Re: [FRIAM] WHEN IS COMPLEXITY A GOOD?
Nicholas Thompson wrote at 02/08/2013 11:44 AM: I have have two quite contradictory definitions floating around in my head: (1) the number of bits and pieces x the number of kinds of bits and pieces or (2)the number of organizational levels in the system. The two definitions work at cross purposes in my head because I think of heaps of stuff as being unstable and hierarchical systems as (usually) stable. I tend to shy away from any construct requiring the concept of levels, because it carries all sorts of hidden assumptions that severely bias the conversation. A more general concept is that of aspects, scopes, facets, foci, perspectives, etc. Instead of the simple ordering relation of or , we can use inside, outside, sibling, overlap/closure, and distance in all those relations. Glen now introduces (with respect to programming languages) a new dimension, expressivity vs generality. I know j.s. about computer languages, but the metaphor of expressivity is intriguing to me, particularly when opposed to generality. Is the genetic code expressive or general? And how do they related to complexity. And what is YOUR working definition of complexity. The thing about a gene is that it's a placeholder, a name, for the multifarious mechanisms that constitute the world around us. Then we come along with our dynamic but singular, focused attention and slice out a part of the observable muck around us. The artificial discreteness between any one gene and any other gene is imposed by that aspect, scope, or focus of attention. The extent to which there is a natural discreteness between the ambient muck (observABLE phenomena), a natural discreteness in the machine(s) that generate that ambient muck, is questionable. Moreover, the extent to which the discreteness of the muck maps to the discreteness of the machine(s) is questionable. FWIW, when I talk about complexity, I'm talking about these discretizations, of the generator, then generated, and the maps between the two. Expressivity applies to the generating machine(s). E.g. What's the smallest machine we can imagine that is capable of generating any given slice of ambient muck? Or, given any machine, how large is its generated phenotype? This is where I think complexity is useful. Complexity is the word we use to describe interesting maps between generators and the generated. -- glen e. p. ropella, 971-255-2847, http://tempusdictum.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
Re: [FRIAM] WHEN IS COMPLEXITY A GOOD?
I probably should not pick such a nit, but all of Silicon Valley would haunt me for years. The term actually used there is civilian. I don't know exactly why it was became so popular in the 70's but I believe it is when it was first used relating to computing. Naturally it was used by the military derisively forever. Back to the show! -- Owen On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: All, When I first moved here, seven years ago, Owen set me down and eldered me concerning citizens like me who have no respect for threads, whereas, people like YOU, people who really are experienced with computers, see the importance of not bending threads But this is the worst gang of @##!@% thread benders I have ever had the misfortune to talk with. Thus, I now find myself in the unlikely role of the FRIAM thread fascist. Owen, you can pass me the Official Gavel, next time we meet. snip** 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
Re: [FRIAM] WHEN IS COMPLEXITY A GOOD?
In the UN we used the term civil society. Ah the vocabulary of silos. Enjoyed attending FRIAM again. Paul -Original Message- From: Owen Densmore o...@backspaces.net To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group friam@redfish.com Sent: Fri, Feb 8, 2013 2:59 pm Subject: Re: [FRIAM] WHEN IS COMPLEXITY A GOOD? I probably should not pick such a nit, but all of Silicon Valley would haunt me for years. The term actually used there is civilian. I don't know exactly why it was became so popular in the 70's but I believe it is when it was first used relating to computing. Naturally it was used by the military derisively forever. Back to the show! -- Owen On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 12:44 PM, Nicholas Thompson nickthomp...@earthlink.net wrote: All, When I first moved here, seven years ago, Owen set me down and eldered me concerning citizens like me who have no respect for threads, whereas, people like YOU, people who really are experienced with computers, see the importance of not bending threads But this is the worst gang of @##!@% thread benders I have ever had the misfortune to talk with. Thus, I now find myself in the unlikely role of the FRIAM thread fascist. Owen, you can pass me the Official Gavel, next time we meet. snip 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 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
