Thank you, those responsible for the discussion regarding simulation and the real. Here is a competition currently sponsored by MIT where competitors write AI to perform automated war: BattleCode <https://www.battlecode.org/>.
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 10:00 AM, <friam-requ...@redfish.com> wrote: > Send Friam mailing list submissions to > friam@redfish.com > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > friam-requ...@redfish.com > > You can reach the person managing the list at > friam-ow...@redfish.com > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of Friam digest..." > > Today's Topics: > > 1. Re: FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs (Robert Wall) > 2. Meet the Math Professor Who?s Fighting Gerrymandering With > Geometry - The Chronicle of Higher Education (Tom Johnson) > 3. Re: Meet the Math Professor Who?s Fighting Gerrymandering > With Geometry - The Chronicle of Higher Education (Merle Lefkoff) > 4. FW: Grasping the scary, shaping local action (Nick Thompson) > 5. FW: trump/Ford (Nick Thompson) > 6. help with memory (Nick Thompson) > 7. Re: help with memory (Russell Standish) > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Robert Wall <wallrobe...@gmail.com> > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com> > Cc: > Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 13:18:39 -0700 > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs > Hi Vladimyr, > > Nice to chat with you on the glen-channel. :-) I guess I came late to the > chat without fully understanding the how it was vectored. It happens ... > age ... > > Wrt conflating the two models of "being in the groove," y' all seem to be > focused on the, perhaps, unintentional fusing of the real with the symbols > we assign to the real for analysis or other purposes. This issue works on > many levels. Csikszentmihalyi discusses this "being in the zone" in a > positive way where creativity happens and what is really lost is our sense > of self in the process. Whitehead writes about this as a continuous > process change that largely is motivated by "feeling." But there is > another side that you and Glen seem to be discussing that presents a more > destructive side, where one loses the understanding that the > representational is not the represented. We give too much meaning to the > symbols such that they migrate from epistemological to ontological. The > question becomes are the symbols real? So this is more one of delusion. > Okay ... I think I am "in the groove" now. :-) > > You draw an interesting distinction between war-oriented computer games > and real war engagements. The distinction, however, seems to be fading > away in the drone-engagement wars. The representational becomes the > grounded reality. An emulation and not a simulation. One of the > combatants--the targeted--are but mere symbols, like on a heads-up display > in a military fighter plane or just images on a computer monitor. Empire > can go to war without actually going to war ... at least not until you have > to own and occupy what Empire has destroyed: the livelihoods of the > newly-minted refugees and the newly-minted enemies. Killing becomes > painless and remorseless and danger-free. It becomes like a war-oriented > computer game in that no one is shooting back at the guy who is pulling the > trigger or at the "joy" stick. > > For a time, I used to build educating simulators for propositional war > games that were used tactically in the field and strategically in a > so-called war college. But these were still the kind where the assets and > weapons were symbolic and just representational of possible eventualities. > The goal was war training with only cyber-oriented risk ... kind of like a > flight simulator. But now, these simulators seem to have been weaponized > and the risk all but eliminated. > > When you finally remove all the meaning from the math notation and just >> manipulate the markings, it can be very hypnotic. > > > Yes. For the triggermen, the process is kind of like the one Glen > describes where the symbols have become ungrounded, valueless, meaningless. > But, in reality, the "game" is no longer a simulation (a model) but an > emulation (a surrogate for something real) operating in real time. And, for > the targets, the process is the opposite of the one Glen describes where > the symbols are very much grounded. Is the corollary that the triggermen > are Platonists and the targeted combatants are Constructivists? > > Most of my time working under the rubric of systems engineering, though, > was in building simulators for decision support. This I much preferred. > This seemed more constructive than destructive or combative, even if still > only a simulator. But are we deluded to believe these models, or any model, > to be reasonable facsimiles of the modeled, at least in the context of its > range of applicability? Is *face validity* enough? I mentioned some > issues concerning this in the previous post. > > With the FEM and CAD background, I suspect you were or are a structural > engineer by profession. In fact, educationally, FEM is being used to > analyze Minecraft structural models. But, these FEM models--like with, > say, NASTRAN--are quite accurate at predicting the behavior of mechanical > or structural devices under the expected stresses. We could predict where > they would break. Had to be accurate to have any value. > > So I guess the point of all of this is that there is quite a spectrum of > simulators to consider. In turn, there is a spectrum of the strength of > binding between the representational and the speculative or represented. > Analytical simulators are of no value if they are not believable, which > comes about through the rigor of verification and validation. > > On the other hand, computer games are inherently unbelievable as they are > just for entertainment. But, I have known some folks who get totally lost > in cult-like internet games like Dungeons and Dragons, which is what ... > forty-years old now? Yeah, this is loopiness and possibly dangerously > tautological. But delusions can be fun. An escape to an alternate reality. > Good that Frank limits this to an hour/day for his grandson. :-) > > As for being in the zone socially, I disagree, though I don't particularly >> care about any jargonal co-option of the term. During hearty arguments, >> mostly with religious people, I definitely lose myself in exactly the same >> way I lose myself after that 3rd mile when running. I have no illusions >> that my zone is in any way shared by the people I'm arguing with, though >> ... no more than I think you and I share internal constructs mediated by >> the word "blue" > > > To be clear, Glen, I was referring to a society being "in the zone" as a > whole. Maybe this could mean an alignment of symbolic references. Not > sure, but, like you, somewhat dubious that this could happen. Within my > philosophy group, we have discussed the idea of *conscious > evolution*--becoming, > say, wiser, by being "in the zone" so to speak--*with respect to the > individua*l. And I do see this as kind of a Csikszentmihalyi-est "being > in the zone," a period of selfless awareness of a task or challenge. It's a > neurological phenomenon. The objective is to make the period last as long > as possible. Society is not very good at being selfless, even for a moment. > > Perhaps with the assistance of Hebbian learning, say, over time this is > possible for individuals who work at it to remain in this state longer than > is typical. It becomes a skill or practice. But bubbling this up to the > level of a society does not seem possible. Religion hasn't and won't do it > because that's a model that requires blind credulity to the provided > surreal symbols. Even in the context of Hebbian learning, where are the > "societal neurons" that need to be rewired from their inculcated states? > They tend to be imbued in the laws and in the prevailing morality memes. > But these are just things to be gamed to ensure a *face validity* with > our self-full life simulations. > > The key component to any smart system is feedback. But, we live in a > society that is running open loop. Another form of loopiness or delusion, > I guess ... believing that everything will work out in the long run. We > are exceptional. We have democratic elections ... Hmmm, I think the > awakening is happening. Maybe there is hope? Is that a drone I hear above > ... Oh, it's just an Amazone delivery ... or is it? :-) > > Cheers > > > On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 6:45 PM, Vladimyr Burachynsky <vbur...@shaw.ca> > wrote: > >> Thanks for the structure of thought . >> >> >> >> So am I an Iconoclast because I am all too aware of the misuse of Icons ( >> simulations). I taught FEM and CAD and >> >> saw puzzlement on the, soon to be, engineers faces. I have watched >> engineers sneak out of the lecture hall when I started showing slides of >> >> summation of stacked matrices flying across the screen. >> >> >> >> So this alludes to a possible intrinsic Tautology or Loopiness in our >> brains. The representation is conflated with the speculative but unknown >> reality (since it is never completely understood anyway) Switching from one >> state to the other might be called metaphysical thinking. A wonderful >> source of confusion. >> >> Being totally immersed in a computer game might be said to be in the >> groove but when one man fights another and we call that being in the groove >> then are we conflating two models. If one is slaughtering the enemies on a >> game platform one can say he is free of ethics or morality. When Bruce Lee >> does the same on film >> >> many thought it real. but those who actually fought in life knew it was >> BS on constrained/elevated ropes. >> >> >> >> If the mirror neurons discussed at length do as described then they must >> occupy configurations near identical to neurons trained by self discovery >> (learning) >> >> Then actual differentiation would seem very difficult. >> >> >> >> I have a daughter formally trained as a M.Sc. BioMedical Artist and we >> used to argue about symbolic thinking , she pro and I con. But the >> strangest part is that I am also or was considered a fair artist and >> illustrator for a time. Indeed I use symbols very well but mistrust others >> with lesser skill. Yet the most skillful are the most dangerous at least in >> engineering. She would regularly remark that I sketched in perspective >> complex machinery that did not yet exist and then built the working >> prototypes. Nothing elegant but functional. She claimed only to draw what >> already really existed dead or alive, I always thought those arguments >> were small expeditions into some form of knowledge about human thinking. >> She thought otherwise unfortunately, but I have never had the fortune to >> meet another with her combination of talents. Somewhere in this >> quasi-church may be others lurking in the shadows. >> >> >> >> I admit to being a rather visual thinker so data visualization is my >> hobby now. And understanding Normal People, since they are so many... >> >> Perhaps this is not exactly the correct thread but miss the song of larks >> on the prairie fields. A few notes brings back so many memories and the >> smells >> >> of clover and honey. >> >> vib >> >> >> >> *From:* Friam [mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com] *On Behalf Of *Robert >> Wall >> *Sent:* February-21-17 2:46 PM >> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group >> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] FW: Fractal discussion Landscape-bird songs >> >> >> >> Hi Glen, >> >> >> >> What you describe as *flow* or being *in the zone* has been precisely >> written >> <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000W94FE6/ref=dp-kindle-redirect?_encoding=UTF8&btkr=1> >> and talked >> <https://www.ted.com/talks/mihaly_csikszentmihalyi_on_flow#t-396713> >> about by Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi as the Optimal Experience. No one will >> experience this quite the same way, as the flow experience requires >> both skill and challenge in an area where flow will occur. By his own >> statements, Einstein is said to have been in flow when he synthesized the >> concept of General and Special Relativity. At the time he was arguably very >> skilled in math and physics and, of course, very challenged. >> >> >> >> However, I prefer Alfred North Whitehead's (et al.) concept that we are >> all always in *flow*. We just don't alway realize it. In his *Process >> Philosophy*, as conveyed in his *Process and Reality*, he writes about >> the two modes of perceptual experience: (1) *Presentational Immediacy* >> [the bits of data that get presented to us through our senses--or >> imagination] and (2) *Causal Efficacy* [the conditioning of the present >> by the past]. Curiously, Csikszentmihalyi says that we can only process >> data from our senses at a rate of 110 bit/sec. Reading this post likely >> will chew up 60 bits/sec. of that bandwidth. 😴 >> >> >> >> Why I bring this up at all is that Whitehead thinks that what integrates >> these two modes into the whole of what we perceive is *Symbolic >> Reference*. Symbolic reference is kind of like how we tag bits of our >> real-world immersion for building a largely symbolic but sustainable--for >> us individually--worldview. Most time these symbolic references are >> provided to us--inculcated--by others like with a religion or by our >> parents. Most are satisfied with that. In your friend's case, I believe it >> is possible that y' all were unsettling--challenging--his worldview ... or, >> he challenging yours. >> >> >> >> Flow is not likely to be aroused in a social context. It is an inner >> state ... what the Greeks and Csikszentmihalyi would say is the entering >> into an alternate reality devoid of our sense of self. Your existence >> melts away in such a state. So our symbols get challenged or, perhaps, >> disappear as well. French social philosophers Jean Baudrillard and Gilles >> Deleuze also talk about symbolism, but it was at a social level. As far as >> I am concerned, Flow can't be achieved at the level of society ... but, boy >> I wish that that were not so. Csikszentmihalyi talks about the opposite of >> Flow that occurs on a social level that often occurs when society has been >> thrown into a chaos as with war or Trumpism. 🤔 >> >> >> >> Is mathematics invented or discovered? This is a perennial topic that >> arises within my philosophy group. It never really gets resolved, but how >> could it be? It is the ultimate of symbolic reference systems because of >> its precision in predicting the way the world manifests itself to our >> perception. This is not so true of our other symbols or abstractions. So >> are they any different? In a way, they are because mathematical symbols >> form from an axiom-driven language. But, notwithstanding Jerry Fodor's >> "built-in" syntactic language of thought, languages are human inventions >> based on metaphors [if you like George Lakoff]. Languages work among >> cultures because they are more or less conventional (acceptable) to a >> culture. The fact that they can be translated into other languages is >> because we are all immersed in the same reality. In this way, I tend to >> think of mathematics as invented. If you are a Platonist--a worldview--you >> will likely disagree. >> >> >> >> As I often do, I kind of resonate with Vladimyr's thought, which you >> included in your post. It is very Csikszentmihalyi-est. I do think that >> simulations can lure us into thinking that they are an exact dynamic >> facsimile of the reality which they try to abstract into an analytical >> model. There are all kinds of things about simulations that can lead us >> astray. Fidelity is one thing, obviously. But, I think that the worst >> thing--and this is often the fate of a simulator because of time and >> funding--is when they get so complicated that no one understands the >> process for how the results were computed. This--like with many neural >> networks--is when the simulator just become an Oracle. This is kind of >> what happened with Henry Markam's Blue Brain Project >> <https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-the-human-brain-project-went-wrong-and-how-to-fix-it/>, >> building a simulation of something for which they didn't know the first >> principles. I think also this is what John Horgan wrote about concerning >> what was going on at the Santa Fe Institute in his *SA* article From >> Complexity to Perplexity >> <http://www2.econ.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/hogan.complexperplex.htm>. >> >> >> >> But, as Vladimyr muses, maybe this is the best we can do ... and symbolic >> reference is what nature served up for us to cope, concerning what we are >> perceiving. But, as with all smart systems, a smart entity will always try >> to challenge and refine those symbols with continuous feedback--FLOW. >> However, in the larger scheme of things, it really doesn't matter if >> mathematics was invented or discovered. I mean, where did the concept of a >> hammer come from? 🤔 >> >> >> >> Cheers >> >> >> >> On Tue, Feb 21, 2017 at 11:13 AM, glen ☣ <geprope...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> There's no doubt that there's some kernel of truth to the concept of >> "flow" or "in the zone". I always make the mistake of thinking others have >> had similar experiences to mine. But at our journal club a few weeks ago, >> while discussing whether math is invented or discovered, one guy kept >> conflating mathematical symbols with their semantic grounding. A couple of >> us kept trying to make the point that after you've abstracted all the >> symbols away from their grounding, so that you're just manipulating the >> symbols, you get into the state where you start to think of the math, >> itself, as having an ontological existence. You're "in the zone", so to >> speak, where the math becomes real as opposed to a proxy for the real. >> That the other guy couldn't grok it could be a sign that he's never entered >> that zone, hamstrung by his grounding to physical reality. >> >> Or, he could have simply felt defensive because he thought we kept >> attacking him ... you never know how some people interpret the milieu. >> >> On 02/20/2017 10:44 PM, Vladimyr Burachynsky wrote: >> > Some music allows some people to focus longer. Maybe Taser jolts work >> for others. The simulation lures us into fantasy lands. Which I kinda like >> sometimes. >> > Time links these sims of mine but temporality is a coincidence not a >> true cause and we don't live long enough to test every contingency, so we >> make do with delusions. There seems no path out of this box. The box just >> grows with us. >> > vib >> > >> > So why did evolution place so much emphasis on time... >> >> -- >> ☣ glen >> >> ============================================================ >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >> >> >> >> ============================================================ >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >> > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Tom Johnson <t...@jtjohnson.com> > To: "Friam@redfish. com" <friam@redfish.com> > Cc: > Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 13:35:33 -0700 > Subject: [FRIAM] Meet the Math Professor Who’s Fighting Gerrymandering > With Geometry - The Chronicle of Higher Education > Meet the Math Professor Who’s Fighting Gerrymandering With Geometry > http://www.chronicle.com/article/Meet-the-Math-Professor/239260/ > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Merle Lefkoff <merlelefk...@gmail.com> > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com> > Cc: > Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 13:44:32 -0700 > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Meet the Math Professor Who’s Fighting Gerrymandering > With Geometry - The Chronicle of Higher Education > Interesting. I posted on my Facebook page this morning an article about > the federal court in Wisconsin questioning gerrymandering there--new > precedent. Wonder if this group was involved in this important court > decision. > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 1:35 PM, Tom Johnson <t...@jtjohnson.com> wrote: > >> Meet the Math Professor Who’s Fighting Gerrymandering With Geometry >> http://www.chronicle.com/article/Meet-the-Math-Professor/239260/ >> >> ============================================================ >> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv >> Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College >> to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com >> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove >> > > > > -- > Merle Lefkoff, Ph.D. > President, Center for Emergent Diplomacy > Santa Fe, New Mexico, USA > merlelef...@gmail.com > mobile: (303) 859-5609 > skype: merle.lelfkoff2 > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Nick Thompson <nickthomp...@earthlink.net> > To: Friam <Friam@redfish.com> > Cc: "'Jonathan Barker'" <jsheddbar...@gmail.com>, "'Dix McComas'" < > dixmccom...@gmail.com>, "'Rachel Folsom'" <rachelfol...@mac.com>, > "'Rachel Thompson'" <rachelw...@gmail.com> > Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:09:49 -0700 > Subject: [FRIAM] FW: Grasping the scary, shaping local action > > Hi, everybody. > > > > Some of you might remember my friend Jonathan Barker, a political > scientist from the University of Toronto, who came to visit with us a few > years back. I have turned to him to help me think about how much danger > we are actually in, fascism-wise. I think the short answer he would give > is that the danger is substantial. > > > > Here are some materials he has forwarded to me to prod me along in my > thinking (links below). > > > > There is one more I will send in a separate message. > > > > Nick > > > > Nicholas S. Thompson > > Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology > > Clark University > > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ > > > > *From:* Jonathan Barker [mailto:jsheddbar...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, February 22, 2017 2:21 PM > *To:* Nancy Barker <jonabar...@sympatico.ca> > *Subject:* Grasping the scary, shaping local action > > > > Greetings from Toronto, > > Here are four sources for understanding what US politics is in for and one > very promising path of effective resistance and redirection. I read a lot > on the new administration and these pieces, I find, throw a bright light on > the unfamiliar events spilling out every day. Thanks to friends and > relatives who signaled them to me. But let me add that (the late) Sheldon > Wolin in his 2008 book *Democracy Inc.: Managed Democracy and the Specter > of Inverted Totalitarianism* shows how thoroughly the ground was prepared > for the current corruption and strangulation of the political sphere of > Democracy. > > Three to read, one to watch for a deeper and deeply disturbing exposure of > the Trump phenomenon. You may have seen one or more of these. > > They complement, but do not duplicate, one another. > > > > All best, > > Jonathan > > > > (1) https://www.lrb.co.uk/v39/n04/sidney-blumenthal/a-short- > history-of-the-trump-family [Sidney Blumenthal, A Short History of the > Trump > > Family, London Review of Books] > > (2) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GAw6dvh8v4 [Masha Gessen on the > Trump-Putin relationship - the fifth estate] > > (3) https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/03/how- > to-build-an-autocracy/513872/ [David Frum, How to build and autocracy. > the Atlantic] > > (4) https://www.indivisibleguide.com/about-us/ [About the Indivisible > Guide and the thousands of groups taking action to reclaim the public > sphere in the U.S] > > > > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Nick Thompson <nickthomp...@earthlink.net> > To: Friam <Friam@redfish.com> > Cc: "'Jonathan Barker'" <jsheddbar...@gmail.com>, penny thompson < > penny.thomp...@earthlink.net>, "'Dix McComas'" <dixmccom...@gmail.com>, > "rachelfolsom@me. com" <rachelfol...@me.com>, "'Rachel Thompson'" < > rachelw...@gmail.com> > Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 17:15:00 -0700 > Subject: [FRIAM] FW: trump/Ford > > Hi, everybody, > > > > Here is the second shoe. I asked Jonathan to comment on trump on the > basis of his experience with the Mayor of Toronto, a man named Ford, who > managed to get himself reelected despite the fact that it was pretty clear > he was a coke head … and a fool. I asked him how was that possible and how > do we fight it. > > > > See below. I particularly urge you to “stay for “ the newspaper article > at the end. Both Jon’s letter and that article provide ground truth about > the difficulties of extracting oneself from such a regime, once it has been > stabled. > > > > Nick > > > > Nicholas S. Thompson > > Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology > > Clark University > > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ > > > > *From:* Jonathan Barker [mailto:jsheddbar...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Saturday, February 18, 2017 8:30 PM > *To:* Nick Thompson <nickthomp...@earthlink.net> > *Subject:* Re: trump/Ford > > > > The appeal to the anger of those who feel sidelined and ignored is is > similar. They both attacked "the gravy train." They both had great need for > popular approval and held the aim of limiting government and taxes. Ford in > office was undisciplined and not very effective. He did not systematically > attack all city services, but did cut their funding. He had links with > shady operators, attacked the media, cared nothing for facts, stuck to a > simple message. And his supporters stuck with him despite all the criticism > and investigative reporting. Ford had a genuine affection for regular > people, answered their calls, and even went to their houses to look after > complaints about city services. He also had serious addictions to alcohol > and other drugs. > > Opposing him had some similarities to opposing Trump. He did not have firm > control of city council and the city is highly dependent on the province. > There was room to stymie some of his efforts. And after he admitted to > substance abuse most power was stripped from his office. (There was no > provision for removing him from office.) To get him out of power, like for > Trump, required grass roots action: organize and get out the vote. But city > politics has no organized parties in Toronto which means there were no > party organizations to mobilize or to pry supporters from. The seeming > futility of well-informed reporting and opposition arguments seems similar > in the two cases. In his second election Ford might well have won because > the non-Ford vote was split between two strong candidates, but cancer > sidelined Ford before election day. > > Lessons: Use all available institutional weapons and reach into the places > supporting Trump to organize and activate and inform the many people there > who oppose him. The key problem is addressing the issues in the Trump > voters minds in a convincing way. There are many strands here to think > through. What can government and citizens do to reduce inequality and > reverse the cultural and physical separation of class and identity groups? > How to rehabilitate the reputation of government as a problem solver? And > serous media as sources of true information? What groups and places to > target first? > > Daniel Dale covered Ford and then Trump for the Toronto Star. Here are his > thoughts about similarities and differences from an interview after the > Republican convention. > > The nuclear codes are a worry... > > > > Jonathan > > ===================== > > *Daniel Dale > <https://twitter.com/ddale8?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor> > on Donald Trump and Rob Ford* > > *Towards the beginning of Trump’s campaign, a lot of people drew > connections between his political rhetoric and rise in popularity and that > of Rob Ford. What’s diverged since — or only gotten bizarrely more similar?* > > A very big difference is that Ford managed to stay on his best behaviour > during his first campaign, in which he managed to convince people he wasn’t > quite the erratic, angry, scary man that people had said he was. Trump just > doesn’t care. His behaviour has only gotten more concerning to a lot of > people, but he’s unwilling to modify it. > > Another is that [Trump] has explicitly used racial or ethnic division in > an attempt to fuel his popularity with a small segment of the population. > Ford may have benefited from the homophobia of the part of the electorate > who didn’t like George Smitherman [in 2010], or from blurting out in > debates where he didn’t want immigrants coming to the city. But that type > of fear-based appeal wasn’t something that he did. > > Early in the campaign there were eerie similarities. But the more it’s > continued, the more they’ve diverged. Trump has gone beyond. > > I think it’s hard in general to compare a Canadian municipal campaign to a > U.S. presidential one. But what we saw in Trump’s very dark, angry, > fear-mongering speech at the Republican convention last week is nothing > like what we saw from Ford. Trump is trying to make crime and law and order > central to his campaign. That’s something that’s more often central to > municipal campaigns, but it’s not something Ford talked about. Even in his > fierce criticism of government, his message was practical: “I am a fixer. I > will be more responsive to you than this current government.” > > If anything, that’s the parallel. When Trump said, “I am your voice, and > you have been forgotten by elites who look after their own interests. I > will be your champion.” That’s what Rob Ford did: Instead of Miller, this > Harvard-educated lawyer who goes on about bike lanes, I will champion what > you want me to champion. > > *What are some examples of these parallels or divergences you’ve seen in > the last week during the Republican National Convention?* > > The most reminiscent to me during the convention was the way Trump and his > campaign responded to the Melania plagiarism problem. It was so obvious > that words had been copied. Political advisors spent days screaming the > obvious thing: You acknowledge the issue, apologize and move on. But they > denied, and said, “No, nothing’s wrong here, it’s just the media making > things up.” I think at one point his spokesperson said something along the > lines of Michelle Obama thinks she invented the English language > <http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/288316-trump-aide-concept-that-michelle-obama-invented-the> > . > > Finally, after dragging the news cycle on longer, they finally admitted an > error. It was so Ford-like to me. It was this perpetual unwillingness to > concede anything, and turning yourself into the victim of your own error. > [from http://tvo.org/article/current-affairs/shared-values/ > rob-ford-donald-trump-and-the-future-of-politics]. > > =============== > > On 2/16/2017 11:48 PM, Nick Thompson wrote: > > Wondering, to what extent your experience with Mayor Ford is a model for > our experience with President Trump. > > > > Absent, nuclear codes, of course. > > > > Nick > > > > Nicholas S. Thompson > > Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology > > Clark University > > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ > > > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Nick Thompson <nickthomp...@earthlink.net> > To: Friam <Friam@redfish.com>, Faculty Discussion < > faculty-gene...@lists.clarku.edu> > Cc: > Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2017 18:04:38 -0700 > Subject: [FRIAM] help with memory > > Hi, Everybody, > > > > Does anybody remember from the 90’s (yes, the 90’s!) a computer web thing, > VERY primitive, that tried to imitate a university with class rooms, and > discussion groups. It had a cheesy graphic interface you could “move > around in” I think it was called moo doo, but I possibly have it confused > with the Vermont Fertilizer company of the same name. I don’t know if it > bears any relation to the educational software Moodle. > > > > Ring any bells? > > > > Have done some poking around on the web but I can’t find anything, > possibly because of people using the same or similar names for other > things. > > > > Nick > > > > Nicholas S. Thompson > > Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology > > Clark University > > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ > > > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Russell Standish <li...@hpcoders.com.au> > To: Friam <Friam@redfish.com> > Cc: > Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 12:54:58 +1100 > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] help with memory > I know ... I know ! > > MOOC - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_open_online_course > > On Wed, Feb 22, 2017 at 06:04:38PM -0700, Nick Thompson wrote: > > Hi, Everybody, > > > > > > > > Does anybody remember from the 90's (yes, the 90's!) a computer web > thing, > > VERY primitive, that tried to imitate a university with class rooms, and > > discussion groups. It had a cheesy graphic interface you could "move > around > > in" I think it was called moo doo, but I possibly have it confused with > the > > Vermont Fertilizer company of the same name. I don't know if it bears > any > > relation to the educational software Moodle. > > > > > > > > Ring any bells? > > > > > > > > Have done some poking around on the web but I can't find anything, > possibly > > because of people using the same or similar names for other things. > > > > > > > > Nick > > > > > > > > Nicholas S. Thompson > > > > Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Biology > > > > Clark University > > > > http://home.earthlink.net/~nickthompson/naturaldesigns/ > > > > > > > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > > to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove > > > -- > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------------- > Dr Russell Standish Phone 0425 253119 (mobile) > Principal, High Performance Coders > Visiting Senior Research Fellow hpco...@hpcoders.com.au > Economics, Kingston University http://www.hpcoders.com.au > ------------------------------------------------------------ > ---------------- > > > > _______________________________________________ > Friam mailing list > Friam@redfish.com > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > >
============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College to unsubscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ by Dr. Strangelove