[FRIAM] more structure-based mind-reading

Steve Smith sasmyth at swcp.com
Tue Sep 6 20:54:47 EDT 2022 

On 9/6/22 6:17 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Why model some complex (if meaningless) phenomena if it can driven 
> toward something less complex?  I mean, jeez, isn’t DJT’s patchy and 
> inconsistent use of bronzer proof that people don’t really care about 
> detail? 

I am often perplexed by this...   I can't tell if DJT 
cluelessly/arrogantly bronzed up with his own tiny fists or if he had a 
professional makeup person go to the effort to make him look that 
bad...   my father's comment about Rodeo Clowns was: "you have to be 
really good to look that bad"...

There are other features of DJTs behaviour that suggests it really is 
arrogant cluelessness, but then there is *also* clearly a "method to his 
madness" on many levels...  He is the ultimate "tool" which is 
fascinating because he has created (or groomed) so many "tools" 
himself...  if one must grant him "genius" it is rooted somehow in his 
ability to play both ends against the middle in so many dimensions...

> I watched this black comedy last night.  _Killer Joe_.  It predated 
> MAGA.  It nicely captures how low-dimensional culture can be.  What’s 
> needed in these circumstances is a complete deconstruction and 
> deletion of empathy.  Ask what rats would do.   Oh it takes me back.
I do like me a good "black comedy"...  I recently enjoyed Woody 
Harrelson as _The Man from Toronto_...  McConaughey also rarely disappoints.
>
>> On Sep 6, 2022, at 11:15 AM, Steve Smith <sasmyth at swcp.com> wrote:
>>
>> 
>>
>> I can't find/recall the exact quote, but you made something of a 
>> convert of me when we were discussing whether creativity/learning was 
>> *anything more* than complex/elaborate mimicry.
>>
>>
>> Crypto-anythings (closeted "whatevers") have worked this in a similar 
>> way to spies, but where there is a little more complicity by the 
>> non-cryptos who may well be collaborating in the "closeting", in the 
>> spirit of "don't ask, don't tell"...
>>
>>
>> "I/he/she/it/ze can pass" is the bar...   it is OK if some/many of 
>> the observers "suspect" the true nature but the community shares the 
>> consequences of a community member proving to be "less than 
>> fully-compliant".
>>
>>
>> Whitelash supremacists' dog-whistles are a good example.   I don't 
>> want to think that my neighbor is part of that movement, so some of 
>> the slightly "off color" things she might say across the fence, I am 
>> inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to...  so if she notice I 
>> don't respond to her dog whistles, she continues to whistle them 
>> under her breath now and then, just to soothe her inner 
>> racist/mysXinist and maybe keep checking if I maybe have been 
>> "converted", and I continue to (hopefully) ignore it and keep 
>> bringing her casseroles (laced with xanax) when her husband is 
>> recovering from his latest self-inflicted gunshot wound...
>>
>>
>> In this case, we are *all* "acting as if"...   until someone gets 
>> converted to "radical honesty" and that just adds another level of 
>> indirection of (self/other) deception.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/6/22 8:37 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>>> I had to do some cybersecurity training and it was set up so that 
>>> all the choices one could make led to the same outcome.   The point 
>>> was to understand the properties of the paths, not the outcome.
>>> While that wisdom might be of some value in some other situation, 
>>> often there is no discernable difference between the nuance in a 
>>> social rule and variation that arises due to novelty or ambiguity of 
>>> circumstances. The signal to noise ratio just isn't high enough to 
>>> justify the extra precision.   The actors in this training could 
>>> have been interpreted as quietly demonstrating concern rather than 
>>> neglect.   One could imagine a cartel boss would not want to wait 
>>> for a reasonable number of outliers before taking action. After all 
>>> the cartel boss is a criminal and not concerned with fairness.  An 
>>> experienced undercover cop knows she needs to mimic the expected 
>>> distribution very carefully, and that even if she does mimic it very 
>>> carefully her life is still in danger.
>>>
>>> Marcus
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of glen 
>>> <gepropella at gmail.com>
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 6, 2022 7:57 AM
>>> *To:* friam at redfish.com <friam at redfish.com>
>>> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] more structure-based mind-reading
>>> Well, Steve's targeting of "feeling included" does target 
>>> "understanding". I'd argue that the spies don't understand the 
>>> communities they infiltrate. Even deep undercover or method acting 
>>> doesn't provide understanding. I argue that any bad faith actor like 
>>> a spy or "acting while cynical" has a reductive objective as their 
>>> target. What was interesting about the concept of bad faith was 
>>> Sartre's suggestion that the deep undercover operator who finally 
>>> *does* begin to identify with the community they've infiltrated is 
>>> the interesting edge case. That's the cusp of understanding.
>>>
>>> I suppose I'm making a similar argument to EricC's argument for 
>>> "belief", which I call "dispositional". If you don't act on your 
>>> belief, then you don't actually believe that thing. So, an 
>>> undercover cop who infiltrates a drug cartel but refuses to Necklace 
>>> a local do-gooder just doesn't understand what it means to be in the 
>>> cartel. They can't understand. And they shouldn't understand. The 
>>> spy is there for a more specific objective, not understanding.
>>>
>>> One of those more specific objectives might be *prediction*. In 
>>> simulation and [x|i]ML, there's a stark distinction between 
>>> predictive versus explanatory power. Ideally, strong explanatory 
>>> power provides predictive power. But practically, 80/20, reductive 
>>> prediction is easier, faster, and more important. The excess meaning 
>>> is swept under the rug of variation or noise. At raves, a reductive 
>>> objective is harm reduction. Sure, it would be fantastic to teach 
>>> all the kids pharmaco[kinetics|dynamics] and chemistry ... as well 
>>> as psychology and neuroscience. But the harm reduction tent is not 
>>> really there to get into the kids' minds. The objective isn't 
>>> understanding. It's a reductive focus on dampening the edge cases.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 9/3/22 08:47, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>>> > The claim is that there is all this diversity in subcultures and 
>>> that the only way to understand them is to participate in them. If 
>>> it is possible to fake it, and I think it is, then that raises 
>>> doubts about the claim.   That is what spies specialize in.
>>> >
>>> >> On Sep 2, 2022, at 7:17 PM, Steve Smith <sasmyth at swcp.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> I have spent most of my life avoiding "acting while cynical"... 
>>> I have *felt* cynical about a lot of things, and Marcus' description 
>>> of a lot of things speaks to my "inner cynic" but I haven't spent 
>>> much time being *harmed* by engaging in "performative activities 
>>> while feeling cynical about them".    If I dig a hole it is either 
>>> because *I* need a hole, or someone else *needs* a whole, and only 
>>> rarely do I help someone dig a hole as a team/trust/affinity 
>>> building exercise unless the   There are too many holes in the world 
>>> that *want* digging to spend much effort en-performance.
>>> >>
>>> >> I've never felt particulary "included" in any social circle and I 
>>> have seen that a little bit of "Performative Grease" might have 
>>> helped this square peg fit more-better in the round holes it 
>>> encountered, but generally I simply avoided those activities and 
>>> drifted further and further out.  That is not to say I haven't 
>>> *tried* to be a good sport and do what others were doing on the off 
>>> chance that it would actually be something that worked for me, but 
>>> generally not.
>>> >>
>>> >> BTW... there seems to be some inverted general usage of 
>>> "square-peg/round-hole", drilling a round hole and then driving a 
>>> square(ish) peg into it guarantees a good tight fit... it is 
>>> preferred to round peg-round hole in traditional joinery.
>>> >>
>>> >>> On 9/2/22 8:17 AM, glen wrote:
>>> >>> OK. But the affinity and "inner self" alluded to by the phrase 
>>> "faking it" is nothing but a personality momentum, a build-up of 
>>> past behaviors, like a fly-wheel spun up by all the previous 
>>> affinities and faking of it. We faked it in our mom's womb, faked it 
>>> as babies, faked it as children on the playground or in class, etc. 
>>> all the way up to the last time we faked it digging ditches or pair 
>>> programming in Java.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> The only difference between feeling an affinity and engaging in 
>>> a new faking it exercise is the extent to which the new 
>>> collaboration is similar to the previous collaborations. As both 
>>> Steve and Dave point out, spend enough time living in a world and 
>>> you'll grow affine to that world (and the world will grow affine to 
>>> you).
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I suppose it's reasonable to posit a spectrum (or a higher dim 
>>> space) on which some people have particularly inertial fly-wheels 
>>> and others have more easily disturbed things that store less energy. 
>>> Of the Big 5, my guess would be neuroticism would be most inertial. 
>>> Perhaps openness and agreeableness would be the least inertial.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>> On 9/2/22 05:35, Marcus Daniels wrote:
>>> >>>> There are many common tasks that parties could direct their 
>>> attention toward.   This happens at companies, prison cafeterias, 
>>> and churches.   That it is grounded in a particular way doesn't make 
>>> it any truer, or anyone more committed to it.   We are often forced 
>>> to participate in cultures we don't care about, and faking it is an 
>>> important skill. Just because someone sweats or gets calluses or 
>>> tolerates others' inappropriate emotions in some circle of people, 
>>> doesn't mean there is any affinity toward that circle. Oh look, he 
>>> dug a hole.  I dug a hole.    Sure, I'd do those kind of 
>>> performative activities if I were a politician, as I bet there are 
>>> people who think this way.
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> >>>> From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of glen
>>> >>>> Sent: Friday, September 2, 2022 12:06 AM
>>> >>>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group 
>>> <friam at redfish.com>
>>> >>>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] more structure-based mind-reading
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> And, of course, there is no such thing except appearance. What 
>>> could it possibly mean to say that an appearance of a bond exists, 
>>> but no actual bond exists?
>>> >>>>
>>> >>>> On September 1, 2022 7:29:45 PM PDT, Marcus Daniels 
>>> <marcus at snoutfarm.com> wrote:
>>> >>>>> If you want to create the appearance of a bond where none 
>>> exists, get to work.   Once one recognizes the nature of work it is 
>>> easy.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On Sep 1, 2022, at 6:25 PM, Prof David West 
>>> <profwest at fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> 
>>> >>>>>  From glen: "If you want to share values with some arbitrary 
>>> shmoe, then get to
>>> >>>>>        *work*. Build something or cooperate on a common task. 
>>> Talking,
>>> >>>>>        communicating, is inadequate at best, disinfo at worst."
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> This is kinda the whole point of Participant Observation at 
>>> the core of cultural anthropology. The premise is you cannot truly 
>>> understand a culture until you live it.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> Of course, there is still a boundary, a separation, between 
>>> the anthropologist and those with whom she interacts, but sweat, 
>>> calluses, blood, and emotions go a long way toward establishing 
>>> actual understanding.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> davew
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On Thu, Sep 1, 2022, at 12:30 PM, Steve Smith wrote:
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> On 9/1/22 11:21 AM, glen wrote:
>>> >>>>> Inter-brain synchronization occurs without physical 
>>> co-presence during cooperative online gaming
>>> >>>>> 
>>> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0028393222001750
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> There's a lot piled into the aggregate measures of EEG. And 
>>> the mere fact of the canalization conflates the unifying tendencies 
>>> of the objective (shared purpose) with that of the common structure 
>>> (virtual world, interface, body, brain). But overall, it argues 
>>> against this guru focus on "sense-making" (hermeneutic, monistic 
>>> reification) and helps argue for the fundamental plurality, 
>>> openness, and stochasticity of "language games".
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> If you want to share values with some arbitrary shmoe, then 
>>> get to *work*. Build something or cooperate on a common task. 
>>> Talking, communicating, is inadequate at best, disinfo at worst.
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> I agree somewhat with the spirit of this, however a recent 
>>> writer/book I discovered is Sand 
>>> Talk<https://www.harpercollins.com/products/sand-talk-tyson-yunkaporta?variant=32280908103714> 
>>> by Tyson Yunkaporta and more specifically his references to 
>>> "Yarning" in his indigenous Australian culture offered me a 
>>> complementary perspective...
>>> >>>>>
>>> >>>>> I definitely agree that the "building of something together" 
>>> is a powerful world-building/negotiating/collaborative/seeking 
>>> experience.   The social sciences use the term Boundary 
>>> Object<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boundary_object> and Boundary 
>>> Negotiation Artifact.    Jenny and I wrote a draft white-paper on 
>>> the topic of the SimTable as a "boundary negotiating artifact" last 
>>> time she visited (2019?).    A lot of 
>>> computer-graphics/visualization products provide fill this role, but 
>>> the physicality of a sand-table with it's tactility and multiple 
>>> perspectives add yet more.   The soap-box racer or fort you build 
>>> with your friend as a kid provides the same.   The bulk of my best 
>>> relationships in life involved "building something together" whether 
>>> it be a software system or a house...
>>> >>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> ꙮ Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ ꙮ
>>>
>>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
>>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>>> archives:  5/2017 thru present 
>>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>>>   1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>>>
>>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
>>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoomhttps://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>> to (un)subscribehttp://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>>> FRIAM-COMIChttp://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>>> archives:  5/2017 thru presenthttps://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>>>    1/2003 thru 6/2021http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
>> FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
>> archives:  5/2017 thru present 
>> https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>>  1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
>
> -. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoomhttps://bit.ly/virtualfriam
> to (un)subscribehttp://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
> FRIAM-COMIChttp://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
> archives:  5/2017 thru presenthttps://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
>    1/2003 thru 6/2021http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20220906/8f6e8c6e/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Friam mailing list