<div dir="auto">Wait, what? Eigenvectors are properties of a linear transformation from a space to itself. What's the space and what's the linear transformation? Principal components analysis is a method of spanning a space of variables with one of lower dimension.<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Or are you speaking metaphorically?<br><br><div data-smartmail="gmail_signature" dir="auto">---<br>Frank C. Wimberly<br>140 Calle Ojo Feliz, <br>Santa Fe, NM 87505<br><br>505 670-9918<br>Santa Fe, NM</div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Oct 10, 2020, 12:27 PM Steve Smith <<a href="mailto:sasmyth@swcp.com">sasmyth@swcp.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<p>Marcus -</p>
<p>(in mild agreement/acknowledgement of your point as I understand
it)<br>
</p>
<p>I suppose my own biases about human nature are that we are driven
along an internal greed/fear axis which is then "weaponized" by
the politicos. The Right seems particularly adept at both, while
impugning the Left as if they are the ones playing those trump
(Trump?) cards... <br>
</p>
<p>Other axes such as equality/equanimity, group loyalty/deference
to authority, etc. seem *somewhat* orthogonal.. <br>
</p>
<p>I suspect the terms "Progressive" and "Conservative" don't really
capture what is actually exhibited/explored by the Left/Right
tug-of war. I know that as I have aged/matured/evolved I've
become *much* more socially progressive whilst feeling much more
conservative about progress itself... not trusting the headlong
rush we are on, while acknowledging that it is (somewhat)
inevitable.</p>
<p>Following the arc of SteveG's ideas about collective
intelligence, least/stationary action, bidirectional path-tracing
as a paradigm that eclipses or replaces or maybe subsumes (neo)
Darwinism and Paternalism, I also feel that we are overdue for
some fundamental refactoring of our collective models/paradigms.
I'm no more interested in the style of Pol Pot's Communism than I
am in Hitler's Fascism or Stalin's Fascism-disguised-as-Socialism
than I am in Trump's variants on the same. They seem like they
are all aberrant excursions into a highly compressed (projection)
subspace that is at best a *shadow* of what is really
needed/possible.</p>
<p>- Steve<br>
</p>
<div>On 10/10/20 11:37 AM, Marcus Daniels
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">My model is that people lean left and right
as a developmental aspect of personality, and the parties
mimic but also manipulate those patterns. People really
must be gamed and manipulated by politicians because even the
best-intentioned people are often ignorant of the complexity
of the population and the practicalities of governance.
Worse, many people are blamers who have nothing to add
beyond What’s In It For Me.
<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Friam
<a href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer"><friam-bounces@redfish.com></a> <b>On Behalf Of
</b>Steve Smith<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, October 10, 2020 9:55 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:friam@redfish.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">friam@redfish.com</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [FRIAM] labels<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p>Nick- <u></u><u></u></p>
<p>Not trying to ding you personally for this, but this kind of
blind deference to authority/party/tribe/loyalty is one of the
mechanisms I'm trying to tease a part with Marcus' reference
to the Left/Right *dominant* component as an inevitability?
And I *think* EricC's questioning of that assumption?<u></u><u></u></p>
<p>How *do* our political parties "precess" in higher
dimensional space such that the subdominant components can
"flip" entirely... how did the party of Lincoln Republicans
who rejected secession and abolished Slavery and their
opposition which had a strong component of what became
formally the Dixiecrats, effectively flip positions? The
party that accused (accuses?) their opposition of being "tax
and spenders" has become "print money and spenders". How do
deficit Hawks become Deficit Doves or Owls, and is there an
instantaneous "tunneling" between these somewhat oppositional
positions?<u></u><u></u></p>
<p><a href="https://citizenvox.org/2012/02/22/hawks-doves-and-owls-budget-policy-goes-to-the-zoo/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">https://citizenvox.org/2012/02/22/hawks-doves-and-owls-budget-policy-goes-to-the-zoo/</a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p>- Steve<u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">Thaniks, EricS for reading and commenting
on the Amy Interview I am such a benighted, naïve, stupid,
optimist. I can imagine that if she were an Obama nominee,
I would be saying, “We have a good one here!”<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Nicholas Thompson<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Emeritus Professor of Ethology and
Psychology<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Clark University<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="mailto:ThompNickSon2@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer"><span style="color:#0563c1">ThompNickSon2@gmail.com</span></a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer"><span style="color:#0563c1">https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson/</span></a><u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Friam <a href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">
<friam-bounces@redfish.com></a> <b>On Behalf Of
</b>David Eric Smith<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Saturday, October 10, 2020 3:47 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee
Group <a href="mailto:friam@redfish.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">
<friam@redfish.com></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [FRIAM] labels<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yes, and not only Ugh.<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The two places this bothers me as a
category error are:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">1. It conflates writing the rules of
the game and being a player in the game. Shubik used to
harp on this: that the government’s role as the declarer
of monetary policy, and as the participant in fiscal
policy, were roles at different levels, game designer
versus large atomic player. The category isn’t quite as
clean here, in that a rule targeting balanced affiliation
isn’t exactly the same as playing for one side. It is a
bit more like certain monkey societies, in which the
problem-solver steps in on the side of whoever is being
attacked to lessen the asymmetry.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">But it still feels like it has a
related problem, of defining an outer law (constitution or
statute for structure of the court) in terms of a
non-legal convention (the particular parties and how they
are non-formally categorized and weighted in the society
at this time), and that feels completely unstable against
drift. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">A more mechanism-design-y thing would
be to revisit whichever Federalist Paper it was that
talked about the destabilizing role of parties, never
imagining the technologies for coordination that would be
available to them 230 years later, and ask what the
mechanism update is to the constitution in a world where
instabilities toward consolidation are so extreme. Kind
of the same spirit as revisiting capitalist property
rights laws when a warehouser and distributor can come to
own the whole economy.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">2. In the Coney Barrett talk that Nick
circulated, she made an important point that should be
true, even if we could argue that it is a smokescreen that
isn’t true in reality. She says “liberal/conservative” in
regard to the interpretation of constitutional law are
different categories from “liberal/conservative” as
political affiliations. She probably even believes it,
though I expect that her SCOTUS decisions will magically
align with the political axes 100% of the time, and one
must ask how that happens to always be the case. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Of course, the question is whether it
is all disingenuous. Thomas Edsall had a decent article
in NYT a few days ago on originalism/living-text
definitions, that was right on the thread we were on. It
is interesting that the opponents of each side make
_exactly_ the same accusation toward it: that the side
they are criticizing has no real method and is a program
for rationalizing whatever outcome the judge wanted
politically. To the extent that that is true in
substance, if obfuscated in appearance, then Coney
Barrett’s claim that they are different categories is a
falsehood. One wonders then at what level of argument one
could force her to acknowledge that error.<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Eric. <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<br>
<u></u><u></u></p>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Oct 9, 2020, at 11:18 PM, Eric
Charles <<a href="mailto:eric.phillip.charles@gmail.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">eric.phillip.charles@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">--- reconfigure (expand) it
from 9 to 15 but<br>
*balance* the Left/Right ideology (I think he
proposed 5/5) and then ---------<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Note that one
thing both parties agree on is that
we should conceive politics as
utterly and completely a choice
between the two of them. God forbid
that we conceive of judges using any
other dimensions. In fact, let's
enshrine it in law that we must
forever focus on exactly whether we
have a "balance" of "left" and
"right". Ugh!<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Thu, Oct 8, 2020 at 4:48
PM Steve Smith <<a href="mailto:sasmyth@swcp.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">sasmyth@swcp.com</a>>
wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">Ha! I refer to the last bit
as "ok fine, TWIST my drinking arm!" when<br>
someone offers to buy me one... the only one
to twists my drinking arm<br>
this last six months has been Mary... and Maybe
Stephen and his circle<br>
on "ZoomGrappaNight".<br>
<br>
I don't like the language around "packing the
court". I don't think<br>
"reconfiguring the court" is the same as
"packing the court". Clearly,<br>
the (not so) loyal opposition to the Dems
*would* pack the court... add<br>
6 more justices and make sure they are ALL
conservative leaners. Pete<br>
Buttegeig was the first to speak of this in my
earshot, and HIS version<br>
sounded pretty reasonable... reconfigure
(expand) it from 9 to 15 but<br>
*balance* the Left/Right ideology (I think he
proposed 5/5) and then<br>
leave it to the Justices themselves to fill the
remaining 5 (through<br>
some arcane process?). What the Republicans
have been building up to<br>
for decades is "packing the courts". <br>
<br>
Checks and balances are tricky, as is depending
on social norms and<br>
standards, but I think it might be "as good as
it gets", at least for<br>
the time being.<br>
<br>
- Steve<br>
<br>
<br>
On 10/8/20 1:36 PM, uǝlƃ ↙↙↙ wrote:<br>
> Ha! That was the essence of one of the 538
panel member's phrasing suggestion for Kamala
Harris in response to Pence's question about
packing SCOTUS. The elaborated version was:
"Because confirming Barrett, NOW, is such a
horribly wrong thing to do, we have no choice
BUT to pack the court." ... I.e. now look what
you made me do. That was my dad's favorite
phrase to justify whatever abuse he chose to
mete out that day. He once ran over my bicycle
with his truck. I *made* him run over my bike
because I left it laying in the driveway. It's a
running joke with my fellow drinkers who
*regularly* FORCE me to drink more than I
should. There is no free will. I live to serve.<br>
><br>
> On 10/8/20 11:28 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:<br>
>> Look what you made me do,<br>
<br>
<br>
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. ....
. .-. .<br>
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 <a href="https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,URHTYCOflB74O-_DI0dbEhUwuhzDGYhdSf7LRjl8tLmkmBJe0loSf3HRqMO-h67RLZ4QLL-6H3NYMq-vHO34GaSjKIco4zOUls70uHzwTBIWcvHn&typo=1" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">
bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><br>
un/subscribe <a href="https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,oX4UeygX7WyjK2Xi8iHb-qXD9vWPVWi6XsrTB90sewU0zpNs-mvdsgHfOL2worw-ytWZ_18lnGwWfXgvRIFun1zpllz0K6lj9e3ZS4-6bI1o&typo=1" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">
http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>
archives: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/FRIAM-COMIC" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">
http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/<br>
FRIAM-COMIC</a> <a href="https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,qMX6P95xw33fEDq5XPleqTxWs0O9aB7WZ6yMGijXAOWIHS2Lt5NtZOSJanSIUypD21_kG17KJGuC6krWtw4GFYixe5n4YCeGwqIPwjaExwo2VX9KNYvp&typo=1" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">
http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> <u></u><u></u></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. ..
... -..-. .... . .-. .<br>
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 <a href="http://bit.ly/virtualfriam" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><br>
un/subscribe <a href="https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,lZ9NlezAXRM1UtFBcPexp2OE5s5wCsat6c9eCh64km3EUesmzcIlKDfzSs9ZrJuMbsPJnP2WfadsCxnvI86yjYhX0VdrsjiRNTioFNEl4yQ,&typo=1" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">
https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,lZ9NlezAXRM1UtFBcPexp2OE5s5wCsat6c9eCh64km3EUesmzcIlKDfzSs9ZrJuMbsPJnP2WfadsCxnvI86yjYhX0VdrsjiRNTioFNEl4yQ,&typo=1</a><br>
archives: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a><br>
FRIAM-COMIC <a href="https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,gAOKowwHhfsjxEeiJJ_3atSEBLz9pnU4UB3PBeOugHijREv3dfYC6ZaCsd6P40vUQJMuRXqDXu5JS1lb8Ktvn4Lf5hfdWyqtxhNRrHHmZkORJPyag89AuA,,&typo=1" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">
https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,gAOKowwHhfsjxEeiJJ_3atSEBLz9pnU4UB3PBeOugHijREv3dfYC6ZaCsd6P40vUQJMuRXqDXu5JS1lb8Ktvn4Lf5hfdWyqtxhNRrHHmZkORJPyag89AuA,,&typo=1</a>
<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br>
<br>
<u></u><u></u></p>
<pre>- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre>FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre>Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 <a href="http://bit.ly/virtualfriam" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre>un/subscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre>archives: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a><u></u><u></u></pre>
<pre>FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> <u></u><u></u></pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 <a href="http://bit.ly/virtualfriamun/subscribe" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">bit.ly/virtualfriam
un/subscribe</a> <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a>
archives: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a>
FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
- .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. .<br>
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv<br>
Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 <a href="http://bit.ly/virtualfriam" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">bit.ly/virtualfriam</a><br>
un/subscribe <a href="http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com</a><br>
archives: <a href="http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/</a><br>
FRIAM-COMIC <a href="http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/</a> <br>
</blockquote></div>