[FRIAM] Copernican thresholds; was: Newborn Heart Rate

Fri Oct 8 11:06:45 EDT 2021

Let’s say one deconstructed a neural net with substitutions from a library of functions (fit on the basis of input/output mappings), and that after a series of substitutions and application of rewrite rules, there was no neural net left.  Further suppose the resulting recomposition was as readable as a program by a good software engineer.  If one can do this the dichotomy seems artificial.   However, I claim the neural net representation is not ideal for reasoning about what the program will do without running it.   It will be obvious when generality arises from (in effect) a big case statement rather than from a compact functional form in the code representation.

> On Oct 8, 2021, at 7:32 AM, uǝlƃ ☤>$ <gepropella at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I *think* I disagree. But I'm not sure. The distinction between:
> 
> • in-the-moment, go-with-the-flow, compiled/parallel/chunked
> 
> versus
> 
> • articulated, delineated, de-compiled, serialized, persnickety, academic, rational
> 
> processing isn't really a crushing of Zaphod Beeblebrox in light of the Total View. It's more like a mode change. It was only crushing to Zaphod because he was incapable of thinking of the larger whole of which he was only a small part. I don't know much about wu wei or the dao. But it always struck me that what I have understood is about that context switching ... the *navigation* across the frames, from Copernican to Ptolemaic and back ... from making tea simply because you need a kick to making tea as a religious experience ... and back.
> 
> So there seem to be 2 different traditions. The "progressive" one, which only follows the one direction (from banal to enlightened). And the "pragmatic" one, which facilitates the navigation of the map, both forward and inverse. I think you're lamenting the former, which leads us into fantasy land. But the latter is almost a brute fact for anyone who experiences "Flow" of some kind, from running to magic mushrooms to getting caught up in seemingly endless algebra only to be yelled at by mom to take out the garbage.
> 
> I often think there's a similarity between True Believers who think their model of some thing "makes so much sense". Like when I listen to Chiara Marletto talk about constuctor theory. I can't shake the feeling that she's similar to many Christians I've argued with. (Not the banal kind on the street. But the Jesuits I've met and some of the Protestant "biblical scholars" I've met.) It just feels too "progressive" ... pushing only toward the one-way, forward map, from banal to ecstasy. 
> 
> The objective isn't really apotheosis. It's the cycle. To both rise *and* fall, if not periodically, then at least sporadically. I feel like I'm discussing a philosophy of engineering, where you not only expect your constructs to collapse sometimes, you almost *want* it ... It's hard to describe how satisfying that smell of a burnt IC chip is, when you've bent that circuit beyond its capabilities.
> 
> 
> 
>> On 10/8/21 2:26 AM, David Eric Smith wrote:
>> It’s an interesting assertion, Dave, and I understand that you are both serious and informed in making it.
>> 
>> I don’t know, and there is a thing I struggle with in responding to some of this literature that straddles what I might call (making up a term on the spot) the “Copernican threshold”.  (Hat tip to Carl Woese’s “Darwinian threshold”, though not meant to connect to it in any detail.)
>> 
>> Your characterization of Arjuna’s dilemma in the note on wu wei was probably the most helpful I have seen, in expressing what the writers believed to be the point in a language that uses modern frames (together with words like “factors” that I recognize are references to certain Sanskrit terms of art).  
>> 
>> As I read it, though, language like “a perfect knowledge of all factors affecting an action” rings to me as the kind of hyperbolic framing that characterizes the era of epic literature.  
>> 
>> There seems to be a human habit of yearning for god that I would characterize — and _every one_ of its adherents will say I am totally wrong in this — as saying “no, you are not just one person in one body in one lifetime with limits to what you can be and can have; actually you are the whole universe, with unlimited power and knowledge and time and extent, and your desires or wants are not really limited.”  In short form: no, baby, you didn’t have to grow up and realize that life has disappointments; you can still be a creature of pure will and desire.  (That last way of putting it is trollish, and I understand that it totally leaves out the considerable elaboration behind these literatures in terms of a dev-psych gloss, so I don’t mean the trolling to be too categorical.)
>> 
>> I imagine that the age of epic literature comes out of the indulgence of this yearning.  Everything is, quite literally, “bigger than life”.  It tries to have significance by exaggeration.  So whether it is Mahabharata and Ramayana, the Epic of Gilgamesh, the Eddas, the Three Kingdoms romance and Journey to the West, there are these big, bold-colored characters, supernaturals, of the kind that we retain in comic books (and which I am sure were inspired by epic literature).
>> 
>> But somewhere, I think in Jane Smiley’s introduction to her volume of the Icelandic Sagas, a thing is written that has had a very strong formative effect on my understanding of things.  It is: that the innovation we associate with the Modern Novel was a letting-go of the heroic stance in favor of the scope and scale of the literal-human experience.  Smiley makes this point because she says that the Sagas deserve to be recognized as among the earliest precursors to the Modern Novel, well in advance of the landmark works that are usually credited with stages in its establishment: Quixote or some works by Kafka.  
>> 
>> That to me brings a ton of things into focus.  It says that even cultures, in their literary tastes, eventually get tired of the superlatives.  They realize that these bold-colored figures, which try for significance by pushing boundaries of extremity, are ultimately somewhat boring, and that there is much more interest to be found in literature that looks closely at ordinary things.  Like I once read that young people get all enamored of the romantic composers, but they realize that those don’t hold up well to repeated listening, and then they come back to Bach which seems to be almost inexhaustible, even though and in part because it is such a composition of measure and balance. 
>> 
>> Because I am the way I am, I then imprint it on all sorts of other things: the transition from the epic to the modern novel seems to me the literary peer to what happened in science in the various Copernican revolutions, both the original one for planetary orbits, but also relativity with respect to observational frames and the abandonment of the aether, and in quantum mechanics with respect to the assumption that states are a kind of thing fixed by observables.  These have in common that each removes an unconditioned privileged frame and replaces it with a situated one.  And of course Darwin for biology (with his various companions and antecedents).  We could talk about Nietzche’s concern that without god, people would sink into nihilism, which I believe got picked up by the existentialists later.
>> 
>> And of course, we could take the entire anthology of the agriculture people like Aldo Leopold, Wendell Berry, and Wes Jackson, arguing that a large-scale agriculture is a blunt instrument because it generates homogeneous responses to heterogeneous problems.  A part of that literature argues that agriculture and culture are windows on the same phenomenon, which rightly has a complexity not appreciated from the outside, because it needs to adapt and solve problems in many dimensions that are particular to each region.
>> 
>> 
>> So, sorry for that long preamble, which is not directly to your point, but is a declaration of context on my side: 
>> 
>> I read the assertions about how humans should not learn that limits are a a part of what is real and therefore something to be more clearly seen, but rather see that limits are an illusion which can be transcended by various occult (sense of hidden in shadow) revelations to awareness, and my whole impulse is to read them as just an indulgence of the heroic frame from the epic era, and a kind of rejection of Copernican transitions, or indeed of a Copernican threshold.  Attentiveness to Copernican transitions seems to me like one of the resources achieved in the transition to modernity, because it could be worked into a philosophy and culture of restraint that we badly need.  The very occultness of the heroic transitions, which is always their first line of presentation (The Dao that can be told is not the Dao), strikes me as placing the evaluation of whether they are just the indulgence of the epic frame beyond any criteria for serious questioning.  If you are a devotee, you
>> will Know it is True, and if you aren’t, your criteria of knowledge don’t matter anyway because they are all lost in illusion.  It just all feels like the religious frame for domination that I recoil from.  
>> 
>> It would be good to bring these questions into some kind of normal frame for evaluation, because of course to be less bored, to have more options, or just to see something really new, would be great.
>> 
>> Eric
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>>> On Oct 8, 2021, at 2:48 AM, Prof David West <profwest at fastmail.fm <mailto:profwest at fastmail.fm>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> David Eric Smith wrote:
>>> 
>>> /"I cannot juggle hundreds of variables, and produce a result that would fail _any_ test for randomness.  I can conceive that maybe there are people smart enough to do that, but cannot imagine any-wise what it would feel like to be one of them."/
>>> 
>>> But  . . . . every human being does exactly that, all the time, more or less effortlessly — certainly below the threshold of "conscious" awareness. Billions of variables, including certain cell receptors "detecting" and responding to quantum effects (like changes in spin induced by magnetic fields).
>>> 
>>> Some Asian philosophies (Jnana Yoga, Tibetan Tantra) and most of the Alchemical literature can be read as efforts to "decompile" this ability, make it conscious, and apply it in "ordinary reality."
>>> 
>>> davew
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Oct 6, 2021, at 9:28 AM, David Eric Smith wrote:
>>>> Gilding the lily, since I don’t disagree with anything that has specifically been said.
>>>> 
>>>> I have felt like, somewhere between the deliberate distortion of Emerson that reads “consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds” 
>>>> (Fun ref see https://www.lawfareblog.com/foolish-consistency-hobgoblin-little-minds-metadata-stay <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.lawfareblog.com%2ffoolish-consistency-hobgoblin-little-minds-metadata-stay&c=E,1,eDi2-qPUJiCHaxBuHu6hEtsX5zACULC0rSwdyjZWlqtz3g9dMx-Srjv0GOmSBli_E0wTCeTWHgyMkctCMC8qnJcRvftKmEVeHpB2eVddlwJ2NA,,&typo=1> )
>>>> and what Scott Aaronson might call “the blankfaces of consistency”, 
>>>> there should be a sort of Herb Simon Watchmaker’s consistency.  The ability to check a form for consistency — even if I am alert that the system within which I am checking might be subject to overruling or revision — allows me to get past one thing and go to the next.  To clip together a sub-component of the watch and set it on the shelf, while assembling other sub-components, or to take the sub-components and assemble them relative to each other without having to constantly actively maintain the innards of each.  
>>>> 
>>>> To somebody with my innate limitations, that seems among the most valuable things in the world.
>>>> 
>>>> DaveW wrote this fabulous paean to never calling anything done, some months ago.  I can’t resurrect the text, and on my best living day could not compose its equal, but the gist was that sciences in which one arrives at conclusions are the pastimes of trivial minds.  Real Men do anthropology, where nothing is ever closed.  In a lovely rant on what a day in the life of a Real Man is like, a sentence contained a clause I am pretty sure I do have verbatim: “ . . . , juggling hundreds of variables, . . . “.
>>>> 
>>>> I cannot juggle hundreds of variables, and produce a result that would fail _any_ test for randomness.  I can conceive that maybe there are people smart enough to do that, but cannot imagine any-wise what it would feel like to be one of them. 
>>>> 
>>>> It seems it must be possible in this sense to cling to consistency like a life-raft, yet not elevate it to aa religious icon.  After all, life rafts only keep you alive, and in the big sweep of things, that isn’t _all_ that important. 
>>>> 
>>>> Eric
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On Oct 5, 2021, at 11:56 AM, uǝlƃ ☤>$ <gepropella at gmail.com <mailto:gepropella at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Yeah, I'm perfectly aligned with the freak among freaks sentiment, though I'd argue we *do* live in that world, we just deny it with our false beliefs. "The problem with communication is the illusion that it exists."
>>>>> 
>>>>> But the more important part of the argument surrounds whether consistency, itself, is a matter of degree or kind. The analog world is full of graded [in]consistency. You see it a lot with artifacts resulting from welding, baking, brewing, etc. ... I even saw it often with the level 3 drafting at lockheed. Any inconsistencies resulting from our designs, the effete knowledge engineers, were *easily* overcome by the gritty on-the-ground engineers ... like smoothing out burrs or gluing together pieces that don't quite fit.
>>>>> 
>>>>> In the special case of refined, crisply expressed propositions of digital computation, inconsistency finding becomes a (perhaps the) powerful tool. Debugging a serial program relies on it fundamentally. But it's softened a bit in parallel algorithms. Inconsistency is broken up into multiple, yet still crisp, types (race conditions, deadlocks, etc.). As approach "the real world" and move away from digital computation, it seems, to my ignorant eye, that [in]consistency softens more and more. Whether that softening takes the form of a countable set of types or something denser, I don't know. But it definitely takes on a different form.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Discussions like Frank and EricS are having about the stability of a limit point (never mind the ontological status of that point) get at this nicely. If you change the frame entirely (e.g. move to position-momentum) and the "inconsistency" of the singularities *moves* (or disappears entirely), then a focus on consistency is not as powerful of a tool. The focus becomes one of which frame expresses the target domain "less inconsistently" ... aka with fewer exceptions to the rule.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Yes, I know I've completely abused the word and its normal meaning.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 10/4/21 12:03 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>>>>>> 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 <friam-bounces at redfish.com <mailto:friam-bounces at redfish.com>> On Behalf Of u?l? ?>$
>>>>>> Sent: Monday, October 4, 2021 10:16 AM
>>>>>> To: friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at 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 <https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Gatekeeping <https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=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 <http://bit.ly/virtualfriam>
>>>>> un/subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,7f2mPq52aCiNP-NOFihSaR-cg_kz1iAkDMpygFlJfkcSgmEZmEFic7x62k1cZn98hMplDRUf7uz95gbzVN3rKoTgwWmKH46EfJ8sTtv1&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,7f2mPq52aCiNP-NOFihSaR-cg_kz1iAkDMpygFlJfkcSgmEZmEFic7x62k1cZn98hMplDRUf7uz95gbzVN3rKoTgwWmKH46EfJ8sTtv1&typo=1>
>>>>> FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,MomHJhYAIbAGPpxMBmUS3Ni9pCKbgGErtd46zkPFkQf2j-muY5IANU5y7QJpsNrH0lQXfle6j44F-jxs5eeUUX6KitPZlGLQZUQcy9q1NaaVMA4,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,MomHJhYAIbAGPpxMBmUS3Ni9pCKbgGErtd46zkPFkQf2j-muY5IANU5y7QJpsNrH0lQXfle6j44F-jxs5eeUUX6KitPZlGLQZUQcy9q1NaaVMA4,&typo=1>
>>>>> archives:
>>>>> 5/2017 thru present https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,dwZL0XPERidEln6ak4dQwZ2pi8qaqBY_64JWdl_o-CrDSu2V8E0Dy9QaTmHOrVvw3bOxdJwbiUjVsjDceZnYl0NwzUPoDwlOoVOuncTMoNHFBg,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,dwZL0XPERidEln6ak4dQwZ2pi8qaqBY_64JWdl_o-CrDSu2V8E0Dy9QaTmHOrVvw3bOxdJwbiUjVsjDceZnYl0NwzUPoDwlOoVOuncTMoNHFBg,,&typo=1>
>>>>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ <http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/>
>>>> 
>>>> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
>>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam <http://bit.ly/virtualfriam>
>>>> un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,XufyiUxp--ST5iB93qvWo0nAyFkxCAZ5PUqALr97V3taTMIKYtjTNYZcIC6TfXGL6wvb2GZKWlexwkUNR_ZEWYkyZK4G3Xk1scJr-PT_DLH6SH-Oy18WQlmtjSI,&typo=1>
>>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,ZL1vm39n6Qsa8WTV0E4Mv2IXGtSvloAQZteMzlVS9dAqKSmuW1qKcU76V87vaRBbNxQw2leebmocTGFVGaEYNxG0rHIdddxG95Y1bORUep4,&typo=1>
>>>> archives:
>>>> 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,pUxvnqqTi91I4q8L9TZeytpo-JpWre04JYF3vPyXv99faBGavRkusqJl42FdfaaDb0fWw_zld6RXg0TA7EmkUMNBY7gcmfRTH-rzGfAsHFd1dT8IBbRq&typo=1>
>>>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ <http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/>
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> .-- .- -. - / .- -.-. - .. --- -. ..--.. / -.-. --- -. .--- ..- --. .- - .
>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>> Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn UTC-6  bit.ly/virtualfriam <http://bit.ly/virtualfriam>
>>> un/subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,WVyn1pjemhXMljSxsP-NbfGWi8iN_BUv_Z4hqB3Vl41lDJUZ98VqVryH7EocvbPSzseqL9UvYmxYJINYpi88Lo1HHe0bV1662RJmPuiUAeE4IJ8aHvPA&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,WVyn1pjemhXMljSxsP-NbfGWi8iN_BUv_Z4hqB3Vl41lDJUZ98VqVryH7EocvbPSzseqL9UvYmxYJINYpi88Lo1HHe0bV1662RJmPuiUAeE4IJ8aHvPA&typo=1>
>>> FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,UCVcwucRl-MWHRfIP7nauFwcGCxfuIjWgVbgvSvufR4Sq2RrPQlyafs4oenxra2AHOQR14zFcDJBrQ5FTrjqJVy-zca1HSWjPLZ0Ns8E5r7yikK8_tw,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,UCVcwucRl-MWHRfIP7nauFwcGCxfuIjWgVbgvSvufR4Sq2RrPQlyafs4oenxra2AHOQR14zFcDJBrQ5FTrjqJVy-zca1HSWjPLZ0Ns8E5r7yikK8_tw,&typo=1>
>>> archives:
>>> 5/2017 thru present https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,fX3Jg6L0BnlyxP-XCja6RUFHr4iWXjfjKLX0m6mqtUQN6QPWVKMb_16chPBE5Ij_0C5Z4ecbZRRoiK-mG8udHbCgsuGI1ChNGEKw6tkK&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,fX3Jg6L0BnlyxP-XCja6RUFHr4iWXjfjKLX0m6mqtUQN6QPWVKMb_16chPBE5Ij_0C5Z4ecbZRRoiK-mG8udHbCgsuGI1ChNGEKw6tkK&typo=1>
>>> 1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ <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/
>> 
> 
> -- 
> "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/