[FRIAM] What is FRIAM and is it still alive

[glen]

It likely matters *how* you present the posts to the machine. Did you simply point it to the archives? Both sets? Or did you download it all and curate it? A good thing to do might be to remove the footer that gets repeated a billion times in an active thread because people refuse to clean up their posts. [grrr]

The threading indices might be more interesting than the by-date indices:

https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/2026-August/thread.html#start

versus

https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/2026-August/date.html

Of course, Codex could help you reorganize the corpus for each given inference type. The best thing to do might be to gather the corpus and build a queryable database. Then for any given type of inference, the LLM queries the database.

Garbage in → garbage out ... and it's clearly garbage if the machine thinks I'm funny. cf https://asteriskmag.com/issues/15/why-we-like-things


On 8/12/26 8:31 AM, jofr wrote:
> A simple model is based on timezones. When I post something at 9 AM CET (or CEST) Central European Time, then I usually get no response before 5 PM when it it is 8 AM in California and 9 AM in Santa Fe. The posting times reflect where a person is physically located.
> 
> The rest is more or less unpredictable. Posts could be correlated to even more posts. Some kind of self-reinforcing bubble. It also reminds me of the famous El-Farol Bar Problem which predicts visitors for a bar. Does this bar still exist in Santa Fe?
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Farol_Bar_problem
> 
> In general it seems to be unpredictable. I posted for example less in recent weeks because my mail server provider from New York changed the settings and I had difficulties to access this email account I am using now.
> 
> -J.
> 
> 
> 
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com>
> Date: 8/12/26 5:05 PM (GMT+01:00)
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is FRIAM and is it still alive
> 
> I was looking for a (null space) model of when and why a post occurs.  Like why a person would reach for the remote and change the TV station.   It may have nothing to do with the coherence or silliness of any particular programming.   Like going out for a cup of coffee or a smoke.
> 
> *From: *Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of jofr <jofr at cas-group.net>
> *Date: *Wednesday, August 12, 2026 at 7:58 AM
> *To: *The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [FRIAM] What is FRIAM and is it still alive
> 
> You mean a "credit model" depending on correspondence length and authorship time? GitHub has a statistics page for repositories which shows who has committed the most lines in what timeframe. And some open source frameworks like Ruby on Rails list their most active contributors https://contributors.rubyonrails.org
> 
> ChatGPT says about you Marcus that you are the most active poster by a substantial margin. You win clearly in this category.
> 
> Nick and Glen are funnier according to ChatGPT though. ChatGPT is particularly fond of the Nick's post "All those who think Steve was wrong raise your hands" and Glen's post "Say it again … Say it again in a different way … Again … Again, damnit!"
> 
> -J.
> 
> -------- Original message --------
> 
> From: Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com>
> 
> Date: 8/12/26 4:28 PM (GMT+01:00)
> 
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> 
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] What is FRIAM and is it still alive
> 
> Correspondence length and apparent authorship time that follows the distribution of a compile/link cycle or system integration test suite execution duration?
> 
> *From: *Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of jofr at cas-group.net <jofr at cas-group.net>
> *Date: *Wednesday, August 12, 2026 at 4:50 AM
> *To: *The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject: *Re: [FRIAM] What is FRIAM and is it still alive
> 
> ChatGPT proposed these two laws:
> 
> FRIAM's First Law: We take difficult philosophical problems and worry
> them to death until someone produces either a profound insight, a
> completely insane hypothesis, or a phrase like "quantum woo".
> 
> FRIAM's Second Law: If a theory is suspiciously elegant, somebody on the
> list will throw a shoe at it.
> 
> The reason I have asked ChatGPT and Gemini is I am writing a new
> self-published book, and the first chapter is about FRIAM. Their
> summaries are surprisingly good. I asked them to find funny anecdotes in
> the FRIAM archives and they found a post from Nick that said "OK
> friammers, All those who think Steve was wrong raise your hands" :-)
> 
> If you do NOT want to be mentioned in the chapter because it is too much
> quantum woo for you then please let me know or raise your hand. Will
> share a draft in a few days.
> 
> -J.
> 


-- 
8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.