Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: What a funny

[Stephen Guerin]

Professor of Analytic Journalism declares fake news to artificially create
irony based on tired stereotypes is now worth it. As long as it's funny.

That's ironic. And funny. Take it and run. ;-p

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 10:05 PM Tom Johnson  wrote:

> Don't fact-check jokes.  Take the laugh and run.
>
> ===
> Tom Johnson
> Inst. for Analytic Journalism
> Santa Fe, New Mexico
> 505-577-6483
> ===
>
> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021, 9:56 PM Stephen Guerin 
> wrote:
>
>> 2017 Chemistry Olympiad.
>>
>> https://cen.acs.org/articles/95/web/2017/07/US-team-makes-history-IChO.html
>>
>> The US students won 4 gold medals.
>>
>> from the article:
>> The medals were announced during the closing ceremony on July 14. Taiwan
>> (Chinese Taipei) was the only other country to receive four gold medals.
>> The top scoring gold medal went to a high school student from Russia. In
>> total, 297 students from 76 countries participated in the weeklong
>> competition. The IChO committee awarded 36 gold medals, 65 silver medals,
>> and 95 bronze medals.
>>
>> (and Park is probably a Korean American name)
>>
>> A good journalist checks their sources ;-p  ja ja ja
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 9:35 PM Tom Johnson 
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ===
>>> Tom Johnson
>>> Inst. for Analytic Journalism
>>> Santa Fe, New Mexico
>>> 505-577-6483
>>> ===
>>>
>>> -- Forwarded message -
>>> From: Alfredo Covaleda Vélez 
>>> Date: Mon, Oct 4, 2021, 8:25 PM
>>> Subject: What a funny
>>> To: 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- -
>>> .
>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>> 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
>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> 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
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> 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
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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/

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: What a funny

[Tom Johnson]

Don't fact-check jokes.  Take the laugh and run.

===
Tom Johnson
Inst. for Analytic Journalism
Santa Fe, New Mexico
505-577-6483
===

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021, 9:56 PM Stephen Guerin 
wrote:

> 2017 Chemistry Olympiad.
> https://cen.acs.org/articles/95/web/2017/07/US-team-makes-history-IChO.html
>
> The US students won 4 gold medals.
>
> from the article:
> The medals were announced during the closing ceremony on July 14. Taiwan
> (Chinese Taipei) was the only other country to receive four gold medals.
> The top scoring gold medal went to a high school student from Russia. In
> total, 297 students from 76 countries participated in the weeklong
> competition. The IChO committee awarded 36 gold medals, 65 silver medals,
> and 95 bronze medals.
>
> (and Park is probably a Korean American name)
>
> A good journalist checks their sources ;-p  ja ja ja
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 9:35 PM Tom Johnson  wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> ===
>> Tom Johnson
>> Inst. for Analytic Journalism
>> Santa Fe, New Mexico
>> 505-577-6483
>> ===
>>
>> -- Forwarded message -
>> From: Alfredo Covaleda Vélez 
>> Date: Mon, Oct 4, 2021, 8:25 PM
>> Subject: What a funny
>> To: 
>>
>>
>>
>> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> 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
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> 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
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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/

Re: [FRIAM] Fwd: What a funny

[Stephen Guerin]

2017 Chemistry Olympiad.
https://cen.acs.org/articles/95/web/2017/07/US-team-makes-history-IChO.html

The US students won 4 gold medals.

from the article:
The medals were announced during the closing ceremony on July 14. Taiwan
(Chinese Taipei) was the only other country to receive four gold medals.
The top scoring gold medal went to a high school student from Russia. In
total, 297 students from 76 countries participated in the weeklong
competition. The IChO committee awarded 36 gold medals, 65 silver medals,
and 95 bronze medals.

(and Park is probably a Korean American name)

A good journalist checks their sources ;-p  ja ja ja



On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 9:35 PM Tom Johnson  wrote:

>
>
> ===
> Tom Johnson
> Inst. for Analytic Journalism
> Santa Fe, New Mexico
> 505-577-6483
> ===
>
> -- Forwarded message -
> From: Alfredo Covaleda Vélez 
> Date: Mon, Oct 4, 2021, 8:25 PM
> Subject: What a funny
> To: 
>
>
>
> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> 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
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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] Fwd: What a funny

[Tom Johnson]

===
Tom Johnson
Inst. for Analytic Journalism
Santa Fe, New Mexico
505-577-6483
===

-- Forwarded message -
From: Alfredo Covaleda Vélez 
Date: Mon, Oct 4, 2021, 8:25 PM
Subject: What a funny
To: 

.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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] Fwd: Regarding the Journal on Policy and Complex Systems (JPCS)

[Russ Abbott]

If anyone is interested.

-- Russ Abbott
Professor Emeritus, Computer Science
California State University, Los Angeles


-- Forwarded message -
From: Habib Maizoumbou Dan Aouta 
Date: Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 8:30 AM
Subject: Regarding the Journal on Policy and Complex Systems (JPCS)
To: JPCS-group 


[image: Logo.png]

Dear JPCS Reader,

The Policy Studies Organization (PSO) is looking for a new Editor-in-Chief
for its Journal on Policy and Complex Systems (JPCS), published by the PSO
as an open access title. More information on the journal, board, and past
issues, can be found here:
https://www.ipsonet.org/publications/open-access/policy-and-complex-systems

An external website can also be found here:

https://policyandcomplexsystems.wordpress.com

We are very thankful to the outgoing Editor-in-Chief, professor Mirsad
Hadžikadić for all the great work he did on the journal since its
foundation in the Spring of 2014. Since then, JCPS has published
continuously twice a year a great variety of articles, promoting
professional and public understanding of the relationship between policy
and complex systems, and bringing together a thriving community of
multidisciplinary scholars.

We look forward to continuing publication of the journal with a new
Editor-in-Chief. Duties are those customary to the Editor-in-Chief of a
scholarly journal, including complete freedom to appoint staff, co-editors,
and boards, as wished, and make final decisions on the journal’s content.
PSO is responsible for all aspects of journal production, including website
maintenance, copyediting, layout and design, DOI registration, as well as
providing print copies to the editors, boards, and authors, as wished.

If you are interested, or want more information, please contact Daniel
Gutierrez, PSO Executive Director, at dgutierr...@ipsonet.org or by phone
at (202) 795-9165.

The Policy Studies Organization is a non-profit, non-governmental
organization based in Washington, DC, with the goals to disseminate policy
scholarship and promote multidisciplinary conversation about current policy
issues.

Very best regards,

The Journal on Policy and Complex Systems.

-- 
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to jpcs-group+unsubscr...@uncc.edu.

.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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/

Re: [FRIAM] do you answer those phone calls?

[Russ Abbott]

I use the same Google screening service on my Pixel phone. On our landline,
I recorded a similar screening message using our voice-mail system. It will
also record the caller's message.

-- Russ Abbott
Professor Emeritus, Computer Science
California State University, Los Angeles


On Mon, Oct 4, 2021 at 2:18 PM Frank Wimberly  wrote:

> I use Google call screening which asks the caller to say their name and
> reason for calling.  If they say anything I see a transcript and I can
> answer immediately.  Most calls from numbers I don't recognize result in
> hangups.
>
> ---
> Frank C. Wimberly
> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
> Santa Fe, NM 87505
>
> 505 670-9918
> Santa Fe, NM
>
> On Mon, Oct 4, 2021, 2:42 PM Barry MacKichan <
> barry.mackic...@mackichan.com> wrote:
>
>> Our phone service here (in N. Carolina) includes caller id by voice —
>> which is generated by a text-to-voice program that hilariously garbles the
>> text. It seems like state of the art circa 1990.
>>
>> Back when there were humans on the line (usually trying to pump stocks),
>> I’d say hello and then carefully lay the handset on my desk. After about 40
>> seconds I could faintly hear “Barry, … Barry? Barry? Click” I wasn’t
>> keeping track, but my sense is that the number of those calls went down.
>>
>> The only number I give out now is my cell phone, which is relatively
>> immune to these calls. For the moment, anyway.
>>
>> —Barry
>>
>> On 4 Oct 2021, at 12:24, uǝlƃ ☤>$ wrote:
>>
>> Who scams the scammers? Meet the scambaiters
>>
>> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/03/who-scams-the-scammers-meet-the-amateur-scambaiters-taking-on-the-crooks
>>
>> Story: When Renee' and I first got the new phone number here in Oly, the
>> calls were non-stop, 10-20 per day on the landline. I just removed the
>> phone from my office and don't look at or check messages on the landline
>> anymore. But I finally bit the bullet and started answering every call. And
>> talking to whoever was there. If I had to push a button to get to a human,
>> I pushed the button. If I had to talk to a robot for awhile in order to get
>> to a human, I talked to the robot. After about a week of this, the calls
>> started to fade. After about a month, we were down to 1-3 calls per day.
>> Now we're down to maybe 2-3 per week.
>>
>> It works to simply waste their time. And it works whether their
>> "legitimate" life insurance salespeople or scammers.
>>
>> --
>> "Better to be slapped with the truth than kissed with a lie."
>> ☤>$ uǝlƃ
>>
>>
>> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> 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
>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> 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
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> 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
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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] What took Facebook down

[Jochen Fromm]

Are you affected by the ongoing Facebook, Instagram or WhatsApp outage? I don't 
use Facebook or Instagram, only WhatsApp occasionally, in addition to Telegram 
and Signal. It seems to be a DNS/BGP problem. I must admit I have never heard 
of BGP (Border Gateway Protocol) before. 
https://www.zdnet.com/article/what-took-facebook-down/-J.
.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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/

Re: [FRIAM] do you answer those phone calls?

[Frank Wimberly]

I use Google call screening which asks the caller to say their name and
reason for calling.  If they say anything I see a transcript and I can
answer immediately.  Most calls from numbers I don't recognize result in
hangups.

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021, 2:42 PM Barry MacKichan 
wrote:

> Our phone service here (in N. Carolina) includes caller id by voice —
> which is generated by a text-to-voice program that hilariously garbles the
> text. It seems like state of the art circa 1990.
>
> Back when there were humans on the line (usually trying to pump stocks),
> I’d say hello and then carefully lay the handset on my desk. After about 40
> seconds I could faintly hear “Barry, … Barry? Barry? Click” I wasn’t
> keeping track, but my sense is that the number of those calls went down.
>
> The only number I give out now is my cell phone, which is relatively
> immune to these calls. For the moment, anyway.
>
> —Barry
>
> On 4 Oct 2021, at 12:24, uǝlƃ ☤>$ wrote:
>
> Who scams the scammers? Meet the scambaiters
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/03/who-scams-the-scammers-meet-the-amateur-scambaiters-taking-on-the-crooks
>
> Story: When Renee' and I first got the new phone number here in Oly, the
> calls were non-stop, 10-20 per day on the landline. I just removed the
> phone from my office and don't look at or check messages on the landline
> anymore. But I finally bit the bullet and started answering every call. And
> talking to whoever was there. If I had to push a button to get to a human,
> I pushed the button. If I had to talk to a robot for awhile in order to get
> to a human, I talked to the robot. After about a week of this, the calls
> started to fade. After about a month, we were down to 1-3 calls per day.
> Now we're down to maybe 2-3 per week.
>
> It works to simply waste their time. And it works whether their
> "legitimate" life insurance salespeople or scammers.
>
> --
> "Better to be slapped with the truth than kissed with a lie."
> ☤>$ uǝlƃ
>
>
> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam
> 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
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> 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
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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/

Re: [FRIAM] do you answer those phone calls?

[Barry MacKichan]

Our phone service here (in N. Carolina) includes caller id by voice — 
which is generated by a text-to-voice program that hilariously garbles 
the text. It seems like state of the art circa 1990.


Back when there were humans on the line (usually trying to pump stocks), 
I’d say hello and then carefully lay the handset on my desk. After 
about 40 seconds I could faintly hear “Barry, … Barry? Barry? 
Click” I wasn’t keeping track, but my sense is that the number of 
those calls went down.


The only number I give out now is my cell phone, which is relatively 
immune to these calls. For the moment, anyway.


—Barry


On 4 Oct 2021, at 12:24, uǝlƃ ☤>$ wrote:


Who scams the scammers? Meet the scambaiters
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/03/who-scams-the-scammers-meet-the-amateur-scambaiters-taking-on-the-crooks

Story: When Renee' and I first got the new phone number here in Oly, 
the calls were non-stop, 10-20 per day on the landline. I just removed 
the phone from my office and don't look at or check messages on the 
landline anymore. But I finally bit the bullet and started answering 
every call. And talking to whoever was there. If I had to push a 
button to get to a human, I pushed the button. If I had to talk to a 
robot for awhile in order to get to a human, I talked to the robot. 
After about a week of this, the calls started to fade. After about a 
month, we were down to 1-3 calls per day. Now we're down to maybe 2-3 
per week.


It works to simply waste their time. And it works whether their 
"legitimate" life insurance salespeople or scammers.


--
"Better to be slapped with the truth than kissed with a lie."
☤>$ uǝlƃ


.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- 
- .

FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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/

Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate

[Marcus Daniels]

I agree with some of that.   I mentioned the dependently typed programming 
language as one technology to know when I am being inconsistent.   It doesn't 
mean I stop everything to resolve the inconsistency, but I might point the 
headlights in some other direction to avoid the inconsistency (breadth first 
search instead of depth first).   Inconsistency finding is a tool, and 
preferably a semi-automated one.

I'd rather have the option of being a depth first searcher and not worry about 
shelter and food and health care.   I'm not talented enough to be among the 
small number of people that can survive (adequately) doing that sort of thing.  
 I think I wouldn't even like it in general, even if I were.   I don't like 
being the person that says something is irrelevant because everything is 
irrelevant.   I'd like to be a freak among billions of freaks that all admire 
the accomplishments of other freaks.   This is not the world we live in, though.

-Original Message-
From: Friam  On Behalf Of u?l? ?>$
Sent: Monday, October 4, 2021 10:16 AM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate

OK. But academia is in serious trouble, not least exhibited by the rise of 
populism and anti-intellectual distrust of those who might be attracted to 
depth-first search.

Another story: At the last salon, an entomologist asked me "Why do you know so 
much philosophy?" My guess is he was actually trying to politely criticize my 
incessant concept-dropping, referring to oblique discussions that only occur 
amongst such depth-first people. The answer is I don't know any philosophy. I'm 
the worst kind of tourist, trampling endangered species while snapping selfies 
on my iPhone.

But the deeper answer is that we don't need the academy anymore. What we need 
are social safety nets that facilitate the diverse exploration of the 
information field splayed out before us. If an unemployed snowboarder wants to 
do the work to propose a new theory of everything, so be it. I'm willing to 
sacrifice some of my income to help that happen, even if, or perhaps because it 
may eventually be found contradictory to some other ToE somewhere. But a 
consistency hobgoblin would nip that nonsense in the bud at the first hint of 
contradiction ... like a blankface academic advisor in some Physics department 
at some elitist institution.

A focus on consistency is nothing more than subculture gatekeeping 
.

On 10/4/21 10:01 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> In some depth first search one might find a sub-problem that was uncrackable. 
>   If it is one of 100 problems to solve, it is dumb to get hung-up on it, 
> especially if it is of no practical significance.But it is a problem that 
> will attract a certain kind of (autistic) academic attention as well.


-- 
"Better to be slapped with the truth than kissed with a lie."
☤>$ uǝlƃ


.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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] Stages of an Academic Career

[Jochen Fromm]

Sergey Gavrilets from the University of Tennessee posted these stages of an 
academic career today:Stage 1. You give a talk about your professor's 
work.Stage 2. You give a talk about your own work.Stage 3. You give a talk 
about your students' work.Stage 4. You give a talk about the state-of-the-art 
of your field.Stage 5. You give a talk about the state-of-the-art of your field 
but the field has already moved away.Stage 6. You write books on any topic you 
fancy at the moment. Stage 7. You give a talk about consciousness.Not all of us 
may have reached the late Francis Crick stage 7+, but I guess most of us are in 
an advanced stage already... Tomorrow there is a new DySoC webinar from Sergey 
by the way. Nathan Nunn is speaking about cultural mismatch. You can join by 
using Zoomhttps://www.dysoc.org/ess_webinars-J.
.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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/

Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate

[uǝlƃ ☤ $]

OK. But academia is in serious trouble, not least exhibited by the rise of 
populism and anti-intellectual distrust of those who might be attracted to 
depth-first search.

Another story: At the last salon, an entomologist asked me "Why do you know so 
much philosophy?" My guess is he was actually trying to politely criticize my 
incessant concept-dropping, referring to oblique discussions that only occur 
amongst such depth-first people. The answer is I don't know any philosophy. I'm 
the worst kind of tourist, trampling endangered species while snapping selfies 
on my iPhone.

But the deeper answer is that we don't need the academy anymore. What we need 
are social safety nets that facilitate the diverse exploration of the 
information field splayed out before us. If an unemployed snowboarder wants to 
do the work to propose a new theory of everything, so be it. I'm willing to 
sacrifice some of my income to help that happen, even if, or perhaps because it 
may eventually be found contradictory to some other ToE somewhere. But a 
consistency hobgoblin would nip that nonsense in the bud at the first hint of 
contradiction ... like a blankface academic advisor in some Physics department 
at some elitist institution.

A focus on consistency is nothing more than subculture gatekeeping 
.

On 10/4/21 10:01 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> In some depth first search one might find a sub-problem that was uncrackable. 
>   If it is one of 100 problems to solve, it is dumb to get hung-up on it, 
> especially if it is of no practical significance.But it is a problem that 
> will attract a certain kind of (autistic) academic attention as well.


-- 
"Better to be slapped with the truth than kissed with a lie."
☤>$ uǝlƃ


.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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/

Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate

[Marcus Daniels]

< A more productive route is to focus not on contradiction but on completeness. 
And I'm using "focus on" ... I'm not saying *ignore* consistency. Simply spend 
more time trying to cover the ground that needs covering. >

In some depth first search one might find a sub-problem that was uncrackable.   
If it is one of 100 problems to solve, it is dumb to get hung-up on it, 
especially if it is of no practical significance.But it is a problem that 
will attract a certain kind of (autistic) academic attention as well.

Marcus
 

.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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/

Re: [FRIAM] do you answer those phone calls?

[Marcus Daniels]

Once I talked to such a person for a while and asked them about their day and 
how things were going for them.   It seems to me there is no one to sensibly 
abuse so I just hang up immediately.   The people that do the work need it even 
if they have robots helping them.  About the only use I have for a landline now 
is as way to advertise my area code, e.g. to a hiring agent.  (One can do that 
easily enough with VOIP if one thinks it could be useful to fake it.)

-Original Message-
From: Friam  On Behalf Of u?l? ?>$
Sent: Monday, October 4, 2021 9:24 AM
To: FriAM 
Subject: [FRIAM] do you answer those phone calls?

Who scams the scammers? Meet the scambaiters 
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/03/who-scams-the-scammers-meet-the-amateur-scambaiters-taking-on-the-crooks

Story: When Renee' and I first got the new phone number here in Oly, the calls 
were non-stop, 10-20 per day on the landline. I just removed the phone from my 
office and don't look at or check messages on the landline anymore. But I 
finally bit the bullet and started answering every call. And talking to whoever 
was there. If I had to push a button to get to a human, I pushed the button. If 
I had to talk to a robot for awhile in order to get to a human, I talked to the 
robot. After about a week of this, the calls started to fade. After about a 
month, we were down to 1-3 calls per day. Now we're down to maybe 2-3 per week.

It works to simply waste their time. And it works whether their "legitimate" 
life insurance salespeople or scammers.

--
"Better to be slapped with the truth than kissed with a lie."
☤>$ uǝlƃ


.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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/

Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate

[uǝlƃ ☤ $]

I'm not making an anti-reductionist argument ... or, at least, not the typical 
one. That's why I wanted to use "linguistic salience bias". It's a *bias*, 
that's all. But it's a bias that overwhelms some people (e.g. Nick) to harp on 
and on about some tiny little concept (like monism) that has zero impact on 
anything anyone ever does. We don't have to pick on Nick. But it's fun and he 
doesn't seem to mind. We could pick on the logicbros 
.
 Or the lefty "journalists" who like to point out contradictions in anti-masker 
rhetoric . Or whatever. The people we could pick 
on for this salience bias are never ending.

A more productive route is to focus not on contradiction but on completeness. 
And I'm using "focus on" ... I'm not saying *ignore* consistency. Simply spend 
more time trying to cover the ground that needs covering.

On 10/4/21 9:34 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> In what way is it inadequate to fission features into sub-features?  The wall 
> of a cell is one feature of a cell.   Explain why there are walls, variations 
> in the types of walls, how they arise.   Proliferate features but with a 
> consistent model until exceptions are found to that model.  Rinse and repeat.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Friam  On Behalf Of u?l? ?>$
> Sent: Monday, October 4, 2021 9:14 AM
> To: friam@redfish.com
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate
> 
> Well, yeah, I agree. But even that dichotomy isn't clean. Humans are 
> computers, at least a large share of what those bodies do each moment is 
> computation. And, I'd argue that computers are human, at least a large share 
> of the programmed-in sensibilities we see in our applications orbit 
> humanity/humanness. When dogs finally get around to designing computers, that 
> may not be the case. But so far, it is. Or, i.e., we can infer quite a bit 
> about the tool maker from the tool.
> 
> It's that tendency to assume clean dichotomies, predicates, partitions, XOR, 
> that's an artifact of consistency thinking. [ζ] Completeness thinking 
> facilitates constructs like analog computing, even if only slightly. 
> Consistency thinking tends to devolve into sophistry (both the good type like 
> paradox and the bad type).
> 
> I suppose this is why things like quantum woo are so attractive. Or even why 
> it's so easy for middle aged fat men to preach all day about how best to play 
> american football. It's all about where the tight focus butts up against the 
> loose focus. For some reason, this evokes foam and high dimensional, 
> irregular tessellation for me.
> 
> [ζ] Which argues that attempts to isolate, reduce, essentialize what it is 
> humans do that computers don't or vice versa is equivalently fraught ... like 
> that discussion we had recently about whether (or how to make) computers 
> feel. If nothing else, that isolation/essentialism/reductionism of "the hard 
> problem" is, itself, the problem. Our myopia (aka focusable attention) is the 
> problem. We spend lots of time tightening the focus down to things like 
> coherent light, and too little time defocusing out to the universe as a whole.
> 
> On 10/4/21 8:50 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>> I don’t see it that way.  Consistency is work for computers and creativity 
>> is work for humans.  Want the best of both..
>>
>>> On Oct 4, 2021, at 8:11 AM, uǝlƃ ☤>$  wrote:
>>>
>>> So, here again, we seem to be dancing around the hegemony [ξ] of 
>>> consistency. EricS brings in "coherence", which I like better. But I think 
>>> it's the same concept. Monism, "not being self-contradictory", objective 
>>> Bayesian priors, coherence, the ontological status of actual infinities, 
>>> integrated personality, value alignment, partition/predicate crispness, XOR 
>>> choices, etc. all target the same fundamental bogey: 
>>>
>>>   inconsistency
>>>
>>> And that's fine. But it seems, to my biased eye, that we usually leave 
>>> "completeness" to take care of itself ... as part of the negative space in 
>>> the picture. The best definition I've seen of completeness is from a 
>>> presentation by Greg Restall (paraphrasing): "If X models A completely, 
>>> then we can derive A from X." I like this because it smells like 
>>> reachability, "can we get there from here". When we harp too much on not 
>>> being inconsistent, we end up in some sort of word game ... like some wak 
>>> logicbro trying to pwn the libs. But when we talk about completeness, we 
>>> talk about what is *sayable* in our language ... It's less about what we 
>>> can't say and more about what we can say.
>>>
>>> That makes consistency the spastic little sibling of completeness. Yes, mom 
>>> told me I have to take it along with me on the bike ride. But everyone 
>>> hates it because it never shuts up and always says stupid stuff.
>>>
>>> [ξ] I wanted to use a new phrase, "linguistic salience bias", in place of 

Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate

[Frank Wimberly]

In my opinion XOR is useful in mathematics but rarely in human affairs.

---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505

505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM

On Mon, Oct 4, 2021, 10:14 AM uǝlƃ ☤>$  wrote:

> Well, yeah, I agree. But even that dichotomy isn't clean. Humans are
> computers, at least a large share of what those bodies do each moment is
> computation. And, I'd argue that computers are human, at least a large
> share of the programmed-in sensibilities we see in our applications orbit
> humanity/humanness. When dogs finally get around to designing computers,
> that may not be the case. But so far, it is. Or, i.e., we can infer quite a
> bit about the tool maker from the tool.
>
> It's that tendency to assume clean dichotomies, predicates, partitions,
> XOR, that's an artifact of consistency thinking. [ζ] Completeness thinking
> facilitates constructs like analog computing, even if only slightly.
> Consistency thinking tends to devolve into sophistry (both the good type
> like paradox and the bad type).
>
> I suppose this is why things like quantum woo are so attractive. Or even
> why it's so easy for middle aged fat men to preach all day about how best
> to play american football. It's all about where the tight focus butts up
> against the loose focus. For some reason, this evokes foam and high
> dimensional, irregular tessellation for me.
>
> [ζ] Which argues that attempts to isolate, reduce, essentialize what it is
> humans do that computers don't or vice versa is equivalently fraught ...
> like that discussion we had recently about whether (or how to make)
> computers feel. If nothing else, that isolation/essentialism/reductionism
> of "the hard problem" is, itself, the problem. Our myopia (aka focusable
> attention) is the problem. We spend lots of time tightening the focus down
> to things like coherent light, and too little time defocusing out to the
> universe as a whole.
>
> On 10/4/21 8:50 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> > I don’t see it that way.  Consistency is work for computers and
> creativity is work for humans.  Want the best of both..
> >
> >> On Oct 4, 2021, at 8:11 AM, uǝlƃ ☤>$  wrote:
> >>
> >> So, here again, we seem to be dancing around the hegemony [ξ] of
> consistency. EricS brings in "coherence", which I like better. But I think
> it's the same concept. Monism, "not being self-contradictory", objective
> Bayesian priors, coherence, the ontological status of actual infinities,
> integrated personality, value alignment, partition/predicate crispness, XOR
> choices, etc. all target the same fundamental bogey:
> >>
> >>   inconsistency
> >>
> >> And that's fine. But it seems, to my biased eye, that we usually leave
> "completeness" to take care of itself ... as part of the negative space in
> the picture. The best definition I've seen of completeness is from a
> presentation by Greg Restall (paraphrasing): "If X models A completely,
> then we can derive A from X." I like this because it smells like
> reachability, "can we get there from here". When we harp too much on not
> being inconsistent, we end up in some sort of word game ... like some wak
> logicbro trying to pwn the libs. But when we talk about completeness, we
> talk about what is *sayable* in our language ... It's less about what we
> can't say and more about what we can say.
> >>
> >> That makes consistency the spastic little sibling of completeness. Yes,
> mom told me I have to take it along with me on the bike ride. But everyone
> hates it because it never shuts up and always says stupid stuff.
> >>
> >> [ξ] I wanted to use a new phrase, "linguistic salience bias", in place
> of "hegemony". But my epistemic status for the use of that phrase is 50%.
> Hegemony has a nice political tone, too. I kinda like dominance or tyranny.
> Maybe I should have gone with "gravity well" to indicate that consistency
> is a kind of least common denominator ... the type of thing people like
> grammar nazis and logicbros focus on. But I'd rather highlight the more
> accurate state of affairs, which is that those who study expressibility are
> underclass citizens compared to those who study correctness. Sure, when the
> expressors finally "make it" (such that nobody can deny their impact ---
> think Tom Waits, not Elon Musk), we all gather round and use them as an
> excuse to party. But we never go back and knead the tortuous pipeline of
> consistency they *survived* to get there.
> >>
> >>> On 10/3/21 9:41 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> >>> A compiler for a programming language with an advanced type system can
> essentially reject loose talk, but also give powerful tools for
> >>> automated reasoning about consistency.   Getting past this merciless
> editor gives one confidence, or even a certification, that one is not being
> self-contradictory.
> >>
> >>> On 10/3/21 2:43 AM, David Eric Smith wrote:
> >>> ... and when they got comfortable that they had a constructive
> language whose propositions would carry some weight and not br

Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate

[Marcus Daniels]

In what way is it inadequate to fission features into sub-features?  The wall 
of a cell is one feature of a cell.   Explain why there are walls, variations 
in the types of walls, how they arise.   Proliferate features but with a 
consistent model until exceptions are found to that model.  Rinse and repeat.

-Original Message-
From: Friam  On Behalf Of u?l? ?>$
Sent: Monday, October 4, 2021 9:14 AM
To: friam@redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate

Well, yeah, I agree. But even that dichotomy isn't clean. Humans are computers, 
at least a large share of what those bodies do each moment is computation. And, 
I'd argue that computers are human, at least a large share of the programmed-in 
sensibilities we see in our applications orbit humanity/humanness. When dogs 
finally get around to designing computers, that may not be the case. But so 
far, it is. Or, i.e., we can infer quite a bit about the tool maker from the 
tool.

It's that tendency to assume clean dichotomies, predicates, partitions, XOR, 
that's an artifact of consistency thinking. [ζ] Completeness thinking 
facilitates constructs like analog computing, even if only slightly. 
Consistency thinking tends to devolve into sophistry (both the good type like 
paradox and the bad type).

I suppose this is why things like quantum woo are so attractive. Or even why 
it's so easy for middle aged fat men to preach all day about how best to play 
american football. It's all about where the tight focus butts up against the 
loose focus. For some reason, this evokes foam and high dimensional, irregular 
tessellation for me.

[ζ] Which argues that attempts to isolate, reduce, essentialize what it is 
humans do that computers don't or vice versa is equivalently fraught ... like 
that discussion we had recently about whether (or how to make) computers feel. 
If nothing else, that isolation/essentialism/reductionism of "the hard problem" 
is, itself, the problem. Our myopia (aka focusable attention) is the problem. 
We spend lots of time tightening the focus down to things like coherent light, 
and too little time defocusing out to the universe as a whole.

On 10/4/21 8:50 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> I don’t see it that way.  Consistency is work for computers and creativity is 
> work for humans.  Want the best of both..
> 
>> On Oct 4, 2021, at 8:11 AM, uǝlƃ ☤>$  wrote:
>>
>> So, here again, we seem to be dancing around the hegemony [ξ] of 
>> consistency. EricS brings in "coherence", which I like better. But I think 
>> it's the same concept. Monism, "not being self-contradictory", objective 
>> Bayesian priors, coherence, the ontological status of actual infinities, 
>> integrated personality, value alignment, partition/predicate crispness, XOR 
>> choices, etc. all target the same fundamental bogey: 
>>
>>   inconsistency
>>
>> And that's fine. But it seems, to my biased eye, that we usually leave 
>> "completeness" to take care of itself ... as part of the negative space in 
>> the picture. The best definition I've seen of completeness is from a 
>> presentation by Greg Restall (paraphrasing): "If X models A completely, then 
>> we can derive A from X." I like this because it smells like reachability, 
>> "can we get there from here". When we harp too much on not being 
>> inconsistent, we end up in some sort of word game ... like some wak logicbro 
>> trying to pwn the libs. But when we talk about completeness, we talk about 
>> what is *sayable* in our language ... It's less about what we can't say and 
>> more about what we can say.
>>
>> That makes consistency the spastic little sibling of completeness. Yes, mom 
>> told me I have to take it along with me on the bike ride. But everyone hates 
>> it because it never shuts up and always says stupid stuff.
>>
>> [ξ] I wanted to use a new phrase, "linguistic salience bias", in place of 
>> "hegemony". But my epistemic status for the use of that phrase is 50%. 
>> Hegemony has a nice political tone, too. I kinda like dominance or tyranny. 
>> Maybe I should have gone with "gravity well" to indicate that consistency is 
>> a kind of least common denominator ... the type of thing people like grammar 
>> nazis and logicbros focus on. But I'd rather highlight the more accurate 
>> state of affairs, which is that those who study expressibility are 
>> underclass citizens compared to those who study correctness. Sure, when the 
>> expressors finally "make it" (such that nobody can deny their impact --- 
>> think Tom Waits, not Elon Musk), we all gather round and use them as an 
>> excuse to party. But we never go back and knead the tortuous pipeline of 
>> consistency they *survived* to get there.
>>
>>> On 10/3/21 9:41 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>>> A compiler for a programming language with an advanced type system can 
>>> essentially reject loose talk, but also give powerful tools for
>>> automated reasoning about consistency.   Getting past this merciless editor 
>>> gives one confidence, o

[FRIAM] do you answer those phone calls?

[uǝlƃ ☤ $]

Who scams the scammers? Meet the scambaiters
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/03/who-scams-the-scammers-meet-the-amateur-scambaiters-taking-on-the-crooks

Story: When Renee' and I first got the new phone number here in Oly, the calls 
were non-stop, 10-20 per day on the landline. I just removed the phone from my 
office and don't look at or check messages on the landline anymore. But I 
finally bit the bullet and started answering every call. And talking to whoever 
was there. If I had to push a button to get to a human, I pushed the button. If 
I had to talk to a robot for awhile in order to get to a human, I talked to the 
robot. After about a week of this, the calls started to fade. After about a 
month, we were down to 1-3 calls per day. Now we're down to maybe 2-3 per week.

It works to simply waste their time. And it works whether their "legitimate" 
life insurance salespeople or scammers.

-- 
"Better to be slapped with the truth than kissed with a lie."
☤>$ uǝlƃ


.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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/

Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate

[uǝlƃ ☤ $]

Well, yeah, I agree. But even that dichotomy isn't clean. Humans are computers, 
at least a large share of what those bodies do each moment is computation. And, 
I'd argue that computers are human, at least a large share of the programmed-in 
sensibilities we see in our applications orbit humanity/humanness. When dogs 
finally get around to designing computers, that may not be the case. But so 
far, it is. Or, i.e., we can infer quite a bit about the tool maker from the 
tool.

It's that tendency to assume clean dichotomies, predicates, partitions, XOR, 
that's an artifact of consistency thinking. [ζ] Completeness thinking 
facilitates constructs like analog computing, even if only slightly. 
Consistency thinking tends to devolve into sophistry (both the good type like 
paradox and the bad type).

I suppose this is why things like quantum woo are so attractive. Or even why 
it's so easy for middle aged fat men to preach all day about how best to play 
american football. It's all about where the tight focus butts up against the 
loose focus. For some reason, this evokes foam and high dimensional, irregular 
tessellation for me.

[ζ] Which argues that attempts to isolate, reduce, essentialize what it is 
humans do that computers don't or vice versa is equivalently fraught ... like 
that discussion we had recently about whether (or how to make) computers feel. 
If nothing else, that isolation/essentialism/reductionism of "the hard problem" 
is, itself, the problem. Our myopia (aka focusable attention) is the problem. 
We spend lots of time tightening the focus down to things like coherent light, 
and too little time defocusing out to the universe as a whole.

On 10/4/21 8:50 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> I don’t see it that way.  Consistency is work for computers and creativity is 
> work for humans.  Want the best of both..
> 
>> On Oct 4, 2021, at 8:11 AM, uǝlƃ ☤>$  wrote:
>>
>> So, here again, we seem to be dancing around the hegemony [ξ] of 
>> consistency. EricS brings in "coherence", which I like better. But I think 
>> it's the same concept. Monism, "not being self-contradictory", objective 
>> Bayesian priors, coherence, the ontological status of actual infinities, 
>> integrated personality, value alignment, partition/predicate crispness, XOR 
>> choices, etc. all target the same fundamental bogey: 
>>
>>   inconsistency
>>
>> And that's fine. But it seems, to my biased eye, that we usually leave 
>> "completeness" to take care of itself ... as part of the negative space in 
>> the picture. The best definition I've seen of completeness is from a 
>> presentation by Greg Restall (paraphrasing): "If X models A completely, then 
>> we can derive A from X." I like this because it smells like reachability, 
>> "can we get there from here". When we harp too much on not being 
>> inconsistent, we end up in some sort of word game ... like some wak logicbro 
>> trying to pwn the libs. But when we talk about completeness, we talk about 
>> what is *sayable* in our language ... It's less about what we can't say and 
>> more about what we can say.
>>
>> That makes consistency the spastic little sibling of completeness. Yes, mom 
>> told me I have to take it along with me on the bike ride. But everyone hates 
>> it because it never shuts up and always says stupid stuff.
>>
>> [ξ] I wanted to use a new phrase, "linguistic salience bias", in place of 
>> "hegemony". But my epistemic status for the use of that phrase is 50%. 
>> Hegemony has a nice political tone, too. I kinda like dominance or tyranny. 
>> Maybe I should have gone with "gravity well" to indicate that consistency is 
>> a kind of least common denominator ... the type of thing people like grammar 
>> nazis and logicbros focus on. But I'd rather highlight the more accurate 
>> state of affairs, which is that those who study expressibility are 
>> underclass citizens compared to those who study correctness. Sure, when the 
>> expressors finally "make it" (such that nobody can deny their impact --- 
>> think Tom Waits, not Elon Musk), we all gather round and use them as an 
>> excuse to party. But we never go back and knead the tortuous pipeline of 
>> consistency they *survived* to get there.
>>
>>> On 10/3/21 9:41 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>>> A compiler for a programming language with an advanced type system can 
>>> essentially reject loose talk, but also give powerful tools for
>>> automated reasoning about consistency.   Getting past this merciless editor 
>>> gives one confidence, or even a certification, that one is not being 
>>> self-contradictory.
>>
>>> On 10/3/21 2:43 AM, David Eric Smith wrote:
>>> ... and when they got comfortable that they had a constructive language 
>>> whose propositions would carry some weight and not break into 
>>> inconsistencies, they stopped protesting against taking limits.  So one 
>>> could dig back into all that laborious history, which
>>> ... Then we can go round and round about the axiom of choice and so f

Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate

[Marcus Daniels]

I don’t see it that way.  Consistency is work for computers and creativity is 
work for humans.  Want the best of both..

> On Oct 4, 2021, at 8:11 AM, uǝlƃ ☤>$  wrote:
> 
> So, here again, we seem to be dancing around the hegemony [ξ] of 
> consistency. EricS brings in "coherence", which I like better. But I think 
> it's the same concept. Monism, "not being self-contradictory", objective 
> Bayesian priors, coherence, the ontological status of actual infinities, 
> integrated personality, value alignment, partition/predicate crispness, XOR 
> choices, etc. all target the same fundamental bogey: 
> 
>   inconsistency
> 
> And that's fine. But it seems, to my biased eye, that we usually leave 
> "completeness" to take care of itself ... as part of the negative space in 
> the picture. The best definition I've seen of completeness is from a 
> presentation by Greg Restall (paraphrasing): "If X models A completely, then 
> we can derive A from X." I like this because it smells like reachability, 
> "can we get there from here". When we harp too much on not being 
> inconsistent, we end up in some sort of word game ... like some wak logicbro 
> trying to pwn the libs. But when we talk about completeness, we talk about 
> what is *sayable* in our language ... It's less about what we can't say and 
> more about what we can say.
> 
> That makes consistency the spastic little sibling of completeness. Yes, mom 
> told me I have to take it along with me on the bike ride. But everyone hates 
> it because it never shuts up and always says stupid stuff.
> 
> [ξ] I wanted to use a new phrase, "linguistic salience bias", in place of 
> "hegemony". But my epistemic status for the use of that phrase is 50%. 
> Hegemony has a nice political tone, too. I kinda like dominance or tyranny. 
> Maybe I should have gone with "gravity well" to indicate that consistency is 
> a kind of least common denominator ... the type of thing people like grammar 
> nazis and logicbros focus on. But I'd rather highlight the more accurate 
> state of affairs, which is that those who study expressibility are underclass 
> citizens compared to those who study correctness. Sure, when the expressors 
> finally "make it" (such that nobody can deny their impact --- think Tom 
> Waits, not Elon Musk), we all gather round and use them as an excuse to 
> party. But we never go back and knead the tortuous pipeline of consistency 
> they *survived* to get there.
> 
>> On 10/3/21 9:41 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>> A compiler for a programming language with an advanced type system can 
>> essentially reject loose talk, but also give powerful tools for
>> automated reasoning about consistency.   Getting past this merciless editor 
>> gives one confidence, or even a certification, that one is not being 
>> self-contradictory.
> 
>> On 10/3/21 2:43 AM, David Eric Smith wrote:
>> ... and when they got comfortable that they had a constructive language 
>> whose propositions would carry some weight and not break into 
>> inconsistencies, they stopped protesting against taking limits.  So one 
>> could dig back into all that laborious history, which
>> ... Then we can go round and round about the axiom of choice and so forth, 
>> versus Voevodsky and univalent foundations, or Brouwer and intuitionism.  
>> There were a few turns of that wheel of samsara here a few months ago, but I 
>> think people ran out of things to comment on and drifted away.
>> 
>> ... and still be coherent.  
>> 
>> ... there is no “objective Bayesianism”.  ... then chooses however one will. 
>>  The point is not to ask God to save you from making a choice.  The point is 
>> to acknowledge and embrace that you will make a choice, and then accept that 
>> all the consequences of it are yours as well.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> "Better to be slapped with the truth than kissed with a lie."
> ☤>$ uǝlƃ
> 
> 
> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
> 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
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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/

Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate

[uǝlƃ ☤ $]

So, here again, we seem to be dancing around the hegemony [ξ] of consistency. 
EricS brings in "coherence", which I like better. But I think it's the same 
concept. Monism, "not being self-contradictory", objective Bayesian priors, 
coherence, the ontological status of actual infinities, integrated personality, 
value alignment, partition/predicate crispness, XOR choices, etc. all target 
the same fundamental bogey: 

   inconsistency

And that's fine. But it seems, to my biased eye, that we usually leave 
"completeness" to take care of itself ... as part of the negative space in the 
picture. The best definition I've seen of completeness is from a presentation 
by Greg Restall (paraphrasing): "If X models A completely, then we can derive A 
from X." I like this because it smells like reachability, "can we get there 
from here". When we harp too much on not being inconsistent, we end up in some 
sort of word game ... like some wak logicbro trying to pwn the libs. But when 
we talk about completeness, we talk about what is *sayable* in our language ... 
It's less about what we can't say and more about what we can say.

That makes consistency the spastic little sibling of completeness. Yes, mom 
told me I have to take it along with me on the bike ride. But everyone hates it 
because it never shuts up and always says stupid stuff.

[ξ] I wanted to use a new phrase, "linguistic salience bias", in place of 
"hegemony". But my epistemic status for the use of that phrase is 50%. Hegemony 
has a nice political tone, too. I kinda like dominance or tyranny. Maybe I 
should have gone with "gravity well" to indicate that consistency is a kind of 
least common denominator ... the type of thing people like grammar nazis and 
logicbros focus on. But I'd rather highlight the more accurate state of 
affairs, which is that those who study expressibility are underclass citizens 
compared to those who study correctness. Sure, when the expressors finally 
"make it" (such that nobody can deny their impact --- think Tom Waits, not Elon 
Musk), we all gather round and use them as an excuse to party. But we never go 
back and knead the tortuous pipeline of consistency they *survived* to get 
there.

On 10/3/21 9:41 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> A compiler for a programming language with an advanced type system can 
> essentially reject loose talk, but also give powerful tools for
> automated reasoning about consistency.   Getting past this merciless editor 
> gives one confidence, or even a certification, that one is not being 
> self-contradictory.

On 10/3/21 2:43 AM, David Eric Smith wrote:
> ... and when they got comfortable that they had a constructive language whose 
> propositions would carry some weight and not break into inconsistencies, they 
> stopped protesting against taking limits.  So one could dig back into all 
> that laborious history, which
> ... Then we can go round and round about the axiom of choice and so forth, 
> versus Voevodsky and univalent foundations, or Brouwer and intuitionism.  
> There were a few turns of that wheel of samsara here a few months ago, but I 
> think people ran out of things to comment on and drifted away.
> 
> ... and still be coherent.  
> 
> ... there is no “objective Bayesianism”.  ... then chooses however one will.  
> The point is not to ask God to save you from making a choice.  The point is 
> to acknowledge and embrace that you will make a choice, and then accept that 
> all the consequences of it are yours as well.



-- 
"Better to be slapped with the truth than kissed with a lie."
☤>$ uǝlƃ


.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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/

Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate

[Prof David West]

Textbook knowledge:

*wu wei *is the Taoist close equivalent to Vedic / Buddhist "non-attached 
action."The most often cited "description" of this idea is Arjuna's dilemma as 
laid out in the Bhagavad-Gita. To qualify, an action must be "correct" based on 
a perfect knowledge of all the factors affecting that action, AND, it must be 
free of "motivation" including desire, fear, ego, etc.

Experiential knowledge:

wu wei is very akin to "being in the flow" — actions without conscious 
awareness, each one exactly and precisely correct in context. There is no sense 
of an "actor" just the actions.  

Favorite example:

Sesshu's Long Scroll (Landscapes of the Four Seasons) — ink and color washes, 
1.25 feet by 51 feet, *"Painted by Sesshu Toyo, formerly holder of the first 
seat at Tine-'tung, _on a sunny afternoon _in December in the eighteenth year 
of the Bummei era at the age of sixtey-seven." (emphasis mine)*

*davew*
**

On Sun, Oct 3, 2021, at 10:04 PM, David Eric Smith wrote:
> I think about as opposite to nugatory as one could get.
> 
> Wu wei more like having an affect “get itself done” without making a big 
> noise about doing it.  A kind of more efficient getting-done by avoiding the 
> distractions of self-conscious effort.
> 
> 
>> On Oct 3, 2021, at 11:35 PM,  
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> Speaking of words, I thought wuwei was interesting.  It seems to mean 
>> “nugatory”.
>>  
>> Nick Thompson
>> thompnicks...@gmail.com
>> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ 
>> 
>>  
>> *From:* Friam  *On Behalf Of *Stephen Guerin
>> *Sent:* Sunday, October 3, 2021 4:02 PM
>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate
>>  
>> On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 5:57 PM  wrote:
>>> Just to be clear – and perhaps nerdishly literal minded – I would NEVER 
>>> claim that word play alone is science; I would only claim that it has a 
>>> role to play.
>>>  
>>> On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 10:59 AM  wrote:
  You might help me distinguish between vicious DAWW and virtuous DAWW.  
 You might exile me.  But you probably won’t get me to stop. 
>>> 
>>> If we follow the virtuous DAWW, it feels like wuwei  
>>> science
>>>  to me. Who needs action  
>>> when you got words? We are but meat puppets playing with nirvana 
>>> .
>>> 
>> Nick, I absolutely see the value in wordplay (DAWW) and do think it's an 
>> important part of science and mathematics.
>> 
>> I was being perhaps a little too clever in my own mind with my obtuse DAWW 
>> riff above.  At the risk of over parsing (like the risk of explaining a 
>> joke)  virtuous DAWW triggered the homophone of the Dao (道) and its central 
>> concept of wu-wei, which is often inaccurately translated as inaction but 
>> closer to right action / Least (stationary) action in physics for me. 
>>  
>> This then triggered lyrics of one of my favorite songs, Plateau 
>> 
>>  from the Meat Puppets,  "who needs action when you got words". To me, the 
>> line captures your and my relationship where I'm struggling with 
>> generalizing the concept of Action in Complex Systems and you are working 
>> your thoughts out with words. I find this a healthy dialogue!
>>  
>> And then I couldn't resist sharing the MTV unplugged concert where Nirvana 
>> covered the Meat Puppets song with one of the Meat Puppets playing on stage. 
>> The link to Youtube is to that line in the song in the performance.  So the 
>> literal Meat Puppet playing with Nivana mutated to "we are but meat puppets 
>> playing with Nirvana" gave me 15 minutes of interesting private 
>> contemplation of a puppet master animating our puppets and wooing our puppet 
>> minds with Nirvana.
>>   
>> Certainly too obtuse of references and self-indulgent to post but what the 
>> hell.
>> 
>> So I really do appreciate your DAWW and was just trying to join in and play 
>> with your dicking. :-)
>> 
>> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> un/subscribe 
>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=

[FRIAM] biology, the exceptional science

[Roger Critchlow]

Or where categories go to die.  Everybody knows what a cell is, right?  The
most abundant human cells by number are red blood cells, which are
perfectly good cells, except that they have no cell nucleus.  The most
abundant human cells by volume would be the voluntary muscle cells, which
are perfectly good cells, except that they have multiple cell nuclei.  So
most human cells are exceptional.

And everybody knows what a body is, right?  Or at least know one when you
see one?  https://www.rifters.com/crawl/?p=10007

that last via hackernews

-- rec --

.-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam
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/

Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate

[David Eric Smith]

I think about as opposite to nugatory as one could get.

Wu wei more like having an affect “get itself done” without making a big noise 
about doing it.  A kind of more efficient getting-done by avoiding the 
distractions of self-conscious effort.


> On Oct 3, 2021, at 11:35 PM,  
>  wrote:
> 
> Speaking of words, I thought wuwei was interesting.  It seems to mean 
> “nugatory”.
>  
> Nick Thompson
> thompnicks...@gmail.com 
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/ 
> 
>  
> From: Friam mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com>> On 
> Behalf Of Stephen Guerin
> Sent: Sunday, October 3, 2021 4:02 PM
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group  >
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Newborn Heart Rate
>  
> On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 5:57 PM  > wrote:
>> Just to be clear – and perhaps nerdishly literal minded – I would NEVER 
>> claim that word play alone is science; I would only claim that it has a role 
>> to play.
>>  
>> On Sat, Oct 2, 2021 at 10:59 AM > > wrote:
>>>  You might help me distinguish between vicious DAWW and virtuous DAWW.  You 
>>> might exile me.  But you probably won’t get me to stop. 
>> 
>> If we follow the virtuous DAWW, it feels like wuwei  
>> science
>>  to me. Who needs action  
>> when you got words? We are but meat puppets playing with nirvana 
>> .
>> 
> Nick, I absolutely see the value in wordplay (DAWW) and do think it's an 
> important part of science and mathematics.
> 
> I was being perhaps a little too clever in my own mind with my obtuse DAWW 
> riff above.  At the risk of over parsing (like the risk of explaining a joke) 
>  virtuous DAWW triggered the homophone of the Dao (道) and its central concept 
> of wu-wei, which is often inaccurately translated as inaction but closer to 
> right action / Least (stationary) action in physics for me. 
>  
> This then triggered lyrics of one of my favorite songs, Plateau 
> 
>  from the Meat Puppets,  "who needs action when you got words". To me, the 
> line captures your and my relationship where I'm struggling with generalizing 
> the concept of Action in Complex Systems and you are working your thoughts 
> out with words. I find this a healthy dialogue!
>  
> And then I couldn't resist sharing the MTV unplugged concert where Nirvana 
> covered the Meat Puppets song with one of the Meat Puppets playing on stage. 
> The link to Youtube is to that line in the song in the performance.  So the 
> literal Meat Puppet playing with Nivana mutated to "we are but meat puppets 
> playing with Nirvana" gave me 15 minutes of interesting private contemplation 
> of a puppet master animating our puppets and wooing our puppet minds with 
> Nirvana.
>   
> Certainly too obtuse of references and self-indulgent to post but what the 
> hell.
> 
> So I really do appreciate your DAWW and was just trying to join in and play 
> with your dicking. :-)
> 
> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam 
> 
> un/subscribe 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,0hKg5nNVyMTwZ28Wq23pfo2xzn0L2FgLm2_aY_hfIXMUUAx6KpTUfo-YKuozVt1lb8EJjA7X87fFBzd8aFdoX01AOYNmoTXPY_-xdc7K1PnuBTnFm_IF7fLbsTY,&typo=1
>  
> 
> FRIAM-COMIC 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,otdM3mXOTQrtX5ZdHAOTv1aTVkvix2uYZwVPj-M3-6CnImVf72qiapEwMPwaZzSfFfMrNZHl0ONjHZ5anf0b0Fz_3Lj17sg3wMvOvdJX&typo=1
>  
> 
> archives:
> 5/2017 thru present 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%