Theme: Measurement

  • (Runcible Update) Today we created the first pass at Runcible Reality Descriptio

    (Runcible Update)
    Today we created the first pass at Runcible Reality Description Language (RDL). But what does that mean?

    Think of the evolutionary sequences of:

    … 0) Grammars of Paradigms: embodiment > narration > mythology > philosophy > empiricism > science > operationalism

    … 1) Reduction (expressibility): Mathematical Reducibility > Programmatic Reducibility > Operational Reducibility > Verbal Reducibility > Artificial Neural Network Reducibility

    … 2) Closure: Intuitive/Embodied Closure: Basic survival-based instincts or heuristics (e.g., immediate sensory feedback or trial-and-error in pre-literate societies), providing rudimentary decidability without formal structure. > Logical Closure: Affirmative justification through internal consistency (aligning with early philosophy or positiva tests), but vulnerable to unfalsifiable assumptions. > Empirical Closure: Falsification via external correspondence (e.g., scientific method), adding verifiability but still limited to observable phenomena. > Operational Closure: Constructive procedures that demand actionable, repeatable steps (e.g., operationalism), ensuring computability but potentially ignoring ethics or reciprocity. > Reciprocal/Adversarial Closure: Full integration of necessity, sufficiency, reciprocity/symmetry, and coherence under adversarial testing, yielding auditable, ethical, and liability-enforcing decisions (as in RDL and Runcible’s “closure layer”).

    … 3) Tests: Justification (Positiva) > Falsification (Negativa) > Adversarialism (constructive logic and empirical correspondence)

    … 4) Programming: Sequential Programming > Functional Programming > Object Oriented Programming > Reality Description Language (RDL)

    “RDL is an operational grammar, reliant on adversarial survival, by both operational construction and empirical correspondence, for testing the computability, ethics, and testifiability of any statement in human language.”–
    RDL Formalized our work in a way that closed the gaps in LLM computability due to it’s tendency to drift.
    This is revolutionary in no small part because until we solved the method and the grammars it was thought not possible.

    Cheers


    Source date (UTC): 2025-12-21 23:29:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2002884149854752989

  • (Runcible Update) Today we created the first pass at Runcible Reality Descriptio

    (Runcible Update)
    Today we created the first pass at Runcible Reality Description Language (RDL). But what does that mean?

    Think of the evolutionary sequences of:

    … 0) Grammars: embodiment > narration > mythology > philosophy > empiricism > science > operationalism

    … 2) Reduction (expressability): Mathematical Reducibility > Programmatic Reducibility > Operational Reducibility > Verbal Reducibility > Artificial Neural Network Reducibility

    … 1) Tests: Justification (Positiva) > Falsification (Negativa) > Adversarialism (constructive logic and empirical correspondence)

    … 3) Programming: Sequential Programming > Functional Programming > Object Oriented Programming > Reality Description Language (RDL)

    –“RDL is an operational grammar, reliant on adversarial survival, by both operational construction and empirical correspondence, for testing the computability, ethics, and testifiability of any statement in human language.”–

    RDL Formalized our work in a way that closed the gaps in LLM computability due to it’s tendency to drift.

    This is revolutionary in no small part because until we solved the method and the grammars it was thought not possible.

    Cheers


    Source date (UTC): 2025-12-21 22:15:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2002865449474859158

  • Approximate IQ Ranges by Sub-Population (Race and Hybrids) Old African (55-65)>

    Approximate IQ Ranges by Sub-Population (Race and Hybrids)
    Old African (55-65)> New African (68-72) > Afro-Asiatic (78) > India (76-82) > Pacific Islands (78) > Central Asian (82-88) > European (98-99) > East Asian (104-106)
    a) norms and institutions must suit the abilities of the populations, which is largely reflected in competency and trust.
    b) any variation by more than 1/2 standard deviation (7 pts) generates conflict in norms and institutions, but more so in economic capacity as technologies increase.
    c) Those people with IQ under 92 in today’s world are effectively dead weight to harmful in modern european and east asian economies.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-12-18 21:20:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2001764457236828183

  • 1) IQ is the most accurate measure in psychology 2) Stereotypes are the most acc

    1) IQ is the most accurate measure in psychology
    2) Stereotypes are the most accurate measure in social science.
    3) Neoteny is the most accurate measure in biology.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-12-18 17:09:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2001701365299789895

  • Well, I know. I’m agreeing. The point I’m making is that the way I use symbols r

    Well, I know. I’m agreeing. The point I’m making is that the way I use symbols requires the domain (Scale) of what I’m discussing. This appears inconsistent but it isn’t. I would need to explain the use of the symbols in each case. If I did that then the pattern would be obvious.
    The scale <, > and dependency <-, ->, and capital +,-,=,!= are meta symbols that require the user to ‘do work’. And I am too inconsistent, I agree. Where we disagree is the capital symbols, which is the same as the ternary logic triangle (or diamond if we include !=.
    For some reason that doesn’t make sense to you because you interpret it as inconsistent. I haven’t figured out your interpretation – usually it’s more literal than I mean it.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-12-15 23:24:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2000708649824714992

  • You’re thinking too hard. 😉 It’s a simple issue of logical dependency. <,> grea

    You’re thinking too hard. 😉

    It’s a simple issue of logical dependency.
    <,> greater than, less than (scale)
    <-, -> dependency (causality)
    Nothing else to be said.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-12-15 23:13:54 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2000705907676864678

  • lol. Jon. Are those two statements necessarily mutually exclusive? lol -hugs. Th

    lol. Jon. Are those two statements necessarily mutually exclusive? lol -hugs.

    The reducibility stack using “<” means the item to the right constitutes a larger field than the item to the left.
    Which could be confusing since I use the same symbol to show scale as reducibility, thus confusing you and I assume a whole lot of other people. 😉

    In fact, this is one of those criticisms
    @AutistocratMS
    levies at me frequently, as the symbols require understanding the context.

    I suppose I could use “>, <“: greater than / less than and “<-, ->”: Follows From if I were disciplined.

    I’ll skip the sarcastic side-trip into bondage and discipline, but let’s just say I have a natural resistance to discipline. 😉

    lol -hugs


    Source date (UTC): 2025-12-15 22:35:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/2000696307607122243

  • @MattPirkowski : Yes. Well done. Mathematics is a constrained grammar within the

    @MattPirkowski
    : Yes. Well done. Mathematics is a constrained grammar within the domain of the universal grammar of all language that is subjectively testable via internal consistency and externally demonstrable by empirical evidence.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-12-07 00:28:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1997463273231565240

  • Its Chomsky. It means every addition increases disambiguation. This is true for

    Its Chomsky. It means every addition increases disambiguation. This is true for every state and operation from the quantum background through to language at the other. Its the law of negative entropy.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-11-29 03:37:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1994611552209817964

  • All language consists of measurement. (yes) There should be no reason that if so

    All language consists of measurement. (yes)
    There should be no reason that if something is described in language it can’t be modeled. The question is wether the LLM can be constrained to an operational model using langauge or it must use a tool (shell out) to do so (as it does with programming). To some degree we should treat programming as the equivalent of humans using any measurement tool.
    In our work we force high dimensionality questions into operational prose, sequences of tests, and distinct outputs. I can’t yet fully test it’s operationalization against the ternary logic hierarchy since I need to finish what I’m working on first. But the partial tests work fine.
    But asking it how to fix a 64 ford carburetor or something of that nature is wholly dependent upon existing text. Which is true for anything in that real world category.
    I dont consider any of that very challenging. The robotics folks are tearing up the universe already. So between self driving (perception and navigation), robotics (manipulation and transformation) and llms (concepts and language) it’s just a matter (just? 😉 ) of representing and interfacing the three domains. And we have data models and languages for doing so.
    Regardless of what others think, IMO the hard problem has always been language, and attention was the revolutionary leap that made it possible. Language is the system of measurement for humans at human scale.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-11-28 23:58:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1994556524400971860