<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p>Sometimes all you need is a good aphorism<br>
</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://sketchplanations.com/goodharts-law">https://sketchplanations.com/goodharts-law</a></p>
</blockquote>
<p>or maybe boost it up with a cartoon<br>
</p>
<blockquote>
<p><a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://sketchplanations.com/">https://sketchplanations.com/</a><br>
</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:BD0068C3-8394-4AFC-8796-0EEAF8BF77A6@gmail.com">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">I can't help but wonder if there's an analog of Goodhart's law lurking, here.
On September 9, 2021 2:31:39 PM PDT, Marcus Daniels <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:marcus@snoutfarm.com"><marcus@snoutfarm.com></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">Or they are reprogramming their people to be smarter!
(Actually, deCODE is owned by Amgen now.)
Selection is already occurring, so it isn't as if this is some sci-fi thing.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/12/the-last-children-of-down-syndrome/616928/">https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2020/12/the-last-children-of-down-syndrome/616928/</a>
-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com"><friam-bounces@redfish.com></a> On Behalf Of David Eric Smith
Sent: Thursday, September 9, 2021 2:12 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:friam@redfish.com"><friam@redfish.com></a>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] gen'fur
Aha! This is why Iceland has the highest per-capita fraction of published authors in the world. I had assumed it was the weather….
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">On Sep 10, 2021, at 2:17 AM, Marcus Daniels <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:marcus@snoutfarm.com"><marcus@snoutfarm.com></a> wrote:
That can be screened as well with a large population-wide survey such has been done in the UK or Iceland.
Of course, it is unlikely that complex behaviors will be governed by isolated mutations, so the task is to look for highly predictive motifs (e.g. regular expressions).
-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com"><friam-bounces@redfish.com></a> On Behalf Of u?l? ?>$
Sent: Thursday, September 9, 2021 10:12 AM
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:friam@redfish.com">friam@redfish.com</a>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] gen'fur
Ha! Now you're trolling. The answer is: "because the sites that generate reading ability (or whatever) *also* generate other 'abilities'", with "abilities" in scare quotes because many abilities are considered bad ... like the ability of a pimply faced white dude to shoot up a church or blow up a federal building.
In addition to polyphenism, there's robustness. If more than 1 site generates the same functional ability (reading), then do we write them all? ... just one of them? ... a probabilistically predictive handful of them?
On 9/9/21 10:00 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">So find the sites that correspond to reading ability, or whatever, and WRITE them.
-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com"><friam-bounces@redfish.com></a> On Behalf Of u?l? ?>$
Sent: Thursday, September 9, 2021 9:51 AM
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:friam@redfish.com">friam@redfish.com</a>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] gen'fur
I was alerted to this article this morning:
Can Progressives Be Convinced That Genetics Matters?
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/09/13/can-progressives-be-con">https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/09/13/can-progressives-be-con</a>
v
inced-that-genetics-matters
It should delight those amongst us who rant about the "woke". 8^D But it dovetails nicely with the fraught concept of equality in the other thread.
Coincidentally, also on 9/6, the BIAPT announced their early career prize winner Emily McTernan:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.associationfo">https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.associationfo</a>
rpoliticalthought.ac.uk%2fbiapt-2021-early-care&c=E,1,Je9MVNdO8lpJQOd
6fZwUNe-4z5yuFq0upxNIzMBFjmLFh_h5a63ueVVpd8lkEdWeUx5Xx1RaoPg3T5Ph8YlG
0558qqHLZD8-DKeBPEC3YYM,&typo=1
er-prize-winner-dr-emily-mcternan/
"In her forthcoming monograph, Dr McTernan develops her work on social equality further, to advance a pioneering conceptual account – and robust normative defence – of the phenomenon of ‘taking offence’. Therein, McTernan contends, we should understand taking offence, under appropriate conditions, as a civic virtue rather than a vice, as an emotion that embodies the resistance of social inequalities within a community."
On 9/8/21 8:06 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">From about a cancer rate of 10% (without mutation) to 50% (with) but it depends on the BRCA variant.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_ca">https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_ca</a>
n
c
er.htm
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_cancer.htm"><https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_c
a
n
cer.htm></a>
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">On Sep 8, 2021, at 4:07 PM, Frank Wimberly <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:wimberly3@gmail.com"><wimberly3@gmail.com></a> wrote:
Is the Braca gene that little correlated with breast cancer?
---
Frank C. Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz,
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918
Santa Fe, NM
On Wed, Sep 8, 2021, 4:57 PM Marcus Daniels <<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:marcus@snoutfarm.com">marcus@snoutfarm.com</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:marcus@snoutfarm.com"><mailto:marcus@snoutfarm.com></a>> wrote:
Yeah, it is hard to get excited about “unusual” variance. Modern
classification algorithms like gradient boosting make it possible
to predict phenotypes, and to me that is a lot more interesting
(and still possible to deconstruct).____
__ __
*From:* Friam <<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com">friam-bounces@redfish.com</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com"><mailto:friam-bounces@redfish.com></a>> *On Behalf Of *Eric Charles
*Sent:* Wednesday, September 8, 2021 3:53 PM
*To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:friam@redfish.com">friam@redfish.com</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:friam@redfish.com"><mailto:friam@redfish.com></a>>
*Subject:* [FRIAM] gen'fur____
__ __
Gen'fur this, gen'fur that... and also the realities of biological complexity....
____
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>