It just occurred to me that it's entirely fitting how often Kowalski refers to the Caudine Forks, for that battle is a metaphor for ping pong arguments:
Suppose we have two statements (Romans), A and B.
A priori, there are four possible situations:
A & not B | A & B | not A & not B | not A & B
However, as mathematicians, let us play the Samnite. First we close one pass, in proving A → B, which is equivalent to ruling out A & not B. Then we close the other pass, in proving B → A (ruling out not A & B).
Now our romans, err, statements are confined to A & B | not A & not B, and (with no truth values having been harmed) must therefore pass under the yoke of equivalence: A ↔ B.
(Im guessing he was as aware as MAA of the burdens of office)
Hopefully we can return to the formalization of Nietzsche/Greco-Roman ethics/(New) systems of survival soon. State of my art, how to extend Boyd’s Ping-Pong Lemma* to Rao’s SoS (assuming it already works in JJ’s system)
Maybe the eternal Culture War is indeed the Russell one (Banks’ having his Culture win the Mandate of H) . Hey, JAW was concerned too, we are now on the same hunt as the Masters?
*the same old, but generalizing boss to adversaries, also noting in passing parallelism of your justice-prudence to guardian/commerce, so temperance-fortitude maps to Blue/Red hypernormal/weirdo???
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/John_Boyd
Front page activity indicates that cpython is becoming hypernormal ;) (even if GvR as a concept remains a Wojak)
on a quick Boyd tangent, the japanese three pwns (三殺法) easily map into Boyd's OODA:
kill the sword - you are observing your opponent's actions
kill the technique - you are observing your opponent's decisions
kill the spirit - you are observing your opponent's orientations
Not enough spare cycles to chew on that yet, just pointing:
To buy time:
weirdo -> peripherally oriented
hypernormal -> centroidally oriented
(Neither really observing the states of opposing camp beyond 1st pwn level, though the hypernormal may regard the other hypernormals as memetic rivals [the individuation in the Apolline])
Linux kernel devs —> … ?
(Those customs inherited by crypto coredevs, hence also Yarvin, by diffusion, ..)
Edit: something reminds me of the threeway struggle between the RI, the klepts, & the Met in Gibson’s trilogy+adaptation, which is not cleanly an indo-aryan division, as the Met is clearly the 3rd estate yet a warrior caste, while the klepts are merchant princes..
Re: "it from bit", the MGM view is that most "it"s arise because the universe is full of interactions with negligible energy but decohering phase.
(which physicist said "better to be wrong in an interesting way than right in a boring one"? I guess that was an early weirdo>>hypernormal slogan?)
I'm closer to Apache devs than Linux devs, so using them as a proxy I'd guess the Linux devs to be closest to our earlier-proposed third ("hacker") SoS (though not as close as Knuth's squad, who are probably the nonfictional crew having the highest dot product with Castalia of which I am aware).
In particular, the geek ethic (a peripheral center?) values prowess and openness simultaneously...
[I'll have to read the Jackpots; tarnishing my geek cred I'm only up on Gibson through Neuromancer. On the jock front it's a tournament weekend for us, so my HN b/w will be limited.]
For quick catchup, watch the amazon prime video at 2x. some elements not in the original but imho the screenwriters surpassed Gibson in exposition. casting almost perfect, exactly how i had imagined it. my guess is in the upcoming WG himself will retcon the RI in some form, heh. (If anything, channelling some of the klept’s villainy to academe makes more sense today)
“In contrast for China, nature means spontaneity, therefore the future is not completely predictable.” —Ilya Prigogine.
Reportedly (could be in the 1980 book? To check later) he also said that the best way to cope with the future is to create it, but he didnt say that you could be thoroughly relaxed about it.
Physicist — its tegmark or weinsteins advsior, again, to verify later..
Makes sense — I shan't feel so bad about lack of b/w then, because if the Santa Fe Institute hasn't cracked it in four decades, the chances I'll have anything worthwhile to add in a weekend are probably on the order of IEEE epsilon?
[Will reply to the other one abt soph after i get more b/w myself]
Well, if your not being facetious— you should be familiar with the recurring institutional failures in the old country? MGM, Leggett, Geroch might have been fine in their salad days but as they got on, nothing really diffused to their squads.. As it is, Ole Peters is having difficulties defending himself against serious charges (from the orthodox econs) of unfamiliarity with Jensen’s inequality..
The TCS horde is routinely cleaning out the institutionalized physicists these days, from what i can see its due to effective horizontal virtue transfers from the european/pure math community. Wont be long before the econs suffer the same, seems like they are walled up in the same old way.
it does look like UK physics education today is in pretty ok shape compared to the others. i will assume from now on that the Research Institute (featured in the amazon adaptation) was created by american refugees.
If immortality were an available option, I'd expect to see Sumerian hedge funds still trading; at some point any particular coarse-grained institution winds up stuck in an oxbow lake?
(sure, conservation holds at a fine-grained level, but is traversing a final-initial edge distinguishable from absorption?)
i seriously doubt anyone has figured out to study how coarse grained institutions should behave, if no professional has even thought of seriously applying expanders to study how they already behave..
Your conjecture, even if incorrect, certainly reminds one of Jensen’s inequality does it not :) ?
Compare with Aaronson-Carroll-et-al p5 properties of c-sophistication..
Prigogine 1980 Ch5, peddling copium in the form of Lyapounov functions to the Chinese ? (Wouldnt have found that without your tip!)
(Personally, i increased my weights for IRP having stolen Dennis Gabor’s quote, especially since it was re-liberated by an actuary)
All mutterings from SFI are in scope, haha
How have kernel devs (lkml data) or apache devs (your anecdata) been (ab)using the Fehmi principles? Any new insights from your taykh (fishing?) escapades?
[Swiss hydrogen storage using iron as catalyst keeping kosher, but that stainless steel tank isnt lol]
Suppose we have two statements (Romans), A and B.
A priori, there are four possible situations:
However, as mathematicians, let us play the Samnite. First we close one pass, in proving A → B, which is equivalent to ruling out A & not B. Then we close the other pass, in proving B → A (ruling out not A & B).Now our romans, err, statements are confined to A & B | not A & not B, and (with no truth values having been harmed) must therefore pass under the yoke of equivalence: A ↔ B.