ask and ye shall receive Ok. since you guys want something to talk about and something that has real world impact, time to wake up samurai. I for one hate googles guts:
Here is me trying to just routinely log into a email: https://dropr.co/v/52938b11 https://streamable.com/dry2of Since you at the time of that email were bored. Then how about this: Build the better email? Since google has grown to big and arrogant. I don't want the email of the future, how about putting your fancy degrees to good use then, lets make a ourselves email that's not complete ass and owned by a pathetic little ai-bro shit. Make the company where shit just fucking works, with kick fucking ass stuff and actuall fucking humans in the loop, You folks said your bored and claimed to have a lot of time: -> Any of you folks have experience with unfucking your email from these shitforbrains? ->and since you said you have lots of time: lets build, maintain, and make go viral the starts of new company to do all the stuff google claims to do, yet utterly fails to deliver on mostly making shovelware, and enshitifying there email. So instead of enshitification and contributing to 2026 bein a dick ramed into peoples asses: make a company puts up where those motherfuckers need to stfu. Can start with what'd be small fries for you: email and mass storage, basic email that's extremely back to basics... I won't suggest going alltheway back to POP that might be a bit to back to basics. Start with imap, then build based on correctness and look at googles mistakes and where they suck ass I mean I for one think there aidsinfestedly terrible at having protection vs woopsies: from email landing in the blast radius of the latest internet wyrm ungodly amounts of spam, I don't know about ya'all but my spam box routinely saturated with junk. surely your big bored brains can do better. On Thu, Jul 16, 2026 at 9:55 AM glen <[email protected]> wrote: > Yes, the way the active inference people (in particular - much less so > than the predictive processing people) write/talk is either simply very > dense *or* laden with bias. > > But re: your cross-trophy (?) comment - I can't help but think we're a lot > more like octupusses than we want to admit. Each anatomical region of the > brain might be thought of as a semi-independent ganglion. And maybe it just > so happens our ganglia are clustered in our head/CNS for convenience or > some sort of energy minimization ... or maybe risk minimization (which is > why the meningeal lymphatic architecture paper was included in my list). > Sure, *some* newer regions may only be 'efficient' because our ganglia are > co-located. But we might also be able to smear those out, distribute them > through (an artificial) organism with other pathways. > > Anyway, my point is that if we thought of these subnetworks/circuits as > separate ganglia that could have been located closer to the sensorimotor > manifold they manage, then interoception kindasorta reduces away. > > On 7/11/26 3:33 PM, Eric Charles wrote: > > I skimmed the predictive processing chapter. My main thought was > wondering if it still seemed interesting if translated into less jargon-ey > English. > > > > My second thought was: Doesn't Gibson help with this? Isn't the "loop" > problem a "problem" at least in part because you are trying to find the > loops inside the organism instead of in the larger organism-environment > system? > > > > /If/ there is specification in the ambient energy, /then /the loop can > extend outside the organism, and exist at whatever scale the relevant > patterns exist at. Yes, you need sufficient neuronal support for the > organism to do their part of the loop... at least with us very-neuronal > organisms... but that type of "complexity" is different than the complexity > one might imagine if they thought _all_ the work had to happen inside the > head. For example, recognizing that one is accelerating towards the ground > --- because the rate of optic expansion is accelerating --- could be much > easier than trying to "predict" whether one is accelerating towards the > ground by comparing a series of snapshot images and trying to neuronally > create an internal model of everything happening around you. You can > offload most of that by not trying to "model" things that are directly > perceivable. And that can extend as far as we can extend "perceivable." > > > > Re the first thought.... Here is a quote: > > > > The second type of predictive circuitmight support the sequencing > and arbitration of behaviors. Simple solutions to these problemsmight > appeal to generative models for sequential dynamics (Parr et al., 2023). > For example, locomotion behavior in C. elegans might be supported by > sequential generativemodels that encode expected transitions among > locomotion behaviors(e.g., forward and backward movements, left and right > turns), with decision points corresponding to bifurcations in the dynamical > sequences (Kato et al., 2015). In turn, the transitions prioritized at > bifurcation points might depend partially on external sensation and > partially on internal (e.g., interoceptive) sensations reporting impending > drives and needs, which leads us to the next point. > > > > > > So far as I can tell, that means something like: > > > > A second thing well-developed neuron clumps do is ensure movements > happen in order, so as to form coherent "behaviors." We can understand how > this happens in several ways, some of which Ph.D.-level scientists call > "simple." Roundworms, for example, swim in predictable ways, sometimes > changing direction. Those turns sometimes depend on external factors, at > least in part. > > > > > > Seriously... this might be my weird form of getting old and yelling at > kids to get off my lawn... but... Ugh... A lot of that might as well be > pretentious continental philosophers stringing jargon together. "The epoch > of the logos thus debases writing considered as mediation of mediation and > as a fall into the exteriority of meaning. To this epoch belongs the > difference between signified and signifier, or at least the strange > separation of their 'parallelism,' and the exteriority, however extenuated, > of the one to the other." Orwell could take at least half the sentences as > examples of bad writing, and not be wrong. Even in my attempt at a > translation, the word "ensure" is highly suspect. > > > > Best, > > Eric > > > > <mailto:[email protected]> > > > > > > On Tue, Jul 7, 2026 at 10:35 AM glen <[email protected] <mailto: > [email protected]>> wrote: > > > > Of course. You have a knack for pushing my buttons. 8^D > > > > What irritates me about all this active inference and predictive > processing advocacy [⛧] is well-represented in the title of that chapter > "From Sensorimotor Skills to Higher Cognition". [grrrr] The reason I took > the time to download it and start skimming it was my hope for a thorough > *composition* from the very small-fast feedback loops to the large-slow > ones. There are a lot of citations. So maybe the clues are in there. But > I'm lazy. > > > > What I *want* ... what I really really want is evidence of > predictive processing in a minimal model organism like C. Elegans or > Drosophilia. Such exist [1-5]! But now we need something like connectome > (or simpler?) circuits in more complex organisms that show how small-fast > predictive processing composes into large-slow predictive processing. Does > the model work at *all* scales? Only some scales? Is it like a percolating > stew of predictions, some of which are suppressed by the larger circuits? > > > > Speaking of which, I discovered this book just last night: > > > > > https://bookshop.org/p/books/from-human-reasoning-to-belief-an-empirical-account-joshua-mugg/de6c8394b4e24d99?ean=9781032736952 > < > https://bookshop.org/p/books/from-human-reasoning-to-belief-an-empirical-account-joshua-mugg/de6c8394b4e24d99?ean=9781032736952 > > > > > > But as always, it's silly to keep buying books I'll never read. I > post it here in the hopes that you readers out there might read it and tell > me what it says ... or maybe I'll buy the epub and feed it to Claude ... or > maybe it's read it already? I haven't checked. You'll remember we've had > such arguments before, when you claimed I *must* believe in the floor in > order to get out of bed in the morning. And my counter was that it is my > *doubt* about the existence of the floor that allows me to get out of bed. > IDK if Mugg's "DJ mixing board" model fits one of our stances better. But I > do like it better than the overly simplistic fast vs slow thinking model. > > > > > > [1] Dimakou A, Pezzulo G, Zangrossi A, Corbetta M. The predictive > nature of spontaneous brain activity across scales and species. Neuron. > Published online March 1, 2025. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2025.02.009 > > [2] Kaplan H, Nichols A, Zimmer M. Sensorimotor integration in > Caenorhabditis elegans: a reappraisal towards dynamic and distributed > computations. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological > Sciences. 2018;373. doi:10.1098/rstb.2017.0371 > > [3] Kim A, Fitzgerald J, Maimon G. Cellular evidence for efference > copy in Drosophila visuomotor processing. Nature neuroscience. > 2015;18:1247-1255. doi:10.1038/nn.4083 > > [4] Lin A, Witvliet D, Hernandez-Nunez L, Linderman S, Samuel A, > Venkatachalam V. Imaging whole-brain activity to understand behavior. > Nature reviews Physics. 2022;4:292-305. doi:10.1038/s42254-022-00430-w > > [5] Wang S, Segev I, Borst A, Palmer S. Maximally efficient > prediction in the early fly visual system may support evasive flight > maneuvers. PLoS Computational Biology. 2019;17. > doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008965 > > > > > > [⛧] It seems to me that most of the peri-Friston work borders on > advocacy of the model(s) as opposed to challenging them. But I'm not a > scholar. So my scope is very small. > > > > On 7/6/26 8:15 PM, Nicholas Thompson wrote: > > > Hi, Glen, > > > > > > I liked the predictive processing thing. It coheres with an idea > I have been kicking around of late. People tend to think of cognitive > processes as putting us in touch with the world as it is. Then we look at > that represented world and make decisions about the future. Wouldn't it > make more sense for cognitive processes to put us in touch with the world > as it is going to be? To translate that back into monist talk, we live in a > world of successive anticipations. As I get more frail, I become aware of > all the hard work my cerebellum must be doing to anticipate the > consequences of any action I might take that changes my center of gravity. > A delayed prediction can lead to my taking actions that compound a balance > prediction and send me to the floor. it's like I am doing judo to myself. > > > > > > Is that annoying enough to feed the beast? > > > > > > Nick > > > > > > On Mon, Jul 6, 2026 at 6:31 PM glen <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto: > [email protected]>>> wrote: > > > > > > It's so dead, here, I figure it can't hurt to post arbitrary > nonsense I've run across lately: > > > > > > Meningeal lymphatic architecture and drainage dynamics > surrounding the human middle meningeal artery > > > https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2025.113693 < > https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2025.113693> < > https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2025.113693 < > https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2025.113693>> > > > > > > Constructing a lower-bound estimate of the global number of > insect species on a hyperdiverse empirical foundation > > > https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2524283123 < > https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2524283123> < > https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2524283123 < > https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2524283123>> > > > > > > Predictive Processing: From Sensorimotor Skills to Higher > Cognition > > > https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/15999.003.0011 < > https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/15999.003.0011> < > https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/15999.003.0011 < > https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/15999.003.0011>> > > > > > > As always, I'm reading them in fitful bursts, interleaved > across each other and all the other open tabs and crap strewn about my > desk. So .... grain of salt and all. > > > > > > -- > 8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ > ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα > σώσω. > > > .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / > ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom > https://bit.ly/virtualfriam > to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ > archives: 5/2017 thru present > https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ > 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ >
.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-.. FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ 1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
