READ JUST ONE PAPER BY POPPER, HAYEK, MISES, AND TURING BEFORE CHOMSKY – OR YOU WILL MISS THE POINT. Understand that Chomsky applied Turing to Grammar (language). That’s his insight. Just as Popper really needed to produce one paper (sources of knowledge and ignorance), Hayek One Paper (uses of knowledge in society), Mises (economic calculation), Turing (turing machine recursive computation), Chomsky produced one paper (Grammar). Most of this occurred in the pre-postmodernist period prior to 1960. We have been fighting pseudoscience since then, for the simple reason that universities could sell shit courses to proles and in doing so finance postmodern propaganda through tuition-debt, and the burning of intergenerational savings (Retirement Savings) as tuition fees. This is the most suicidal economic set of polities in western history other than perhaps the selling of indulgences. Once we further understand that universities do not teach but simply filter in, and out, we realize how catastrophic this entire state-propaganda driven experiment has been. Instead we should put the vast majority of people to work in part time apprenticeship (entry level work) by age 12-14, and limit university training to those forms of calculation (STEM) that cannot be learned until the brains are more fully matured. EVERYTHING IS REDUCIBLE TO CALCULATION AT DEGREES OF PRECISION AND DEGREES OF AGENCY.
Category: Epistemology and Method
-
Everything Is Reducible to Calculation at Degrees of Precision and Degrees of Agency.
READ JUST ONE PAPER BY POPPER, HAYEK, MISES, AND TURING BEFORE CHOMSKY – OR YOU WILL MISS THE POINT. Understand that Chomsky applied Turing to Grammar (language). That’s his insight. Just as Popper really needed to produce one paper (sources of knowledge and ignorance), Hayek One Paper (uses of knowledge in society), Mises (economic calculation), Turing (turing machine recursive computation), Chomsky produced one paper (Grammar). Most of this occurred in the pre-postmodernist period prior to 1960. We have been fighting pseudoscience since then, for the simple reason that universities could sell shit courses to proles and in doing so finance postmodern propaganda through tuition-debt, and the burning of intergenerational savings (Retirement Savings) as tuition fees. This is the most suicidal economic set of polities in western history other than perhaps the selling of indulgences. Once we further understand that universities do not teach but simply filter in, and out, we realize how catastrophic this entire state-propaganda driven experiment has been. Instead we should put the vast majority of people to work in part time apprenticeship (entry level work) by age 12-14, and limit university training to those forms of calculation (STEM) that cannot be learned until the brains are more fully matured. EVERYTHING IS REDUCIBLE TO CALCULATION AT DEGREES OF PRECISION AND DEGREES OF AGENCY.
-
You know, given a string of phonemes, in some order of continuous disambiguation
You know, given a string of phonemes, in some order of continuous disambiguation, the reconstruction of meaning is even more dependent upon the reader than the author. (I generally make profound sense. It just requires rather broad knowledge, and fewer errors).
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-31 19:06:23 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1002265048021159937
Reply addressees: @dmataconis
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1002264103140896768
IN REPLY TO:
@dmataconis
@curtdoolittle Your comment makes no sense whatsoever
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1002264103140896768
-
READ JUST ONE PAPER BY POPPER, HAYEK, MISES, AND TURING BEFORE CHOMSKY – OR YOU
READ JUST ONE PAPER BY POPPER, HAYEK, MISES, AND TURING BEFORE CHOMSKY – OR YOU WILL MISS THE POINT.
Understand that Chomsky applied Turing to Grammar (language). That’s his insight. Just as Popper really needed to produce one paper (sources of knowledge and ignorance), Hayek One Paper (uses of knowledge in society), Mises (economic calculation), Turing (turing machine recursive computation), Chomsky produced one paper (Grammar). Most of this occurred in the pre-postmodernist period prior to 1960. We have been fighting pseudoscience since then, for the simple reason that universities could sell shit courses to proles and in doing so finance postmodern propaganda through tuition-debt, and the burning of intergenerational savings (Retirement Savings) as tuition fees. This is the most suicidal economic set of polities in western history other than perhaps the selling of indulgences. Once we further understand that universities do not teach but simply filter in, and out, we realize how catastrophic this entire state-propaganda driven experiment has been. Instead we should put the vast majority of people to work in part time apprenticeship (entry level work) by age 12-14, and limit university training to those forms of calculation (STEM) that cannot be learned until the brains are more fully matured.
EVERYTHING IS REDUCIBLE TO CALCULATION AT DEGREES OF PRECISION AND DEGREES OF AGENCY.
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-31 11:18:00 UTC
-
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_43196237263/33902929_10156390998717264_80183126
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_43196237263/33902929_10156390998717264_8018312627161661440_o_10156390998712264.jpg ( Working on Constant Relations, Logic and Grammars at my new ‘ideal writing spot’. Restaurant with huge covered porch, electricity, wireless, and friendly service. )Andrei VamenscuThis man has the will to change society, do you?May 30, 2018 3:27pmAndrei VamenscuI enjoyed the personality interactions with you on The Daily Shoah and The Public Space. Please continue doing more of that in the future.May 30, 2018 3:30pmTruxton OlmsteadWas the recent Shoah episode behind their paywall?May 30, 2018 4:02pmAndrei VamenscuYeah it was a Friday episode.May 30, 2018 4:04pmVengefül BobmoranCurt definitely shines when there’s smart people around to bounce ideas and ask for clarifications.May 30, 2018 4:23pmGary KnightLooks like you’re working on a fried chicken recipe 😬May 31, 2018 8:12amMary RomanoYes. Divert some of your beer money towards something useful.Jun 01, 2018 7:57am( Working on Constant Relations, Logic and Grammars at my new ‘ideal writing spot’. Restaurant with huge covered porch, electricity, wireless, and friendly service. )
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-30 14:44:00 UTC
-
Damn. Two days on “Constant Relations” and Word Crashes, taking corrupting the b
Damn. Two days on “Constant Relations” and Word Crashes, taking corrupting the backup before hand. Sigh.
Relations, Constant Relations, Competition between Relations. Ergo nothing exists without something to compare it with
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-30 14:42:00 UTC
-
ONCE YOU SEE IT YOU CAN’T UNSEE IT 1 ) Via Positiva vs Via Negativa 2 ) Additive
ONCE YOU SEE IT YOU CAN’T UNSEE IT
1 ) Via Positiva vs Via Negativa
2 ) Additive vs Subtractive
3 ) Reason vs Science
4 ) Logic vs Correspondence
5 ) Rationalism vs Empiricism
6 ) Justification vs Falsification
7 ) (((Pilpul vs Critique)))
8 ) (((Marxism))) vs Postmodernism
9 ) (((Abrahamism))) vs Natural Law
10) Conflation vs Deconflation
11) Ambiguation vs Disambiguation
It’s:
Pilpul Via-Positiva Justification (deception)
-vs-
Critique via Negativa Falsification (deception).
The invention of lying through loading, framing, overloading,
and suggestion under cover of appeals to reasonableness,
rather than Truth.
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-30 14:38:00 UTC
-
NOTES: Constant vs contingent vs inconsistent vs non-relations. Recursive Contin
NOTES:
- Constant vs contingent vs inconsistent vs non-relations.
- Recursive Continuous Disambiguation vs Scale of Set of Constant Relations(density)
- Cumulation of association vs falsification of associations
- Computational efficiency.
- State Persistence vs breadth search, vs depth search
- We cannot know the intelligence of distant ancestors.
- Planning a series of steps in sequence must emerge – which requires recursion.
- Consciousness must emerge, meaning, the ability to compare states.
- Cooperation must emerge, meaning, the ability to empathize with intent.
- At some point we must develop sufficient computational ability to manipulate our bodies in some way that allows for unambiguous communication, or a means of continuous disambiguation, that is fast enough for one another to make use of in real time, and easy enough for one another to retain.
- And at some point, given sufficient computational ability, memory, and state persistence independent of recursion, language must emerge.
- At some point the value of such communication much be such that the cost of it is offset by the rewards of it.
- And we should see a cliff in history where there is a dramatic change when we did develop those abilities. And we do see it – rather recently.
But language requires a system of measurement. The system of measurement is limited by our senses. And as such meaning refers to a set of measurements, eventually reducible to analogies to human experience. So while semantic content (measurements) must vary from species to species, grammar (continuous recursive disambiguation) should be universal in the sense that it varies predictably with computational abilities. We can understand a child, a person with 60IQ, 70IQ and so on, up to 200+ IQ. But as far as I can tell the set of measurements (basis of semantics) remain the same, and all that changes is the scope of the state persisted, the depth of recursion, and the density and distance of relations, and the ability to model (forecast). In other words, simple people are in fact simply ‘more simple’ in the density of content of their semantics, use of grammar, and models (Stories) that they can construct with them. So universal grammar as a set of computational minimums and efficiencies, should always exist, and human universal grammar as universal grammar limited to human measurements (semantics), does exist. And any organism with sufficient computational (neural) capacity, should develop some means of communication using some variation of universal grammar, and some sense-perception – action dependent semantics. May 29, 2018 4:28pm
-
NOTES: Constant vs contingent vs inconsistent vs non-relations. Recursive Contin
NOTES:
- Constant vs contingent vs inconsistent vs non-relations.
- Recursive Continuous Disambiguation vs Scale of Set of Constant Relations(density)
- Cumulation of association vs falsification of associations
- Computational efficiency.
- State Persistence vs breadth search, vs depth search
- We cannot know the intelligence of distant ancestors.
- Planning a series of steps in sequence must emerge – which requires recursion.
- Consciousness must emerge, meaning, the ability to compare states.
- Cooperation must emerge, meaning, the ability to empathize with intent.
- At some point we must develop sufficient computational ability to manipulate our bodies in some way that allows for unambiguous communication, or a means of continuous disambiguation, that is fast enough for one another to make use of in real time, and easy enough for one another to retain.
- And at some point, given sufficient computational ability, memory, and state persistence independent of recursion, language must emerge.
- At some point the value of such communication much be such that the cost of it is offset by the rewards of it.
- And we should see a cliff in history where there is a dramatic change when we did develop those abilities. And we do see it – rather recently.
But language requires a system of measurement. The system of measurement is limited by our senses. And as such meaning refers to a set of measurements, eventually reducible to analogies to human experience. So while semantic content (measurements) must vary from species to species, grammar (continuous recursive disambiguation) should be universal in the sense that it varies predictably with computational abilities. We can understand a child, a person with 60IQ, 70IQ and so on, up to 200+ IQ. But as far as I can tell the set of measurements (basis of semantics) remain the same, and all that changes is the scope of the state persisted, the depth of recursion, and the density and distance of relations, and the ability to model (forecast). In other words, simple people are in fact simply ‘more simple’ in the density of content of their semantics, use of grammar, and models (Stories) that they can construct with them. So universal grammar as a set of computational minimums and efficiencies, should always exist, and human universal grammar as universal grammar limited to human measurements (semantics), does exist. And any organism with sufficient computational (neural) capacity, should develop some means of communication using some variation of universal grammar, and some sense-perception – action dependent semantics. May 29, 2018 4:28pm
-
NOTES: Constant vs contingent vs inconsistent vs non-relations. Recursive Contin
NOTES:
Constant vs contingent vs inconsistent vs non-relations.
Recursive Continuous Disambiguation vs Scale of Set of Constant Relations(density)
Cumulation of association vs falsification of associations
Computational efficiency.
State Persistence vs breadth search, vs depth search
We cannot know the intelligence of distant ancestors.
Planning a series of steps in sequence must emerge – which requires recursion.
Consciousness must emerge, meaning, the ability to compare states.
Cooperation must emerge, meaning, the ability to empathize with intent.
At some point we must develop sufficient computational ability to manipulate our bodies in some way that allows for unambiguous communication, or a means of continuous disambiguation, that is fast enough for one another to make use of in real time, and easy enough for one another to retain.
And at some point, given sufficient computational ability, memory, and state persistence independent of recursion, language must emerge.
At some point the value of such communication much be such that the cost of it is offset by the rewards of it.
And we should see a cliff in history where there is a dramatic change when we did develop those abilities. And we do see it – rather recently.
But language requires a system of measurement. The system of measurement is limited by our senses. And as such meaning refers to a set of measurements, eventually reducible to analogies to human experience.
So while semantic content (measurements) must vary from species to species, grammar (continuous recursive disambiguation) should be universal in the sense that it varies predictably with computational abilities.
We can understand a child, a person with 60IQ, 70IQ and so on, up to 200+ IQ. But as far as I can tell the set of measurements (basis of semantics) remain the same, and all that changes is the scope of the state persisted, the depth of recursion, and the density and distance of relations, and the ability to model (forecast). In other words, simple people are in fact simply ‘more simple’ in the density of content of their semantics, use of grammar, and models (Stories) that they can construct with them.
So universal grammar as a set of computational minimums and efficiencies, should always exist, and human universal grammar as universal grammar limited to human measurements (semantics), does exist. And any organism with sufficient computational (neural) capacity, should develop some means of communication using some variation of universal grammar, and some sense-perception – action dependent semantics.
Source date (UTC): 2018-05-29 16:28:00 UTC