—“We can follow Pinker in the characterization of Intelligence itself as a heuristic of sorts devised by evolutionary processes. The cost of specialization in terms of individuation is simply too costly, so a general set of cognitive dispositions that can adapt is of greater benefit to the species in question.”—Skye Stewart
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-18 19:34:00 UTC
There is no steady state. the rules are not stateful, but adaptive. There is no ‘done’. genes and culture and norms and institutions all store past information that we can express when needed. It’s not that we are machines that adapt to a fixed set. but that we store a broad range of possibilities that we can express through genetic, cultural, normative, personal, political and institutional SELECTION. We are still thinking in terms of mechanical models rather than informational models. man and the universe are correctly represented as information.
There is no steady state. the rules are not stateful, but adaptive. There is no ‘done’. genes and culture and norms and institutions all store past information that we can express when needed. It’s not that we are machines that adapt to a fixed set. but that we store a broad range of possibilities that we can express through genetic, cultural, normative, personal, political and institutional SELECTION. We are still thinking in terms of mechanical models rather than informational models. man and the universe are correctly represented as information.
THE MODEL IS INFORMATION
There is no steady state. the rules are not stateful, but adaptive. There is no ‘done’. genes and culture and norms and institutions all store past information that we can express when needed. It’s not that we are machines that adapt to a fixed set. but that we store a broad range of possibilities that we can express through genetic, cultural, normative, personal, political and institutional SELECTION.
We are still thinking in terms of mechanical models rather than informational models. man and the universe are correctly represented as information.
This is what Hayek was trying to tell us but he was too early, and the crisis too early. It took Turing and two or three generations of programmers to understand what he and popper had intuited: information is not only the model for the physical sciences, but we are part of the physical sciences, and information is the current model we must work from.
Source date (UTC): 2016-11-16 08:11:00 UTC
doolittle and taleb.
there is this wonderful movie. its the precursor to war games.
from the early seventies. called colossus – the forbin project.
in the movie the soviet and american supercomputers are aware of each other but have to learn to communicate.
this process goes on a long time, and then they can, and they take over the world.
the problem for taleb and i (mostly me because i understand the problem) is developing that language so that we could get on the same page.
i think if we could have a serious conversation it might be good for both of us. but I don’t see why he would be interested.
he comes very close to the connection every time he talks about mandelbrot, but he doesn’t quite get there.
what he doesn’t yet grasp is this: the only way to win is not to play the mathematical game.
stability consists of voluntary exchanges, not of calculations. why? because voluntary exchanges are within the realm of human cognition and like game theory and equations they are not within the realm of human cognition. Why? because there is less information in every judgment as abstraction increases.
Aggregates are not possible to calculate. As he’s shown for years, it’s all noise.
what does this mean?
debt instruments are not resellable.
doh!….
this line of reasoning is not terribly intuitive but it’s actually the problem with information loss. Think of it as an act of fraud every time a debt instrument is resold. The only possible means of preserving the sanctity(truth content) of debt instruments (skin in the game) is to sell shares in receivables on the debt using divisible shares (ie: blockchain shares), where the issuer is required to retain x% of the capital as warranty of truthfulness.
This kind of thing was not possible in the past. We lacked the tech for it.
It is quite possible that the data that would be produced as a result of the long run observation of the above-suggested process would produce the empirical evidence that taleb is searching for.
i suspect so.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-26 15:09:00 UTC
All group evolutionary strategies are contained in metaphysical assumptions rather than explicit statements. I state them.
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-24 08:15:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/790466762550702080
Reply addressees: @SnapPopCrackle
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/790438856663248897
IN REPLY TO:
@SnapPopCrackle
@curtdoolittle And not only is your philosophy a messy word-salad, but you claim it is the philosophy of Western Civilization. Why?
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/790438856663248897
WE REALLY WANT ALLIES NOT EQUALITY
We all think human equality of some kind is good. What we really mean is that allies in our evolutionary strategy are good for us. We just desire that everyone adopt our strategy.
—“The Elite seek allies with equality, the Masses seek control through equality. The Meritocratic seek equality under law.”—Delian Valeriani
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-15 13:35:00 UTC
SEQUENCE:
SEQUENCE:
Selfishness is necessary for the collective processing of information by individual perception (data), and interpersonal cooperation (falsification: true/false)… neural networks do not just exist in our minds, but between us. The difference is we are calculatively capable of processing (experiencing) the information we produce in the division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, and advocacy. But we are unable to experience the information of the collective other than through observation of the group’s persistence in an environment of group competition within a hostile universe.