For those interested, here's my talk, "What is it like to be a Machine Elf?" from Breaking Convention 2015 last month...

https://vimeo.com/136079047

Very nice! I really liked your energy during your presentation! I also loved the connection you made about how our sober brains are essentially filtering out any sort of possible alien realities that may exist. But introduce DMT to the brain and all the walls are broken down and we are suddenly experiencing the seemingly impossible. Very methodical and well thought out presentation! I greatly enjoyed it and will likely watch it again to catch anything I may have missed!

Thank you for sharing!

Edit: Just noticed your avatar... Epic!

Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it! Please see my papers for more detail on parts of what I was discussing in the video:

Basic intro:
https://www.dropbox.com/...PsypressAug2014.pdf?dl=0

More advanced:
https://www.dropbox.com/..._Worlds_JSE2013.pdf?dl=0

Very Interesting.
Thanks

Very nice presentation, laughing cat! You have a very clear and engaging way of presenting quite a complex subject. I really enjoyed that, thank you!

Thanks dude!

I enjoyed your presentation and will comb through your writings when the sun dawns! I wish you well in your future endeavors and can't wait to watch your future presentations!

To be honest, much of this does not resonate for me with the context of my own DMT experiences, but that could just be my own interpretation of the data. I don't see machine elves, never have and perhaps never will..I would not know what a machine elf even is. I have met beings, but it happens more with psilocybin and they are fully animated things that engage me in narratives etc..

There is far far more going on for me with tryptamines and I see much of this stuff as surface level, compared to a lot of the stuff not mentioned so often in pop culture when DMT is discussed.

Interesting talk though.

I hear ya and you're not alone! To be honest, the talk wasn't really about machine elves in particular - it was just a pithy title referencing Nagel's "What is it like to be a bat?". But, actually, I was talking about all entities seen during the DMT experience and considering the question of whether or not they might be conscious, as an alternative to the usual question of whether or not they are 'real'.....

yeah..that makes sense to me. I don't find the real/unreal debate all that interesting at this point. I think it actually tends to miss the point at times..

I often think about aspects of the self as being some kind of other, from the perspective of the waking conscious self. They might as well be. I don't feel like I am generating them, so if some part of my nervous system is, than what does that say about me in relation to my whole system and it's processes?

Where is the "I" in all of this, and where does that self begin and where does it end within that system? Can I really call all of it "me"?..If so, why? Why can I say a part of that system is me, but not refer to parts of the the larger system(s), like trees as "me" as well?

...I dunno...
boggles my mind.

i enjoyed that, cheers laughingcat, good work

The presentation was quite interesting and exciting! I enjoyed your level of engagement with what you had to present via the audience. That's something not a lot of people can do. Well done.

Something that I have long reflected on that you have at the center of your talk involves the "consensual" interaction that we have with the entities. I have found the term of "consensual reality" to be a bit of a misnomer because in these instances, consensuality seems relative. When I smoke DMT in the room with someone else, the other person may not be aware of the entities, but it doesn't mean that we (the entities and I) are not aware of each other, and it stands to reason that we are aware of each other.

If I might nitpick at the same point, I am curious what the entities' awareness of our physical surroundings and of others in the environment might be. What I might glean from your talk is that I think that you believe they are unaware of these things, but they are quite "physically" affected by the surroundings regardless of their awareness of it. In other words, the size of the room I am in matters. The room is like a container for the experience, which correlates to closed-eye visions as well. In a small room, everything is upclose, and packed together. In a larger room, everything is spaced out accordingly. The physical clutter in the room provides obstacles for them, which they tend to circumvent rather than faze through. I have never seen them directly engage with other people, but then again, I find that without others bound by their awareness, they don't stand much to gain by trying to interact with them. Perhaps in your model, they might be aware of your physical surroundings for so long as you are aware of theirs.