’s say the world is really just a stack of inconsistent facts that only ever partially make sense under some local definition/s but never under a global one.
Dissolve one complexity with another, greater complexity. Like a sugar cube dropped into a river. The advantage being: leverage is a function of symmetry and this is about identifying, describing and orchestrating the underlying axioms.
If you identify an antinomy – I say amplify it. Entropy, time and logic all seem to be nudging us that way already. The weakness and perhaps justifiably exasperating flaws in a system, or in some types of systems, can be applied to themselves.
An application would be: ambiguity as to privacy (data) consent indicates pressure for the definition of consent to change. It doesn’t present as a tractable nor easily navigable problem space, such that strategic interdiction involves a clever person either inventing a narrative contradiction or amplifying an existing one.
Daedelus Kite 