Memes, and more

Seeing an article on Memes in the Smithsonian Magazine brought several reactions.

---

At first, a little irony cropped up. Just like this blog dances around t-issues, those who use meme stay on this side of the metaphysical. Ah, when will science allow a more full view? By the way, truth engineering can help attain this.

---

Then, associated with the article was this one on media making us dumber. Of course, they're only talking the social, at this point. But, we could use the TV, too (idiot box, some have said). Perhaps, even radio may have had some denigration thrown at it.

---

Even back in the early days, some may have seen writing as a means to lessen memory (phenomenally, of more stature than any of our artificial beasties). To wit, the old guys knocking those who were chiseling in stone. Bring this forward step by step.

---

So, we see 'Turn on, Log in, Wise up' (06/25/2015 -- if only, then the real promise of the web/cloud might be realized) as a tongue-in-cheek nod to the 60s (and Leary) in the context of the internet's influence on our psyches. Forgetting the zombies who drive (that is, mindless attention to some social media being presented by a supposed 'smart' device all the while riding in a dangerous projectile whose sole control is reliant upon the brain of the one who, in a trance, seems to be absorbed in some 'nothing' that seems to be every dense nowadays), there is still a lot to look at here.

---

We need to get back to being (and Being), having left this topic dangling for a long while. After all, note the use of 'Being' in the label.

Remarks:

06/25/2015 -- Throwback Thursday, a social media meme. Leary's influence (also, his iconoclastic self's rewards - albeit, late - let's hear it for Berkeley as that which allowed his salvage). Referenced this from that (on auras).

06/25/2015 -- ACM Communications had an article (Created Computed Universe) that suggest that our computional prowess ought to lead to agnosticism rather than to anything else. Of course, my initial remark: So many modern minds conjure and contort in order to introduce what is not much different than what some knew many millennia ago in the desert.

11/09/2012 -- Picked up a Dawkins book yesterday that grabbed me several ways. So, I'll have to be getting back to this discussion. Anyone not get either/or? Does it not say to get your face out of that of others'?

11/08/2012 -- Wonderful new blog: Engineering Memes.

05/03/2012 -- We'll start a 'meme' discussion, Either / Or. 

05/01/2012 -- We'll need to talk singularity in the context of Alan.

12/05/2011 -- We have a new meme. Rather than have/have nots (which is a moral split), we now have 1%-99% (a metrical space); that is, something within which we can maneuver and make decisions (any more meaningful?).

08/11/2011 -- IEEE -- The selfish meme.

08/10/2011 -- For 'head-butt' below, use 'establish pecking order' (all the various ways -- perhaps the meme will guide to that which is less destructive to the innocent).

08/05/2011 -- In case there is a need to be more obvious (the meme: the chicken or the egg -- below), which is the oldest profession: head-butt or mate. Note, if you would, that the latter is usually preceded by the former, in many cases.

08/03/2011 -- There are several ways to ponder economics within an evolutionary framework. However, starting with the two (no, not one) 'oldest' professions might be of interest: head-butting (see Remarks 07/29/2011) and, then, that which is usually cast as the oldest. Which came first (the meme: the chicken or the egg)?

Modified: 06/25/2015

Social era

The title refers to the theme of the IEEE Spectrum's June, 2011 issue. All of the articles are interesting to a truth engineering framework, however here is a peek at a few.

• Super socialize me -- the cover theme. Altogether, there are sixteen articles very much worth a read. The following order has no implied meaning (not even Jungian).
• New insults -- looking at some of the behavior that these new media invoke in people, one might think that the Johnson quote might be apropos: It is surely better a man should be abused than forgotten.
• The map -- interesting little take on people finding each other via the new media; how many are looking for you? says one ad.
• This is your mind online -- Ah yes, the web's contents/presentations do (can) have palpable results. And, what we are on-line may tell a bit about ourselves (only to the extent allow by 'being' (small-t issue). The avatar (whose look, and behavior, will surely change) is one example that bears some more attention.
• Under the hood -- basically looks at some technical issues related to the two big players, yet these apply to the whole spectrum. Yes, your on-line being does not exist without a whole lot of support.

Now, to tie into the blog's focus, here are some concepts to be explored further within the context of social media: map-territory, Turing space, t-issues, truth and lemons, ... One subject may be to anticipate how these will look in 10 years and to what extent we may have changed.

... in work

Remarks:

12/13/2012 -- Is it time to move beyond the Turing Test?

Modified: 12/13/2012

Caveat Emptor

Beware, essentially. A recent article in the ACM Communications, inadvertently, lays out the motivation behind Truth Engineering. We'll have to take advantage of that. Why?

It ought to become 'be aware' which is what is essential to life (sensors, feedbacks, etc.).

---

The article is under controlled access; see Fedaerated's comment and the editorial review.

The article deals with why 'lemons' can be a problem with markets. Now, why are markets important? Essentially, with the newer age's progress (supposed -- to be discussed), the wisdom of crowds, and markets, are how we know the truth?

---

Is that not silly? To carry it further, the article, by Princeton people, was serious in describing how we cannot know many things. Such as the future. Well, risk handling looks at that. Or, such as, whether your buddy is trustworthy. Here, folks, the military paradigm has the advantage. And, it's related to group dynamics, partly. We ought to run some of the banking, similarly, under a bare bones (truthful) mechanism, thereby removing fat cats, et al.

---

Now, to the matter, we'll get back to lemons. We all hope that we're not dealing with such, but how do we know? Usually, family is a fall-back thing but not always. The military carries that forward, with the band of brothers. We can talk about all sorts of ways that humans have dealt with hypocrisy and deceit.

---

But, then come mathematics, which is the realm, usually, of the egg-heads, and its companion, computation. Early reactions, by the public, was that the computer knows all (hence, one of the attractions of Watson), even though there was the adage of garbage-in, garbage-out. You see, GIGO still assumed that 'logic' was right. See? Yet, we know chips fail, etc.

Ever think that the mathematics, itself, can be suspect? Evidently, Hawking does not, from what I can see. But, we'll save that for another time.

---

The referenced article laid out a rationale for describing how a buyer could be duped even with transparency and rational decisions. How? Complexity, in certain cases, prevents determining sleight of hand on the part of the seller.

---

Consider, folks, that this could even be unconscious on the part of the seller, though, in most cases, it's just the human trait to try 'to screw' someone.

---

These are computationally hard problems, but intuition can help. That is, the very thing that was thrown out by the egg-head mathematicians is the essential thing needed for truth assessment. Yes, indeed. Somehow, we've all been led to honor, worship, a particular brand of mathematics, probably due to its success in conquering the world. At the same time, has not the mess (oops on oops) grown to be worse?

---

Not proposing easy answers, as these are difficult issues. However, a new type of elitism has emerged with the mathematic/computation-ally expressed worlds (first, second, cyber, ...) that can be chilling to observe and downright ominous in its possible consequences. Some have ranted about this.

Unfortunately, the whole mechanism of out-housing (doing in the doers) is based upon this paradigm that exploits and spits out. Yet, as demonstrated by those who have ascended, there are heights to attain; however, and I say again, however, it will, in the end, turn out to be within the egalitarian scope loved so much by some of the boomers, in their youth.

And, crucial to the theme will be those things for which truth engineering was meant to offer a means for knowing, controlling, and ensuring sustainability across the board.

Remarks:

10/19/2013 -- Changes are pending.

09/21/2011 -- On Wealth and the CEO MVP.

05/28/2011 -- We'll see 'avatars' galore.

Modified: 10/19/2013

Doers II

In reviewing some old posts (2008), I ran across this one (Doers and speculators). Sheesh, we think those types that deal with abstractions as being so smart. Like, how many idolize Warren, as if he is some epitome? Then, Big Ben has his following, too.

Now, reading this post made me recall the motivation. Too, I see that it is right on three years later. For some reason, there has been a little digression but not really.

Let's, first, pull together posts related to this theme from the past few years.

• Criticism and truth (October 26, 2007) - if one looks at sports, for instance, it's really apparent. How many arm chair quarterbacks are there each monday night throughout the NFL season? In baseball, there are nine on the field for any team at any point in the game. Forgetting the few, coaches and staff and such, that support the team, how many are involved (fans: at the game, watching on tv, etc.)? So, we have only a small collection of doers and a whole lot of watchers. Trouble is, the economy is like that, too. Just as people bet on games, the markets (as currently defined) allow a whole lot of gambling that is really not of much usefulness (crowd sourcing notwithstanding).
• Justice and truth (November 10, 2007) - as the workers toil, they diminish to naught. As the watchers gain, fat cats grow unbounded. Part of that is the belief that business has to be ruthless (to wit, article about Warren's recent misstep - see Remarks 04/30/2011).
• Free and fee (August 27, 2008) - something for nothing seems to be the underpinning motivation of greed (or more for less, etc.). That this cannot lead to realistic, and sustainable, economics is what we need to look at.
• Truth and toil (September 16, 2009) - of course, there is always the 'classism' that is the basis of capitalism (which is one big factor in the emergence of the ca-pital-sino).

--

What is the point of all this? Well, there are two things. For one, problems with handling abstractions cause more than just the map-territory mishap in which we see the model becoming more real, in the minds of some, than that which is modeled. Pity the poor sucker caught in the jaws of the six-sigma tightening belt.

Secondly, many, who are in the positions of power, never did a lick of 'real' work (as in, dirty hands, of course). Now, we may consider that excelling at some sport may be considered 'work' in this context. A joke that one heard prior to the wedding of last week was that some, within the ranks of the royals, were aghast that Kate had actually worked for a living.

Perhaps, if some of those who are the diapered CEO types had been forced to work their way up (in senses to be discussed), they would not fall so much under the weight of their egos into hubris. The military model works in this case. There are few higher-order officers who have not come up through the ranks (O-series, sufficient, okay?). That is, one does not fall into a position of command via family or appointment (though, some politicos would probably want this).

In terms of exhausting their resources, some top-down thinkers would know more about the reality of what can be accomplished if they had the proper experience. But, no. Management has taken itself to be above differentiation by domain as it operates from universals (or, almost).

The whole out-housing phenomenon is predicated on a never-ending pool of potential exploitees. But, that is a whole another subject to be addressed.

---

Of course, the whole system is awry in this sense and has been for some time. After all, it was several 100s years ago that the first insurance minds cast lots in betting on the success of the doers (people like those who produced goods and those actually moved them from one place to another - in many cases, facing storms on a raging sea). Then, we have funny money which has no basis in reality, at all.

Remarks:

03/25/2013 -- The Atlantic had an article about King Abdullah II. Now, he is an example of a doer, from several angles. What I liked when I read it was that while being educated in Massachusetts, he bussed tables. What that means for those who don't know is clean up dirty dishes and such. When I, as a young man, was in the US Army, we had still had KP duty which included such types of things. Another task that ought to be tried once by everyone: cleaning the grease pit.

05/25/2011 -- Lemons problem, dark pools, ... Oh, so much to look at!

05/09/2011 -- Milking the system, something from nothing, ... (analogous to perpetual motion).

05/06/2011 -- Good engineers are doers.

05/05/2011 -- New America Foundation: Middle class under siege.

Modified: 03/25/2013

Turing space

We have known about the Turing test for awhile. There has been progress in passing of this test that seemed far fetched at the time that Turing offered the notion and its context.

We also know that people dumb themselves down in order for systems to work, many times. And, this is mandated by work and bosses so that things, like processes and standard procedures, rule.

Yet, the creative and the free (defined as the monied by some) show that there must be something to human existence that can lift us beyond the angst and existential despair (about work, think Maggie's Farm).

Aside: That the best and brightest think that they are 'it' assumes that there is an army (as in hosts of old) of those who can be trammeled. How else to explain the out-housing mania that left the US without jobs? But, we'll get back to that.

Of course, the motivation for Truth Engineering comes from things related to Turing and more. The emergence of idiocies, via social media and more, seem to be an expanding affair; is there any limit to the dumbness?

The Atlantic's recent story bears some attention which we intend to look at further in this, and related, contexts. Many things need to be discussed: how many think that the map is the territory without a moment's thought?

For now, consider this a note for heads-up caution, if you have not thought about these things and about how they will impact (yes, used advisedly) your life and that of your loved ones.

As well, we can give Turing more of his due, too.

Remarks:

12/13/2012 -- Is it time to move beyond the Turing Test?

03/12/2012 -- We have all year to think of Alan's contributions.

03/08/2012 -- Example modern use of Turing, et al.

03/07/2012 -- 100th of Alan M. Turing.

05/28/2011 -- We'll see 'avatars' galore.

Modified: 12/13/2012

Map and territory, again

That in the title was mentioned before, very early (Territory and map and Territory, map, truth). It was over three years ago, before dire things unfolded along several fronts.

So, we now have a skin issue to look at. From a distance, okay, since there is no close tie. Rather, our mode will be collecting examples to show how we have gone awry, along several fronts.

It seems to me that some type of realizability warp has happened in the minds of the educated. Of course, not all of the learned. I want to specifically address those of the quantitative bent (mathematical and computational) and to discuss the issues with any who want to understand how the best and brightest (not only by their greed) have led so many on perdition-laden paths.

One thing that we can do is try to establish where things went awry, using the timeline of mathematics as it unfolded in the twentieth century. That we saw computational prowess explode in so many ways during the last 20 years, or so, exacerbated the problems.

It was noted earlier that things would have to become more technical in focus in order to understand the problems. Berkeley is not the only motivation.

Remarks:

05/30/2013 -- This theme will play within the cosmology of business. Too, Zeno applies in the modern context.

05/25/2011 -- Lemons problem, dark pools, ... Oh, so much to look at!

04/19/2011 -- It was said that engineering has science behind it. What the hell is behind all of the gaming by the idiots in best-and-brightest clothing? That an insanity goes on daily is not seen (from whence, the blindness?); those in power (with their suits, suntans, ...) act with such grace. Somewhat vacuously, do you not think?

The prime characteristic: mutual admiration society! Almost like the 'royal' courts of old.

Modified: 05/30/2013

Mind over matter?

Is that not a big-T issue?

The Atlantic, last month, had an article on a recent Turing test. Until of late, this challenge seemed to favor the human. However, computation has really evolved. Note that the article mentions human computers. You see, it was not so long ago that scores of people did the hard work of solving problems that now take less time than a blink of the eye by computer.

Are we thereby smarter?

To boot, the main issues are still avoided, in the debate, due to many reasons We'll get to that, eventually. But, to be shown, mind precedes matter. Yep.

The real kick? The emerging prowess of things cyber (at least, the cloud, but more) will be the basis for the demonstration.

And, truth engineering will be at the core. How? Again, we'll get to that.

Remarks:

12/13/2012 -- Is it time to move beyond the Turing Test?

05/01/2012 -- We'll need to talk singularity in the context of Alan. The computer has as many holes as do we; however, we can cut out of the fog. 

03/28/2011 -- See on March madness.

03/24/2011 -- In part, rant: It's obvious that some have talents and some have insights (not mutually exclusive). The former can show us marvels like a golden touch. Is that what we're seeing with Warren Buffett? Or, is it the latter? Or a combination? Whatever it is, my argument is this: lasting business success (or any type of success) does not come about from solely playing luck - that is, the whole gaming-metaphoric jargon that business has descended to (yes, advisedly used) is very much degrading to human dignity (and, no apologies necessary to Las Vegas or other realms of legalized pocket takings). Nor does success come from unconscionable exploitation of others (which, by the way, we see with many types of globalization - the new colonialism). Now, what does that might mean? Well, all of mankind want to pull themselves out of the hole. Guess what? The best-and-brightest (yes, Harvard, to boot, probably in more cases than some would allow us to know) want to preserve their status of walking over others, of using the resources of others (after all, slavery, in many forms, is there, folks -- corporate serfdom, included), of being fed without due effort (yes, as in management, in many case), and a whole lot more. Don't worry, we'll continue to discuss this. Our ancestors did not come over here (the majority, I would venture) to carry forward the whole notion of aristocratic butts to kiss, etc. So, some have remarkable insights and talents. Some less so. Are the latter any less human? Do the former deserve to trample the rights of the latter? Of course, do the latter, by design, need to pilfer from the former? But, where to start in understanding the mess that we're in? Middle out, of course. Some type of national, even international, service is imperative to set the ground for each generation (cohort) to relate peaceably, fruitfully, et al, on this limited planet of ours. And, computation will be an enabling beast (that term used since we see many bad side-effects of the social media, plus a whole cohort of zombies seems to have emerged causing dire straits for themselves and those unlucky enough to be around them, and, like Made-off showed, the supposed wizards of the ether (e-m) can demonstrate an endless means in monkeying with the works (that are ours, collectively)). Does it need to be so? Well, we can try to back off from the gaming viewpoints (except where apropos), even if we do have to deal with uncertainty. We're not saying that we ought not express likelihood and such. Rather, the whole notion of multiple expansions (yes) could help temper those of the type who said a mere three years ago: oh, we have risk in check, never again a downside. Idiots that they were. The suffering continues, despite the chimera.

03/15/2011-- As well, need to bring in Schervish's viewpoint. Paul brings in the 't issues' quite well.

03/13/2011 -- Let's put it this way. Everyone who is successful knows that they have powers behind their good fortune. That is, we can see those who are lucky. But, if that were the only factor, success would not persist. Now, what exactly are those 'powers' that are support gainful efforts. We'll look at those. And, we also have not changed from the position that 'wealth' is NOT the best of measures. That is, some of the successful (too many to name) are plagues upon the earth and it citizens. If we're going to deal with truth, we'll, by necessity, have to look at these issues, to boot.

Modified: 12/13/2012