From gepr at ropella.name  Tue Sep  1 07:56:19 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 04:56:19 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
Message-ID: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>


https://www.aaup.org/academe/issues/fall-2025/seven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity

OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity. But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I think I'm going to stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use "instrumental pluralist" instead.

But 1) what Siraganian says here is simply wrong:

"To promote viewpoint diversity is to be thrilled to have my views in the mix, even if you think they are wrong, because either (a) they contribute to more viewpoint diversity (the more views you have, the more viewpoint diversity there is), or (b) they provide more views to choose from to figure out which view is the most true. In the first position, you end up not caring about whether a particular view is true or good, because you care about viewpoint diversity intrinsically: What matters is having the greatest possible variety of views. In the second position, you instrumentally value a diversity of views; having viewpoint diversity only matters until you can figure out which view is the best or most true, at which point all the other views can be rejected."

If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the 1st best to the 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject "all the others". Such smooth grading has to remain contingent, defeasible. And my guess is the gradation isn't smooth everywhere. It may be smooth for the first 2 or 3 distinguishable ideas, but #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>)

2) Diversity remains a useful measure of the crosstrophic nature of complex systems, circularity, industrial symbiosis, etc. So even in light of Goodhart's Law, diversity is a reasonable *outcome*, even if it's dangerous to optimize to that sole outcome.

There are issues with all the theses she lays out. But persnickety nits aside, her gist seems right. And you can't overlook the blatant hypocrisy of objecting to DEI initiatives, but then arguing for "intellectual pluralism", pointed out in thesis 7.

This post is too long already. But I know many, here, have succumbed to Haidt glazing. So I offer this as further demonstration of Bad Faith rhetoric: https://assignedmedia.org/breaking-news/jonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs/, only peripherally about instrumental pluralism.

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


From thompnickson2 at gmail.com  Tue Sep  1 10:03:12 2026
From: thompnickson2 at gmail.com (Nicholas Thompson)
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 10:03:12 -0400
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
Message-ID: 
 <CAAXA=W=Bv=g=119g-Z9kV2HhYm05MT7gBn6VSj-EgO79=e5P5Q@mail.gmail.com>

Hi  Glen,

I am deep in meteorology right now so I hope you won’t be offended if I
give you an iPhone-Ish quick response. Why not a  dialectic between a love
of convergence and a fascination with the, a dialectic that never settles?
I believe you computer folk have a name for that?


Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology
Clark University
nthompson at clarku.edu
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson
https://substack.com/@monist

On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 7:57 AM glen <gepr at ropella.name> wrote:

>
>
> https://www.aaup.org/academe/issues/fall-2025/seven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity
>
> OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity. But I am
> aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I think I'm going to
> stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use "instrumental
> pluralist" instead.
>
> But 1) what Siraganian says here is simply wrong:
>
> "To promote viewpoint diversity is to be thrilled to have my views in the
> mix, even if you think they are wrong, because either (a) they contribute
> to more viewpoint diversity (the more views you have, the more viewpoint
> diversity there is), or (b) they provide more views to choose from to
> figure out which view is the most true. In the first position, you end up
> not caring about whether a particular view is true or good, because you
> care about viewpoint diversity intrinsically: What matters is having the
> greatest possible variety of views. In the second position, you
> instrumentally value a diversity of views; having viewpoint diversity only
> matters until you can figure out which view is the best or most true, at
> which point all the other views can be rejected."
>
> If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the 1st best to the
> 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject "all the others". Such
> smooth grading has to remain contingent, defeasible. And my guess is the
> gradation isn't smooth everywhere. It may be smooth for the first 2 or 3
> distinguishable ideas, but #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<
> https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>)
>
> 2) Diversity remains a useful measure of the crosstrophic nature of
> complex systems, circularity, industrial symbiosis, etc. So even in light
> of Goodhart's Law, diversity is a reasonable *outcome*, even if it's
> dangerous to optimize to that sole outcome.
>
> There are issues with all the theses she lays out. But persnickety nits
> aside, her gist seems right. And you can't overlook the blatant hypocrisy
> of objecting to DEI initiatives, but then arguing for "intellectual
> pluralism", pointed out in thesis 7.
>
> This post is too long already. But I know many, here, have succumbed to
> Haidt glazing. So I offer this as further demonstration of Bad Faith
> rhetoric:
> https://assignedmedia.org/breaking-news/jonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs/,
> only peripherally about instrumental pluralism.
>
> --
> 8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
> ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα
> σώσω.
>
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260901/b68c6a4e/attachment.html>

From gepr at ropella.name  Tue Sep  1 10:27:20 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 07:27:20 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAAXA=W=Bv=g=119g-Z9kV2HhYm05MT7gBn6VSj-EgO79=e5P5Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <CAAXA=W=Bv=g=119g-Z9kV2HhYm05MT7gBn6VSj-EgO79=e5P5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ed5e9937-0a08-4203-bd91-022defee0b09@ropella.name>

Well, there is this, though I'm sure there's newer stuff:

Enhancing AI-Assisted Group Decision Making through LLM-Powered Devil's Advocate
https://doi.org/10.1145/3640543.3645199

The interesting contrast (IMNSHO) is "consensus-oriented dialectical inquiry" versus what I'm calling "agonistics". The former leans hard on pro versus con. But that seems so dualist to me. The latter tolerates many different perspectives in and around the same (perhaps vaguely specified) constellation of targets. For example, we can take a look at how Debian recently voted on the use of AI in its development.

https://www.debian.org/vote/2026/vote_002#quorum

"""
Option 1 "Ban LLM contributions from Debian via Social Contract" reached quorum: 144 >= 48.4896896257338
Option 2 "Allow AI-Assisted Contributions with conditions" reached quorum: 267 >= 48.4896896257338
Option 3 "Reject LLMs as far as practical, update Code of Conduct" reached quorum: 176 >= 48.4896896257338
Option 4 "Accept AI contributions for Debian specific work" reached quorum: 259 >= 48.4896896257338
Option 5 "Responsible Use of Generative AI" reached quorum: 281 >= 48.4896896257338
Option 6 "A cautious approach to generative AI" reached quorum: 276 >= 48.4896896257338
Option 7 "Debian is created by humans" reached quorum: 213 >= 48.4896896257338
Option 8 "Avoid the use of LLM: climate destruction is a deal breaker" reached quorum: 225 >= 48.4896896257338
"""

This isn't clearly separable into us vs them. Each proposal has subtle differences from each other proposal. Attempts to reduce it to pro vs con fail. And I know the academy uses "dialectic" in a general sense. It still irks me. Similarly, "stakeholder" is a meme whose infection vector is carried by the Suits. But it gets at the right sense of a rich ecology of agents, each with its own agenda.

On 9/1/26 7:03 AM, Nicholas Thompson wrote:
> Hi  Glen,
> 
> I am deep in meteorology right now so I hope you won’t be offended if I give you an iPhone-Ish quick response. Why not a  dialectic between a love of convergence and a fascination with the, a dialectic that never settles? I believe you computer folk have a name for that?
> 
> 
> Nicholas S. Thompson
> Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology
> Clark University
> nthompson at clarku.edu <mailto:nthompson at clarku.edu>
> https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson <https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson>
> https://substack.com/@monist <https://substack.com/@monist>
> 
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 7:57 AM glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>> wrote:
> 
> 
>     https://www.aaup.org/academe/issues/fall-2025/seven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity <https://www.aaup.org/academe/issues/fall-2025/seven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity>
> 
>     OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity. But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I think I'm going to stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use "instrumental pluralist" instead.
> 
>     But 1) what Siraganian says here is simply wrong:
> 
>     "To promote viewpoint diversity is to be thrilled to have my views in the mix, even if you think they are wrong, because either (a) they contribute to more viewpoint diversity (the more views you have, the more viewpoint diversity there is), or (b) they provide more views to choose from to figure out which view is the most true. In the first position, you end up not caring about whether a particular view is true or good, because you care about viewpoint diversity intrinsically: What matters is having the greatest possible variety of views. In the second position, you instrumentally value a diversity of views; having viewpoint diversity only matters until you can figure out which view is the best or most true, at which point all the other views can be rejected."
> 
>     If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the 1st best to the 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject "all the others". Such smooth grading has to remain contingent, defeasible. And my guess is the gradation isn't smooth everywhere. It may be smooth for the first 2 or 3 distinguishable ideas, but #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>>)
> 
>     2) Diversity remains a useful measure of the crosstrophic nature of complex systems, circularity, industrial symbiosis, etc. So even in light of Goodhart's Law, diversity is a reasonable *outcome*, even if it's dangerous to optimize to that sole outcome.
> 
>     There are issues with all the theses she lays out. But persnickety nits aside, her gist seems right. And you can't overlook the blatant hypocrisy of objecting to DEI initiatives, but then arguing for "intellectual pluralism", pointed out in thesis 7.
> 
>     This post is too long already. But I know many, here, have succumbed to Haidt glazing. So I offer this as further demonstration of Bad Faith rhetoric: https://assignedmedia.org/breaking-news/jonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs/ <https://assignedmedia.org/breaking-news/jonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs/>, only peripherally about instrumental pluralism.
> 
-- 
8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.


From sasmyth at swcp.com  Tue Sep  1 13:56:13 2026
From: sasmyth at swcp.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 11:56:13 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAAXA=W=Bv=g=119g-Z9kV2HhYm05MT7gBn6VSj-EgO79=e5P5Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <CAAXA=W=Bv=g=119g-Z9kV2HhYm05MT7gBn6VSj-EgO79=e5P5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <da98b8d1-81cc-40ff-adae-84b393b3e302@swcp.com>

Nick -

> I am deep in meteorology right now so I hope you won’t be offended if 
> I give you an iPhone-Ish quick response. Why not a  dialectic between 
> a love of convergence and a fascination with the, a dialectic that 
> never settles? I believe you computer folk have a name for that?

and the crufty lint I found in my navel today was roughly the circular 
tail chase of:

      * affording to know
      * affording to act
      * affording to judge

and the complement/negation of each

it seems to be a scissors-paper-stone influence/causal loop which 
nominally is virtuous when we run it forward, but vicious when we run it 
backward?

- Steve

/measure thrice, cut twice/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260901/cbba7892/attachment.html>

From wimberly3 at gmail.com  Tue Sep  1 14:08:18 2026
From: wimberly3 at gmail.com (Frank Wimberly)
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 12:08:18 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: <da98b8d1-81cc-40ff-adae-84b393b3e302@swcp.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <CAAXA=W=Bv=g=119g-Z9kV2HhYm05MT7gBn6VSj-EgO79=e5P5Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <da98b8d1-81cc-40ff-adae-84b393b3e302@swcp.com>
Message-ID: 
 <CAA5dAfqEGO174r=PjMVFyi_hnsWft_cctsX+ibARd1hnCBSqGw@mail.gmail.com>

Clancy (non) verdict.

Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918

Research:  https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2

On Tue, Sep 1, 2026, 11:57 AM Steve Smith <sasmyth at swcp.com> wrote:

> Nick -
>
> I am deep in meteorology right now so I hope you won’t be offended if I
> give you an iPhone-Ish quick response. Why not a  dialectic between a love
> of convergence and a fascination with the, a dialectic that never settles?
> I believe you computer folk have a name for that?
>
> and the crufty lint I found in my navel today was roughly the circular
> tail chase of:
>
>
>    - affording to know
>    - affording to act
>    - affording to judge
>
> and the complement/negation of each
>
> it seems to be a scissors-paper-stone influence/causal loop which
> nominally is virtuous when we run it forward, but vicious when we run it
> backward?
>
> - Steve
>
>     *measure thrice, cut twice*
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260901/beb222da/attachment.html>

From sasmyth at swcp.com  Tue Sep  1 14:19:11 2026
From: sasmyth at swcp.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 12:19:11 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAAXA=W=Bv=g=119g-Z9kV2HhYm05MT7gBn6VSj-EgO79=e5P5Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <CAAXA=W=Bv=g=119g-Z9kV2HhYm05MT7gBn6VSj-EgO79=e5P5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1bcc397e-30ff-4d1c-8120-458ffb084155@swcp.com>

- uǝןƃ

>
>     If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the 1st
>     best to the 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject
>     "all the others". Such smooth grading has to remain contingent,
>     defeasible. And my guess is the gradation isn't smooth everywhere.
>     It may be smooth for the first 2 or 3 distinguishable ideas, but
>     #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>)
>
in the interest of not running off in all directions again forever, I 
clipped a single paragraph/thought and will attempt stay focused on the 
tangent it triggered in me:

Given Nick's appeal to you (and other's) CS idioms of topic, what you 
describe here makes me think that what you are gesturing at is a 
qualitative annealing schedule/mechanism.   I anneal metal at my 
blacksmith's forge to the following pattern:

  # * Annealing*: release accumulated constraint and restore flexibility.
  # *Hardening/quenching*: commit strongly into a constrained
    high-energy structure.
  # *Tempering*: selectively relax that commitment so it does not become
    fragile.

In practical blacksmithing (mostly tool making including, I suppose, the 
canonical samurai sword)  the point is usually to differentially harden 
a cutting edge while leaving the backing bulk less brittle.   It 
includes doing the bulk of the sharpening of a cutting edge before final 
hardening (and final, but tedious, sharpening of the last bit of the 
edge detail)

While I've used the analogical methods in simulation/search programming 
(my idiosynctratic re-implementations) I don't know the precise binding 
(if there is one) in CS formalisms (as far as I know, simulated 
annealing wasn't in the lexicon in my formative 70s-80s period).

applied in a more general problem solving or perspective landscape 
exploration which I think we are discussing

    /<sometimes I suspect I miss what youse guys are even talking about
    and wander off talking myself about what must look like a total
    hallucinatory phantasm to the rest of you?>/

, the value of diversity is as qualitative thermal noise in the 
perspectival landscape to break out of ?

- Steve

    /(clearly my idea of short and succinct is not particularly so by
    some objective measure, or would it by many subjective measures)/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260901/3c60cd7c/attachment.html>

From sasmyth at swcp.com  Tue Sep  1 14:20:30 2026
From: sasmyth at swcp.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 12:20:30 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAAXA=W=Bv=g=119g-Z9kV2HhYm05MT7gBn6VSj-EgO79=e5P5Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <CAAXA=W=Bv=g=119g-Z9kV2HhYm05MT7gBn6VSj-EgO79=e5P5Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <eb582144-c621-471d-86f7-5cb1861b5f7b@swcp.com>


>
>     https://www.aaup.org/academe/issues/fall-2025/seven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity
>
>     OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity.
>     But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I
>     think I'm going to stop calling myself a "methodological
>     pluralist" and use "instrumental pluralist" instead.
>
or parsimony might suggest my last missive could have been simply:

    "perspectival annealing?"
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260901/5fd14208/attachment.html>

From sasmyth at swcp.com  Tue Sep  1 14:35:38 2026
From: sasmyth at swcp.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 12:35:38 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAA5dAfqEGO174r=PjMVFyi_hnsWft_cctsX+ibARd1hnCBSqGw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <CAAXA=W=Bv=g=119g-Z9kV2HhYm05MT7gBn6VSj-EgO79=e5P5Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <da98b8d1-81cc-40ff-adae-84b393b3e302@swcp.com>
 <CAA5dAfqEGO174r=PjMVFyi_hnsWft_cctsX+ibARd1hnCBSqGw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <135ec4f4-31f4-4f8a-b294-8d195f80f371@swcp.com>


Frank Wimberly wrote:
> Clancy (non) verdict.

alternate compression:

    /Hung Jury/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260901/c01ccb82/attachment.html>

From eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com  Tue Sep  1 15:27:55 2026
From: eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com (Eric Charles)
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 15:27:55 -0400
Subject: [FRIAM] Dualism and analytic formalism
Message-ID: 
 <CAEYGzMATXhUJ3KxyDhA5n9+oSAM4F29i+azTc9u4k3DuPrV7aA@mail.gmail.com>

A brief explanation of dualism and analytic formalism.
[image: image.png]
<echarles at american.edu>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260901/386ec8c2/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 278895 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260901/386ec8c2/attachment-0001.png>

From gepr at ropella.name  Tue Sep  1 15:59:20 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 12:59:20 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: <eb582144-c621-471d-86f7-5cb1861b5f7b@swcp.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <CAAXA=W=Bv=g=119g-Z9kV2HhYm05MT7gBn6VSj-EgO79=e5P5Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <eb582144-c621-471d-86f7-5cb1861b5f7b@swcp.com>
Message-ID: <2dacc149-f9b9-4fa0-b677-317a6a209eaa@ropella.name>

IDK. I don't think annealing or tempering gets at the point very well. That assumes a shared parameter space. Again using the Debian example, do the 8 options look like they're all expressed within the same space? If so, it's pretty large ... lumping in climate change with Codes of Conduct and such. Each domain seems like it could be orthogonal, a totally separate belief system ... hence pluralism.

On 9/1/26 11:20 AM, Steve Smith wrote:
> 
>>
>>     https://www.aaup.org/academe/issues/fall-2025/seven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity
>>
>>     OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity. But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I think I'm going to stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use "instrumental pluralist" instead.
>>
> or parsimony might suggest my last missive could have been simply:
> 
>     "perspectival annealing?"
> 


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


From sasmyth at swcp.com  Tue Sep  1 20:29:15 2026
From: sasmyth at swcp.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2026 18:29:15 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: <2dacc149-f9b9-4fa0-b677-317a6a209eaa@ropella.name>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <CAAXA=W=Bv=g=119g-Z9kV2HhYm05MT7gBn6VSj-EgO79=e5P5Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <eb582144-c621-471d-86f7-5cb1861b5f7b@swcp.com>
 <2dacc149-f9b9-4fa0-b677-317a6a209eaa@ropella.name>
Message-ID: <cfe25887-e100-452f-b3cf-9311613d8cc0@swcp.com>

I'll try to concede your point.   The annealing and/or parallax I was 
intuitng would be across the composed, higher dimensional *plural* space 
you suggest.  Debian-ness is the plurality of all-things-Debian?

The blind men cannot discover true elephantness by groping their 
respective parts harder.

But a circus trainer, a trophy/ivory hunter, a timber-man in Burma, and 
a villager wanting to feed her kin have axiological differences of 
perspective on the same creature?


On 9/1/26 1:59 pm, glen wrote:
> IDK. I don't think annealing or tempering gets at the point very well. 
> That assumes a shared parameter space. Again using the Debian example, 
> do the 8 options look like they're all expressed within the same 
> space? If so, it's pretty large ... lumping in climate change with 
> Codes of Conduct and such. Each domain seems like it could be 
> orthogonal, a totally separate belief system ... hence pluralism.
>
> On 9/1/26 11:20 AM, Steve Smith wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> https://www.aaup.org/academe/issues/fall-2025/seven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity
>>>
>>>     OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity. 
>>> But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I think 
>>> I'm going to stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and 
>>> use "instrumental pluralist" instead.
>>>
>> or parsimony might suggest my last missive could have been simply:
>>
>>     "perspectival annealing?"
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260901/aaf86e9d/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Screenshot 2026-09-01 at 6.28.09 pm.png
Type: image/png
Size: 637760 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260901/aaf86e9d/attachment-0001.png>

From desmith at santafe.edu  Tue Sep  1 20:48:05 2026
From: desmith at santafe.edu (Santafe)
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2026 09:48:05 +0900
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
Message-ID: <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>

Agree Siraganian is wrong.

I believe the etymology of the expression “red herring” was not intended to be a compliment to the dogs that run off following it.

In some lecture or interview or someplace, I remember Snyder making a connection that seems good for the current situation:  Authoritarian gaslighting really works by adopting the main premises of postmodernism (as it has become in its now-degenerated form; I understand the defense of some of the original work).  A thing Snyder didn’t say, which just calls out a further point of context, but that I think is also within the center of his point: in eras where postmodernism hadn’t spread as widely as it has here and now, the need was the same, but the authoritarian gaslighters had to build some of the infrastructure they wanted to use.  For today, it is just there at the Ikea where you can go pick it up and assemble it the same day.  Or, so widely distributed in Amazon warehouses that they can deliver it the same day, anywhere.

Another nice little frame I saw, from some commenter on some article, was:

For my friends, the Unitary Executive Theory.
For my enemies, the Major Questions Doctrine.

And then:I have heard (reasonable) people criticize Paul Krugman for having lots of public opinions in areas where he doesn’t have a lot of earned expertise.  Okay; fair enough for that.  But I think it is to his credit that he started calling out bad faith as the central issue, quite a long time ago (when I also thought that needed to stay the focus).  Not leaving it to irony, as Siraganian sort-of does, but being plain that it is too frontal an attack to be winked at in irony.   

(And of course Glen’s point is also exactly right, but already said: it is just because the notion of what one wants from truth isn’t so easy that it can be handled lazily, and if we did less of that, maybe we would be better positioned to repel some of this other nonsense, or at least have a smaller vandal-group to repel over it.  That could itself be an interesting article, but it would have a completely different aim (solving a new problem) than Siraganian’s evident aim in this piece, which was to contribute to a struggle.)

I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now started to use the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various oligarchs and the relatively small and connected band of people trying to end the society and turn it into a CAFO.  It has been about time for that term to be one of the standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic term “predatory capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has been both long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have become semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant to draw a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are the thing that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the world both knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there is a path to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.

Eric



> On Sep 1, 2026, at 20:56, glen <gepr at ropella.name> wrote:
> 
> 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1
> 
> OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity. But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I think I'm going to stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use "instrumental pluralist" instead.
> 
> But 1) what Siraganian says here is simply wrong:
> 
> "To promote viewpoint diversity is to be thrilled to have my views in the mix, even if you think they are wrong, because either (a) they contribute to more viewpoint diversity (the more views you have, the more viewpoint diversity there is), or (b) they provide more views to choose from to figure out which view is the most true. In the first position, you end up not caring about whether a particular view is true or good, because you care about viewpoint diversity intrinsically: What matters is having the greatest possible variety of views. In the second position, you instrumentally value a diversity of views; having viewpoint diversity only matters until you can figure out which view is the best or most true, at which point all the other views can be rejected."
> 
> If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the 1st best to the 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject "all the others". Such smooth grading has to remain contingent, defeasible. And my guess is the gradation isn't smooth everywhere. It may be smooth for the first 2 or 3 distinguishable ideas, but #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>)
> 
> 2) Diversity remains a useful measure of the crosstrophic nature of complex systems, circularity, industrial symbiosis, etc. So even in light of Goodhart's Law, diversity is a reasonable *outcome*, even if it's dangerous to optimize to that sole outcome.
> 
> There are issues with all the theses she lays out. But persnickety nits aside, her gist seems right. And you can't overlook the blatant hypocrisy of objecting to DEI initiatives, but then arguing for "intellectual pluralism", pointed out in thesis 7.
> 
> This post is too long already. But I know many, here, have succumbed to Haidt glazing. So I offer this as further demonstration of Bad Faith rhetoric: https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 only peripherally about instrumental pluralism.
> 
> -- 
> 8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
> ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.
> 
> 
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,Z3MoIzr2_gYwXuX-WJtLvRPuw4lrhGeRqwGco_ktfU4qQxaHJOmOv8h7QMo4q3phH_1bmuxN1YrArL9vwsmrlwLg4h5aQ--jFIBIjkqUV_3dZSnq0Of_&typo=1
> to (un)subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,o6A878gmRtPOn9RwEViePS_tcms3qTJcMqxXPZx3Tkb5VVsg3DN3BwRifub1Y27kD8BXA2EcIdTAA5u_ss_n-HeWoDOugHR7cAovqEIe&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,4L88HNZqyH91Pv-TjJN8ZBC5prMxsVmwbT8EnV2BL55YaGf9xpqybKKdZXevcT9vNGfnKXERh-TdHqJkFi9pu4vaShGSjiFDpS-sbMcf7zMfgrrV&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,dGOrN-AOox-kFvpdb0Dq2LmV2SHzDQkncfWAKefpZ-jFJiBypNbt-CvFkQf_lkDpmGDYeTJJ-klo5QXsqOKhhet4GxkDAa2L8OPx7YvTlbSWDCeIFEY,&typo=1
>  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/


From eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com  Wed Sep  2 13:04:07 2026
From: eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com (Eric Charles)
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2026 13:04:07 -0400
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
Message-ID: 
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>

I know I'm coming to it late, but I did not find that article very
convincing. The main problems are:

   1. Nothing about the omnipresent DEI initiatives of the past few decades
   assures viewpoint diversity, and, if you are only getting people deeply
   devoted to DEI you are for sure actually quashing viewpoint diversity. And,
   by deeply-devoted I mean that academic job applications require DEI
   statements, teaching statements are required to highlight how your teaching
   relates to DEI efforts, applicants are judged based on "diversity" goals at
   the college and within departments, some members of hiring committees
   explicitly see it as their goal to right past wrongs against certain groups
   with their selections, etc.
   2. In certain contexts there is very, very good justification to prefer
   a narrow range of viewpoint diversity over maximal diversity. For example,
   having a math department with different perspectives on what math "is"
   creates a positive environment for students to learn in. For example, it
   might be nice to have a math realist, someone with an aesthetic approach, a
   hard core logician-mathematician, etc., and you certainly want people who
   study different fields within math. However, you might not want someone who
   thinks mathematics is a tool of colonialist oppression which should be
   rejected from the curriculum. In fact, it might be problematic to have
   proponents of that argument in decision-making roles *anywhere *within
   an *educational *institution.
   3. I have seen (when I was full-time in academia), and continue to see
   (via colleagues in academia) actual discrimination against academics with
   conservative views, and a ton of self-silencing based on anticipated
   discrimination. To use the DEI phrase, most faculty settings are not a
   "safe space" for them.
   4. Most of what the author asserts to be secretly implied or covertly
   assumed or bad faith about the efforts seems very upfront and
   straightforward.
   5. Frankly, the failure to replace conservative academics as they retire
   has created HUGE problems in this country. The conservative movement used
   to have decent group of hard-core academics and public intellectuals as a
   key part of it. The current trainwreck of ideas that pass for
   "conservative" these days could be, and could have been, greatly helped if
   academia broadly returned a good chunk of the prior support it used to give
   to people doing serious intellectual work from a conservative perspective.
   6. While this obviously applies to humanities and social sciences, it
   applies in all fields. It is good for a chemistry department to have some
   people who believe in hard core merit and some who believe in actively
   supporting those who might have had less opportunity growing up. It is good
   for a chemistry department to have some people who see "less opportunity"
   in terms of structural oppression rampant within a society and others who
   see it in terms of individual hardship. etc.

<echarles at american.edu>
All that said, for sure the Trump administration is acting in bad faith in
many ways, about all things... but that's a different issue.


On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 8:57 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu> wrote:

> Agree Siraganian is wrong.
>
> I believe the etymology of the expression “red herring” was not intended
> to be a compliment to the dogs that run off following it.
>
> In some lecture or interview or someplace, I remember Snyder making a
> connection that seems good for the current situation:  Authoritarian
> gaslighting really works by adopting the main premises of postmodernism (as
> it has become in its now-degenerated form; I understand the defense of some
> of the original work).  A thing Snyder didn’t say, which just calls out a
> further point of context, but that I think is also within the center of his
> point: in eras where postmodernism hadn’t spread as widely as it has here
> and now, the need was the same, but the authoritarian gaslighters had to
> build some of the infrastructure they wanted to use.  For today, it is just
> there at the Ikea where you can go pick it up and assemble it the same
> day.  Or, so widely distributed in Amazon warehouses that they can deliver
> it the same day, anywhere.
>
> Another nice little frame I saw, from some commenter on some article, was:
>
> For my friends, the Unitary Executive Theory.
> For my enemies, the Major Questions Doctrine.
>
> And then:I have heard (reasonable) people criticize Paul Krugman for
> having lots of public opinions in areas where he doesn’t have a lot of
> earned expertise.  Okay; fair enough for that.  But I think it is to his
> credit that he started calling out bad faith as the central issue, quite a
> long time ago (when I also thought that needed to stay the focus).  Not
> leaving it to irony, as Siraganian sort-of does, but being plain that it is
> too frontal an attack to be winked at in irony.
>
> (And of course Glen’s point is also exactly right, but already said: it is
> just because the notion of what one wants from truth isn’t so easy that it
> can be handled lazily, and if we did less of that, maybe we would be better
> positioned to repel some of this other nonsense, or at least have a smaller
> vandal-group to repel over it.  That could itself be an interesting
> article, but it would have a completely different aim (solving a new
> problem) than Siraganian’s evident aim in this piece, which was to
> contribute to a struggle.)
>
> I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now started to use
> the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various oligarchs and the
> relatively small and connected band of people trying to end the society and
> turn it into a CAFO.  It has been about time for that term to be one of the
> standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic term “predatory
> capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has been both
> long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have become
> semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant to draw
> a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are the thing
> that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the world both
> knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there is a path
> to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.
>
> Eric
>
>
>
> > On Sep 1, 2026, at 20:56, glen <gepr at ropella.name> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1
> >
> > OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity. But I am
> aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I think I'm going to
> stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use "instrumental
> pluralist" instead.
> >
> > But 1) what Siraganian says here is simply wrong:
> >
> > "To promote viewpoint diversity is to be thrilled to have my views in
> the mix, even if you think they are wrong, because either (a) they
> contribute to more viewpoint diversity (the more views you have, the more
> viewpoint diversity there is), or (b) they provide more views to choose
> from to figure out which view is the most true. In the first position, you
> end up not caring about whether a particular view is true or good, because
> you care about viewpoint diversity intrinsically: What matters is having
> the greatest possible variety of views. In the second position, you
> instrumentally value a diversity of views; having viewpoint diversity only
> matters until you can figure out which view is the best or most true, at
> which point all the other views can be rejected."
> >
> > If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the 1st best to
> the 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject "all the others".
> Such smooth grading has to remain contingent, defeasible. And my guess is
> the gradation isn't smooth everywhere. It may be smooth for the first 2 or
> 3 distinguishable ideas, but #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<
> https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>)
> >
> > 2) Diversity remains a useful measure of the crosstrophic nature of
> complex systems, circularity, industrial symbiosis, etc. So even in light
> of Goodhart's Law, diversity is a reasonable *outcome*, even if it's
> dangerous to optimize to that sole outcome.
> >
> > There are issues with all the theses she lays out. But persnickety nits
> aside, her gist seems right. And you can't overlook the blatant hypocrisy
> of objecting to DEI initiatives, but then arguing for "intellectual
> pluralism", pointed out in thesis 7.
> >
> > This post is too long already. But I know many, here, have succumbed to
> Haidt glazing. So I offer this as further demonstration of Bad Faith
> rhetoric:
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1
> only peripherally about instrumental pluralism.
> >
> > --
> > 8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
> > ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα
> σώσω.
> >
> >
> > .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --.
> / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,Z3MoIzr2_gYwXuX-WJtLvRPuw4lrhGeRqwGco_ktfU4qQxaHJOmOv8h7QMo4q3phH_1bmuxN1YrArL9vwsmrlwLg4h5aQ--jFIBIjkqUV_3dZSnq0Of_&typo=1
> > to (un)subscribe
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,o6A878gmRtPOn9RwEViePS_tcms3qTJcMqxXPZx3Tkb5VVsg3DN3BwRifub1Y27kD8BXA2EcIdTAA5u_ss_n-HeWoDOugHR7cAovqEIe&typo=1
> > FRIAM-COMIC
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,4L88HNZqyH91Pv-TjJN8ZBC5prMxsVmwbT8EnV2BL55YaGf9xpqybKKdZXevcT9vNGfnKXERh-TdHqJkFi9pu4vaShGSjiFDpS-sbMcf7zMfgrrV&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,dGOrN-AOox-kFvpdb0Dq2LmV2SHzDQkncfWAKefpZ-jFJiBypNbt-CvFkQf_lkDpmGDYeTJJ-klo5QXsqOKhhet4GxkDAa2L8OPx7YvTlbSWDCeIFEY,&typo=1
> >  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 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260902/4f94d77b/attachment.html>

From sasmyth at swcp.com  Wed Sep  2 13:42:57 2026
From: sasmyth at swcp.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2026 11:42:57 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <17bab650-66af-467c-9a58-79dd4015134e@swcp.com>


Eric Charles wrote:
> Frankly, the failure to replace conservative academics as they retire 
> has created HUGE problems in this country. The conservative 
> movement used to have decent group of hard-core academics and public 
> intellectuals as a key part of it.

While the obvious and most painful to many of us aspect of the current 
whitelash/MAGA/Trumpian capture is the damage to liberal democracy as 
well as Liberal Democracy, the complementary space of oldSkool or 
"traditional" Conservatism (or conservatism) is already deeply in an 
existential crisis.

I am nominally a Liberal/Progressive socially by many measures with a 
foundation of Anarcho-Primitivism personally.

What "we" have lost aside from significant direct control is a righteous 
"Loyal Opposition" to help us define our best selves.

<background anecdote worth skipping>

    I was raised on rural/conservative even (soft) Calvanist ideals,
    meaning primarily that everyone i knew or met before I was 13 lived,
    ate, breathed and wallowed in not being wasteful or profligate and
    not seeking change for the sake of change.  My parents (who
    eventually became very mainstream Conservative) were nominally the
    most Progressive and Liberal people I knew. They chose to have
    (only) 2 children because Zero Population Growth, they were never
    intolerant of anyone for their gender, race, religion, etc. that I
    could detect (and rarely even for their behaviour unless
    outrageous).   They talked of their own experience growing up a few
    miles north of the Mason Dixon line with Grandparents who would have
    remembered the Civil War, and being proud to be called Yankee in an
    area were your cousins were as likely to still be whistling Dixie
    and wearing a Johnny Reb Cap.   They both had innocent encounters
    with blacks as children where they were caught off guard by their
    own parent's prejudice.   Most women I grew up around did wear
    dresses or skirts, but seeing them in jeans was not a surprise and
    most rode horses, mended fences, and bucked hay, even if they didn't
    wrestle steers, dehorn or brand them (that I knew of).   Men might
    not have always treated women as equals, but often did, depending on
    them to handle competently many of the things they did routinely.

    I joined semi-rural/small-urbanism at 13 with a residual component
    of this kind of self-reliance evident but also overlapping a fairly
    modern 60's Pop-Culture and a border Mexican/American
    alternative-traditionalism where the women were still highly
    competent but gender roles were more distinct with a whole different
    dynamic between parents and children within and across genders.

    Then on to a small university town (NAU/Flagstaff AZ) where a whole
    new suite of exposures were available.  By that time (mid 70s) I was
    a vegetarian and a peacenik by most standards, a bit past proper
    hippy era but informed (sorry Nick) by all that. Somehow I still
    managed to think helping Reagan oust Carter was a good idea.  6
    months in I realized I'd been duped.

</baws>

   It didn't make me overtly a Democrat, and I HAD been sympathetic with 
Carter's actions, just bamboozled into thinking we needed a  "Harder 
line" on things than he was up for.

But I began to recognize the deep and enduring value of Political 
Pluralism and in particularly in a 2 party system of the "Loyal Opposition".

An adult lifetime of encountering people and cultures and religions and 
political systems from round the world has lead me to respect what I 
hope is the deepest/broadest sense of Pluralism which as I think the 
through line here reflects that DEI is at best a weak proxy or mild 
measure of such Plurality?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260902/dfba8551/attachment.html>

From desmith at santafe.edu  Wed Sep  2 17:04:21 2026
From: desmith at santafe.edu (Santafe)
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 06:04:21 +0900
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>

At a kind of vibe level, I understand the picture you paint, and I can think of enough instances that fit it, to agree that there is a problem to correct.

But how far can you go to defend the premise that the retirement of some academics was a HUGE problem in this country — or more specifically, do you think that is causal for the choice of what has become the political right to go in for fascism, with its considerable elements of cynicism, anomie, and nihilism?  Had there been “ideas” on offer from some university faculty, do you think these people would have wanted them?  Or just wanted to burn that down too along with all the rest of it?

As with many things I can kind of recognize at a vibe level, if I look at it more closely, I don’t know what I should understand the categories even to refer to.  By which I mean, what should I attach to the word “conservatism”, as any range of things from a movement name, to a social group-label, to a domain or thesis of “ideas”.  For instance, is it:

1. A backfilling of what is meant to look like argument, but anchored for real in the motive of holding onto power, wealth, and agency by those who have it, and further concentrating it, specifically to increase the asymmetry over those who don't?  Certainly that goes on, and those who want to fight the C label as a label would say this is its essence.  Is that its essence, or is that the essence of a corruption when the real C word has been lost?  If it is part of the genuine thing, how far does it go toward efforts to cultivate the belief that people are constitutively different enough that there is no defensible right of agency and freedom for everybody on an equal footing, and there should be rulers and ruled?

2. A thesis that “move fast and break things” was not an admirable values system, and that seeking change merely for change’s sake is too harmful relative to what it achieves to be allowed to go on un-regulated or un-restricted?  That would fit with the name C.  Wendell Berry died a couple of days ago, somebody I knew a little and had some time with in person, and have also read some of though not nearly a lot.  This was one of his theses.  Close to the notion of upholding the Ordnung among the Amish, or a defense of Luddism as honorable precaution.

3. A notion that a category like “family” is robust only through cultural collective and cooperative effects, and that a type system needs to be built up, and most types excluded from participation in it, because otherwise it is so fragile that the admission of more than one form endangers it?  So, for instance: we have no real way to distinguish abusive from supportive marriages, so as long as there is one man and one woman, so-identified by self and others (maybe a subset of who the others are allowed to be), we have to admit it all.  But other kinds of unions need to be kept outside the perimeter as viewed by the protections of law and the rights of civil society?  The argument being (?) that there are certain obligations the institution needs to enable people to keep (raising and support of kids being the obvious one, but you can imagine others, and I know of marriage customs that symbolically encode several different ones), and we know so little about how to do that, that some one form accepted at whatever level of consideration constitutes social convention is the only conceivable solution, so anything else needs to be presumptively excluded.

4. That people have to experience religious devotions, of whatever kind?  The word “faith” has become very popular by people trying not to alienate any of those who go through life with a chip on their shoulders, the new PC (really the same old PC).  If people just used it, it wouldn’t be such a sore thumb to me, but the pandering feels really blatant.  Does that self-identified group, and any Greeks using it as a Trojan Horse for whatever else motivates them — since it is not clear how any “sincerely” motivated people police their own and keep the fakers out — get veto power?  Are the mystics excluded, as the doctrinal religious people have often wanted them to be?  Or are they religious enough that they are okay too?

5. That anybody who doesn’t live an entire life in the place he was born is automatically suspect?  The view being that he hasn’t tied himself into any one local lifeboat, ergo there can’t be any way he can be counted on to defend it existentially?  This is also close to one of Wendell’s views, though in person it was important enough for him to like people, that he didn’t go into his personal relations plastering doctrines of Original Sin on anybody to whom they could be applied.  But as a core of ethnic tribalism, this impulse to reinforce mutual obligation seems to me to be one of the oldest and most universal cultural things people do, and if it is ever temporarily absent in some pocket, some of the people there will recreate it from whole cloth.

6. Is it a negotiation of how much of the completed past needs to be kept current as a debt, and how much needs to be let go?  Meaning: when, by making extra effort to identify and support people who are on the wrong end of a structural exclusion or exploitation, are we actively working to dismantle the structure, and when have enough generations gone by and enough circumstances created new people, that there isn’t anything productive to be done by trying to trace an indefinitely long past of who-displaced-whom?  I am emphasizing here, as possible C, the premise that there is a negotiation on that point to be carried out, as opposed to a dogma that to ever let go of anything is a sin.  And if that is the C premise, is there a distinction that is also C between having that negotiation in good faith and having it in bad faith?  Of how one tries to police against plain irresponsible self-interest hijacking the form with no moral or ethical anchor?


I can imagine any of the above, or none of them, as being what “conservatism” is supposed to stand for.  And I can imagine many combinations of people proudly advocating any of them at the same time as others would sharply distinguish what is okay and what is corrupt or degenerated.

There’s another mid-length rant about how I watch the memes change, on timescales of about 1–4 years, and while each of them has some truth, I feel like they are substitutes for seeing a kind of paralysis and inability or unwillingness to actually do things that need to be done, across the whole of society, that feels to me like a better candidate for cause of the fascist and nihilist turn.  But this note is too long already, and I should do work.

Eric



> On Sep 3, 2026, at 2:04, Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I know I'm coming to it late, but I did not find that article very convincing. The main problems are:
> Nothing about the omnipresent DEI initiatives of the past few decades assures viewpoint diversity, and, if you are only getting people deeply devoted to DEI you are for sure actually quashing viewpoint diversity. And, by deeply-devoted I mean that academic job applications require DEI statements, teaching statements are required to highlight how your teaching relates to DEI efforts, applicants are judged based on "diversity" goals at the college and within departments, some members of hiring committees explicitly see it as their goal to right past wrongs against certain groups with their selections, etc. 
> In certain contexts there is very, very good justification to prefer a narrow range of viewpoint diversity over maximal diversity. For example, having a math department with different perspectives on what math "is" creates a positive environment for students to learn in. For example, it might be nice to have a math realist, someone with an aesthetic approach, a hard core logician-mathematician, etc., and you certainly want people who study different fields within math. However, you might not want someone who thinks mathematics is a tool of colonialist oppression which should be rejected from the curriculum. In fact, it might be problematic to have proponents of that argument in decision-making roles anywhere within an educational institution. 
> I have seen (when I was full-time in academia), and continue to see (via colleagues in academia) actual discrimination against academics with conservative views, and a ton of self-silencing based on anticipated discrimination. To use the DEI phrase, most faculty settings are not a "safe space" for them. 
> Most of what the author asserts to be secretly implied or covertly assumed or bad faith about the efforts seems very upfront and straightforward. 
> Frankly, the failure to replace conservative academics as they retire has created HUGE problems in this country. The conservative movement used to have decent group of hard-core academics and public intellectuals as a key part of it. The current trainwreck of ideas that pass for "conservative" these days could be, and could have been, greatly helped if academia broadly returned a good chunk of the prior support it used to give to people doing serious intellectual work from a conservative perspective. 
> While this obviously applies to humanities and social sciences, it applies in all fields. It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who believe in hard core merit and some who believe in actively supporting those who might have had less opportunity growing up. It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who see "less opportunity" in terms of structural oppression rampant within a society and others who see it in terms of individual hardship. etc. 
>  <mailto:echarles at american.edu>All that said, for sure the Trump administration is acting in bad faith in many ways, about all things... but that's a different issue. 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 8:57 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>> wrote:
>> Agree Siraganian is wrong.
>> 
>> I believe the etymology of the expression “red herring” was not intended to be a compliment to the dogs that run off following it.
>> 
>> In some lecture or interview or someplace, I remember Snyder making a connection that seems good for the current situation:  Authoritarian gaslighting really works by adopting the main premises of postmodernism (as it has become in its now-degenerated form; I understand the defense of some of the original work).  A thing Snyder didn’t say, which just calls out a further point of context, but that I think is also within the center of his point: in eras where postmodernism hadn’t spread as widely as it has here and now, the need was the same, but the authoritarian gaslighters had to build some of the infrastructure they wanted to use.  For today, it is just there at the Ikea where you can go pick it up and assemble it the same day.  Or, so widely distributed in Amazon warehouses that they can deliver it the same day, anywhere.
>> 
>> Another nice little frame I saw, from some commenter on some article, was:
>> 
>> For my friends, the Unitary Executive Theory.
>> For my enemies, the Major Questions Doctrine.
>> 
>> And then:I have heard (reasonable) people criticize Paul Krugman for having lots of public opinions in areas where he doesn’t have a lot of earned expertise.  Okay; fair enough for that.  But I think it is to his credit that he started calling out bad faith as the central issue, quite a long time ago (when I also thought that needed to stay the focus).  Not leaving it to irony, as Siraganian sort-of does, but being plain that it is too frontal an attack to be winked at in irony.   
>> 
>> (And of course Glen’s point is also exactly right, but already said: it is just because the notion of what one wants from truth isn’t so easy that it can be handled lazily, and if we did less of that, maybe we would be better positioned to repel some of this other nonsense, or at least have a smaller vandal-group to repel over it.  That could itself be an interesting article, but it would have a completely different aim (solving a new problem) than Siraganian’s evident aim in this piece, which was to contribute to a struggle.)
>> 
>> I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now started to use the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various oligarchs and the relatively small and connected band of people trying to end the society and turn it into a CAFO.  It has been about time for that term to be one of the standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic term “predatory capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has been both long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have become semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant to draw a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are the thing that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the world both knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there is a path to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.
>> 
>> Eric
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> > On Sep 1, 2026, at 20:56, glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>> wrote:
>> > 
>> > 
>> > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1
>> > 
>> > OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity. But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I think I'm going to stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use "instrumental pluralist" instead.
>> > 
>> > But 1) what Siraganian says here is simply wrong:
>> > 
>> > "To promote viewpoint diversity is to be thrilled to have my views in the mix, even if you think they are wrong, because either (a) they contribute to more viewpoint diversity (the more views you have, the more viewpoint diversity there is), or (b) they provide more views to choose from to figure out which view is the most true. In the first position, you end up not caring about whether a particular view is true or good, because you care about viewpoint diversity intrinsically: What matters is having the greatest possible variety of views. In the second position, you instrumentally value a diversity of views; having viewpoint diversity only matters until you can figure out which view is the best or most true, at which point all the other views can be rejected."
>> > 
>> > If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the 1st best to the 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject "all the others". Such smooth grading has to remain contingent, defeasible. And my guess is the gradation isn't smooth everywhere. It may be smooth for the first 2 or 3 distinguishable ideas, but #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>)
>> > 
>> > 2) Diversity remains a useful measure of the crosstrophic nature of complex systems, circularity, industrial symbiosis, etc. So even in light of Goodhart's Law, diversity is a reasonable *outcome*, even if it's dangerous to optimize to that sole outcome.
>> > 
>> > There are issues with all the theses she lays out. But persnickety nits aside, her gist seems right. And you can't overlook the blatant hypocrisy of objecting to DEI initiatives, but then arguing for "intellectual pluralism", pointed out in thesis 7.
>> > 
>> > This post is too long already. But I know many, here, have succumbed to Haidt glazing. So I offer this as further demonstration of Bad Faith rhetoric: https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 only peripherally about instrumental pluralism.
>> > 
>> > -- 
>> > 8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
>> > ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.
>> > 
>> > 
>> > .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,Z3MoIzr2_gYwXuX-WJtLvRPuw4lrhGeRqwGco_ktfU4qQxaHJOmOv8h7QMo4q3phH_1bmuxN1YrArL9vwsmrlwLg4h5aQ--jFIBIjkqUV_3dZSnq0Of_&typo=1
>> > to (un)subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,o6A878gmRtPOn9RwEViePS_tcms3qTJcMqxXPZx3Tkb5VVsg3DN3BwRifub1Y27kD8BXA2EcIdTAA5u_ss_n-HeWoDOugHR7cAovqEIe&typo=1
>> > FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,4L88HNZqyH91Pv-TjJN8ZBC5prMxsVmwbT8EnV2BL55YaGf9xpqybKKdZXevcT9vNGfnKXERh-TdHqJkFi9pu4vaShGSjiFDpS-sbMcf7zMfgrrV&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,dGOrN-AOox-kFvpdb0Dq2LmV2SHzDQkncfWAKefpZ-jFJiBypNbt-CvFkQf_lkDpmGDYeTJJ-klo5QXsqOKhhet4GxkDAa2L8OPx7YvTlbSWDCeIFEY,&typo=1
>> >  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 Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,1F9g4ESHX8fs-0GPkG4T3UFaH1at5g6XCjOraG48bvh5Z9SDVqgEX6KSX95vW4Od1tMWv7kvKgtkrHk2jvd0BT43zXQ3FHttOtfDaqpnLIi6&typo=1>
>> to (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,hi4x7VA8xMlylLCreOwJrLHKbA058tbN0zbPxsT4sHa6zNkZ9_UoZs8qYuRQwyP1WkJGcdcOkqs__LvglQKuyzmnEMwEHujyKL3RSSmH0xNUA_XJB99BfA,,&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,MCWEFyRGkX_zPgbamdYmsBnWqk91HHl0kAkO5ZGBbUH5h4rhZ-pPk-w9VbLOlCxcnXFqDCmkD1d4Cya0_L1uDoFMRsKOJ04Zp8P47Frhd8uFbscp1d6c4SE,&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,1,41mZERuksfEvx_6YHrwe8pPfLcPnvhvHf4KnWNACCGlZ3JRuOI9r4juj-p7UwaToo72c0jc2A-M5SfMPOTjIV15fVEsGg851X1phCSKA4WV0HhqVTAgPezc,&typo=1>
>>   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 Zoom https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,uvrW2KLjMhzw--eytVGiRPto8bH4EdfRopq_XQ7w2hUnntwbwE55w_SEPoryVnYnQJdkteR7DB-zGMCjjhIh0W6e_D2HPOb1CpNUsmBrSZBLsOE2&typo=1
> to (un)subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,-eIFcX5KDxQHC4jdw-0o-BvWPPVbQKCQNvwTwM1DIQCmsntRurHJ7boqQYHoUkeC5szOUlAXHN2_eg-Y1UepKI2hJ7WfOAgHF5FncEaRici5h4BLoQE,&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,BYNtQucCZC6Q0IL49uckOGFEXaUhGCI5pDptIIF4EwBi76y1xfMy-PZbA8SBP8--jaFvjLs2gC2jWYlA9Qu2qNVGVjpzM2fcrPG-bMjFmdtbXTvstsPzeo_f&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,ACG8gOlZyJ8vu0XnkngJ9S6_RPwh-ZiPu9IOHZsX1pygnIKXxArYw1okwcAo3w6FoDxvXNn2SFFzK3bYLMlSwZlcJj5yTf_2xjwng2Ghn7nM8c225niwrbOf&typo=1
>  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260903/a9774b67/attachment.html>

From stephen.guerin at simtable.com  Wed Sep  2 21:19:30 2026
From: stephen.guerin at simtable.com (Stephen Guerin)
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2026 19:19:30 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
Message-ID: 
 <CAOmOqnK3r5tf2ooHEyD__X+s9bQqm0yz_kOYQTtMFv=uE3OZVw@mail.gmail.com>

woah, Eric S, love the CAFO metaphor - I had to look up the acronym for
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (feedlots)

it gave me a better visual for the cloud companies and their data centers.
My AI Slop rendering:

[image: cafo.jpg]

My AI Slop Summary:

In the CAFO (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation) metaphor, human users
cease to be sovereign agents and are reduced to captive "data cows,"
grazing on algorithmically synthetic feed while centralized data centers
function as industrial feedlots engineered for continuous behavioral and
biological extraction. Rather than enabling autonomous movement across an
open, peer-to-peer digital commons, each cloud titan fences off human
activity within proprietary pens to harvest high-yield telemetry,
attention, and cognitive labor. Within these computational complexes, every
interaction is quantified, concentrated, and processed into predictive
models or metered rents, stripping the human commons into an industrialized
resource base where escape is foreclosed by deliberate technical friction,
network lock-in, and legal enclosures.

Across the industrial landscape, each major cloud operator runs a
specialized processing line within its data center infrastructure: *Meta*
operates the affective agitation feedlot, where engagement algorithms
provoke emotional volatility to extract behavioral surplus for
hyper-targeted advertising; *Google* runs the zero-click information
corral, ingesting global search intent, ambient Android location, and video
dwell times to process human curiosity into programmatic auctions; *Amazon*
manages a dual-sided marketplace pen and logistics abattoir, using
fulfillment monopsonies, platform ad-tolls, and AWS compute meters to
squeeze both sellers and consumers; *Microsoft* maintains the white-collar
corporate pen, capturing workplace enterprise telemetry through mandatory
OS, identity (Entra ID), and Copilot subscriptions; *Apple* runs the gilded
luxury paddock, using hardware sandboxing, ecosystem tethers, and App Store
tolls to extract recurring rents under the banner of security; *OpenAI* and
*Anthropic* operate the high-density cognitive rendering plants, scraping
the digital intellectual commons to digest human language into proprietary
token-inference engines; *Epic Systems* encloses clinical healthcare into
administrative vaults, processing patient biometrics and doctor workflows
into un-exportable electronic silos; *Esri* runs the spatial registry pen,
turning public geography, civil infrastructure, and hazard response into
metered proprietary service credits; *Adobe* and *Autodesk* manage
specialized creative and architectural cages, locking design files behind
perpetual cloud subscriptions; while *Oracle* and *Broadcom* serve as the
corporate extraction facilities, leveraging audit threats, architectural
dependency, and sudden 300% to 1,000% hypervisor rate hikes to strip-mine
trapped enterprise IT departments.

_________________________________________________________________
Stephen Guerin
CEO, Founder
https://simtable.com
stephen.guerin at simtable.com

stephenguerin at fas.harvard.edu
Visualization Research and Teaching Lab
<https://hwpi.harvard.edu/eps-visualization-research-laboratory/home>
Harvard Earth and Planetary Science
Landscape Architecture
<https://www.gsd.harvard.edu/2025/02/landscape-architecture-students-explore-pioneering-climate-visualization-techniques-to-inform-design/>
Harvard Graduate School of Design

mobile: (505)577-5828


On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 6:48 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu> wrote:

>
> I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now started to use
> the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various oligarchs and the
> relatively small and connected band of people trying to end the society and
> turn it into a *CAFO*.  It has been about time for that term to be one of
> the standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic term “predatory
> capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has been both
> long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have become
> semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant to draw
> a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are the thing
> that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the world both
> knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there is a path
> to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260902/5f9050cf/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: cafo.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 183975 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260902/5f9050cf/attachment-0001.jpg>

From desmith at santafe.edu  Thu Sep  3 07:04:39 2026
From: desmith at santafe.edu (Santafe)
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 20:04:39 +0900
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOmOqnK3r5tf2ooHEyD__X+s9bQqm0yz_kOYQTtMFv=uE3OZVw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAOmOqnK3r5tf2ooHEyD__X+s9bQqm0yz_kOYQTtMFv=uE3OZVw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <C3C92DE1-17C6-49F0-9B64-0C98C204C640@santafe.edu>

Scary how that reminds me of the Rio Grande corridor down to Albuquerque.  Maybe in winter, or under forest fire smoke.  Was that part of the design prompt?

But very useful, Stephen; thank you.

It’s funny; I wasn’t actually thinking about data cows, though that is very available here, and the written part below is really quite a great summary.

I have continued to wrestle with a certain specific set of assertions, which to me were totalizing.  Not only data, but the whole pro-natalism program, the Amazon driver-eye-tracking surveillance, and on and on.  Total possession and disposal of what formerly were called people.

The assertion is one that I first got from Arendt, and probably mentioned here.  She distinguishes between party fascism and movement fascism, and says there was something very important that (somebody; in the day (?)) had failed to grasp: that the Parties wanted to control the government, while the Movements wanted to destroy the government.  Parties and Movements are two categories for her, which she doesn’t ever “define”, but just starts referring to and kind of fills in by context.  As if those were current terms among the readership she had in mind.

Snyder, in some recent essaying, has been making not-the-same point, but one using the same assertion:  that what people are not getting is that the destruction by the MAGA Honchos isn’t incidental to some other point; that it is itself the point.  And that the cabal who envision a Really Different Future are conscious and deliberate about this.  They imagine that they see something that will make their power sufficient to whatever it is they want, and the destruction of the “country” as a place that hosts “citizens” and all those related concepts, is explicitly a step to get there.

I have no way to know if this language is always in the air for historians, or if Snyder inherits it as a point from Arendt or others who preceded him.  So I don’t know if I should take these as independently formed insights, or repetitions of one same thing.

But he wasn’t using that language a few months ago, the way he is now regularly.  More memes running through the discourse.

Eric



> On Sep 3, 2026, at 10:19, Stephen Guerin <stephen.guerin at simtable.com> wrote:
> 
> woah, Eric S, love the CAFO metaphor - I had to look up the acronym for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (feedlots)  
> 
> it gave me a better visual for the cloud companies and their data centers. My AI Slop rendering:
> 
> <cafo.jpg>
> 
> My AI Slop Summary:
> In the CAFO (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation) metaphor, human users cease to be sovereign agents and are reduced to captive "data cows," grazing on algorithmically synthetic feed while centralized data centers function as industrial feedlots engineered for continuous behavioral and biological extraction. Rather than enabling autonomous movement across an open, peer-to-peer digital commons, each cloud titan fences off human activity within proprietary pens to harvest high-yield telemetry, attention, and cognitive labor. Within these computational complexes, every interaction is quantified, concentrated, and processed into predictive models or metered rents, stripping the human commons into an industrialized resource base where escape is foreclosed by deliberate technical friction, network lock-in, and legal enclosures.
> 
> Across the industrial landscape, each major cloud operator runs a specialized processing line within its data center infrastructure: Meta operates the affective agitation feedlot, where engagement algorithms provoke emotional volatility to extract behavioral surplus for hyper-targeted advertising; Google runs the zero-click information corral, ingesting global search intent, ambient Android location, and video dwell times to process human curiosity into programmatic auctions; Amazon manages a dual-sided marketplace pen and logistics abattoir, using fulfillment monopsonies, platform ad-tolls, and AWS compute meters to squeeze both sellers and consumers; Microsoft maintains the white-collar corporate pen, capturing workplace enterprise telemetry through mandatory OS, identity (Entra ID), and Copilot subscriptions; Apple runs the gilded luxury paddock, using hardware sandboxing, ecosystem tethers, and App Store tolls to extract recurring rents under the banner of security; OpenAI and Anthropic operate the high-density cognitive rendering plants, scraping the digital intellectual commons to digest human language into proprietary token-inference engines; Epic Systems encloses clinical healthcare into administrative vaults, processing patient biometrics and doctor workflows into un-exportable electronic silos; Esri runs the spatial registry pen, turning public geography, civil infrastructure, and hazard response into metered proprietary service credits; Adobe and Autodesk manage specialized creative and architectural cages, locking design files behind perpetual cloud subscriptions; while Oracle and Broadcom serve as the corporate extraction facilities, leveraging audit threats, architectural dependency, and sudden 300% to 1,000% hypervisor rate hikes to strip-mine trapped enterprise IT departments.
> 
> 
> _________________________________________________________________
> Stephen Guerin
> CEO, Founder 
> https://simtable.com <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fsimtable.com&c=E,1,aser_-Ofcf43lLHEFgZbSdpW8uTE_2deEFrWduPoDxU6AyEkjbUJ0f3qrEWZSTFbJJPb5CpE3DGik9o4RQ5Fd5goK-9ojgcjFz-eryMEQmwNLe1v&typo=1>
> stephen.guerin at simtable.com <mailto:stephen.guerin at simtable.com> 
> 
> stephenguerin at fas.harvard.edu <mailto:stephenguerin at fas.harvard.edu>
> Visualization Research and Teaching Lab <https://hwpi.harvard.edu/eps-visualization-research-laboratory/home>
> Harvard Earth and Planetary Science
> Landscape Architecture  <https://www.gsd.harvard.edu/2025/02/landscape-architecture-students-explore-pioneering-climate-visualization-techniques-to-inform-design/>
> Harvard Graduate School of Design
> 
> mobile: (505)577-5828
> 
> 
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 6:48 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>> wrote:
>> 
>> I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now started to use the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various oligarchs and the relatively small and connected band of people trying to end the society and turn it into a CAFO.  It has been about time for that term to be one of the standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic term “predatory capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has been both long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have become semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant to draw a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are the thing that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the world both knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there is a path to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.
>> 
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,w9glZGvIvSYJRqEGS4i-tq9tGGoj1NMC-Veu6-8G9xJKEFolQWzyhjzLwYen4MzciZl_hA2Vg6aoBxdQ6H-a5b_jb_vWoh4TW2HdmvqT6a5zpwE,&typo=1
> to (un)subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,d_yVdoMSCLkeMipiNKSVi7UQfYNQ-6fNM_iOR7E-kYTZiSbgPd3rpdNFFN52QviXAdp1nkTA-wqgM1LxT6yYUFCOLxYd08LSpKOpc_I_VzENlmrP8GwCtA,,&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,wOZDVjaXvXhfH7bMK8TwxelnxmR5OFPhi9nQgDjVftm7PE0h3MiWRPXixCSBlmNoyf2UPi6arrU5pp9zIn7iiWu7Mcs2rw3cCIFMczkoBDmYsCi4mzuyAGLi6BsP&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,IeljYyYd6Yz1xEWkAa3Y2frMcqW_qUnG4qPVQbIfAqlursKUmEHwOfFVgdgwSX8vHQeJBEe3vvqypVMdxk-qOhZNrambVJKx1zoS8TJIEQ,,&typo=1
>  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260903/f5bdf66a/attachment.html>

From gepr at ropella.name  Thu Sep  3 10:50:02 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 07:50:02 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: <C3C92DE1-17C6-49F0-9B64-0C98C204C640@santafe.edu>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAOmOqnK3r5tf2ooHEyD__X+s9bQqm0yz_kOYQTtMFv=uE3OZVw@mail.gmail.com>
 <C3C92DE1-17C6-49F0-9B64-0C98C204C640@santafe.edu>
Message-ID: <a912c753-c8fb-4fcd-84c5-2c5fded00263@ropella.name>

I'd like to back up a bit to "predators" and what/who that refers to. Stephen's slop points at companies (Amazon, Meta, etc.). But Applebaum (only inferring from EricS' post) seems to be pointing at the humans ... what? ... *driving* those corporations? Is "driving" the right word ... One need not know how a car works in order to drive it. Maybe *motivating* those corporations? Bezos did such a good job instilling a demiurge, could Amazon be anything other than what it is? Microsoft seems to struggle. Gates had some agonistics with Allen, Ballmer, et al. Jobs and Wozniak are different enough ... How different are Karp and Thiel? And what demigod lies at the heart of Palantir?

Anyway, it reminds me of the Daniel Quinn novel with Takers and Leavers. And I recently ran across an anti-immigrant rant referring to Givers and Takers (immigrants are Takers and good 'ole boys are Givers in this framing). I worry about rampant false dichotomies. As much as I loathe Bezoses/Amazons of the world, I can't help but wonder if that's not part and parcel of any built environment?

I mean, I reallyreally wanted to move to a real city when Renee' got her MS. Seattle counts, San Francisco, New York, ... Dublin! for cryin' out loud. We coulda moved to Dublin. But my appreciation for cities may be a kind of predictive nostalgia. Cities objectively suck ... the filth ... the primitive predation of muggers or gang members. But they're also gorgeous examples of scaffolding. Hell, we don't even have a good place to recycle/reuse old laptops here in Olympia. Even a smallish city like Portland has Free Geek. Rural people just toss 'em in the landfill, I guess.

And to mix all my metaphors, I am enthralled by the idea that the existence of an apex predator in the wild benefits their local domain. I got these 2 emails yesterday:

https://isal.groups.io/g/announce/message/1131, and
https://mailchi.mp/unicornriot/story-recap-aug-12-sept-1-26?e=1d001189d3

"Complex Anarchism", "Far-Right" flourishing in Queens, ... Don't our predators do something *for* us? I'm not talking about the ability to order Q-Tips and have them at your doorstep within minutes. There's something else they do for us not merely in spite of their psychopathy but *because* of it? Maybe w.r.t. CAFO, to what extent can we really appreciate artisanal meat if our DEI programs ensure that half of our meat is artisanal? I see so many people wearing Bikini Kill or Sex Pistols t-shirts and I can't help but think something's been lost, maybe akin to the loss of conservatism's referent. I say, let the conservatives have the academy. We'll see what happens to them when they have to actually *do the work*.


On 9/3/26 4:04 AM, Santafe wrote:
> Scary how that reminds me of the Rio Grande corridor down to Albuquerque.  Maybe in winter, or under forest fire smoke.  Was that part of the design prompt?
> 
> But very useful, Stephen; thank you.
> 
> It’s funny; I wasn’t actually thinking about data cows, though that is very available here, and the written part below is really quite a great summary.
> 
> I have continued to wrestle with a certain specific set of assertions, which to me were totalizing.  Not only data, but the whole pro-natalism program, the Amazon driver-eye-tracking surveillance, and on and on.  Total possession and disposal of what formerly were called people.
> 
> The assertion is one that I first got from Arendt, and probably mentioned here.  She distinguishes between party fascism and movement fascism, and says there was something very important that (somebody; in the day (?)) had failed to grasp: that the Parties wanted to control the government, while the Movements wanted to destroy the government.  Parties and Movements are two categories for her, which she doesn’t ever “define”, but just starts referring to and kind of fills in by context.  As if those were current terms among the readership she had in mind.
> 
> Snyder, in some recent essaying, has been making not-the-same point, but one using the same assertion:  that what people are not getting is that the destruction by the MAGA Honchos isn’t incidental to some other point; that it is itself the point.  And that the cabal who envision a Really Different Future are conscious and deliberate about this.  They imagine that they see something that will make their power sufficient to whatever it is they want, and the destruction of the “country” as a place that hosts “citizens” and all those related concepts, is explicitly a step to get there.
> 
> I have no way to know if this language is always in the air for historians, or if Snyder inherits it as a point from Arendt or others who preceded him.  So I don’t know if I should take these as independently formed insights, or repetitions of one same thing.
> 
> But he wasn’t using that language a few months ago, the way he is now regularly.  More memes running through the discourse.
> 
> Eric
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sep 3, 2026, at 10:19, Stephen Guerin <stephen.guerin at simtable.com> wrote:
>>
>> woah, Eric S, love the CAFO metaphor - I had to look up the acronym for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (feedlots)
>>
>> it gave me a better visual for the cloud companies and their data centers. My AI Slop rendering:
>>
>> <cafo.jpg>
>>
>> My AI Slop Summary:
>>
>> In the CAFO (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation) metaphor, human users cease to be sovereign agents and are reduced to captive "data cows," grazing on algorithmically synthetic feed while centralized data centers function as industrial feedlots engineered for continuous behavioral and biological extraction. Rather than enabling autonomous movement across an open, peer-to-peer digital commons, each cloud titan fences off human activity within proprietary pens to harvest high-yield telemetry, attention, and cognitive labor. Within these computational complexes, every interaction is quantified, concentrated, and processed into predictive models or metered rents, stripping the human commons into an industrialized resource base where escape is foreclosed by deliberate technical friction, network lock-in, and legal enclosures.
>>
>> Across the industrial landscape, each major cloud operator runs a specialized processing line within its data center infrastructure: *Meta* operates the affective agitation feedlot, where engagement algorithms provoke emotional volatility to extract behavioral surplus for hyper-targeted advertising; *Google* runs the zero-click information corral, ingesting global search intent, ambient Android location, and video dwell times to process human curiosity into programmatic auctions; *Amazon* manages a dual-sided marketplace pen and logistics abattoir, using fulfillment monopsonies, platform ad-tolls, and AWS compute meters to squeeze both sellers and consumers; *Microsoft* maintains the white-collar corporate pen, capturing workplace enterprise telemetry through mandatory OS, identity (Entra ID), and Copilot subscriptions; *Apple* runs the gilded luxury paddock, using hardware sandboxing, ecosystem tethers, and App Store tolls to extract recurring rents under the banner of 
>> security; *OpenAI* and *Anthropic* operate the high-density cognitive rendering plants, scraping the digital intellectual commons to digest human language into proprietary token-inference engines; *Epic Systems* encloses clinical healthcare into administrative vaults, processing patient biometrics and doctor workflows into un-exportable electronic silos; *Esri* runs the spatial registry pen, turning public geography, civil infrastructure, and hazard response into metered proprietary service credits; *Adobe* and *Autodesk* manage specialized creative and architectural cages, locking design files behind perpetual cloud subscriptions; while *Oracle* and *Broadcom* serve as the corporate extraction facilities, leveraging audit threats, architectural dependency, and sudden 300% to 1,000% hypervisor rate hikes to strip-mine trapped enterprise IT departments.
>>
>>
>> _________________________________________________________________
>> Stephen Guerin
>> CEO, Founder
>> https://simtable.com <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fsimtable.com&c=E,1,aser_-Ofcf43lLHEFgZbSdpW8uTE_2deEFrWduPoDxU6AyEkjbUJ0f3qrEWZSTFbJJPb5CpE3DGik9o4RQ5Fd5goK-9ojgcjFz-eryMEQmwNLe1v&typo=1>
>> stephen.guerin at simtable.com <mailto:stephen.guerin at simtable.com>
>>
>> stephenguerin at fas.harvard.edu <mailto:stephenguerin at fas.harvard.edu>
>> Visualization Research and Teaching Lab <https://hwpi.harvard.edu/eps-visualization-research-laboratory/home>
>> Harvard Earth and Planetary Science
>> Landscape Architecture <https://www.gsd.harvard.edu/2025/02/landscape-architecture-students-explore-pioneering-climate-visualization-techniques-to-inform-design/>
>> Harvard Graduate School of Design
>>
>> mobile: (505)577-5828
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 6:48 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>     I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now started to use the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various oligarchs and the relatively small and connected band of people trying to end the society and turn it into a *CAFO*.  It has been about time for that term to be one of the standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic term “predatory capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has been both long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have become semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant to draw a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are the thing that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the world both knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there is a path to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.
>>
-- 
8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.


From rec at elf.org  Thu Sep  3 13:02:37 2026
From: rec at elf.org (Roger Critchlow)
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 11:02:37 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: <a912c753-c8fb-4fcd-84c5-2c5fded00263@ropella.name>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAOmOqnK3r5tf2ooHEyD__X+s9bQqm0yz_kOYQTtMFv=uE3OZVw@mail.gmail.com>
 <C3C92DE1-17C6-49F0-9B64-0C98C204C640@santafe.edu>
 <a912c753-c8fb-4fcd-84c5-2c5fded00263@ropella.name>
Message-ID: 
 <CAGayqos1nbpOyHfg8ZSmi5mZ7S9F8bXRvoe7W8cYCc8A0Wyjcg@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Sep 3, 2026, 8:50 AM glen wrote:
> Hell, we don't even have a good place to recycle/reuse old laptops here
in Olympia. Even a smallish city like Portland has Free Geek. Rural people
just toss 'em in the landfill, I guess.

No, they leave the in the yard with the old pickups, tractors, et c. until
they're ripe for disassembly into spare parts.  Maybe inside an old cooler
to keep them dry.  I saw a hackaday disassembling a monitor to make a
monitor the other day.

On predators of the old school, Elena Ferrante's Neapolitan Quartet turns
out to be a bottom up discovery of late 20th c capitalism from the
perspective of a neighborhood where most residents never even learn
Italian.  There's an urban area with some structures to it.

-- rec --
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260903/99d448f9/attachment.html>

From gil.densmore at gmail.com  Thu Sep  3 14:50:44 2026
From: gil.densmore at gmail.com (Gillian Densmore)
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 12:50:44 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Tom hardware there was yet another awful data breach
Message-ID: 
 <CAMaMUCSk2wuf5awU8FXWAk=utHz=8zBBiXB8vDmBd_3ZmiQWBQ@mail.gmail.com>

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/cyber-security/fbi-investigating-153-million-us-and-canadian-drivers-licenses-leaked-on-russian-cybercrime-forum-including-that-of-us-secdef-pete-hegseth-data-is-suspected-to-have-come-from-an-id-authentication-service-provider
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260903/4b6b4766/attachment.html>

From marcus at snoutfarm.com  Thu Sep  3 15:30:29 2026
From: marcus at snoutfarm.com (Marcus Daniels)
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 19:30:29 +0000
Subject: [FRIAM] now that is more like it
Message-ID: 
 <DS0PR11MB77354D44AF1BDC8B295A7530C5B62@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260903/0ec5d01e/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 9B644838-2E20-4537-A80A-C82E840752EA.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 417962 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260903/0ec5d01e/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5609 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260903/0ec5d01e/attachment-0001.p7s>

From gepr at ropella.name  Thu Sep  3 16:31:16 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 13:31:16 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] now that is more like it
In-Reply-To: 
 <DS0PR11MB77354D44AF1BDC8B295A7530C5B62@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: 
 <DS0PR11MB77354D44AF1BDC8B295A7530C5B62@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <2c001882-2bbd-43d7-b700-6d319292da80@ropella.name>


Had to OCR that to make it readable. But, to be fair, OP's "engagement" with Hegel seems pretty dismissive and vapid ... maybe as dismissive as the philosopher's "engagement" with physics. But both seem like snowflakes to me. I mean, the way Renee' loads the dishwasher is SOOOO bad ... not even wrong.

I really can't imagine being in a life relationship with a person who does what I do professionally. It's bizarre. I can't and never will understand what it means to be a nurse. And Renee' will never understand what it means to do what I do (whatever that is). What do these people expect? ... to marry one's twin? Ewwww.

> .. My (33F) husband's (35M) career in academic philosophy is ruining our marriage.  felationships
> Original hegelianwife 16 2019-09-21 15:14:05
> 
> 
> My husband and | are both academics. We've been married for 3 years, and been together for 6. He ts an academic philosopher and | am a physicist, He has recently expressed displeasure that I've never seriously engaged with his work, Now, I've read a bit of the classics of philosophy, but my husband's work is more In what I'm told is called the “continental” tradition. Unfortunately, everything he's shown me has just seems completely insane.
> 
> 
> Here's the problem: his work apparently involves claims about physics that are just wrong, and wrong in a very embarrassing way! I'll admit, 'm a terrible person, but | had never read his thesis before. | tried reading It and It's riddled with talk about for instance the necessary relationship between matter having ‘extension’ and possessing mass. He also talks about the ‘shape’ of fundamental particles. This is obviously nonsensical/wrong,; electrons have mass and are point particles (they don't take up space really). In the thesis and some other papers he wrote he seems to think of himself as “scientific” and a "materialist" but his entire idea of what these words mean Is stuck in like, outdated 19th century ideas about atoms as little billiard balls flying around in space. I've gently tried to help him and explain how he might start to engage seriously with contemporary physics (he has never read a book on the subject and Is by his own admission "bad at math’), but he just gets angry with me and explains that Hegel's system is presuppositional and the basis for all possible rational thought so there is no need at all to read other texts in the first place (I have no idea what this means). He will throw out terms like “speculative propositions” but when | ask him to explain what this means or give me examples he just starts giving me more inscrutable jargon that makes no sense. On top of that, he will repeatedly say German phrases or terms that he uses (and pronounces) incorrectly (! am a native speaker) or nonsensically. He claims to understand the language (he doesn't) and tells me that Hegel can only be understood “in the original German" but he clearly can't read the language and when I've tried to read the original texts they make even less sense.
> 
> 
> On top of this, his obsession with Hegel himself has reached the point of creepiness. At one point he literally told me that all other work either agrees with Hegel so is redundant, or disagrees with Hegel and is wrong. He keeps a framed picture of Hegel on the nightstand in our bedroom. In fact, he even changed his phone's background from a picture of me to this same picture of Hegel. | feel like | am competing with a 200 year old philosopher for my husband's attention.
> 
> 
> Recently we got in a huge fight because he was trying to demonstrate an example of the Hegelian concept of the “unity of opposites” (whatever that means) by claiming that right and left hands are opposite but also identical. | told him this is just wrong and that right and left hands are not “identical” in any meaningful sense (chirality is a basic concept in geometry/group theory: left and right hands are not superimposable). He kept putting his hands together and tried to show how they were "identical" and kept failing (because they're not) and then got angry and stormed out of the house.  \ haven't seen him since (this was about a day ago) and texted him and haven't heard back.
> 
> 
> What do | do Reddit? Do | just let this go? It's immensely frustrating that my account of my own field ts not being taken seriously. He asked me to engage with his work, so | did. But it seems like he won't repay me in kind. He has told me repeatedly that Hegel makes empirical sclence unnecessary and implied that my work is a waste of time and that | should just be studying German Idealism instead and read people like “Fichte’ and “Schelling” (who are apparently very popular in Germany but I've never heard of them). Why Is it okay for him to belittle my field but | can’t offer mild criticism of his?
> 
> 
> TL:DR: My husband's academic work is embarrassingly wrong and can't take any criticism.
> 
> DFahnz 4m



On 9/3/26 12:30 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> 


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


From owen at backspaces.net  Thu Sep  3 16:44:16 2026
From: owen at backspaces.net (Owen Densmore)
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 14:44:16 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Coming up for air!
Message-ID: 
 <CAN_LYRkq+rE-2FTuYfO2g7OvWRZRTDjFcM5Ta1BtLcRja_+DUg@mail.gmail.com>

Could someone summarize this conversation? It seems fascinating but I ran
out of time to do it justice.

    -- Owen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260903/d4ebb965/attachment.html>

From desmith at santafe.edu  Thu Sep  3 17:17:18 2026
From: desmith at santafe.edu (Santafe)
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2026 06:17:18 +0900
Subject: [FRIAM] diversity
In-Reply-To: <a912c753-c8fb-4fcd-84c5-2c5fded00263@ropella.name>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAOmOqnK3r5tf2ooHEyD__X+s9bQqm0yz_kOYQTtMFv=uE3OZVw@mail.gmail.com>
 <C3C92DE1-17C6-49F0-9B64-0C98C204C640@santafe.edu>
 <a912c753-c8fb-4fcd-84c5-2c5fded00263@ropella.name>
Message-ID: <DBF67D6B-96B9-4161-B1F9-7E6145C7AFE5@santafe.edu>

Yeah.  One of the things that limits how high atmospheric O2 levels can get is that, above the percentage in the Jurassic (I read as high as 26%), everything just bursts into flame all the time, and you draw the level back down that way.  You can’t make meter-scale dragonflies and big dinosaurs with the O2 level we have today (21%; I don’t think you can...), but the O2 level where it is possible apparently just couldn’t last that long, and was geologically only a transient.  So with the accumulation of wealth and power.  There’s so much that needs to be done that accumulated wealth and power would be very useful to have to do it, not squander it as is being done now.  But I guess the system has its own dynamics.

Another characterization for predators then being saprophytes of moribund institutional and social forms.

What was it Nietzche said?  If you stare too long into Marketing&Legal, Marketing&Legal stares back into you?

Eric


> On Sep 3, 2026, at 23:50, glen <gepr at ropella.name> wrote:
> 
> I'd like to back up a bit to "predators" and what/who that refers to. Stephen's slop points at companies (Amazon, Meta, etc.). But Applebaum (only inferring from EricS' post) seems to be pointing at the humans ... what? ... *driving* those corporations? Is "driving" the right word ... One need not know how a car works in order to drive it. Maybe *motivating* those corporations? Bezos did such a good job instilling a demiurge, could Amazon be anything other than what it is? Microsoft seems to struggle. Gates had some agonistics with Allen, Ballmer, et al. Jobs and Wozniak are different enough ... How different are Karp and Thiel? And what demigod lies at the heart of Palantir?
> 
> Anyway, it reminds me of the Daniel Quinn novel with Takers and Leavers. And I recently ran across an anti-immigrant rant referring to Givers and Takers (immigrants are Takers and good 'ole boys are Givers in this framing). I worry about rampant false dichotomies. As much as I loathe Bezoses/Amazons of the world, I can't help but wonder if that's not part and parcel of any built environment?
> 
> I mean, I reallyreally wanted to move to a real city when Renee' got her MS. Seattle counts, San Francisco, New York, ... Dublin! for cryin' out loud. We coulda moved to Dublin. But my appreciation for cities may be a kind of predictive nostalgia. Cities objectively suck ... the filth ... the primitive predation of muggers or gang members. But they're also gorgeous examples of scaffolding. Hell, we don't even have a good place to recycle/reuse old laptops here in Olympia. Even a smallish city like Portland has Free Geek. Rural people just toss 'em in the landfill, I guess.
> 
> And to mix all my metaphors, I am enthralled by the idea that the existence of an apex predator in the wild benefits their local domain. I got these 2 emails yesterday:
> 
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fisal.groups.io%2fg%2fannounce%2fmessage%2f1131%2c&c=E,1,TPEpMcVl0tjlMSAOnRJlAQcEOaxpyRukwf_wvFu_CWlw2diIdWB99yPH5qE6P01Ot9x_MDRiJAbpjMQzIxQJ6Q0fZJZwhCxpqYMbv5D4hqyQ78EOvVeJ&typo=1 and
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fmailchi.mp%2funicornriot%2fstory-recap-aug-12-sept-1-26%3fe%3d1d001189d3&c=E,1,cgAUu3u5mJzbH2G4imL960by8M0XVBkYEPpPsGTbfrs_ucBTkeYDkC0En5c0NAWiZpUpwLtRsJVkd7R7odM5IWdBv6Abz3oCw4Mg1o_g3oV03mk,&typo=1
> 
> "Complex Anarchism", "Far-Right" flourishing in Queens, ... Don't our predators do something *for* us? I'm not talking about the ability to order Q-Tips and have them at your doorstep within minutes. There's something else they do for us not merely in spite of their psychopathy but *because* of it? Maybe w.r.t. CAFO, to what extent can we really appreciate artisanal meat if our DEI programs ensure that half of our meat is artisanal? I see so many people wearing Bikini Kill or Sex Pistols t-shirts and I can't help but think something's been lost, maybe akin to the loss of conservatism's referent. I say, let the conservatives have the academy. We'll see what happens to them when they have to actually *do the work*.
> 
> 
> On 9/3/26 4:04 AM, Santafe wrote:
>> Scary how that reminds me of the Rio Grande corridor down to Albuquerque.  Maybe in winter, or under forest fire smoke.  Was that part of the design prompt?
>> But very useful, Stephen; thank you.
>> It’s funny; I wasn’t actually thinking about data cows, though that is very available here, and the written part below is really quite a great summary.
>> I have continued to wrestle with a certain specific set of assertions, which to me were totalizing.  Not only data, but the whole pro-natalism program, the Amazon driver-eye-tracking surveillance, and on and on.  Total possession and disposal of what formerly were called people.
>> The assertion is one that I first got from Arendt, and probably mentioned here.  She distinguishes between party fascism and movement fascism, and says there was something very important that (somebody; in the day (?)) had failed to grasp: that the Parties wanted to control the government, while the Movements wanted to destroy the government.  Parties and Movements are two categories for her, which she doesn’t ever “define”, but just starts referring to and kind of fills in by context.  As if those were current terms among the readership she had in mind.
>> Snyder, in some recent essaying, has been making not-the-same point, but one using the same assertion:  that what people are not getting is that the destruction by the MAGA Honchos isn’t incidental to some other point; that it is itself the point.  And that the cabal who envision a Really Different Future are conscious and deliberate about this.  They imagine that they see something that will make their power sufficient to whatever it is they want, and the destruction of the “country” as a place that hosts “citizens” and all those related concepts, is explicitly a step to get there.
>> I have no way to know if this language is always in the air for historians, or if Snyder inherits it as a point from Arendt or others who preceded him.  So I don’t know if I should take these as independently formed insights, or repetitions of one same thing.
>> But he wasn’t using that language a few months ago, the way he is now regularly.  More memes running through the discourse.
>> Eric
>>> On Sep 3, 2026, at 10:19, Stephen Guerin <stephen.guerin at simtable.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> woah, Eric S, love the CAFO metaphor - I had to look up the acronym for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (feedlots)
>>> 
>>> it gave me a better visual for the cloud companies and their data centers. My AI Slop rendering:
>>> 
>>> <cafo.jpg>
>>> 
>>> My AI Slop Summary:
>>> 
>>> In the CAFO (Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation) metaphor, human users cease to be sovereign agents and are reduced to captive "data cows," grazing on algorithmically synthetic feed while centralized data centers function as industrial feedlots engineered for continuous behavioral and biological extraction. Rather than enabling autonomous movement across an open, peer-to-peer digital commons, each cloud titan fences off human activity within proprietary pens to harvest high-yield telemetry, attention, and cognitive labor. Within these computational complexes, every interaction is quantified, concentrated, and processed into predictive models or metered rents, stripping the human commons into an industrialized resource base where escape is foreclosed by deliberate technical friction, network lock-in, and legal enclosures.
>>> 
>>> Across the industrial landscape, each major cloud operator runs a specialized processing line within its data center infrastructure: *Meta* operates the affective agitation feedlot, where engagement algorithms provoke emotional volatility to extract behavioral surplus for hyper-targeted advertising; *Google* runs the zero-click information corral, ingesting global search intent, ambient Android location, and video dwell times to process human curiosity into programmatic auctions; *Amazon* manages a dual-sided marketplace pen and logistics abattoir, using fulfillment monopsonies, platform ad-tolls, and AWS compute meters to squeeze both sellers and consumers; *Microsoft* maintains the white-collar corporate pen, capturing workplace enterprise telemetry through mandatory OS, identity (Entra ID), and Copilot subscriptions; *Apple* runs the gilded luxury paddock, using hardware sandboxing, ecosystem tethers, and App Store tolls to extract recurring rents under the banner of security; *OpenAI* and *Anthropic* operate the high-density cognitive rendering plants, scraping the digital intellectual commons to digest human language into proprietary token-inference engines; *Epic Systems* encloses clinical healthcare into administrative vaults, processing patient biometrics and doctor workflows into un-exportable electronic silos; *Esri* runs the spatial registry pen, turning public geography, civil infrastructure, and hazard response into metered proprietary service credits; *Adobe* and *Autodesk* manage specialized creative and architectural cages, locking design files behind perpetual cloud subscriptions; while *Oracle* and *Broadcom* serve as the corporate extraction facilities, leveraging audit threats, architectural dependency, and sudden 300% to 1,000% hypervisor rate hikes to strip-mine trapped enterprise IT departments.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> Stephen Guerin
>>> CEO, Founder
>>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fsimtable.com&c=E,1,hghd3pz5rxy1OH3hPr95LXdjig5L8jY1efuGHa8WUzfVFSba7ADUbExw17XgdXuo1OGsW1mENPvCCvF6PBPSGV7CWWz-M1tlBbJWP0GM2e45oKlUIVIgMw,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fsimtable.com&c=E,1,aser_-Ofcf43lLHEFgZbSdpW8uTE_2deEFrWduPoDxU6AyEkjbUJ0f3qrEWZSTFbJJPb5CpE3DGik9o4RQ5Fd5goK-9ojgcjFz-eryMEQmwNLe1v&typo=1>
>>> stephen.guerin at simtable.com <mailto:stephen.guerin at simtable.com>
>>> 
>>> stephenguerin at fas.harvard.edu <mailto:stephenguerin at fas.harvard.edu>
>>> Visualization Research and Teaching Lab <https://hwpi.harvard.edu/eps-visualization-research-laboratory/home>
>>> Harvard Earth and Planetary Science
>>> Landscape Architecture <https://www.gsd.harvard.edu/2025/02/landscape-architecture-students-explore-pioneering-climate-visualization-techniques-to-inform-design/>
>>> Harvard Graduate School of Design
>>> 
>>> mobile: (505)577-5828
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 6:48 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>    I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now started to use the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various oligarchs and the relatively small and connected band of people trying to end the society and turn it into a *CAFO*.  It has been about time for that term to be one of the standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic term “predatory capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has been both long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have become semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant to draw a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are the thing that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the world both knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there is a path to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.
>>> 
> -- 
> 8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
> ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.
> 
> 
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,UjygRej_W5Z_4rKCNtgq8uip0eSprcHc3A5K5hztzyM6YMbLkTSh8Gmj8bm7pUhJpHxKFrpNKtRW2xXDkHm4c8e1AHm2ogqfZXrcmg-GvxrZ9iWN9qk_AIU,&typo=1
> to (un)subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,4C4WqZYkiYS49gQftMYQH3WyxBFGstfpIf6qGg3JYuDd0NpCq9PEZexJTp92p9eXnAtY62GpQWafsQhLJ0oQadYVWFhIjuyzmoeleWrx&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,Ga2SSsSVIYrzqTfzWodpxDSIJqWyoO_C2Q7DJcGtdcGrbOW5HqYBrbchNDuyGk8NPCWHCgXuCK5LebN53cDr6T3sYHq1GxqGc246IX57eTLtsjo,&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,TrFtmjr_phcL3moN2IO4LdpLKuF9sIo_Fef0UXucdV0pmPqG7HhWOCwL_tVZMnyyO3S17lFEDE1tNKvY0lARQrkUPptN8YDKbVlDO3xT79w,&typo=1
>  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/


From gepr at ropella.name  Thu Sep  3 17:49:27 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 14:49:27 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
Message-ID: <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>

EricS' response to EricC's over-reliance on the meaning of "conservative" was better than anything I could have said. But the 6 proposed definitions were too long for my tiny context window. So I asked Ellydee to shorten them for me. (I also asked Mistral. But she did a terrible job.) I think these are pretty good:

Ellydee.ai says ---

**1. Power Hoarding** — Argument-form masking the real motive of those who already hold power to keep and concentrate it, widening the gap over those who don't.

**2. Prudent Restraint** — The view that change for change's sake is too harmful to go unregulated; "move fast and break things" is not an admirable values system.

**3. Institutional Gatekeeping** — Fragile categories like "family" survive only if their defining form is rigidly held, so alternative forms must be presumptively excluded from law and civil rights.

**4. Doctrinal Veto** — The devout get authority over who else qualifies for the group — leaving open whether mystics, or fakers under the "faith" label, are in or out.

**5. Rooted Locality** — Anyone not living their whole life in one place can't be trusted to defend it; local tribal obligation is the oldest form of mutual accountability.

**6. Generational Accounting** — A negotiation (doable in good or bad faith) over how much of the past must be kept current as a debt versus let go once enough generations have passed.
---

I was inclined to change "Rooted Locality" to "Rooted Subjectivity" or "Perspective" ... in a lame attempt to tie in the other sub-thread. But I didn't feel like this task was worth the cost. They have a handy ellydee.ai/usage page for those of us who give a damn. >8^D

On 9/2/26 2:04 PM, Santafe wrote:
> At a kind of vibe level, I understand the picture you paint, and I can think of enough instances that fit it, to agree that there is a problem to correct.
> 
> But how far can you go to defend the premise that the retirement of some academics was a HUGE problem in this country — or more specifically, do you think that is causal for the choice of what has become the political right to go in for fascism, with its considerable elements of cynicism, anomie, and nihilism?  Had there been “ideas” on offer from some university faculty, do you think these people would have wanted them?  Or just wanted to burn that down too along with all the rest of it?
> 
> As with many things I can kind of recognize at a vibe level, if I look at it more closely, I don’t know what I should understand the categories even to refer to.  By which I mean, what should I attach to the word “conservatism”, as any range of things from a movement name, to a social group-label, to a domain or thesis of “ideas”.  For instance, is it:
> 
> 1. A backfilling of what is meant to look like argument, but anchored for real in the motive of holding onto power, wealth, and agency by those who have it, and further concentrating it, specifically to increase the asymmetry over those who don't?  Certainly that goes on, and those who want to fight the C label as a label would say this is its essence.  Is that its essence, or is that the essence of a corruption when the real C word has been lost?  If it is part of the genuine thing, how far does it go toward efforts to cultivate the belief that people are constitutively different enough that there is no defensible right of agency and freedom for everybody on an equal footing, and there should be rulers and ruled?
> 
> 2. A thesis that “move fast and break things” was not an admirable values system, and that seeking change merely for change’s sake is too harmful relative to what it achieves to be allowed to go on un-regulated or un-restricted?  That would fit with the name C.  Wendell Berry died a couple of days ago, somebody I knew a little and had some time with in person, and have also read some of though not nearly a lot.  This was one of his theses.  Close to the notion of upholding the Ordnung among the Amish, or a defense of Luddism as honorable precaution.
> 
> 3. A notion that a category like “family” is robust only through cultural collective and cooperative effects, and that a type system needs to be built up, and most types excluded from participation in it, because otherwise it is so fragile that the admission of more than one form endangers it?  So, for instance: we have no real way to distinguish abusive from supportive marriages, so as long as there is one man and one woman, so-identified by self and others (maybe a subset of who the others are allowed to be), we have to admit it all.  But other kinds of unions need to be kept outside the perimeter as viewed by the protections of law and the rights of civil society?  The argument being (?) that there are certain obligations the institution needs to enable people to keep (raising and support of kids being the obvious one, but you can imagine others, and I know of marriage customs that symbolically encode several different ones), and we know so little about how to do that, 
> that some one form accepted at whatever level of consideration constitutes social convention is the only conceivable solution, so anything else needs to be presumptively excluded.
> 
> 4. That people have to experience religious devotions, of whatever kind?  The word “faith” has become very popular by people trying not to alienate any of those who go through life with a chip on their shoulders, the new PC (really the same old PC).  If people just used it, it wouldn’t be such a sore thumb to me, but the pandering feels really blatant.  Does that self-identified group, and any Greeks using it as a Trojan Horse for whatever else motivates them — since it is not clear how any “sincerely” motivated people police their own and keep the fakers out — get veto power?  Are the mystics excluded, as the doctrinal religious people have often wanted them to be?  Or are they religious enough that they are okay too?
> 
> 5. That anybody who doesn’t live an entire life in the place he was born is automatically suspect?  The view being that he hasn’t tied himself into any one local lifeboat, ergo there can’t be any way he can be counted on to defend it existentially?  This is also close to one of Wendell’s views, though in person it was important enough for him to like people, that he didn’t go into his personal relations plastering doctrines of Original Sin on anybody to whom they could be applied.  But as a core of ethnic tribalism, this impulse to reinforce mutual obligation seems to me to be one of the oldest and most universal cultural things people do, and if it is ever temporarily absent in some pocket, some of the people there will recreate it from whole cloth.
> 
> 6. Is it a negotiation of how much of the completed past needs to be kept current as a debt, and how much needs to be let go?  Meaning: when, by making extra effort to identify and support people who are on the wrong end of a structural exclusion or exploitation, are we actively working to dismantle the structure, and when have enough generations gone by and enough circumstances created new people, that there isn’t anything productive to be done by trying to trace an indefinitely long past of who-displaced-whom?  I am emphasizing here, as possible C, the premise that there is a negotiation on that point to be carried out, as opposed to a dogma that to ever let go of anything is a sin.  And if that is the C premise, is there a distinction that is also C between having that negotiation in good faith and having it in bad faith?  Of how one tries to police against plain irresponsible self-interest hijacking the form with no moral or ethical anchor?
> 
> 
> I can imagine any of the above, or none of them, as being what “conservatism” is supposed to stand for.  And I can imagine many combinations of people proudly advocating any of them at the same time as others would sharply distinguish what is okay and what is corrupt or degenerated.
> 
> There’s another mid-length rant about how I watch the memes change, on timescales of about 1–4 years, and while each of them has some truth, I feel like they are substitutes for seeing a kind of paralysis and inability or unwillingness to actually do things that need to be done, across the whole of society, that feels to me like a better candidate for cause of the fascist and nihilist turn.  But this note is too long already, and I should do work.
> 
> Eric
> 
> 
> 
>> On Sep 3, 2026, at 2:04, Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I know I'm coming to it late, but I did not find that article very convincing. The main problems are:
>>
>>  1. Nothing about the omnipresent DEI initiatives of the past few decades assures viewpoint diversity, and, if you are only getting people deeply devoted to DEI you are for sure actually quashing viewpoint diversity. And, by deeply-devoted I mean that academic job applications require DEI statements, teaching statements are required to highlight how your teaching relates to DEI efforts, applicants are judged based on "diversity" goals at the college and within departments, some members of hiring committees explicitly see it as their goal to right past wrongs against certain groups with their selections, etc.
>>  2. In certain contexts there is very, very good justification to prefer a narrow range of viewpoint diversity over maximal diversity. For example, having a math department with different perspectives on what math "is" creates a positive environment for students to learn in. For example, it might be nice to have a math realist, someone with an aesthetic approach, a hard core logician-mathematician, etc., and you certainly want people who study different fields within math. However, you might not want someone who thinks mathematics is a tool of colonialist oppression which should be rejected from the curriculum. In fact, it might be problematic to have proponents of that argument in decision-making roles /anywhere /within an /educational /institution.
>>  3. I have seen (when I was full-time in academia), and continue to see (via colleagues in academia) actual discrimination against academics with conservative views, and a ton of self-silencing based on anticipated discrimination. To use the DEI phrase, most faculty settings are not a "safe space" for them.
>>  4. Most of what the author asserts to be secretly implied or covertly assumed or bad faith about the efforts seems very upfront and straightforward.
>>  5. Frankly, the failure to replace conservative academics as they retire has created HUGE problems in this country. The conservative movement used to have decent group of hard-core academics and public intellectuals as a key part of it. The current trainwreck of ideas that pass for "conservative" these days could be, and could have been, greatly helped if academia broadly returned a good chunk of the prior support it used to give to people doing serious intellectual work from a conservative perspective.
>>  6. While this obviously applies to humanities and social sciences, it applies in all fields. It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who believe in hard core merit and some who believe in actively supporting those who might have had less opportunity growing up. It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who see "less opportunity" in terms of structural oppression rampant within a society and others who see it in terms of individual hardship. etc. 
>>
>> <mailto:echarles at american.edu>
>> All that said, for sure the Trump administration is acting in bad faith in many ways, about all things... but that's a different issue.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 8:57 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>> wrote:
>>
>>     Agree Siraganian is wrong.
>>
>>     I believe the etymology of the expression “red herring” was not intended to be a compliment to the dogs that run off following it.
>>
>>     In some lecture or interview or someplace, I remember Snyder making a connection that seems good for the current situation:  Authoritarian gaslighting really works by adopting the main premises of postmodernism (as it has become in its now-degenerated form; I understand the defense of some of the original work).  A thing Snyder didn’t say, which just calls out a further point of context, but that I think is also within the center of his point: in eras where postmodernism hadn’t spread as widely as it has here and now, the need was the same, but the authoritarian gaslighters had to build some of the infrastructure they wanted to use.  For today, it is just there at the Ikea where you can go pick it up and assemble it the same day.  Or, so widely distributed in Amazon warehouses that they can deliver it the same day, anywhere.
>>
>>     Another nice little frame I saw, from some commenter on some article, was:
>>
>>     For my friends, the Unitary Executive Theory.
>>     For my enemies, the Major Questions Doctrine.
>>
>>     And then:I have heard (reasonable) people criticize Paul Krugman for having lots of public opinions in areas where he doesn’t have a lot of earned expertise.  Okay; fair enough for that.  But I think it is to his credit that he started calling out bad faith as the central issue, quite a long time ago (when I also thought that needed to stay the focus).  Not leaving it to irony, as Siraganian sort-of does, but being plain that it is too frontal an attack to be winked at in irony.
>>
>>     (And of course Glen’s point is also exactly right, but already said: it is just because the notion of what one wants from truth isn’t so easy that it can be handled lazily, and if we did less of that, maybe we would be better positioned to repel some of this other nonsense, or at least have a smaller vandal-group to repel over it.  That could itself be an interesting article, but it would have a completely different aim (solving a new problem) than Siraganian’s evident aim in this piece, which was to contribute to a struggle.)
>>
>>     I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now started to use the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various oligarchs and the relatively small and connected band of people trying to end the society and turn it into a CAFO.  It has been about time for that term to be one of the standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic term “predatory capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has been both long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have become semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant to draw a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are the thing that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the world both knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there is a path to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.
>>
>>     Eric
>>
>>
>>
>>     > On Sep 1, 2026, at 20:56, glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>> wrote:
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1>
>>     >
>>     > OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity. But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I think I'm going to stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use "instrumental pluralist" instead.
>>     >
>>     > But 1) what Siraganian says here is simply wrong:
>>     >
>>     > "To promote viewpoint diversity is to be thrilled to have my views in the mix, even if you think they are wrong, because either (a) they contribute to more viewpoint diversity (the more views you have, the more viewpoint diversity there is), or (b) they provide more views to choose from to figure out which view is the most true. In the first position, you end up not caring about whether a particular view is true or good, because you care about viewpoint diversity intrinsically: What matters is having the greatest possible variety of views. In the second position, you instrumentally value a diversity of views; having viewpoint diversity only matters until you can figure out which view is the best or most true, at which point all the other views can be rejected."
>>     >
>>     > If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the 1st best to the 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject "all the others". Such smooth grading has to remain contingent, defeasible. And my guess is the gradation isn't smooth everywhere. It may be smooth for the first 2 or 3 distinguishable ideas, but #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>>)
>>     >
>>     > 2) Diversity remains a useful measure of the crosstrophic nature of complex systems, circularity, industrial symbiosis, etc. So even in light of Goodhart's Law, diversity is a reasonable *outcome*, even if it's dangerous to optimize to that sole outcome.
>>     >
>>     > There are issues with all the theses she lays out. But persnickety nits aside, her gist seems right. And you can't overlook the blatant hypocrisy of objecting to DEI initiatives, but then arguing for "intellectual pluralism", pointed out in thesis 7.
>>     >
>>     > This post is too long already. But I know many, here, have succumbed to Haidt glazing. So I offer this as further demonstration of Bad Faith rhetoric: https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1> only peripherally about instrumental pluralism.
>>     >
>>     > --
-- 
8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.


From jofr at cas-group.net  Fri Sep  4 01:57:48 2026
From: jofr at cas-group.net (Jochen Fromm)
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 2026 07:57:48 +0200
Subject: [FRIAM] Coming up for air!
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAN_LYRkq+rE-2FTuYfO2g7OvWRZRTDjFcM5Ta1BtLcRja_+DUg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <mailman.0.1788501515.660385.friam_redfish.com@redfish.com>

ChatGPT created this summary:The diversity thread started by talking about diversity as a property of a system, and ended up talking about pluralism as a property of an ecosystem. Steve proposed “perspectival annealing”: loosen commitments, explore alternatives, then harden a useful configuration; Glen pushed back that some perspectives may be genuinely orthogonal rather than points in a common space. The discussion then extended this idea to politics: a healthy society needs a real, loyal opposition and competing perspectives, not just demographic diversity or superficial disagreement.The result is the insight that pluralism isn't necessarily about integrating different perspectives into one better answer; it may be about maintaining an ecosystem in which fundamentally different perspectives can continue to coexist and challenge one another (a little bit like this list).-J.
-------- Original message --------From: Owen Densmore <owen at backspaces.net> Date: 9/3/26  10:44 PM  (GMT+01:00) To: Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com> Subject: [FRIAM] Coming up for air! Could someone summarize this conversation? It seems fascinating but I ran out of time to do it justice.    -- Owen 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260904/7c6de28f/attachment.html>

From gil.densmore at gmail.com  Fri Sep  4 19:58:38 2026
From: gil.densmore at gmail.com (Gillian Densmore)
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2026 17:58:38 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Ai questions a little speculation and a little Ai science
Message-ID: 
 <CAMaMUCT1tqY-XHrmhhBozGc=VS29HL+LztKCeZ9Q0eJKTQfQNA@mail.gmail.com>

Ai Comp Sci Question: How come there is a need for arms race to get
insanely dense model..so as I am to understand it the big guys have massive
amounts of parameters (30bn from Ali labsqwen) just as layman it seems like
we can make the Neral Nets, unets, and GANS, more...compressed. Can anyone
kindly explain to me what the heck we're doing here, where models can speek
idiot human like me. (suposed to speek )  where the need for
rediculous computes
goes up, but how good the hardware (GPUs and memory etc) have to go up x
amount more to run them. Where is the part where the software is made much
more...correct and elegant.

Or is this just the nature of an exloding new field where we don't know
what the hell we're doing half the time.


Speculative question: Where's the generative ai that can do more than make
pervy pictures and cringe adds for coca cola I was just thinking about
this: it'd be so...handy: if generative ai could be used to create
something where its much much lighter for one thing. And also: It'd be so
handy for maybe videos showing over time what a importat meadow, or some
other...analog thing for want of a better phrase fromthe real world fead
real GIS data and then extrapolate and create videos, semi-interactive
reality based simulations for real big picture: Litium, and silicon aren't
infinite (on 5 year scale) at least so I understand: showing a very
acruate simulation of: gen what comes after Z? oO well them having to using
pretty old tech: day to day life (what ever that looks like) so...the
normies with a very americana tight read get shown in a extreme visceral
way: no actuall not just dry but important nerdy pre-rendered simulations.
But: you could actually ask a ---hyper real person who has simulated 5 year
world: is it like? etc and get...dead on right answers because very
sophisticated agents. that's the world I'd love to have for future
gens...if it'd be a improvement.
What do folks think?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260904/838609e1/attachment.html>

From desmith at santafe.edu  Fri Sep  4 20:49:26 2026
From: desmith at santafe.edu (Santafe)
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2026 09:49:26 +0900
Subject: [FRIAM] Ai questions a little speculation and a little Ai science
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAMaMUCT1tqY-XHrmhhBozGc=VS29HL+LztKCeZ9Q0eJKTQfQNA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAMaMUCT1tqY-XHrmhhBozGc=VS29HL+LztKCeZ9Q0eJKTQfQNA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <B268101C-7559-4622-9740-C0F315914301@santafe.edu>

me too.

I’d love for somebody who has a decent picture of this whole dynamic to be able to lay out a crude look at the whole for those of us outside it.  

> On Sep 5, 2026, at 8:58, Gillian Densmore <gil.densmore at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Ai Comp Sci Question: How come there is a need for arms race to get insanely dense model..so as I am to understand it the big guys have massive amounts of parameters (30bn from Ali labsqwen) just as layman it seems like we can make the Neral Nets, unets, and GANS, more...compressed. Can anyone kindly explain to me what the heck we're doing here, where models can speek idiot human like me. (suposed to speek )  where the need for rediculous computes  goes up, but how good the hardware (GPUs and memory etc) have to go up x amount more to run them. Where is the part where the software is made much more...correct and elegant.
> 
> Or is this just the nature of an exloding new field where we don't know what the hell we're doing half the time.
> 
> 
> Speculative question: Where's the generative ai that can do more than make pervy pictures and cringe adds for coca cola I was just thinking about this: it'd be so...handy: if generative ai could be used to create something where its much much lighter for one thing. And also: It'd be so handy for maybe videos showing over time what a importat meadow, or some other...analog thing for want of a better phrase fromthe real world fead real GIS data and then extrapolate and create videos, semi-interactive reality based simulations for real big picture: Litium, and silicon aren't infinite (on 5 year scale) at least so I understand: showing a very acruate simulation of: gen what comes after Z? oO well them having to using pretty old tech: day to day life (what ever that looks like) so...the normies with a very americana tight read get shown in a extreme visceral way: no actuall not just dry but important nerdy pre-rendered simulations. But: you could actually ask a ---hyper real person who has simulated 5 year world: is it like? etc and get...dead on right answers because very sophisticated agents. that's the world I'd love to have for future gens...if it'd be a improvement.
> What do folks think?
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,_m5pbtswSR-HXlli9a7K9EQSnH-OS3Pk81toCrNrcyinfNfl73nCo8Rt8yv3mcGs_xh-_a2K0CyNAx_W4dMOhozl4KiTNc5XATU5Bx8olCz6v3258mC4aKnrYcQm&typo=1
> to (un)subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,-7YL5BNZS8S7sRlPhTYbViQW--uXP1AaGrwx0B6FGRKl-IJAuqsXRXk93aXT-dk0q8EK50wiZ20z9MLIOpGytH_3LHCnDd6oPnH-Jr5oTrShkfXE&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,wH9obAsHhOP3_9sIEsbAZO75ELskNLCCWjLKpCwBIb_1v_oXP0NvIvVnsrSNc-nkpRlOecffqodLvkfk7iL1mRsHeWnbAJSIgjJFG4iZw8jof-X6I2hCV80,&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,us_qzYrFZfqD6UaObMAlmCt73BOcxD3Alcjq6nEvrzSCCTtrtwbPV9wwD6SHhZJSTmIsWvPTHptDMNfixQ52lmyk6SK0MCbMVWJ8KFKDnw,,&typo=1
>  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/


From marcus at snoutfarm.com  Fri Sep  4 21:45:09 2026
From: marcus at snoutfarm.com (Marcus Daniels)
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2026 01:45:09 +0000
Subject: [FRIAM] Ai questions a little speculation and a little Ai science
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAMaMUCT1tqY-XHrmhhBozGc=VS29HL+LztKCeZ9Q0eJKTQfQNA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAMaMUCT1tqY-XHrmhhBozGc=VS29HL+LztKCeZ9Q0eJKTQfQNA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: 
 <DS0PR11MB7735546682EA88A5C03243F1C5B42@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

< Speculative question: Where's the generative ai that can do more than make pervy pictures and cringe adds for coca cola .. > 

Like this? https://www.anthropic.com/research/formalizing-fermats-last-theorem 



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260905/5fa3bf83/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 8450 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260905/5fa3bf83/attachment.bin>

From patrick.reilly at ipsociety.net  Fri Sep  4 22:04:35 2026
From: patrick.reilly at ipsociety.net (Patrick Reilly)
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2026 19:04:35 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] Ai questions a little speculation and a little Ai science
In-Reply-To: 
 <DS0PR11MB7735546682EA88A5C03243F1C5B42@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: 
 <CAMaMUCT1tqY-XHrmhhBozGc=VS29HL+LztKCeZ9Q0eJKTQfQNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <DS0PR11MB7735546682EA88A5C03243F1C5B42@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: 
 <CAO5ZNe6EQQHLjoM4fK3fT6s2H5umXJgOwu-1ASun4TQ0D9MvDw@mail.gmail.com>

I siggest read/following  Gary Marcus for the pithy AI truth:

https://substack.com/@garymarcus?utm_source=global-search

----   Pat


The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and
confidential information.  It is intended only for the use of the person(s)
named above. If you are not the intended recipient,  you are hereby
notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of
this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies
of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly,
please send an email to patrick.reilly at ipsociety.net.


On Fri, Sep 4, 2026 at 6:45 PM Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com> wrote:

> < Speculative question: Where's the generative ai that can do more than
> make pervy pictures and cringe adds for coca cola .. >
>
>
>
> Like this?
> https://www.anthropic.com/research/formalizing-fermats-last-theorem
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260904/d9c35a0e/attachment.html>

From marcus at snoutfarm.com  Sat Sep  5 00:09:23 2026
From: marcus at snoutfarm.com (Marcus Daniels)
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2026 04:09:23 +0000
Subject: [FRIAM] Ai questions a little speculation and a little Ai science
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAO5ZNe6EQQHLjoM4fK3fT6s2H5umXJgOwu-1ASun4TQ0D9MvDw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAMaMUCT1tqY-XHrmhhBozGc=VS29HL+LztKCeZ9Q0eJKTQfQNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <DS0PR11MB7735546682EA88A5C03243F1C5B42@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAO5ZNe6EQQHLjoM4fK3fT6s2H5umXJgOwu-1ASun4TQ0D9MvDw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: 
 <DS0PR11MB77355473554942DA4589F3FAC5B42@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

It is satisfying to see these `academics’ move from “It doesn’t work” to “It is evil”. 

From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of Patrick Reilly <patrick.reilly at ipsociety.net>
Date: Friday, September 4, 2026 at 7:05 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Ai questions a little speculation and a little Ai science 

I siggest read/following Gary Marcus for the pithy AI truth: 



https://substack.com/@garymarcus?utm_source=global-search <https://substack.com/@garymarcus?utm_source=global-search> 



---- Pat 





The information contained in this transmission may contain privileged and confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the person(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, dissemination, distribution or duplication of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message. To reply to our email administrator directly, please send an email to patrick.reilly at ipsociety.net <mailto:patrick.reilly at ipsociety.net>. 





On Fri, Sep 4, 2026 at 6:45 PM Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com <mailto:marcus at snoutfarm.com>> wrote: 

< Speculative question: Where's the generative ai that can do more than make pervy pictures and cringe adds for coca cola .. > 

Like this? https://www.anthropic.com/research/formalizing-fermats-last-theorem <https://www.anthropic.com/research/formalizing-fermats-last-theorem> 




.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe / Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam <https://bit.ly/virtualfriam>
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com <http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com>
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ <http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/>
archives: 5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ <https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/>
1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ <http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/> 



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260905/502a9bba/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 8450 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260905/502a9bba/attachment-0001.bin>

From desmith at santafe.edu  Sat Sep  5 01:39:37 2026
From: desmith at santafe.edu (Santafe)
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2026 14:39:37 +0900
Subject: [FRIAM] Ai questions a little speculation and a little Ai science
In-Reply-To: 
 <DS0PR11MB7735546682EA88A5C03243F1C5B42@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: 
 <CAMaMUCT1tqY-XHrmhhBozGc=VS29HL+LztKCeZ9Q0eJKTQfQNA@mail.gmail.com>
 <DS0PR11MB7735546682EA88A5C03243F1C5B42@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <356DFC2A-390E-483C-896D-DC271CAAD560@santafe.edu>

Yes!  Like that!

> On Sep 5, 2026, at 10:45, Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com> wrote:
> 
> < Speculative question: Where's the generative ai that can do more than make pervy pictures and cringe adds for coca cola .. >
>  
> Like this?  https://www.anthropic.com/research/formalizing-fermats-last-theorem <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.anthropic.com%2fresearch%2fformalizing-fermats-last-theorem&c=E,1,MFgKL9I9g1UWd_E0BdrgUxyEVnuMJXGMHm6ERcTtti1BARdYG7y7EjCmKoJXDI5BzLcp2trg6uScvhgudn8KW0-AAFbxAnyFnRhCGB_WNIGf8A,,&typo=1&ancr_add=1>.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,mwGao2aXAdKHovyIO6JAzxXcexRxLiCffhNi1kssgDLmH1sxvy1kOAgsOA3ruX4927Z6f3IT2bU_fzx6f2dka-u97vLzN1ywg1F4eXnfA-hm1eJ-Ww,,&typo=1
> to (un)subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,P3EK7EJA-WeMe6coYiztrQd0YUL8D9wCzGl4joxQWSfJRJQrjXv9n0gYsQAXl2I9cshbi2bLoIWZ_LIDuQK9yUBe_xVp6xGSmjARlVwEYGtGJBNx&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,D_YmqPZGFemur0L1701GtCA3FHCibGqQjzUdCxo9jHxZGrglfbgU1rMlvwfLHKr33-qVL77jBrNlMM8TKxRcPcV2vpI8Ny7tWmAoGXQa3BwREzxYb054IEhrmrU,&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,DtucNKz0OLOsaIh9MvULTlySONMI4gwr9FcWbaOUcjTVSqSt2_-Y06L1BN7kl-BfUuux6EQkU0wrrNxgrmWuRXfrlpX16PeQYXXzr-0HIdLq&typo=1
>  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260905/6bc74166/attachment.html>

From desmith at santafe.edu  Sat Sep  5 16:23:18 2026
From: desmith at santafe.edu (Santafe)
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 2026 05:23:18 +0900
Subject: [FRIAM] Ai questions a little speculation and a little Ai science
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAMaMUCT1tqY-XHrmhhBozGc=VS29HL+LztKCeZ9Q0eJKTQfQNA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAMaMUCT1tqY-XHrmhhBozGc=VS29HL+LztKCeZ9Q0eJKTQfQNA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D708B43A-8355-43A6-B3F4-2F5F3C10252C@santafe.edu>

There’s a question related to what Gil asks that I have wanted to look at for a while.

I would put her suggestion in the category of “better democracies provide their citizens with better information for decision-making”, which I also wanted to look into.  It also brings to the forefront another dimension of what one wants a democracy to do, if one wants to argue in favor of democracy as a framework.


But the thing for this post was a bit different (though related).  Redo the basis for pricing and economic decision theory based on real-goods input-output, and whole lifecycle material and energy constraints.

So the background was: we know that marginalist pricing in economics (what we all use right now) commits two big distortions:
A: it doesn’t clear markets very well, and the problem is not just the incompleteness but the skew.  Rich people can bid up prices for luxury consumption to a level where many more ordinary or poor people can’t afford necessities or near-necessities for getting-by (let me not use the word “survival”; it’s too melodramatic).  What form the skew takes and how bad it is depends on the way marginalist pricing interacts with wealth inequality in the population who are using the economy.
B: Not pricing in aspects of one thing can distort the prices of everything.  The not-pricing part is what economists call “externalities”; what one thinks of this term, and its suggestion of inevitability, can be discussed as a separate point.  But the main use case here is energy sources.  The main things not-priced in are climate and other ecological impacts now, and scarcity consequences later.  Oil is the big one, but coal and natural gas are in there too; and equally well we could look at ores that are needed for electrification under current technologies, and much else.

The goal in the re-do, then, is to make real input-output models of the economy that look more like chemical-reaction schemata, in the sense that we know a production event can’t happen unless all its required inputs are available, and all the unavoidable outputs have somewhere to go.  von Neumann started this in 1937 and a few years after, and people worked on it for a while.  He did it the way economists do (and also for the sake of ensuring a problem he could solve), with the requirement of all-positive prices and the assumption of “free disposal”, meaning if there is a pollutant you produce but don’t want, you just walk away from it and it doesn’t cost [you] anything.  Within the last year or two, we redid the same framework, but allowing prices to become negative (you have to pay somebody to take things that neither of you want), and no free disposal (everything has to go concretely somewhere, and the economy should do a thorough accounting of those somewheres).  It’s a trivial construction, of course (a human could do it), but I don’t think anybody has bothered to pursue it before.

von Neumann’s point is that you can put a decision theory on this system and derive prices from that, the same way as you can for marginalist pricing.  But the underlying market-clearing model is very different.  Same goes for the version with both-sign prices and no free disposal.  In the era of “smart” contingent contracts that are popular in the blockchain and proof-of-stake world, there is lots of other already-in-use method that could be built with the information that this kind of data-foundation supplies, beyond just dollar-prices.

Then the whole-lifecycle thing, which can be done independently of, or as part of, a von Neumann representation, is to take account of inescapable baseline costs in such quantities as free energy, so that grades of ores have physical relations to the energy sources used to extract them and the alternatives such as more or less complicated and costly recycling.  This too has some precedent, but by hand it is too costly and labor-consuming, so it was never going to scale that way.


Both of these remind me of things like insurance, where decreased costs of integrative computation and communication can take something that we know perfectly-well how to do, and transition it from being something nobody wants to pursue, to something that there is a valid model for somebody to develop.  Used to be that if you wanted to ensure a ship, you had to go to Lloyds of London and get a custom contract written, with big cost, delay, etc.  Now insurance for very big things is a commonplace with standard models.  It was just increased scale and decreased cost for finance, accounting, computation, and communication, that made that tip possible.  The law around it could then follow.  The combination of comprehensive and also fine-grained data collection that the big-compute companies already do, with the integrative capabilities and custom-rendering that the LLMs do, and the ability to generate large consistent models (as with the Lean applications to big complicated theorems and conjectures) make it seem to me like all the capabilities are already in place to try to prototype something like this.  Incentives, not so much, but that identifies a concrete task.

Eric


> On Sep 5, 2026, at 8:58, Gillian Densmore <gil.densmore at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Ai Comp Sci Question: How come there is a need for arms race to get insanely dense model..so as I am to understand it the big guys have massive amounts of parameters (30bn from Ali labsqwen) just as layman it seems like we can make the Neral Nets, unets, and GANS, more...compressed. Can anyone kindly explain to me what the heck we're doing here, where models can speek idiot human like me. (suposed to speek )  where the need for rediculous computes  goes up, but how good the hardware (GPUs and memory etc) have to go up x amount more to run them. Where is the part where the software is made much more...correct and elegant.
> 
> Or is this just the nature of an exloding new field where we don't know what the hell we're doing half the time.
> 
> 
> Speculative question: Where's the generative ai that can do more than make pervy pictures and cringe adds for coca cola I was just thinking about this: it'd be so...handy: if generative ai could be used to create something where its much much lighter for one thing. And also: It'd be so handy for maybe videos showing over time what a importat meadow, or some other...analog thing for want of a better phrase fromthe real world fead real GIS data and then extrapolate and create videos, semi-interactive reality based simulations for real big picture: Litium, and silicon aren't infinite (on 5 year scale) at least so I understand: showing a very acruate simulation of: gen what comes after Z? oO well them having to using pretty old tech: day to day life (what ever that looks like) so...the normies with a very americana tight read get shown in a extreme visceral way: no actuall not just dry but important nerdy pre-rendered simulations. But: you could actually ask a ---hyper real person who has simulated 5 year world: is it like? etc and get...dead on right answers because very sophisticated agents. that's the world I'd love to have for future gens...if it'd be a improvement.
> What do folks think?
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,_m5pbtswSR-HXlli9a7K9EQSnH-OS3Pk81toCrNrcyinfNfl73nCo8Rt8yv3mcGs_xh-_a2K0CyNAx_W4dMOhozl4KiTNc5XATU5Bx8olCz6v3258mC4aKnrYcQm&typo=1
> to (un)subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,-7YL5BNZS8S7sRlPhTYbViQW--uXP1AaGrwx0B6FGRKl-IJAuqsXRXk93aXT-dk0q8EK50wiZ20z9MLIOpGytH_3LHCnDd6oPnH-Jr5oTrShkfXE&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,wH9obAsHhOP3_9sIEsbAZO75ELskNLCCWjLKpCwBIb_1v_oXP0NvIvVnsrSNc-nkpRlOecffqodLvkfk7iL1mRsHeWnbAJSIgjJFG4iZw8jof-X6I2hCV80,&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,us_qzYrFZfqD6UaObMAlmCt73BOcxD3Alcjq6nEvrzSCCTtrtwbPV9wwD6SHhZJSTmIsWvPTHptDMNfixQ52lmyk6SK0MCbMVWJ8KFKDnw,,&typo=1
>  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/


From jofr at cas-group.net  Mon Sep  7 14:34:56 2026
From: jofr at cas-group.net (Jochen Fromm)
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2026 20:34:56 +0200
Subject: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
Message-ID: <mailman.1.1788806143.660385.friam_redfish.com@redfish.com>

Do you find this urge to rename everything to America ("Gulf of America" and "Lake America" and now "New America") embarassing? Will it help to make America great again? I have doubts. https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/06/politics/trump-map-renames-new-mexico-as-new-america-J.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260907/325c0974/attachment.html>

From frye.roger at gmail.com  Mon Sep  7 14:47:37 2026
From: frye.roger at gmail.com (Roger Frye)
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2026 12:47:37 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
In-Reply-To: <6a9f0414.b518cd97.1d622a.4395SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
References: <6a9f0414.b518cd97.1d622a.4395SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <F5EE06A9-5553-4F57-A4EC-770F68780038@gmail.com>

Leave Jersey, York and Amsterdam, Hampshire, England, Brunswick, Orleans, Haven, Bedford, Rochelle, … alone!

> On Sep 7, 2026, at 12:34 PM, Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net> wrote:
> 
> Do you find this urge to rename everything to America ("Gulf of America" and "Lake America" and now "New America") embarassing? Will it help to make America great again? I have doubts. 
> https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/06/politics/trump-map-renames-new-mexico-as-new-america
> 
> -J.
> 
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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/


From wimberly3 at gmail.com  Mon Sep  7 14:50:46 2026
From: wimberly3 at gmail.com (Frank Wimberly)
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2026 12:50:46 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
In-Reply-To: <F5EE06A9-5553-4F57-A4EC-770F68780038@gmail.com>
References: <6a9f0414.b518cd97.1d622a.4395SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
 <F5EE06A9-5553-4F57-A4EC-770F68780038@gmail.com>
Message-ID: 
 <CAA5dAfpE+QHMD_EBKD3hLOosuPybE2wit0-ENowk3ypmXq523A@mail.gmail.com>

You left out Mexico.

Frank Wimberly
140 Calle Ojo Feliz
Santa Fe, NM 87505
505 670-9918

Research:  https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Wimberly2

On Mon, Sep 7, 2026, 12:48 PM Roger Frye <frye.roger at gmail.com> wrote:

> Leave Jersey, York and Amsterdam, Hampshire, England, Brunswick, Orleans,
> Haven, Bedford, Rochelle, … alone!
>
> > On Sep 7, 2026, at 12:34 PM, Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net> wrote:
> >
> > Do you find this urge to rename everything to America ("Gulf of America"
> and "Lake America" and now "New America") embarassing? Will it help to make
> America great again? I have doubts.
> >
> https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/06/politics/trump-map-renames-new-mexico-as-new-america
> >
> > -J.
> >
> > .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --.
> / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> > 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 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260907/568d4a3c/attachment.html>

From jofr at cas-group.net  Mon Sep  7 15:24:28 2026
From: jofr at cas-group.net (Jochen Fromm)
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2026 21:24:28 +0200
Subject: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
In-Reply-To: <F5EE06A9-5553-4F57-A4EC-770F68780038@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <mailman.2.1788809115.660385.friam_redfish.com@redfish.com>

It is a form of rebranding, isn't it? Marketing is the only thing Donald Trump used to be good at. But in this case it alienates and confuses everybody.The Atlantic writes "American students are now the best at geography because there is only one possible answer to every question"https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/2026/08/everything-called-america-now/688443/What is the name of the lake? Lake America. What is the name of the gulf? Gulf of America. What is the name of the state?  New America.-J.
-------- Original message --------From: Roger Frye <frye.roger at gmail.com> Date: 9/7/26  8:47 PM  (GMT+01:00) To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Rename all the things Leave Jersey, York and Amsterdam, Hampshire, England, Brunswick, Orleans, Haven, Bedford, Rochelle, … alone!> On Sep 7, 2026, at 12:34 PM, Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net> wrote:> > Do you find this urge to rename everything to America ("Gulf of America" and "Lake America" and now "New America") embarassing? Will it help to make America great again? I have doubts. > https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/06/politics/trump-map-renames-new-mexico-as-new-america> > -J.> > .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..> 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 listservFridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriamto (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.comFRIAM-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/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260907/bc744f00/attachment.html>

From eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com  Mon Sep  7 16:24:34 2026
From: eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com (Eric Charles)
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2026 16:24:34 -0400
Subject: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
In-Reply-To: <6a9f0fa5.63b6a12c.1f19e7.b2d2SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
References: <F5EE06A9-5553-4F57-A4EC-770F68780038@gmail.com>
 <6a9f0fa5.63b6a12c.1f19e7.b2d2SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
Message-ID: 
 <CAEYGzMChxrNyks+RBpKL=64WgvHyxH4kPyZ2rzZwDOYJQj2nHg@mail.gmail.com>

Counterpoint: All evidence is that it is working 100% perfectly. It is
*not* an exercise in branding, it is an exercise in distraction, and
you are distracted, The Atlantic is distracted, and CNN is distracted. It
is an effort to get us to be talking less about how bad it is on the ground
in our economy, how we are not-winning a war we never had to get into in
the first place, etc.

Best,
Eric

<echarles at american.edu>


On Mon, Sep 7, 2026 at 3:25 PM Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net> wrote:

> It is a form of rebranding, isn't it? Marketing is the only thing Donald
> Trump used to be good at. But in this case it alienates and confuses
> everybody.
>
> The Atlantic writes "American students are now the best at geography
> because there is only one possible answer to every question"
>
> https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/2026/08/everything-called-america-now/688443/
>
> What is the name of the lake? Lake America. What is the name of the gulf?
> Gulf of America. What is the name of the state?  New America.
>
> -J.
>
>
> -------- Original message --------
> From: Roger Frye <frye.roger at gmail.com>
> Date: 9/7/26 8:47 PM (GMT+01:00)
> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
>
> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
>
> Leave Jersey, York and Amsterdam, Hampshire, England, Brunswick, Orleans,
> Haven, Bedford, Rochelle, … alone!
>
> > On Sep 7, 2026, at 12:34 PM, Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net> wrote:
> >
> > Do you find this urge to rename everything to America ("Gulf of America"
> and "Lake America" and now "New America") embarassing? Will it help to make
> America great again? I have doubts.
> >
> https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/06/politics/trump-map-renames-new-mexico-as-new-america
> >
> > -J.
> >
> > .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --.
> / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> > 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 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 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260907/c9b90212/attachment.html>

From desmith at santafe.edu  Mon Sep  7 16:55:05 2026
From: desmith at santafe.edu (Santafe)
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 05:55:05 +0900
Subject: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEYGzMChxrNyks+RBpKL=64WgvHyxH4kPyZ2rzZwDOYJQj2nHg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <F5EE06A9-5553-4F57-A4EC-770F68780038@gmail.com>
 <6a9f0fa5.63b6a12c.1f19e7.b2d2SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
 <CAEYGzMChxrNyks+RBpKL=64WgvHyxH4kPyZ2rzZwDOYJQj2nHg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <51932153-29CC-4A0C-94C7-1DFDDB9601B0@santafe.edu>

Yep.

Tribal bonding too.

Early on in the first debacle (2016–2020), some commentator from one of the African countries (I think it was Nigeria) said it perfectly:  trump is a troll.  He is trolling the world.

This is all about reveling in stupidity, to prove the point that the ones who are upset by it can’t make you stop.  It’s just abuse for the sake of abuse, by people for whom that is what is left to want in life.  What we can do about that whole make-up seems to me to be the core of the problem.

In New Mexico, various small rodents will gather up whole bunches and clusters of cholla balls (little detachable thorn-balls that are how cholla carries its spines) and pack them in around the entries to their burrows.  So that anything that tries to dig them out will decide to go try something else instead.   (Until you have had these in your fingers, and transferred them from one hand to another several times, it’s hard to appreciate what a good strategy that is.  Reflect for a while on trying to get one of these out of the tongue of a dog….)  We need some kind of a rake.

Eric



> On Sep 8, 2026, at 5:24, Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Counterpoint: All evidence is that it is working 100% perfectly. It is *not* an exercise in branding, it is an exercise in distraction, and you are distracted, The Atlantic is distracted, and CNN is distracted. It is an effort to get us to be talking less about how bad it is on the ground in our economy, how we are not-winning a war we never had to get into in the first place, etc. 
> 
> Best,
> Eric
> 
>  <mailto:echarles at american.edu>
> 
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2026 at 3:25 PM Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net <mailto:jofr at cas-group.net>> wrote:
>> It is a form of rebranding, isn't it? Marketing is the only thing Donald Trump used to be good at. But in this case it alienates and confuses everybody.
>> 
>> The Atlantic writes "American students are now the best at geography because there is only one possible answer to every question"
>> https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/2026/08/everything-called-america-now/688443/
>> 
>> What is the name of the lake? Lake America. What is the name of the gulf? Gulf of America. What is the name of the state?  New America.
>> 
>> -J.
>> 
>> 
>> -------- Original message --------
>> From: Roger Frye <frye.roger at gmail.com <mailto:frye.roger at gmail.com>>
>> Date: 9/7/26 8:47 PM (GMT+01:00)
>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at redfish.com>>
>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
>> 
>> Leave Jersey, York and Amsterdam, Hampshire, England, Brunswick, Orleans, Haven, Bedford, Rochelle, … alone!
>> 
>> > On Sep 7, 2026, at 12:34 PM, Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net <mailto:jofr at cas-group.net>> wrote:
>> > 
>> > Do you find this urge to rename everything to America ("Gulf of America" and "Lake America" and now "New America") embarassing? Will it help to make America great again? I have doubts. 
>> > https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/06/politics/trump-map-renames-new-mexico-as-new-america
>> > 
>> > -J.
>> > 
>> > .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,GSluXsWiG2WKhASoVHMFVmMbfxDAMbjkRItlshrWEuAu0dq2a57XmpEel13YDskOCdg9sznwqK1x-5OV-s7BTmxOqTprYvRTUekn306Q1z8NTvk09dFR&typo=1>
>> > to (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,uC1FAmukUH_LdhyrhsOI4r53RVlyfwAQk0jmTWdQ5WAyIa54F4bW7RewmbOhM3e8sgICrp6qdbVJ-kar5pNQ0UhZEdamvulwDqbIre7HrMWzhoZ0xcYDtDfSo0k,&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,ZWzaxigxUl64BmuTu-N5mMrYxe4WbR6QcyF01ArJMQBHL51zEfR_Noy47MW1DygRuTOnGeWnTeFJrPSOQdaDl1xzJ7kEjrMm9w61y8Mh3xI,&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,CZcNjIZdKw95h9qzLmwuaGL0DuZ86G9LHNsqU3CKRyKnxRJsNBnxqlJtOXaWWFC5aXXn_C2-EtcwKDhpfo9A1FxVnUzSMOfuqOznauyo1LhmgA1mAtU,&typo=1>
>> >  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 Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,FWlmdfU5E-XjBG7B0TWcBn1-aOwKg3r-_Z2CUirWVHjCNTIq2uI1SuBi-g1E7LDhCxsN-fr9BjLWVKukbh_joOHxQ9h25eRNxxrIvA93etFR4-7PjQ,,&typo=1>
>> to (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,TO-GH1EpxtEbx5Z6RKbVBCQWO_CiCXWwy8AQrs9sPvQon83EKIaJOR4iJ9BMu_xVO6BSa7yFC1zFrQ26MU5X5sbqqWZ20QVlHYYnMO-G&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,xBSTOvgiI-NWHKfBYu26OApAVqhoP35hYIhsPLYKLuIYEK3zpvwb_DHqEnpdj1zJtpD7D-oGCgQNx2DuLXORcn-9YWwGi3XR7NvCuJ9l2Xf27p_02eXI&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,OMBSgH01AH7yY7i67SUnmK8SI_HRHtdgNCD7RsDiqmbkix1aYXGGHObxb91iSp4rsaqf-6zYNn82K4iN7TWmFKmNNMRP6FGW1UIh4IqbQdJgDq8,&typo=1>
>>   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 Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,TdIv21xJiC5RmYHc1l8Ld9N1M_Qz2xR8xi1v8Sk_jLjUz1s6dQ5oFFaPRDUYrHC7S2DDbq3YH18nCLCp6tqRS26RTYhXksdhIRB4rXVQ_r0rLA,,&typo=1>
>> to (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,nf56EnbS-5c8CiTn50Bz0ac9tjAwQ6qIvE5Jyrk5j_AIAxCgMV0Mvp--_iMdPzz9nnMibEug-t-ERrjiik3CjoodPLuleTKgiGejL8LITWqqofSR2K8O&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,UoT18q6QjrFrlUGfK5qnD7tTltqmCSUiATFpEn9I-QEufpq19nQSk09jsDASrT_mqjD3j1_52Exvfbfv9E80n-5rtLgHN-qXoyMpOGgRc6dYNBrxbaxej9LlfTKk&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,ZweWYsP10xmM10adFk0bAVLHHUPkT00gbrRIdO2oJg194XMVMNTwmPxt6rgpGejKtKfQpvN0w_EQH4T_5alcz8iIvtrcuXEvgTqXZerZQBWT_UFGSD_7IQ,,&typo=1>
>>   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 Zoom https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,S-bGAtHeMG6x5GLyvlOV_aYToJu63zoRBFqxQm9IR1sRNKfhqrTl881qrUJ6d6RSVPm6rt5ctSPOSZid3PuYIgMzoWQ_kaSscWopgpjOsZvuh4sD&typo=1
> to (un)subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,hAsmAlF2OWUZHB-RXc8LX50E2gPSGol6uXlAZCWvUES79OpFjrr83yQJMGfFMXaFg0icMhNqpOPxRkA4KavNxAoMAHa0yFBCrjxNYTwZcqX5E_NYNYI,&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,sGX3HAPpD-bZhlJgTiTBVMmNomncVDMndgDecl75pe7Er25panNp0qUL_o-svUws8EQQrn1REYtWQ8bwoahOnVRb3y4DjAaIEsKFmtyleaQI9SF0YkfRTE3ClRI,&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,N1lyArhjzPPv5ywBRdgkLP_L-TPTY5OX7QMxhjqkSDgKCzBPecrMpyMU1CMR4DLdeCKv7np7l6l6StoteKRhPlKa6xZrEWlK9A35_PhCE7fx&typo=1
>  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260908/1a7fe69a/attachment.html>

From eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com  Mon Sep  7 21:34:56 2026
From: eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com (Eric Charles)
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2026 21:34:56 -0400
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
 <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>
Message-ID: 
 <CAEYGzMAOBF4_3wo6kBZNww04kPG65AKpuBqywWzcNppE=4Wt=A@mail.gmail.com>

Yeah.... contra how you are interpreting that... The fact that
"conservative" has an increasingly splintered definition, as you
demonstrated, actually evidences how problematic it is that the
intellectual conservatives have, for several decades now, been
systematically excluded from their natural place in the society...
that is *exactly
*the type of problem they would help with 🤷

Best,
Eric


<echarles at american.edu>


On Thu, Sep 3, 2026 at 5:50 PM glen <gepr at ropella.name> wrote:

> EricS' response to EricC's over-reliance on the meaning of "conservative"
> was better than anything I could have said. But the 6 proposed definitions
> were too long for my tiny context window. So I asked Ellydee to shorten
> them for me. (I also asked Mistral. But she did a terrible job.) I think
> these are pretty good:
>
> Ellydee.ai says ---
>
> **1. Power Hoarding** — Argument-form masking the real motive of those who
> already hold power to keep and concentrate it, widening the gap over those
> who don't.
>
> **2. Prudent Restraint** — The view that change for change's sake is too
> harmful to go unregulated; "move fast and break things" is not an admirable
> values system.
>
> **3. Institutional Gatekeeping** — Fragile categories like "family"
> survive only if their defining form is rigidly held, so alternative forms
> must be presumptively excluded from law and civil rights.
>
> **4. Doctrinal Veto** — The devout get authority over who else qualifies
> for the group — leaving open whether mystics, or fakers under the "faith"
> label, are in or out.
>
> **5. Rooted Locality** — Anyone not living their whole life in one place
> can't be trusted to defend it; local tribal obligation is the oldest form
> of mutual accountability.
>
> **6. Generational Accounting** — A negotiation (doable in good or bad
> faith) over how much of the past must be kept current as a debt versus let
> go once enough generations have passed.
> ---
>
> I was inclined to change "Rooted Locality" to "Rooted Subjectivity" or
> "Perspective" ... in a lame attempt to tie in the other sub-thread. But I
> didn't feel like this task was worth the cost. They have a handy
> ellydee.ai/usage page for those of us who give a damn. >8^D
>
> On 9/2/26 2:04 PM, Santafe wrote:
> > At a kind of vibe level, I understand the picture you paint, and I can
> think of enough instances that fit it, to agree that there is a problem to
> correct.
> >
> > But how far can you go to defend the premise that the retirement of some
> academics was a HUGE problem in this country — or more specifically, do you
> think that is causal for the choice of what has become the political right
> to go in for fascism, with its considerable elements of cynicism, anomie,
> and nihilism?  Had there been “ideas” on offer from some university
> faculty, do you think these people would have wanted them?  Or just wanted
> to burn that down too along with all the rest of it?
> >
> > As with many things I can kind of recognize at a vibe level, if I look
> at it more closely, I don’t know what I should understand the categories
> even to refer to.  By which I mean, what should I attach to the word
> “conservatism”, as any range of things from a movement name, to a social
> group-label, to a domain or thesis of “ideas”.  For instance, is it:
> >
> > 1. A backfilling of what is meant to look like argument, but anchored
> for real in the motive of holding onto power, wealth, and agency by those
> who have it, and further concentrating it, specifically to increase the
> asymmetry over those who don't?  Certainly that goes on, and those who want
> to fight the C label as a label would say this is its essence.  Is that its
> essence, or is that the essence of a corruption when the real C word has
> been lost?  If it is part of the genuine thing, how far does it go toward
> efforts to cultivate the belief that people are constitutively different
> enough that there is no defensible right of agency and freedom for
> everybody on an equal footing, and there should be rulers and ruled?
> >
> > 2. A thesis that “move fast and break things” was not an admirable
> values system, and that seeking change merely for change’s sake is too
> harmful relative to what it achieves to be allowed to go on un-regulated or
> un-restricted?  That would fit with the name C.  Wendell Berry died a
> couple of days ago, somebody I knew a little and had some time with in
> person, and have also read some of though not nearly a lot.  This was one
> of his theses.  Close to the notion of upholding the Ordnung among the
> Amish, or a defense of Luddism as honorable precaution.
> >
> > 3. A notion that a category like “family” is robust only through
> cultural collective and cooperative effects, and that a type system needs
> to be built up, and most types excluded from participation in it, because
> otherwise it is so fragile that the admission of more than one form
> endangers it?  So, for instance: we have no real way to distinguish abusive
> from supportive marriages, so as long as there is one man and one woman,
> so-identified by self and others (maybe a subset of who the others are
> allowed to be), we have to admit it all.  But other kinds of unions need to
> be kept outside the perimeter as viewed by the protections of law and the
> rights of civil society?  The argument being (?) that there are certain
> obligations the institution needs to enable people to keep (raising and
> support of kids being the obvious one, but you can imagine others, and I
> know of marriage customs that symbolically encode several different ones),
> and we know so little about how to do that,
> > that some one form accepted at whatever level of consideration
> constitutes social convention is the only conceivable solution, so anything
> else needs to be presumptively excluded.
> >
> > 4. That people have to experience religious devotions, of whatever
> kind?  The word “faith” has become very popular by people trying not to
> alienate any of those who go through life with a chip on their shoulders,
> the new PC (really the same old PC).  If people just used it, it wouldn’t
> be such a sore thumb to me, but the pandering feels really blatant.  Does
> that self-identified group, and any Greeks using it as a Trojan Horse for
> whatever else motivates them — since it is not clear how any “sincerely”
> motivated people police their own and keep the fakers out — get veto
> power?  Are the mystics excluded, as the doctrinal religious people have
> often wanted them to be?  Or are they religious enough that they are okay
> too?
> >
> > 5. That anybody who doesn’t live an entire life in the place he was born
> is automatically suspect?  The view being that he hasn’t tied himself into
> any one local lifeboat, ergo there can’t be any way he can be counted on to
> defend it existentially?  This is also close to one of Wendell’s views,
> though in person it was important enough for him to like people, that he
> didn’t go into his personal relations plastering doctrines of Original Sin
> on anybody to whom they could be applied.  But as a core of ethnic
> tribalism, this impulse to reinforce mutual obligation seems to me to be
> one of the oldest and most universal cultural things people do, and if it
> is ever temporarily absent in some pocket, some of the people there will
> recreate it from whole cloth.
> >
> > 6. Is it a negotiation of how much of the completed past needs to be
> kept current as a debt, and how much needs to be let go?  Meaning: when, by
> making extra effort to identify and support people who are on the wrong end
> of a structural exclusion or exploitation, are we actively working to
> dismantle the structure, and when have enough generations gone by and
> enough circumstances created new people, that there isn’t anything
> productive to be done by trying to trace an indefinitely long past of
> who-displaced-whom?  I am emphasizing here, as possible C, the premise that
> there is a negotiation on that point to be carried out, as opposed to a
> dogma that to ever let go of anything is a sin.  And if that is the C
> premise, is there a distinction that is also C between having that
> negotiation in good faith and having it in bad faith?  Of how one tries to
> police against plain irresponsible self-interest hijacking the form with no
> moral or ethical anchor?
> >
> >
> > I can imagine any of the above, or none of them, as being what
> “conservatism” is supposed to stand for.  And I can imagine many
> combinations of people proudly advocating any of them at the same time as
> others would sharply distinguish what is okay and what is corrupt or
> degenerated.
> >
> > There’s another mid-length rant about how I watch the memes change, on
> timescales of about 1–4 years, and while each of them has some truth, I
> feel like they are substitutes for seeing a kind of paralysis and inability
> or unwillingness to actually do things that need to be done, across the
> whole of society, that feels to me like a better candidate for cause of the
> fascist and nihilist turn.  But this note is too long already, and I should
> do work.
> >
> > Eric
> >
> >
> >
> >> On Sep 3, 2026, at 2:04, Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I know I'm coming to it late, but I did not find that article very
> convincing. The main problems are:
> >>
> >>  1. Nothing about the omnipresent DEI initiatives of the past few
> decades assures viewpoint diversity, and, if you are only getting people
> deeply devoted to DEI you are for sure actually quashing viewpoint
> diversity. And, by deeply-devoted I mean that academic job applications
> require DEI statements, teaching statements are required to highlight how
> your teaching relates to DEI efforts, applicants are judged based on
> "diversity" goals at the college and within departments, some members of
> hiring committees explicitly see it as their goal to right past wrongs
> against certain groups with their selections, etc.
> >>  2. In certain contexts there is very, very good justification to
> prefer a narrow range of viewpoint diversity over maximal diversity. For
> example, having a math department with different perspectives on what math
> "is" creates a positive environment for students to learn in. For example,
> it might be nice to have a math realist, someone with an aesthetic
> approach, a hard core logician-mathematician, etc., and you certainly want
> people who study different fields within math. However, you might not want
> someone who thinks mathematics is a tool of colonialist oppression which
> should be rejected from the curriculum. In fact, it might be problematic to
> have proponents of that argument in decision-making roles /anywhere /within
> an /educational /institution.
> >>  3. I have seen (when I was full-time in academia), and continue to see
> (via colleagues in academia) actual discrimination against academics with
> conservative views, and a ton of self-silencing based on anticipated
> discrimination. To use the DEI phrase, most faculty settings are not a
> "safe space" for them.
> >>  4. Most of what the author asserts to be secretly implied or covertly
> assumed or bad faith about the efforts seems very upfront and
> straightforward.
> >>  5. Frankly, the failure to replace conservative academics as they
> retire has created HUGE problems in this country. The conservative
> movement used to have decent group of hard-core academics and public
> intellectuals as a key part of it. The current trainwreck of ideas that
> pass for "conservative" these days could be, and could have been, greatly
> helped if academia broadly returned a good chunk of the prior support it
> used to give to people doing serious intellectual work from a conservative
> perspective.
> >>  6. While this obviously applies to humanities and social sciences, it
> applies in all fields. It is good for a chemistry department to have some
> people who believe in hard core merit and some who believe in actively
> supporting those who might have had less opportunity growing up. It is good
> for a chemistry department to have some people who see "less opportunity"
> in terms of structural oppression rampant within a society and others who
> see it in terms of individual hardship. etc.
> >>
> >> <mailto:echarles at american.edu>
> >> All that said, for sure the Trump administration is acting in bad faith
> in many ways, about all things... but that's a different issue.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 8:57 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:
> desmith at santafe.edu>> wrote:
> >>
> >>     Agree Siraganian is wrong.
> >>
> >>     I believe the etymology of the expression “red herring” was not
> intended to be a compliment to the dogs that run off following it.
> >>
> >>     In some lecture or interview or someplace, I remember Snyder making
> a connection that seems good for the current situation:  Authoritarian
> gaslighting really works by adopting the main premises of postmodernism (as
> it has become in its now-degenerated form; I understand the defense of some
> of the original work).  A thing Snyder didn’t say, which just calls out a
> further point of context, but that I think is also within the center of his
> point: in eras where postmodernism hadn’t spread as widely as it has here
> and now, the need was the same, but the authoritarian gaslighters had to
> build some of the infrastructure they wanted to use.  For today, it is just
> there at the Ikea where you can go pick it up and assemble it the same
> day.  Or, so widely distributed in Amazon warehouses that they can deliver
> it the same day, anywhere.
> >>
> >>     Another nice little frame I saw, from some commenter on some
> article, was:
> >>
> >>     For my friends, the Unitary Executive Theory.
> >>     For my enemies, the Major Questions Doctrine.
> >>
> >>     And then:I have heard (reasonable) people criticize Paul Krugman
> for having lots of public opinions in areas where he doesn’t have a lot of
> earned expertise.  Okay; fair enough for that.  But I think it is to his
> credit that he started calling out bad faith as the central issue, quite a
> long time ago (when I also thought that needed to stay the focus).  Not
> leaving it to irony, as Siraganian sort-of does, but being plain that it is
> too frontal an attack to be winked at in irony.
> >>
> >>     (And of course Glen’s point is also exactly right, but already
> said: it is just because the notion of what one wants from truth isn’t so
> easy that it can be handled lazily, and if we did less of that, maybe we
> would be better positioned to repel some of this other nonsense, or at
> least have a smaller vandal-group to repel over it.  That could itself be
> an interesting article, but it would have a completely different aim
> (solving a new problem) than Siraganian’s evident aim in this piece, which
> was to contribute to a struggle.)
> >>
> >>     I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now started
> to use the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various oligarchs
> and the relatively small and connected band of people trying to end the
> society and turn it into a CAFO.  It has been about time for that term to
> be one of the standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic term
> “predatory capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has been
> both long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have become
> semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant to draw
> a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are the thing
> that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the world both
> knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there is a path
> to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.
> >>
> >>     Eric
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>     > On Sep 1, 2026, at 20:56, glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:
> gepr at ropella.name>> wrote:
> >>     >
> >>     >
> >>     >
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1
> <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1
> >
> >>     >
> >>     > OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity.
> But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I think I'm
> going to stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use
> "instrumental pluralist" instead.
> >>     >
> >>     > But 1) what Siraganian says here is simply wrong:
> >>     >
> >>     > "To promote viewpoint diversity is to be thrilled to have my
> views in the mix, even if you think they are wrong, because either (a) they
> contribute to more viewpoint diversity (the more views you have, the more
> viewpoint diversity there is), or (b) they provide more views to choose
> from to figure out which view is the most true. In the first position, you
> end up not caring about whether a particular view is true or good, because
> you care about viewpoint diversity intrinsically: What matters is having
> the greatest possible variety of views. In the second position, you
> instrumentally value a diversity of views; having viewpoint diversity only
> matters until you can figure out which view is the best or most true, at
> which point all the other views can be rejected."
> >>     >
> >>     > If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the 1st
> best to the 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject "all the
> others". Such smooth grading has to remain contingent, defeasible. And my
> guess is the gradation isn't smooth everywhere. It may be smooth for the
> first 2 or 3 distinguishable ideas, but #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<
> https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>>)
> >>     >
> >>     > 2) Diversity remains a useful measure of the crosstrophic nature
> of complex systems, circularity, industrial symbiosis, etc. So even in
> light of Goodhart's Law, diversity is a reasonable *outcome*, even if it's
> dangerous to optimize to that sole outcome.
> >>     >
> >>     > There are issues with all the theses she lays out. But
> persnickety nits aside, her gist seems right. And you can't overlook the
> blatant hypocrisy of objecting to DEI initiatives, but then arguing for
> "intellectual pluralism", pointed out in thesis 7.
> >>     >
> >>     > This post is too long already. But I know many, here, have
> succumbed to Haidt glazing. So I offer this as further demonstration of Bad
> Faith rhetoric:
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1
> <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>
> only peripherally about instrumental pluralism.
> >>     >
> >>     > --
> --
> 8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
> ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα
> σώσω.
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260907/cc668671/attachment-0001.html>

From gepr at ropella.name  Tue Sep  8 11:10:45 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 08:10:45 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEYGzMAOBF4_3wo6kBZNww04kPG65AKpuBqywWzcNppE=4Wt=A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
 <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAOBF4_3wo6kBZNww04kPG65AKpuBqywWzcNppE=4Wt=A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4cac1de2-a9ea-458d-9a68-7aee44f2cdf0@ropella.name>

I don't understand what you're attributing to me, here ("how I'm interpreting that"). The splintering of "conservative" is evidence that intellectual conservatives have been systematically excluded from their natural place in society? What? No.

Being excluded (systematically or not) encourages the development of the subculture. The reactionary/rebellious take of a subculture like punk rock can only really thrive and acquire meaning when it's *not* the "natural" narrative. To *be* or *become* the majority is the death knell for such a subculture.

That is how I'm interpreting the splintering. The splintering is *not* evidence of oppression. The splintering is evidence of their 15 minutes of fame. They've *got* their Project 2025 administration! Yay! The conservatives are in charge. Let's see what happens.

I think it's just a bit fantastic to see conservatives like Rand Paul embarrassing themselves going after Fauci - another conservative. MTG, Candace Owens, & Tucker Carlson going after Trump. Etc. It's their day in the sun. We're seeing that they can't muster even 1/10 the cooperation and collaboration it takes to get anything big done.

As one "does the work", one becomes more "woke" because in order to herd a large cohort of cats into *doing* anything requires a system that manages all the persnickety burrs around the edges. The controller must be at least as complex as the system being controlled.

The conservatives whispering their ideas under their breath *is* the controller controlling the system, not something to bemoan but something to celebrate. The best thing to ever happen to grass was the invention of the lawn mower.


On 9/7/26 6:34 PM, Eric Charles wrote:
> Yeah.... contra how you are interpreting that... The fact that "conservative" has an increasingly splintered definition, as you demonstrated, actually evidences how problematic it is that the intellectual conservatives have, for several decades now, been systematically excluded from their natural place in the society... that is /exactly /the type of problem they would help with 🤷
> 
> Best,
> Eric
> 
> 
> <mailto:echarles at american.edu>
> 
> 
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2026 at 5:50 PM glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>> wrote:
> 
>     EricS' response to EricC's over-reliance on the meaning of "conservative" was better than anything I could have said. But the 6 proposed definitions were too long for my tiny context window. So I asked Ellydee to shorten them for me. (I also asked Mistral. But she did a terrible job.) I think these are pretty good:
> 
>     Ellydee.ai says ---
> 
>     **1. Power Hoarding** — Argument-form masking the real motive of those who already hold power to keep and concentrate it, widening the gap over those who don't.
> 
>     **2. Prudent Restraint** — The view that change for change's sake is too harmful to go unregulated; "move fast and break things" is not an admirable values system.
> 
>     **3. Institutional Gatekeeping** — Fragile categories like "family" survive only if their defining form is rigidly held, so alternative forms must be presumptively excluded from law and civil rights.
> 
>     **4. Doctrinal Veto** — The devout get authority over who else qualifies for the group — leaving open whether mystics, or fakers under the "faith" label, are in or out.
> 
>     **5. Rooted Locality** — Anyone not living their whole life in one place can't be trusted to defend it; local tribal obligation is the oldest form of mutual accountability.
> 
>     **6. Generational Accounting** — A negotiation (doable in good or bad faith) over how much of the past must be kept current as a debt versus let go once enough generations have passed.
>     ---
> 
>     I was inclined to change "Rooted Locality" to "Rooted Subjectivity" or "Perspective" ... in a lame attempt to tie in the other sub-thread. But I didn't feel like this task was worth the cost. They have a handy ellydee.ai/usage <http://ellydee.ai/usage> page for those of us who give a damn. >8^D
> 
>     On 9/2/26 2:04 PM, Santafe wrote:
>      > At a kind of vibe level, I understand the picture you paint, and I can think of enough instances that fit it, to agree that there is a problem to correct.
>      >
>      > But how far can you go to defend the premise that the retirement of some academics was a HUGE problem in this country — or more specifically, do you think that is causal for the choice of what has become the political right to go in for fascism, with its considerable elements of cynicism, anomie, and nihilism?  Had there been “ideas” on offer from some university faculty, do you think these people would have wanted them?  Or just wanted to burn that down too along with all the rest of it?
>      >
>      > As with many things I can kind of recognize at a vibe level, if I look at it more closely, I don’t know what I should understand the categories even to refer to.  By which I mean, what should I attach to the word “conservatism”, as any range of things from a movement name, to a social group-label, to a domain or thesis of “ideas”.  For instance, is it:
>      >
>      > 1. A backfilling of what is meant to look like argument, but anchored for real in the motive of holding onto power, wealth, and agency by those who have it, and further concentrating it, specifically to increase the asymmetry over those who don't?  Certainly that goes on, and those who want to fight the C label as a label would say this is its essence.  Is that its essence, or is that the essence of a corruption when the real C word has been lost?  If it is part of the genuine thing, how far does it go toward efforts to cultivate the belief that people are constitutively different enough that there is no defensible right of agency and freedom for everybody on an equal footing, and there should be rulers and ruled?
>      >
>      > 2. A thesis that “move fast and break things” was not an admirable values system, and that seeking change merely for change’s sake is too harmful relative to what it achieves to be allowed to go on un-regulated or un-restricted?  That would fit with the name C.  Wendell Berry died a couple of days ago, somebody I knew a little and had some time with in person, and have also read some of though not nearly a lot.  This was one of his theses.  Close to the notion of upholding the Ordnung among the Amish, or a defense of Luddism as honorable precaution.
>      >
>      > 3. A notion that a category like “family” is robust only through cultural collective and cooperative effects, and that a type system needs to be built up, and most types excluded from participation in it, because otherwise it is so fragile that the admission of more than one form endangers it?  So, for instance: we have no real way to distinguish abusive from supportive marriages, so as long as there is one man and one woman, so-identified by self and others (maybe a subset of who the others are allowed to be), we have to admit it all.  But other kinds of unions need to be kept outside the perimeter as viewed by the protections of law and the rights of civil society?  The argument being (?) that there are certain obligations the institution needs to enable people to keep (raising and support of kids being the obvious one, but you can imagine others, and I know of marriage customs that symbolically encode several different ones), and we know so little about how to do that,
>      > that some one form accepted at whatever level of consideration constitutes social convention is the only conceivable solution, so anything else needs to be presumptively excluded.
>      >
>      > 4. That people have to experience religious devotions, of whatever kind?  The word “faith” has become very popular by people trying not to alienate any of those who go through life with a chip on their shoulders, the new PC (really the same old PC).  If people just used it, it wouldn’t be such a sore thumb to me, but the pandering feels really blatant.  Does that self-identified group, and any Greeks using it as a Trojan Horse for whatever else motivates them — since it is not clear how any “sincerely” motivated people police their own and keep the fakers out — get veto power?  Are the mystics excluded, as the doctrinal religious people have often wanted them to be?  Or are they religious enough that they are okay too?
>      >
>      > 5. That anybody who doesn’t live an entire life in the place he was born is automatically suspect?  The view being that he hasn’t tied himself into any one local lifeboat, ergo there can’t be any way he can be counted on to defend it existentially?  This is also close to one of Wendell’s views, though in person it was important enough for him to like people, that he didn’t go into his personal relations plastering doctrines of Original Sin on anybody to whom they could be applied.  But as a core of ethnic tribalism, this impulse to reinforce mutual obligation seems to me to be one of the oldest and most universal cultural things people do, and if it is ever temporarily absent in some pocket, some of the people there will recreate it from whole cloth.
>      >
>      > 6. Is it a negotiation of how much of the completed past needs to be kept current as a debt, and how much needs to be let go?  Meaning: when, by making extra effort to identify and support people who are on the wrong end of a structural exclusion or exploitation, are we actively working to dismantle the structure, and when have enough generations gone by and enough circumstances created new people, that there isn’t anything productive to be done by trying to trace an indefinitely long past of who-displaced-whom?  I am emphasizing here, as possible C, the premise that there is a negotiation on that point to be carried out, as opposed to a dogma that to ever let go of anything is a sin.  And if that is the C premise, is there a distinction that is also C between having that negotiation in good faith and having it in bad faith?  Of how one tries to police against plain irresponsible self-interest hijacking the form with no moral or ethical anchor?
>      >
>      >
>      > I can imagine any of the above, or none of them, as being what “conservatism” is supposed to stand for.  And I can imagine many combinations of people proudly advocating any of them at the same time as others would sharply distinguish what is okay and what is corrupt or degenerated.
>      >
>      > There’s another mid-length rant about how I watch the memes change, on timescales of about 1–4 years, and while each of them has some truth, I feel like they are substitutes for seeing a kind of paralysis and inability or unwillingness to actually do things that need to be done, across the whole of society, that feels to me like a better candidate for cause of the fascist and nihilist turn.  But this note is too long already, and I should do work.
>      >
>      > Eric
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >> On Sep 3, 2026, at 2:04, Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com>> wrote:
>      >>
>      >> I know I'm coming to it late, but I did not find that article very convincing. The main problems are:
>      >>
>      >>  1. Nothing about the omnipresent DEI initiatives of the past few decades assures viewpoint diversity, and, if you are only getting people deeply devoted to DEI you are for sure actually quashing viewpoint diversity. And, by deeply-devoted I mean that academic job applications require DEI statements, teaching statements are required to highlight how your teaching relates to DEI efforts, applicants are judged based on "diversity" goals at the college and within departments, some members of hiring committees explicitly see it as their goal to right past wrongs against certain groups with their selections, etc.
>      >>  2. In certain contexts there is very, very good justification to prefer a narrow range of viewpoint diversity over maximal diversity. For example, having a math department with different perspectives on what math "is" creates a positive environment for students to learn in. For example, it might be nice to have a math realist, someone with an aesthetic approach, a hard core logician-mathematician, etc., and you certainly want people who study different fields within math. However, you might not want someone who thinks mathematics is a tool of colonialist oppression which should be rejected from the curriculum. In fact, it might be problematic to have proponents of that argument in decision-making roles /anywhere /within an /educational /institution.
>      >>  3. I have seen (when I was full-time in academia), and continue to see (via colleagues in academia) actual discrimination against academics with conservative views, and a ton of self-silencing based on anticipated discrimination. To use the DEI phrase, most faculty settings are not a "safe space" for them.
>      >>  4. Most of what the author asserts to be secretly implied or covertly assumed or bad faith about the efforts seems very upfront and straightforward.
>      >>  5. Frankly, the failure to replace conservative academics as they retire has created HUGE problems in this country. The conservative movement used to have decent group of hard-core academics and public intellectuals as a key part of it. The current trainwreck of ideas that pass for "conservative" these days could be, and could have been, greatly helped if academia broadly returned a good chunk of the prior support it used to give to people doing serious intellectual work from a conservative perspective.
>      >>  6. While this obviously applies to humanities and social sciences, it applies in all fields. It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who believe in hard core merit and some who believe in actively supporting those who might have had less opportunity growing up. It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who see "less opportunity" in terms of structural oppression rampant within a society and others who see it in terms of individual hardship. etc.
>      >>
>      >> <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu>>
>      >> All that said, for sure the Trump administration is acting in bad faith in many ways, about all things... but that's a different issue.
>      >>
>      >>
>      >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 8:57 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>>> wrote:
>      >>
>      >>     Agree Siraganian is wrong.
>      >>
>      >>     I believe the etymology of the expression “red herring” was not intended to be a compliment to the dogs that run off following it.
>      >>
>      >>     In some lecture or interview or someplace, I remember Snyder making a connection that seems good for the current situation:  Authoritarian gaslighting really works by adopting the main premises of postmodernism (as it has become in its now-degenerated form; I understand the defense of some of the original work).  A thing Snyder didn’t say, which just calls out a further point of context, but that I think is also within the center of his point: in eras where postmodernism hadn’t spread as widely as it has here and now, the need was the same, but the authoritarian gaslighters had to build some of the infrastructure they wanted to use.  For today, it is just there at the Ikea where you can go pick it up and assemble it the same day.  Or, so widely distributed in Amazon warehouses that they can deliver it the same day, anywhere.
>      >>
>      >>     Another nice little frame I saw, from some commenter on some article, was:
>      >>
>      >>     For my friends, the Unitary Executive Theory.
>      >>     For my enemies, the Major Questions Doctrine.
>      >>
>      >>     And then:I have heard (reasonable) people criticize Paul Krugman for having lots of public opinions in areas where he doesn’t have a lot of earned expertise.  Okay; fair enough for that.  But I think it is to his credit that he started calling out bad faith as the central issue, quite a long time ago (when I also thought that needed to stay the focus).  Not leaving it to irony, as Siraganian sort-of does, but being plain that it is too frontal an attack to be winked at in irony.
>      >>
>      >>     (And of course Glen’s point is also exactly right, but already said: it is just because the notion of what one wants from truth isn’t so easy that it can be handled lazily, and if we did less of that, maybe we would be better positioned to repel some of this other nonsense, or at least have a smaller vandal-group to repel over it.  That could itself be an interesting article, but it would have a completely different aim (solving a new problem) than Siraganian’s evident aim in this piece, which was to contribute to a struggle.)
>      >>
>      >>     I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now started to use the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various oligarchs and the relatively small and connected band of people trying to end the society and turn it into a CAFO.  It has been about time for that term to be one of the standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic term “predatory capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has been both long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have become semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant to draw a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are the thing that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the world both knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there is a path to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.
>      >>
>      >>     Eric
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>     > On Sep 1, 2026, at 20:56, glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>>> wrote:
>      >>     >
>      >>     >
>      >>     > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-
>     diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1>>
>      >>     >
>      >>     > OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity. But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I think I'm going to stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use "instrumental pluralist" instead.
>      >>     >
>      >>     > But 1) what Siraganian says here is simply wrong:
>      >>     >
>      >>     > "To promote viewpoint diversity is to be thrilled to have my views in the mix, even if you think they are wrong, because either (a) they contribute to more viewpoint diversity (the more views you have, the more viewpoint diversity there is), or (b) they provide more views to choose from to figure out which view is the most true. In the first position, you end up not caring about whether a particular view is true or good, because you care about viewpoint diversity intrinsically: What matters is having the greatest possible variety of views. In the second position, you instrumentally value a diversity of views; having viewpoint diversity only matters until you can figure out which view is the best or most true, at which point all the other views can be rejected."
>      >>     >
>      >>     > If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the 1st best to the 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject "all the others". Such smooth grading has to remain contingent, defeasible. And my guess is the gradation isn't smooth everywhere. It may be smooth for the first 2 or 3 distinguishable ideas, but #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263> <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>>>)
>      >>     >
>      >>     > 2) Diversity remains a useful measure of the crosstrophic nature of complex systems, circularity, industrial symbiosis, etc. So even in light of Goodhart's Law, diversity is a reasonable *outcome*, even if it's dangerous to optimize to that sole outcome.
>      >>     >
>      >>     > There are issues with all the theses she lays out. But persnickety nits aside, her gist seems right. And you can't overlook the blatant hypocrisy of objecting to DEI initiatives, but then arguing for "intellectual pluralism", pointed out in thesis 7.
>      >>     >
>      >>     > This post is too long already. But I know many, here, have succumbed to Haidt glazing. So I offer this as further demonstration of Bad Faith rhetoric: https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1
>     <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>> only peripherally about instrumental pluralism.
>      >>     >
-- 
8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.


From gepr at ropella.name  Tue Sep  8 11:21:17 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 08:21:17 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] competence
Message-ID: <326ff87d-b9d9-4176-b28f-1e3fd3610545@ropella.name>


Many of my lefty friends bemoan the Heritage Foundation as if it were as competent as Sauron or Palantir. It's just not. Witness Memoir, Inc (aka Chapter<askchapter.org>), a company founded by an ex-Palantir employee (Jacob -Cobi- Blumenfeld-Gantz) and funded by the very people who think Medicare should be eliminated. https://www.dnb.com/business-directory/company-profiles/memoir-inc.5e9f21289f43f151e3967f04fdb4ba2f

*That* is competence, hedging one's bets. Yes, Thiel et al hate Medicare. But as long as it exists, we may as well milk it for ALL it's worth, eh? And add a little sugar like a .org TLD, some "we're helping old people" glazing, etc. And you got a real winner, there. I remember the very day I committed to never joining the AARP, when I got a flyer in the mail endorsing GW Bush. Are they evil? Or just stupid? Both? IDK and IDC. I'm not joining your little club.

One can make similar claims about Musk, being overwhelmingly funded by government handouts and yet bemoaning government handouts. But Musk is just so bad at the optics ... or at least his competence took a nose dive at some point ... maybe when he ramped up on the ketamine?

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


From d00d3rs0n at gmail.com  Tue Sep  8 15:46:31 2026
From: d00d3rs0n at gmail.com (cody dooderson)
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 13:46:31 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
In-Reply-To: <51932153-29CC-4A0C-94C7-1DFDDB9601B0@santafe.edu>
References: <F5EE06A9-5553-4F57-A4EC-770F68780038@gmail.com>
 <6a9f0fa5.63b6a12c.1f19e7.b2d2SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
 <CAEYGzMChxrNyks+RBpKL=64WgvHyxH4kPyZ2rzZwDOYJQj2nHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <51932153-29CC-4A0C-94C7-1DFDDB9601B0@santafe.edu>
Message-ID: 
 <CAEddvG2ZxyGeiwvA2YLWkHG-C8Vv0JF5ayBeu8qg69qkmgwLNw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi everyone,

I'm curious about how much traffic and ad revenue a naming stunt like this
generates for Truth Social. Trump and Co owns Truth Social. So I imagine
they get 100% of the ad profit from something like this.

I found myself visiting Truth Social about ten times—first thinking I was
hallucinating, then checking if the account was legitimate, and finally
scrolling through other similarily bonkers posts. While my visits likely
only generated a nano-cent in ad revenue, it made me wonder about the
broader financial impact.

I would like to think this ad revenue is negligible for them and not a
primary motivation, but I don't have any data. Does anyone have insight
into how much traffic or revenue these posts actually drive?

Best,
cody dooderson

On Mon, Sep 7, 2026 at 2:56 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu> wrote:

> Yep.
>
> Tribal bonding too.
>
> Early on in the first debacle (2016–2020), some commentator from one of
> the African countries (I think it was Nigeria) said it perfectly:  trump is
> a troll.  He is trolling the world.
>
> This is all about reveling in stupidity, to prove the point that the ones
> who are upset by it can’t make you stop.  It’s just abuse for the sake of
> abuse, by people for whom that is what is left to want in life.  What we
> can do about that whole make-up seems to me to be the core of the problem.
>
> In New Mexico, various small rodents will gather up whole bunches and
> clusters of cholla balls (little detachable thorn-balls that are how cholla
> carries its spines) and pack them in around the entries to their burrows.
> So that anything that tries to dig them out will decide to go try something
> else instead.   (Until you have had these in your fingers, and transferred
> them from one hand to another several times, it’s hard to appreciate what a
> good strategy that is.  Reflect for a while on trying to get one of these
> out of the tongue of a dog….)  We need some kind of a rake.
>
> Eric
>
>
>
> On Sep 8, 2026, at 5:24, Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Counterpoint: All evidence is that it is working 100% perfectly. It is
> *not* an exercise in branding, it is an exercise in distraction, and
> you are distracted, The Atlantic is distracted, and CNN is distracted. It
> is an effort to get us to be talking less about how bad it is on the ground
> in our economy, how we are not-winning a war we never had to get into in
> the first place, etc.
>
> Best,
> Eric
>
> <echarles at american.edu>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2026 at 3:25 PM Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net> wrote:
>
>> It is a form of rebranding, isn't it? Marketing is the only thing Donald
>> Trump used to be good at. But in this case it alienates and confuses
>> everybody.
>>
>> The Atlantic writes "American students are now the best at geography
>> because there is only one possible answer to every question"
>>
>> https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/2026/08/everything-called-america-now/688443/
>>
>> What is the name of the lake? Lake America. What is the name of the gulf?
>> Gulf of America. What is the name of the state?  New America.
>>
>> -J.
>>
>>
>> -------- Original message --------
>> From: Roger Frye <frye.roger at gmail.com>
>> Date: 9/7/26 8:47 PM (GMT+01:00)
>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
>>
>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
>>
>> Leave Jersey, York and Amsterdam, Hampshire, England, Brunswick, Orleans,
>> Haven, Bedford, Rochelle, … alone!
>>
>> > On Sep 7, 2026, at 12:34 PM, Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net> wrote:
>> >
>> > Do you find this urge to rename everything to America ("Gulf of
>> America" and "Lake America" and now "New America") embarassing? Will it
>> help to make America great again? I have doubts.
>> >
>> https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/06/politics/trump-map-renames-new-mexico-as-new-america
>> >
>> > -J.
>> >
>> > .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --.
>> / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,GSluXsWiG2WKhASoVHMFVmMbfxDAMbjkRItlshrWEuAu0dq2a57XmpEel13YDskOCdg9sznwqK1x-5OV-s7BTmxOqTprYvRTUekn306Q1z8NTvk09dFR&typo=1>
>> > to (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,uC1FAmukUH_LdhyrhsOI4r53RVlyfwAQk0jmTWdQ5WAyIa54F4bW7RewmbOhM3e8sgICrp6qdbVJ-kar5pNQ0UhZEdamvulwDqbIre7HrMWzhoZ0xcYDtDfSo0k,&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,ZWzaxigxUl64BmuTu-N5mMrYxe4WbR6QcyF01ArJMQBHL51zEfR_Noy47MW1DygRuTOnGeWnTeFJrPSOQdaDl1xzJ7kEjrMm9w61y8Mh3xI,&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,CZcNjIZdKw95h9qzLmwuaGL0DuZ86G9LHNsqU3CKRyKnxRJsNBnxqlJtOXaWWFC5aXXn_C2-EtcwKDhpfo9A1FxVnUzSMOfuqOznauyo1LhmgA1mAtU,&typo=1>
>> >  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 Zoom
>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,FWlmdfU5E-XjBG7B0TWcBn1-aOwKg3r-_Z2CUirWVHjCNTIq2uI1SuBi-g1E7LDhCxsN-fr9BjLWVKukbh_joOHxQ9h25eRNxxrIvA93etFR4-7PjQ,,&typo=1>
>> to (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,TO-GH1EpxtEbx5Z6RKbVBCQWO_CiCXWwy8AQrs9sPvQon83EKIaJOR4iJ9BMu_xVO6BSa7yFC1zFrQ26MU5X5sbqqWZ20QVlHYYnMO-G&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,xBSTOvgiI-NWHKfBYu26OApAVqhoP35hYIhsPLYKLuIYEK3zpvwb_DHqEnpdj1zJtpD7D-oGCgQNx2DuLXORcn-9YWwGi3XR7NvCuJ9l2Xf27p_02eXI&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,OMBSgH01AH7yY7i67SUnmK8SI_HRHtdgNCD7RsDiqmbkix1aYXGGHObxb91iSp4rsaqf-6zYNn82K4iN7TWmFKmNNMRP6FGW1UIh4IqbQdJgDq8,&typo=1>
>>   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 Zoom
>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,TdIv21xJiC5RmYHc1l8Ld9N1M_Qz2xR8xi1v8Sk_jLjUz1s6dQ5oFFaPRDUYrHC7S2DDbq3YH18nCLCp6tqRS26RTYhXksdhIRB4rXVQ_r0rLA,,&typo=1>
>> to (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,nf56EnbS-5c8CiTn50Bz0ac9tjAwQ6qIvE5Jyrk5j_AIAxCgMV0Mvp--_iMdPzz9nnMibEug-t-ERrjiik3CjoodPLuleTKgiGejL8LITWqqofSR2K8O&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,UoT18q6QjrFrlUGfK5qnD7tTltqmCSUiATFpEn9I-QEufpq19nQSk09jsDASrT_mqjD3j1_52Exvfbfv9E80n-5rtLgHN-qXoyMpOGgRc6dYNBrxbaxej9LlfTKk&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,ZweWYsP10xmM10adFk0bAVLHHUPkT00gbrRIdO2oJg194XMVMNTwmPxt6rgpGejKtKfQpvN0w_EQH4T_5alcz8iIvtrcuXEvgTqXZerZQBWT_UFGSD_7IQ,,&typo=1>
>>   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 Zoom
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,S-bGAtHeMG6x5GLyvlOV_aYToJu63zoRBFqxQm9IR1sRNKfhqrTl881qrUJ6d6RSVPm6rt5ctSPOSZid3PuYIgMzoWQ_kaSscWopgpjOsZvuh4sD&typo=1
> to (un)subscribe
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,hAsmAlF2OWUZHB-RXc8LX50E2gPSGol6uXlAZCWvUES79OpFjrr83yQJMGfFMXaFg0icMhNqpOPxRkA4KavNxAoMAHa0yFBCrjxNYTwZcqX5E_NYNYI,&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,sGX3HAPpD-bZhlJgTiTBVMmNomncVDMndgDecl75pe7Er25panNp0qUL_o-svUws8EQQrn1REYtWQ8bwoahOnVRb3y4DjAaIEsKFmtyleaQI9SF0YkfRTE3ClRI,&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,N1lyArhjzPPv5ywBRdgkLP_L-TPTY5OX7QMxhjqkSDgKCzBPecrMpyMU1CMR4DLdeCKv7np7l6l6StoteKRhPlKa6xZrEWlK9A35_PhCE7fx&typo=1
>  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 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260908/049aac1e/attachment.html>

From jofr at cas-group.net  Tue Sep  8 16:53:19 2026
From: jofr at cas-group.net (Jochen Fromm)
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2026 22:53:19 +0200
Subject: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEYGzMChxrNyks+RBpKL=64WgvHyxH4kPyZ2rzZwDOYJQj2nHg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <mailman.0.1788900847.2836379.friam_redfish.com@redfish.com>

As Claude would say I would like to push back a little. I would say it is both, a massive distraction but also a form of rebranding.If I look at all the things that are named Trump (like his failed university and his failed casinos and his failed magazine etc) then I get the impression that putting his name on everything is all he knows. This kind of "self-marketing" is his core competency and the way his business used to work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Donald_TrumpHe is doing the same now for his new business "America". And he has apparently found out that it is a useful distraction technique too. As George Lakoff said diversion/distraction is one of his 4 basic techniques (preemptive framing, diversion/distraction, deflection and trial ballons). -J.
-------- Original message --------From: Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com> Date: 9/7/26  10:25 PM  (GMT+01:00) To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Rename all the things Counterpoint: All evidence is that it is working 100% perfectly. It is *not* an exercise in branding, it is an exercise in distraction, and you are distracted, The Atlantic is distracted, and CNN is distracted. It is an effort to get us to be talking less about how bad it is on the ground in our economy, how we are not-winning a war we never had to get into in the first place, etc. Best,EricOn Mon, Sep 7, 2026 at 3:25 PM Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net> wrote:It is a form of rebranding, isn't it? Marketing is the only thing Donald Trump used to be good at. But in this case it alienates and confuses everybody.The Atlantic writes "American students are now the best at geography because there is only one possible answer to every question"https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/2026/08/everything-called-america-now/688443/What is the name of the lake? Lake America. What is the name of the gulf? Gulf of America. What is the name of the state?  New America.-J.-------- Original message --------From: Roger Frye <frye.roger at gmail.com> Date: 9/7/26  8:47 PM  (GMT+01:00) To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Rename all the things Leave Jersey, York and Amsterdam, Hampshire, England, Brunswick, Orleans, Haven, Bedford, Rochelle, … alone!> On Sep 7, 2026, at 12:34 PM, Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net> wrote:> > Do you find this urge to rename everything to America ("Gulf of America" and "Lake America" and now "New America") embarassing? Will it help to make America great again? I have doubts. > https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/06/politics/trump-map-renames-new-mexico-as-new-america> > -J.> > .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..> 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 listservFridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriamto (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.comFRIAM-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 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/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260908/bafe0d08/attachment.html>

From marcus at snoutfarm.com  Tue Sep  8 16:59:37 2026
From: marcus at snoutfarm.com (Marcus Daniels)
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 20:59:37 +0000
Subject: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
In-Reply-To: 
 <4084fab4-a4e6-4b52-acdb-7c3636d133a3@CH2PEPF0000013E.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
References: 
 <CAEYGzMChxrNyks+RBpKL=64WgvHyxH4kPyZ2rzZwDOYJQj2nHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <4084fab4-a4e6-4b52-acdb-7c3636d133a3@CH2PEPF0000013E.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: 
 <DS0PR11MB7735F0691FEA234537541C16C5B12@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

Perhaps it is a bit like psilocybin.   Remove/smear the bindings for words so that (some) brains can reorganize around a new modern reality.   Some won’t but they’ll fall back on AI for their thinking.   Perhaps it is all for the best?

From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> on behalf of Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net>
Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2026 at 1:54 PM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Rename all the things

As Claude would say I would like to push back a little. I would say it is both, a massive distraction but also a form of rebranding.

If I look at all the things that are named Trump (like his failed university and his failed casinos and his failed magazine etc) then I get the impression that putting his name on everything is all he knows. This kind of "self-marketing" is his core competency and the way his business used to work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_things_named_after_Donald_Trump

He is doing the same now for his new business "America". And he has apparently found out that it is a useful distraction technique too. As George Lakoff said diversion/distraction is one of his 4 basic techniques (preemptive framing, diversion/distraction, deflection and trial ballons).

-J.


-------- Original message --------
From: Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com>
Date: 9/7/26 10:25 PM (GMT+01:00)
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Rename all the things

Counterpoint: All evidence is that it is working 100% perfectly. It is *not* an exercise in branding, it is an exercise in distraction, and you are distracted, The Atlantic is distracted, and CNN is distracted. It is an effort to get us to be talking less about how bad it is on the ground in our economy, how we are not-winning a war we never had to get into in the first place, etc.

Best,
Eric



On Mon, Sep 7, 2026 at 3:25 PM Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net<mailto:jofr at cas-group.net>> wrote:
It is a form of rebranding, isn't it? Marketing is the only thing Donald Trump used to be good at. But in this case it alienates and confuses everybody.

The Atlantic writes "American students are now the best at geography because there is only one possible answer to every question"
https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/2026/08/everything-called-america-now/688443/

What is the name of the lake? Lake America. What is the name of the gulf? Gulf of America. What is the name of the state?  New America.

-J.


-------- Original message --------
From: Roger Frye <frye.roger at gmail.com<mailto:frye.roger at gmail.com>>
Date: 9/7/26 8:47 PM (GMT+01:00)
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com<mailto:friam at redfish.com>>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Rename all the things

Leave Jersey, York and Amsterdam, Hampshire, England, Brunswick, Orleans, Haven, Bedford, Rochelle, … alone!

> On Sep 7, 2026, at 12:34 PM, Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net<mailto:jofr at cas-group.net>> wrote:
>
> Do you find this urge to rename everything to America ("Gulf of America" and "Lake America" and now "New America") embarassing? Will it help to make America great again? I have doubts.
> https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/06/politics/trump-map-renames-new-mexico-as-new-america
>
> -J.
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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 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 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/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260908/64af051e/attachment.html>

From sasmyth at swcp.com  Tue Sep  8 17:24:46 2026
From: sasmyth at swcp.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 15:24:46 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEddvG2ZxyGeiwvA2YLWkHG-C8Vv0JF5ayBeu8qg69qkmgwLNw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <F5EE06A9-5553-4F57-A4EC-770F68780038@gmail.com>
 <6a9f0fa5.63b6a12c.1f19e7.b2d2SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
 <CAEYGzMChxrNyks+RBpKL=64WgvHyxH4kPyZ2rzZwDOYJQj2nHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <51932153-29CC-4A0C-94C7-1DFDDB9601B0@santafe.edu>
 <CAEddvG2ZxyGeiwvA2YLWkHG-C8Vv0JF5ayBeu8qg69qkmgwLNw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <65753cda-9bbb-40ca-80ce-5c0d2aec7900@swcp.com>


What's this "Truth Social" thing you are talking about?  Never heard of it!

It sounds like probably the American Arm of :"Pravda" (Truth)?


> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm curious about how much traffic and ad revenue a naming stunt like 
> this generates for Truth Social. Trump and Co owns Truth Social. So I 
> imagine they get 100% of the ad profit from something like this.
>
> I found myself visiting Truth Social about ten times—first thinking I 
> was hallucinating, then checking if the account was legitimate, and 
> finally scrolling through other similarily bonkers posts. While my 
> visits likely only generated a nano-cent in ad revenue, it made me 
> wonder about the broader financial impact.
>
> I would like to think this ad revenue is negligible for them and not a 
> primary motivation, but I don't have any data. Does anyone have 
> insight into how much traffic or revenue these posts actually drive?
>
> Best,
> cody dooderson
>
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2026 at 2:56 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu> wrote:
>
>     Yep.
>
>     Tribal bonding too.
>
>     Early on in the first debacle (2016–2020), some commentator from
>     one of the African countries (I think it was Nigeria) said it
>     perfectly:  trump is a troll.  He is trolling the world.
>
>     This is all about reveling in stupidity, to prove the point that
>     the ones who are upset by it can’t make you stop.  It’s just abuse
>     for the sake of abuse, by people for whom that is what is left to
>     want in life.  What we can do about that whole make-up seems to me
>     to be the core of the problem.
>
>     In New Mexico, various small rodents will gather up whole bunches
>     and clusters of cholla balls (little detachable thorn-balls that
>     are how cholla carries its spines) and pack them in around the
>     entries to their burrows.  So that anything that tries to dig them
>     out will decide to go try something else instead.   (Until you
>     have had these in your fingers, and transferred them from one hand
>     to another several times, it’s hard to appreciate what a good
>     strategy that is.  Reflect for a while on trying to get one of
>     these out of the tongue of a dog….)  We need some kind of a rake.
>
>     Eric
>
>
>
>>     On Sep 8, 2026, at 5:24, Eric Charles
>>     <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>     Counterpoint: All evidence is that it is working 100% perfectly.
>>     It is *not* an exercise in branding, it is an exercise in
>>     distraction, and you are distracted, The Atlantic is distracted,
>>     and CNN is distracted. It is an effort to get us to be talking
>>     less about how bad it is on the ground in our economy, how we are
>>     not-winning a war we never had to get into in the first place, etc.
>>
>>     Best,
>>     Eric
>>
>>
>>
>>     On Mon, Sep 7, 2026 at 3:25 PM Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net>
>>     wrote:
>>
>>         It is a form of rebranding, isn't it? Marketing is the only
>>         thing Donald Trump used to be good at. But in this case it
>>         alienates and confuses everybody.
>>
>>         The Atlantic writes "American students are now the best at
>>         geography because there is only one possible answer to every
>>         question"
>>         https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/2026/08/everything-called-america-now/688443/
>>
>>         What is the name of the lake? Lake America. What is the name
>>         of the gulf? Gulf of America. What is the name of the state? 
>>         New America.
>>
>>         -J.
>>
>>
>>         -------- Original message --------
>>         From: Roger Frye <frye.roger at gmail.com>
>>         Date: 9/7/26 8:47 PM (GMT+01:00)
>>         To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group
>>         <friam at redfish.com>
>>         Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
>>
>>         Leave Jersey, York and Amsterdam, Hampshire, England,
>>         Brunswick, Orleans, Haven, Bedford, Rochelle, … alone!
>>
>>         > On Sep 7, 2026, at 12:34 PM, Jochen Fromm
>>         <jofr at cas-group.net> wrote:
>>         >
>>         > Do you find this urge to rename everything to America
>>         ("Gulf of America" and "Lake America" and now "New America")
>>         embarassing? Will it help to make America great again? I have
>>         doubts.
>>         >
>>         https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/06/politics/trump-map-renames-new-mexico-as-new-america
>>         >
>>         > -J.
>>         >
>>         > .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .--
>>         .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..-
>>         .-..
>>         > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>         > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe /   Thursdays 9a-12p
>>         Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>         <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,GSluXsWiG2WKhASoVHMFVmMbfxDAMbjkRItlshrWEuAu0dq2a57XmpEel13YDskOCdg9sznwqK1x-5OV-s7BTmxOqTprYvRTUekn306Q1z8NTvk09dFR&typo=1>
>>         > to (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,uC1FAmukUH_LdhyrhsOI4r53RVlyfwAQk0jmTWdQ5WAyIa54F4bW7RewmbOhM3e8sgICrp6qdbVJ-kar5pNQ0UhZEdamvulwDqbIre7HrMWzhoZ0xcYDtDfSo0k,&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,ZWzaxigxUl64BmuTu-N5mMrYxe4WbR6QcyF01ArJMQBHL51zEfR_Noy47MW1DygRuTOnGeWnTeFJrPSOQdaDl1xzJ7kEjrMm9w61y8Mh3xI,&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,CZcNjIZdKw95h9qzLmwuaGL0DuZ86G9LHNsqU3CKRyKnxRJsNBnxqlJtOXaWWFC5aXXn_C2-EtcwKDhpfo9A1FxVnUzSMOfuqOznauyo1LhmgA1mAtU,&typo=1>
>>         >  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
>>         Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>         <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,FWlmdfU5E-XjBG7B0TWcBn1-aOwKg3r-_Z2CUirWVHjCNTIq2uI1SuBi-g1E7LDhCxsN-fr9BjLWVKukbh_joOHxQ9h25eRNxxrIvA93etFR4-7PjQ,,&typo=1>
>>         to (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,TO-GH1EpxtEbx5Z6RKbVBCQWO_CiCXWwy8AQrs9sPvQon83EKIaJOR4iJ9BMu_xVO6BSa7yFC1zFrQ26MU5X5sbqqWZ20QVlHYYnMO-G&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,xBSTOvgiI-NWHKfBYu26OApAVqhoP35hYIhsPLYKLuIYEK3zpvwb_DHqEnpdj1zJtpD7D-oGCgQNx2DuLXORcn-9YWwGi3XR7NvCuJ9l2Xf27p_02eXI&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,OMBSgH01AH7yY7i67SUnmK8SI_HRHtdgNCD7RsDiqmbkix1aYXGGHObxb91iSp4rsaqf-6zYNn82K4iN7TWmFKmNNMRP6FGW1UIh4IqbQdJgDq8,&typo=1>
>>           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
>>         Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>         <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,TdIv21xJiC5RmYHc1l8Ld9N1M_Qz2xR8xi1v8Sk_jLjUz1s6dQ5oFFaPRDUYrHC7S2DDbq3YH18nCLCp6tqRS26RTYhXksdhIRB4rXVQ_r0rLA,,&typo=1>
>>         to (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,nf56EnbS-5c8CiTn50Bz0ac9tjAwQ6qIvE5Jyrk5j_AIAxCgMV0Mvp--_iMdPzz9nnMibEug-t-ERrjiik3CjoodPLuleTKgiGejL8LITWqqofSR2K8O&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,UoT18q6QjrFrlUGfK5qnD7tTltqmCSUiATFpEn9I-QEufpq19nQSk09jsDASrT_mqjD3j1_52Exvfbfv9E80n-5rtLgHN-qXoyMpOGgRc6dYNBrxbaxej9LlfTKk&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,ZweWYsP10xmM10adFk0bAVLHHUPkT00gbrRIdO2oJg194XMVMNTwmPxt6rgpGejKtKfQpvN0w_EQH4T_5alcz8iIvtrcuXEvgTqXZerZQBWT_UFGSD_7IQ,,&typo=1>
>>           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 Zoom
>>     https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,S-bGAtHeMG6x5GLyvlOV_aYToJu63zoRBFqxQm9IR1sRNKfhqrTl881qrUJ6d6RSVPm6rt5ctSPOSZid3PuYIgMzoWQ_kaSscWopgpjOsZvuh4sD&typo=1
>>     <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,S-bGAtHeMG6x5GLyvlOV_aYToJu63zoRBFqxQm9IR1sRNKfhqrTl881qrUJ6d6RSVPm6rt5ctSPOSZid3PuYIgMzoWQ_kaSscWopgpjOsZvuh4sD&typo=1>
>>     to (un)subscribe
>>     https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,hAsmAlF2OWUZHB-RXc8LX50E2gPSGol6uXlAZCWvUES79OpFjrr83yQJMGfFMXaFg0icMhNqpOPxRkA4KavNxAoMAHa0yFBCrjxNYTwZcqX5E_NYNYI,&typo=1
>>     <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,hAsmAlF2OWUZHB-RXc8LX50E2gPSGol6uXlAZCWvUES79OpFjrr83yQJMGfFMXaFg0icMhNqpOPxRkA4KavNxAoMAHa0yFBCrjxNYTwZcqX5E_NYNYI,&typo=1>
>>     FRIAM-COMIC
>>     https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,sGX3HAPpD-bZhlJgTiTBVMmNomncVDMndgDecl75pe7Er25panNp0qUL_o-svUws8EQQrn1REYtWQ8bwoahOnVRb3y4DjAaIEsKFmtyleaQI9SF0YkfRTE3ClRI,&typo=1
>>     <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,sGX3HAPpD-bZhlJgTiTBVMmNomncVDMndgDecl75pe7Er25panNp0qUL_o-svUws8EQQrn1REYtWQ8bwoahOnVRb3y4DjAaIEsKFmtyleaQI9SF0YkfRTE3ClRI,&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,N1lyArhjzPPv5ywBRdgkLP_L-TPTY5OX7QMxhjqkSDgKCzBPecrMpyMU1CMR4DLdeCKv7np7l6l6StoteKRhPlKa6xZrEWlK9A35_PhCE7fx&typo=1
>>     <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpipermail%2ffriam_redfish.com%2f&c=E,1,N1lyArhjzPPv5ywBRdgkLP_L-TPTY5OX7QMxhjqkSDgKCzBPecrMpyMU1CMR4DLdeCKv7np7l6l6StoteKRhPlKa6xZrEWlK9A35_PhCE7fx&typo=1>
>>      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 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/20260908/c602b894/attachment-0001.html>

From d00d3rs0n at gmail.com  Tue Sep  8 18:22:13 2026
From: d00d3rs0n at gmail.com (cody dooderson)
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 16:22:13 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
In-Reply-To: <65753cda-9bbb-40ca-80ce-5c0d2aec7900@swcp.com>
References: <F5EE06A9-5553-4F57-A4EC-770F68780038@gmail.com>
 <6a9f0fa5.63b6a12c.1f19e7.b2d2SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
 <CAEYGzMChxrNyks+RBpKL=64WgvHyxH4kPyZ2rzZwDOYJQj2nHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <51932153-29CC-4A0C-94C7-1DFDDB9601B0@santafe.edu>
 <CAEddvG2ZxyGeiwvA2YLWkHG-C8Vv0JF5ayBeu8qg69qkmgwLNw@mail.gmail.com>
 <65753cda-9bbb-40ca-80ce-5c0d2aec7900@swcp.com>
Message-ID: 
 <CAEddvG2N3pZYjHcYS4P522=CPfBhL4ADHJhSiYE+UBLpB-P+Cw@mail.gmail.com>

Oh sorry. I should have referenced that.
He posts the really fresh "policy changes" to his own modern Pravda called
Truth social. That is where the "New America" rebranding was released
yesterday.
I refuse to forward a link.  It is shamelessly full of doublespeak and ads.

_ Cody Smith _
d00d3rs0n at gmail.com


On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 3:25 PM Steve Smith <sasmyth at swcp.com> wrote:

>
> What's this "Truth Social" thing you are talking about?  Never heard of
> it!
>
> It sounds like probably the American Arm of :"Pravda" (Truth)?
>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'm curious about how much traffic and ad revenue a naming stunt like this
> generates for Truth Social. Trump and Co owns Truth Social. So I imagine
> they get 100% of the ad profit from something like this.
>
> I found myself visiting Truth Social about ten times—first thinking I was
> hallucinating, then checking if the account was legitimate, and finally
> scrolling through other similarily bonkers posts. While my visits likely
> only generated a nano-cent in ad revenue, it made me wonder about the
> broader financial impact.
>
> I would like to think this ad revenue is negligible for them and not a
> primary motivation, but I don't have any data. Does anyone have insight
> into how much traffic or revenue these posts actually drive?
>
> Best,
> cody dooderson
>
> On Mon, Sep 7, 2026 at 2:56 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu> wrote:
>
>> Yep.
>>
>> Tribal bonding too.
>>
>> Early on in the first debacle (2016–2020), some commentator from one of
>> the African countries (I think it was Nigeria) said it perfectly:  trump is
>> a troll.  He is trolling the world.
>>
>> This is all about reveling in stupidity, to prove the point that the ones
>> who are upset by it can’t make you stop.  It’s just abuse for the sake of
>> abuse, by people for whom that is what is left to want in life.  What we
>> can do about that whole make-up seems to me to be the core of the problem.
>>
>> In New Mexico, various small rodents will gather up whole bunches and
>> clusters of cholla balls (little detachable thorn-balls that are how cholla
>> carries its spines) and pack them in around the entries to their burrows.
>> So that anything that tries to dig them out will decide to go try something
>> else instead.   (Until you have had these in your fingers, and transferred
>> them from one hand to another several times, it’s hard to appreciate what a
>> good strategy that is.  Reflect for a while on trying to get one of these
>> out of the tongue of a dog….)  We need some kind of a rake.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sep 8, 2026, at 5:24, Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Counterpoint: All evidence is that it is working 100% perfectly. It is
>> *not* an exercise in branding, it is an exercise in distraction, and
>> you are distracted, The Atlantic is distracted, and CNN is distracted. It
>> is an effort to get us to be talking less about how bad it is on the ground
>> in our economy, how we are not-winning a war we never had to get into in
>> the first place, etc.
>>
>> Best,
>> Eric
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 7, 2026 at 3:25 PM Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net> wrote:
>>
>>> It is a form of rebranding, isn't it? Marketing is the only thing Donald
>>> Trump used to be good at. But in this case it alienates and confuses
>>> everybody.
>>>
>>> The Atlantic writes "American students are now the best at geography
>>> because there is only one possible answer to every question"
>>>
>>> https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/2026/08/everything-called-america-now/688443/
>>>
>>> What is the name of the lake? Lake America. What is the name of the
>>> gulf? Gulf of America. What is the name of the state?  New America.
>>>
>>> -J.
>>>
>>>
>>> -------- Original message --------
>>> From: Roger Frye <frye.roger at gmail.com>
>>> Date: 9/7/26 8:47 PM (GMT+01:00)
>>> To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
>>> friam at redfish.com>
>>> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
>>>
>>> Leave Jersey, York and Amsterdam, Hampshire, England, Brunswick,
>>> Orleans, Haven, Bedford, Rochelle, … alone!
>>>
>>> > On Sep 7, 2026, at 12:34 PM, Jochen Fromm <jofr at cas-group.net> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Do you find this urge to rename everything to America ("Gulf of
>>> America" and "Lake America" and now "New America") embarassing? Will it
>>> help to make America great again? I have doubts.
>>> >
>>> https://edition.cnn.com/2026/09/06/politics/trump-map-renames-new-mexico-as-new-america
>>> >
>>> > -J.
>>> >
>>> > .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -.
>>> --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>>> > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>>> > Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom
>>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,GSluXsWiG2WKhASoVHMFVmMbfxDAMbjkRItlshrWEuAu0dq2a57XmpEel13YDskOCdg9sznwqK1x-5OV-s7BTmxOqTprYvRTUekn306Q1z8NTvk09dFR&typo=1>
>>> > to (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,uC1FAmukUH_LdhyrhsOI4r53RVlyfwAQk0jmTWdQ5WAyIa54F4bW7RewmbOhM3e8sgICrp6qdbVJ-kar5pNQ0UhZEdamvulwDqbIre7HrMWzhoZ0xcYDtDfSo0k,&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,ZWzaxigxUl64BmuTu-N5mMrYxe4WbR6QcyF01ArJMQBHL51zEfR_Noy47MW1DygRuTOnGeWnTeFJrPSOQdaDl1xzJ7kEjrMm9w61y8Mh3xI,&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,CZcNjIZdKw95h9qzLmwuaGL0DuZ86G9LHNsqU3CKRyKnxRJsNBnxqlJtOXaWWFC5aXXn_C2-EtcwKDhpfo9A1FxVnUzSMOfuqOznauyo1LhmgA1mAtU,&typo=1>
>>> >  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 Zoom
>>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,FWlmdfU5E-XjBG7B0TWcBn1-aOwKg3r-_Z2CUirWVHjCNTIq2uI1SuBi-g1E7LDhCxsN-fr9BjLWVKukbh_joOHxQ9h25eRNxxrIvA93etFR4-7PjQ,,&typo=1>
>>> to (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,TO-GH1EpxtEbx5Z6RKbVBCQWO_CiCXWwy8AQrs9sPvQon83EKIaJOR4iJ9BMu_xVO6BSa7yFC1zFrQ26MU5X5sbqqWZ20QVlHYYnMO-G&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,xBSTOvgiI-NWHKfBYu26OApAVqhoP35hYIhsPLYKLuIYEK3zpvwb_DHqEnpdj1zJtpD7D-oGCgQNx2DuLXORcn-9YWwGi3XR7NvCuJ9l2Xf27p_02eXI&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,OMBSgH01AH7yY7i67SUnmK8SI_HRHtdgNCD7RsDiqmbkix1aYXGGHObxb91iSp4rsaqf-6zYNn82K4iN7TWmFKmNNMRP6FGW1UIh4IqbQdJgDq8,&typo=1>
>>>   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 Zoom
>>> https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
>>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,TdIv21xJiC5RmYHc1l8Ld9N1M_Qz2xR8xi1v8Sk_jLjUz1s6dQ5oFFaPRDUYrHC7S2DDbq3YH18nCLCp6tqRS26RTYhXksdhIRB4rXVQ_r0rLA,,&typo=1>
>>> to (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,nf56EnbS-5c8CiTn50Bz0ac9tjAwQ6qIvE5Jyrk5j_AIAxCgMV0Mvp--_iMdPzz9nnMibEug-t-ERrjiik3CjoodPLuleTKgiGejL8LITWqqofSR2K8O&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,UoT18q6QjrFrlUGfK5qnD7tTltqmCSUiATFpEn9I-QEufpq19nQSk09jsDASrT_mqjD3j1_52Exvfbfv9E80n-5rtLgHN-qXoyMpOGgRc6dYNBrxbaxej9LlfTKk&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,ZweWYsP10xmM10adFk0bAVLHHUPkT00gbrRIdO2oJg194XMVMNTwmPxt6rgpGejKtKfQpvN0w_EQH4T_5alcz8iIvtrcuXEvgTqXZerZQBWT_UFGSD_7IQ,,&typo=1>
>>>   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 Zoom
>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,S-bGAtHeMG6x5GLyvlOV_aYToJu63zoRBFqxQm9IR1sRNKfhqrTl881qrUJ6d6RSVPm6rt5ctSPOSZid3PuYIgMzoWQ_kaSscWopgpjOsZvuh4sD&typo=1
>> to (un)subscribe
>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,hAsmAlF2OWUZHB-RXc8LX50E2gPSGol6uXlAZCWvUES79OpFjrr83yQJMGfFMXaFg0icMhNqpOPxRkA4KavNxAoMAHa0yFBCrjxNYTwZcqX5E_NYNYI,&typo=1
>> FRIAM-COMIC
>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,sGX3HAPpD-bZhlJgTiTBVMmNomncVDMndgDecl75pe7Er25panNp0qUL_o-svUws8EQQrn1REYtWQ8bwoahOnVRb3y4DjAaIEsKFmtyleaQI9SF0YkfRTE3ClRI,&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,N1lyArhjzPPv5ywBRdgkLP_L-TPTY5OX7QMxhjqkSDgKCzBPecrMpyMU1CMR4DLdeCKv7np7l6l6StoteKRhPlKa6xZrEWlK9A35_PhCE7fx&typo=1
>>  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 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 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 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260908/11d94dd9/attachment.html>

From sasmyth at swcp.com  Tue Sep  8 21:45:23 2026
From: sasmyth at swcp.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 19:45:23 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEddvG2N3pZYjHcYS4P522=CPfBhL4ADHJhSiYE+UBLpB-P+Cw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <F5EE06A9-5553-4F57-A4EC-770F68780038@gmail.com>
 <6a9f0fa5.63b6a12c.1f19e7.b2d2SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
 <CAEYGzMChxrNyks+RBpKL=64WgvHyxH4kPyZ2rzZwDOYJQj2nHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <51932153-29CC-4A0C-94C7-1DFDDB9601B0@santafe.edu>
 <CAEddvG2ZxyGeiwvA2YLWkHG-C8Vv0JF5ayBeu8qg69qkmgwLNw@mail.gmail.com>
 <65753cda-9bbb-40ca-80ce-5c0d2aec7900@swcp.com>
 <CAEddvG2N3pZYjHcYS4P522=CPfBhL4ADHJhSiYE+UBLpB-P+Cw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ace678a5-9e29-443a-b6d7-fdb900f93284@swcp.com>

CodyS -
> Oh sorry. I should have referenced that.

In an attempt at irony, I ironically exposed my weakness at irony!

I have managed to not read any TruthSocial nor X posts direct from 
source and virtually no FaceBookery either...  but screenshots of such 
still pop up too often.   Good call not providing links to such trash...

Do we remember when the Secret Service took Obama's Blackberry away from 
him when he took office?  I suspect his communications staff were behind 
that more than literal "security"

Re New 'Murrica -  I grew up with my eastern relatives actually 
believing that we didn't speak English and that they needed a passport 
to visit.   A few years ago I understand one of the bigger sellers at 
Doodlets downtown was a New Mexico Passport...

Kudos to EricS as usual for noting that Trump is a Troll first and foremost.

- SieveS




From d00d3rs0n at gmail.com  Wed Sep  9 11:17:21 2026
From: d00d3rs0n at gmail.com (cody dooderson)
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 09:17:21 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
In-Reply-To: <ace678a5-9e29-443a-b6d7-fdb900f93284@swcp.com>
References: <F5EE06A9-5553-4F57-A4EC-770F68780038@gmail.com>
 <6a9f0fa5.63b6a12c.1f19e7.b2d2SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
 <CAEYGzMChxrNyks+RBpKL=64WgvHyxH4kPyZ2rzZwDOYJQj2nHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <51932153-29CC-4A0C-94C7-1DFDDB9601B0@santafe.edu>
 <CAEddvG2ZxyGeiwvA2YLWkHG-C8Vv0JF5ayBeu8qg69qkmgwLNw@mail.gmail.com>
 <65753cda-9bbb-40ca-80ce-5c0d2aec7900@swcp.com>
 <CAEddvG2N3pZYjHcYS4P522=CPfBhL4ADHJhSiYE+UBLpB-P+Cw@mail.gmail.com>
 <ace678a5-9e29-443a-b6d7-fdb900f93284@swcp.com>
Message-ID: 
 <CAEddvG1XrAintv5_usLWv+G=DdTwZ76g_jE8DBvRbDV3SyKP_Q@mail.gmail.com>

Steve;

The wikipedia article about Pravda has a nice quote

As the names of the main communist newspaper and the main Soviet newspaper,
> *Pravda* and *Izvestia*, meant "the truth" and "the news" respectively, a
> popular saying was "there's no news in Pravda and no truth in Izvestia".


Which I think leads to the inevitable modern US version : "There is no
truth on Truth Social and no news on Fox News".


_ Cody Smith _
d00d3rs0n at gmail.com


On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 7:46 PM Steve Smith <sasmyth at swcp.com> wrote:

> CodyS -
> > Oh sorry. I should have referenced that.
>
> In an attempt at irony, I ironically exposed my weakness at irony!
>
> I have managed to not read any TruthSocial nor X posts direct from
> source and virtually no FaceBookery either...  but screenshots of such
> still pop up too often.   Good call not providing links to such trash...
>
> Do we remember when the Secret Service took Obama's Blackberry away from
> him when he took office?  I suspect his communications staff were behind
> that more than literal "security"
>
> Re New 'Murrica -  I grew up with my eastern relatives actually
> believing that we didn't speak English and that they needed a passport
> to visit.   A few years ago I understand one of the bigger sellers at
> Doodlets downtown was a New Mexico Passport...
>
> Kudos to EricS as usual for noting that Trump is a Troll first and
> foremost.
>
> - SieveS
>
>
>
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260909/574519f5/attachment.html>

From frye.roger at gmail.com  Wed Sep  9 12:42:02 2026
From: frye.roger at gmail.com (Roger Frye)
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 10:42:02 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEddvG1XrAintv5_usLWv+G=DdTwZ76g_jE8DBvRbDV3SyKP_Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <F5EE06A9-5553-4F57-A4EC-770F68780038@gmail.com>
 <6a9f0fa5.63b6a12c.1f19e7.b2d2SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
 <CAEYGzMChxrNyks+RBpKL=64WgvHyxH4kPyZ2rzZwDOYJQj2nHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <51932153-29CC-4A0C-94C7-1DFDDB9601B0@santafe.edu>
 <CAEddvG2ZxyGeiwvA2YLWkHG-C8Vv0JF5ayBeu8qg69qkmgwLNw@mail.gmail.com>
 <65753cda-9bbb-40ca-80ce-5c0d2aec7900@swcp.com>
 <CAEddvG2N3pZYjHcYS4P522=CPfBhL4ADHJhSiYE+UBLpB-P+Cw@mail.gmail.com>
 <ace678a5-9e29-443a-b6d7-fdb900f93284@swcp.com>
 <CAEddvG1XrAintv5_usLWv+G=DdTwZ76g_jE8DBvRbDV3SyKP_Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <685F260A-4DF1-48B1-A54D-A50D653E4828@gmail.com>

Vice versa

> On Sep 9, 2026, at 9:17 AM, cody dooderson <d00d3rs0n at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Steve;
> 
> The wikipedia article about Pravda has a nice quote
> 
>> As the names of the main communist newspaper and the main Soviet newspaper, Pravda and Izvestia, meant "the truth" and "the news" respectively, a popular saying was "there's no news in Pravda and no truth in Izvestia".
> 
> Which I think leads to the inevitable modern US version : "There is no truth on Truth Social and no news on Fox News".  
> 
> 
> _ Cody Smith _
> d00d3rs0n at gmail.com <mailto:d00d3rs0n at gmail.com>
> 
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 7:46 PM Steve Smith <sasmyth at swcp.com <mailto:sasmyth at swcp.com>> wrote:
>> CodyS -
>> > Oh sorry. I should have referenced that.
>> 
>> In an attempt at irony, I ironically exposed my weakness at irony!
>> 
>> I have managed to not read any TruthSocial nor X posts direct from 
>> source and virtually no FaceBookery either...  but screenshots of such 
>> still pop up too often.   Good call not providing links to such trash...
>> 
>> Do we remember when the Secret Service took Obama's Blackberry away from 
>> him when he took office?  I suspect his communications staff were behind 
>> that more than literal "security"
>> 
>> Re New 'Murrica -  I grew up with my eastern relatives actually 
>> believing that we didn't speak English and that they needed a passport 
>> to visit.   A few years ago I understand one of the bigger sellers at 
>> Doodlets downtown was a New Mexico Passport...
>> 
>> Kudos to EricS as usual for noting that Trump is a Troll first and foremost.
>> 
>> - SieveS
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>> 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 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/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260909/ceb8ccfe/attachment.html>

From sasmyth at swcp.com  Wed Sep  9 16:43:07 2026
From: sasmyth at swcp.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 2026 14:43:07 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
In-Reply-To: <685F260A-4DF1-48B1-A54D-A50D653E4828@gmail.com>
References: <F5EE06A9-5553-4F57-A4EC-770F68780038@gmail.com>
 <6a9f0fa5.63b6a12c.1f19e7.b2d2SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
 <CAEYGzMChxrNyks+RBpKL=64WgvHyxH4kPyZ2rzZwDOYJQj2nHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <51932153-29CC-4A0C-94C7-1DFDDB9601B0@santafe.edu>
 <CAEddvG2ZxyGeiwvA2YLWkHG-C8Vv0JF5ayBeu8qg69qkmgwLNw@mail.gmail.com>
 <65753cda-9bbb-40ca-80ce-5c0d2aec7900@swcp.com>
 <CAEddvG2N3pZYjHcYS4P522=CPfBhL4ADHJhSiYE+UBLpB-P+Cw@mail.gmail.com>
 <ace678a5-9e29-443a-b6d7-fdb900f93284@swcp.com>
 <CAEddvG1XrAintv5_usLWv+G=DdTwZ76g_jE8DBvRbDV3SyKP_Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <685F260A-4DF1-48B1-A54D-A50D653E4828@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <781dd297-87bc-4b98-876a-6dd4b90c7d14@swcp.com>

Recently a snarky podcaster was noting re: Caroline Leavitt leaving her 
post abruptly that somehow folks in those roles, of that ilk almost 
constitutionally cannot tell the truth, that somehow doing so, even on 
the smallest issue, would throw them off their game of "clever lies".

Reminds me of the correspondent's dinner comic (2017ish?) slam against 
HuckaSans about using the smoke from all her burning lies as mascara or 
eye shadow..

An SF author once pointed out that in Fantasy, everything you know to be 
true is up for grabs and in SF, only one thing (e.g. time travel,  FTL 
...) is presumed to be overturned and the story/work emerges from that 
difference?


On 9/9/26 10:42 am, Roger Frye wrote:
> Vice versa
>
>> On Sep 9, 2026, at 9:17 AM, cody dooderson <d00d3rs0n at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Steve;
>>
>> The wikipedia article about Pravda has a nice quote
>>
>>     As the names of the main communist newspaper and the main Soviet
>>     newspaper, /Pravda/ and /Izvestia/, meant "the truth" and "the
>>     news" respectively, a popular saying was "there's no news in
>>     Pravda and no truth in Izvestia". 
>>
>>
>> Which I think leads to the inevitable modern US version : "There is 
>> no truth on Truth Social and no news on Fox News".
>>
>>
>> _ Cody Smith _
>> d00d3rs0n at gmail.com
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 7:46 PM Steve Smith <sasmyth at swcp.com> wrote:
>>
>>     CodyS -
>>     > Oh sorry. I should have referenced that.
>>
>>     In an attempt at irony, I ironically exposed my weakness at irony!
>>
>>     I have managed to not read any TruthSocial nor X posts direct from
>>     source and virtually no FaceBookery either...  but screenshots of
>>     such
>>     still pop up too often.   Good call not providing links to such
>>     trash...
>>
>>     Do we remember when the Secret Service took Obama's Blackberry
>>     away from
>>     him when he took office?  I suspect his communications staff were
>>     behind
>>     that more than literal "security"
>>
>>     Re New 'Murrica -  I grew up with my eastern relatives actually
>>     believing that we didn't speak English and that they needed a
>>     passport
>>     to visit.   A few years ago I understand one of the bigger
>>     sellers at
>>     Doodlets downtown was a New Mexico Passport...
>>
>>     Kudos to EricS as usual for noting that Trump is a Troll first
>>     and foremost.
>>
>>     - SieveS
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. ---
>>     -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>>     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 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/20260909/a3fe7f99/attachment.html>

From marcus at snoutfarm.com  Thu Sep 10 09:29:33 2026
From: marcus at snoutfarm.com (Marcus Daniels)
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 13:29:33 +0000
Subject: [FRIAM] AI and shareholder efficiency
Message-ID: <CEB2D841-1093-472C-95A6-8384600C697C@snoutfarm.com>

With Labor Day behind us, I'm reminded of this..

https://share.google/J4OF0HaNgKpymm91B
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260910/b90dbbd8/attachment.html>

From eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com  Fri Sep 11 12:01:35 2026
From: eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com (Eric Charles)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 12:01:35 -0400
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: <4cac1de2-a9ea-458d-9a68-7aee44f2cdf0@ropella.name>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
 <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAOBF4_3wo6kBZNww04kPG65AKpuBqywWzcNppE=4Wt=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <4cac1de2-a9ea-458d-9a68-7aee44f2cdf0@ropella.name>
Message-ID: 
 <CAEYGzMD8dMj=dL1oncNgbsKUQqnZdLEhUd6pihbN8h48PxaH6Q@mail.gmail.com>

I only meant to point out that you and EricS both seemed to think that I
had an: over-reliance on the meaning of "conservative"

There *is* a thing that used to be much better represented within acamedia,
and it was systematically eliminated. Call it what you will. I certainly
don't think that any particular person who retired is at fault for that, it
is the lack of replacement that *might* be considered a problem. And, of
course, I am talking about it because it's what the article that was shared
was talking about 🤷 . If I'm begging any questions, they are doubly begged
there.

Of course, if we are going to nitpick the language, one of the big
conceptual problems in this country for several decades now is that are
parties identify is "liberal" vs. "conservative".... but the opposite of
conservative should be "progressive", and the opposite of liberal should be
"autocratic." You either want to err on the side of protecting past ways of
doing things (conserving) or err on the side of trying new things in hopes
they will move society towards some better state (progressing). And you
either want to err on the side of letting people do what they want
(liberty) or err on the side of restricting what people can do
(dictatorship).

In the late 1800s and early 1900s in the U.S. the liberals and the progressives
mostly had the same agenda, and that somehow got everything confused, and
the terms locked into place in a really weird way. If anything, this time
around, the Trump administration is solidly "progressive autocratic", but
our zeitgeist can't really handle that designation. A large number of the
headline grabbing things that the Trump administration has done for the
last 2 years are not "conservative" in any proper sense, the administration
is boisterous with new (mostly shitty) ideas. Heck, the "unitary executive"
theory is about as anti-conservative as you can get.

Best,
Eric


On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 11:11 AM glen <gepr at ropella.name> wrote:

> I don't understand what you're attributing to me, here ("how I'm
> interpreting that"). The splintering of "conservative" is evidence that
> intellectual conservatives have been systematically excluded from their
> natural place in society? What? No.
>
> Being excluded (systematically or not) encourages the development of the
> subculture. The reactionary/rebellious take of a subculture like punk rock
> can only really thrive and acquire meaning when it's *not* the "natural"
> narrative. To *be* or *become* the majority is the death knell for such a
> subculture.
>
> That is how I'm interpreting the splintering. The splintering is *not*
> evidence of oppression. The splintering is evidence of their 15 minutes of
> fame. They've *got* their Project 2025 administration! Yay! The
> conservatives are in charge. Let's see what happens.
>
> I think it's just a bit fantastic to see conservatives like Rand Paul
> embarrassing themselves going after Fauci - another conservative. MTG,
> Candace Owens, & Tucker Carlson going after Trump. Etc. It's their day in
> the sun. We're seeing that they can't muster even 1/10 the cooperation and
> collaboration it takes to get anything big done.
>
> As one "does the work", one becomes more "woke" because in order to herd a
> large cohort of cats into *doing* anything requires a system that manages
> all the persnickety burrs around the edges. The controller must be at least
> as complex as the system being controlled.
>
> The conservatives whispering their ideas under their breath *is* the
> controller controlling the system, not something to bemoan but something to
> celebrate. The best thing to ever happen to grass was the invention of the
> lawn mower.
>
>
> On 9/7/26 6:34 PM, Eric Charles wrote:
> > Yeah.... contra how you are interpreting that... The fact that
> "conservative" has an increasingly splintered definition, as you
> demonstrated, actually evidences how problematic it is that the
> intellectual conservatives have, for several decades now, been
> systematically excluded from their natural place in the society... that is
> /exactly /the type of problem they would help with 🤷
> >
> > Best,
> > Eric
> >
> >
> > <mailto:echarles at american.edu>
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 3, 2026 at 5:50 PM glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:
> gepr at ropella.name>> wrote:
> >
> >     EricS' response to EricC's over-reliance on the meaning of
> "conservative" was better than anything I could have said. But the 6
> proposed definitions were too long for my tiny context window. So I asked
> Ellydee to shorten them for me. (I also asked Mistral. But she did a
> terrible job.) I think these are pretty good:
> >
> >     Ellydee.ai says ---
> >
> >     **1. Power Hoarding** — Argument-form masking the real motive of
> those who already hold power to keep and concentrate it, widening the gap
> over those who don't.
> >
> >     **2. Prudent Restraint** — The view that change for change's sake is
> too harmful to go unregulated; "move fast and break things" is not an
> admirable values system.
> >
> >     **3. Institutional Gatekeeping** — Fragile categories like "family"
> survive only if their defining form is rigidly held, so alternative forms
> must be presumptively excluded from law and civil rights.
> >
> >     **4. Doctrinal Veto** — The devout get authority over who else
> qualifies for the group — leaving open whether mystics, or fakers under the
> "faith" label, are in or out.
> >
> >     **5. Rooted Locality** — Anyone not living their whole life in one
> place can't be trusted to defend it; local tribal obligation is the oldest
> form of mutual accountability.
> >
> >     **6. Generational Accounting** — A negotiation (doable in good or
> bad faith) over how much of the past must be kept current as a debt versus
> let go once enough generations have passed.
> >     ---
> >
> >     I was inclined to change "Rooted Locality" to "Rooted Subjectivity"
> or "Perspective" ... in a lame attempt to tie in the other sub-thread. But
> I didn't feel like this task was worth the cost. They have a handy
> ellydee.ai/usage <http://ellydee.ai/usage> page for those of us who give
> a damn. >8^D
> >
> >     On 9/2/26 2:04 PM, Santafe wrote:
> >      > At a kind of vibe level, I understand the picture you paint, and
> I can think of enough instances that fit it, to agree that there is a
> problem to correct.
> >      >
> >      > But how far can you go to defend the premise that the retirement
> of some academics was a HUGE problem in this country — or more
> specifically, do you think that is causal for the choice of what has become
> the political right to go in for fascism, with its considerable elements of
> cynicism, anomie, and nihilism?  Had there been “ideas” on offer from some
> university faculty, do you think these people would have wanted them?  Or
> just wanted to burn that down too along with all the rest of it?
> >      >
> >      > As with many things I can kind of recognize at a vibe level, if I
> look at it more closely, I don’t know what I should understand the
> categories even to refer to.  By which I mean, what should I attach to the
> word “conservatism”, as any range of things from a movement name, to a
> social group-label, to a domain or thesis of “ideas”.  For instance, is it:
> >      >
> >      > 1. A backfilling of what is meant to look like argument, but
> anchored for real in the motive of holding onto power, wealth, and agency
> by those who have it, and further concentrating it, specifically to
> increase the asymmetry over those who don't?  Certainly that goes on, and
> those who want to fight the C label as a label would say this is its
> essence.  Is that its essence, or is that the essence of a corruption when
> the real C word has been lost?  If it is part of the genuine thing, how far
> does it go toward efforts to cultivate the belief that people are
> constitutively different enough that there is no defensible right of agency
> and freedom for everybody on an equal footing, and there should be rulers
> and ruled?
> >      >
> >      > 2. A thesis that “move fast and break things” was not an
> admirable values system, and that seeking change merely for change’s sake
> is too harmful relative to what it achieves to be allowed to go on
> un-regulated or un-restricted?  That would fit with the name C.  Wendell
> Berry died a couple of days ago, somebody I knew a little and had some time
> with in person, and have also read some of though not nearly a lot.  This
> was one of his theses.  Close to the notion of upholding the Ordnung among
> the Amish, or a defense of Luddism as honorable precaution.
> >      >
> >      > 3. A notion that a category like “family” is robust only through
> cultural collective and cooperative effects, and that a type system needs
> to be built up, and most types excluded from participation in it, because
> otherwise it is so fragile that the admission of more than one form
> endangers it?  So, for instance: we have no real way to distinguish abusive
> from supportive marriages, so as long as there is one man and one woman,
> so-identified by self and others (maybe a subset of who the others are
> allowed to be), we have to admit it all.  But other kinds of unions need to
> be kept outside the perimeter as viewed by the protections of law and the
> rights of civil society?  The argument being (?) that there are certain
> obligations the institution needs to enable people to keep (raising and
> support of kids being the obvious one, but you can imagine others, and I
> know of marriage customs that symbolically encode several different ones),
> and we know so little about how to do that,
> >      > that some one form accepted at whatever level of consideration
> constitutes social convention is the only conceivable solution, so anything
> else needs to be presumptively excluded.
> >      >
> >      > 4. That people have to experience religious devotions, of
> whatever kind?  The word “faith” has become very popular by people trying
> not to alienate any of those who go through life with a chip on their
> shoulders, the new PC (really the same old PC).  If people just used it, it
> wouldn’t be such a sore thumb to me, but the pandering feels really
> blatant.  Does that self-identified group, and any Greeks using it as a
> Trojan Horse for whatever else motivates them — since it is not clear how
> any “sincerely” motivated people police their own and keep the fakers out —
> get veto power?  Are the mystics excluded, as the doctrinal religious
> people have often wanted them to be?  Or are they religious enough that
> they are okay too?
> >      >
> >      > 5. That anybody who doesn’t live an entire life in the place he
> was born is automatically suspect?  The view being that he hasn’t tied
> himself into any one local lifeboat, ergo there can’t be any way he can be
> counted on to defend it existentially?  This is also close to one of
> Wendell’s views, though in person it was important enough for him to like
> people, that he didn’t go into his personal relations plastering doctrines
> of Original Sin on anybody to whom they could be applied.  But as a core of
> ethnic tribalism, this impulse to reinforce mutual obligation seems to me
> to be one of the oldest and most universal cultural things people do, and
> if it is ever temporarily absent in some pocket, some of the people there
> will recreate it from whole cloth.
> >      >
> >      > 6. Is it a negotiation of how much of the completed past needs to
> be kept current as a debt, and how much needs to be let go?  Meaning: when,
> by making extra effort to identify and support people who are on the wrong
> end of a structural exclusion or exploitation, are we actively working to
> dismantle the structure, and when have enough generations gone by and
> enough circumstances created new people, that there isn’t anything
> productive to be done by trying to trace an indefinitely long past of
> who-displaced-whom?  I am emphasizing here, as possible C, the premise that
> there is a negotiation on that point to be carried out, as opposed to a
> dogma that to ever let go of anything is a sin.  And if that is the C
> premise, is there a distinction that is also C between having that
> negotiation in good faith and having it in bad faith?  Of how one tries to
> police against plain irresponsible self-interest hijacking the form with no
> moral or ethical anchor?
> >      >
> >      >
> >      > I can imagine any of the above, or none of them, as being what
> “conservatism” is supposed to stand for.  And I can imagine many
> combinations of people proudly advocating any of them at the same time as
> others would sharply distinguish what is okay and what is corrupt or
> degenerated.
> >      >
> >      > There’s another mid-length rant about how I watch the memes
> change, on timescales of about 1–4 years, and while each of them has some
> truth, I feel like they are substitutes for seeing a kind of paralysis and
> inability or unwillingness to actually do things that need to be done,
> across the whole of society, that feels to me like a better candidate for
> cause of the fascist and nihilist turn.  But this note is too long already,
> and I should do work.
> >      >
> >      > Eric
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >> On Sep 3, 2026, at 2:04, Eric Charles <
> eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> >      >>
> >      >> I know I'm coming to it late, but I did not find that article
> very convincing. The main problems are:
> >      >>
> >      >>  1. Nothing about the omnipresent DEI initiatives of the past
> few decades assures viewpoint diversity, and, if you are only getting
> people deeply devoted to DEI you are for sure actually quashing viewpoint
> diversity. And, by deeply-devoted I mean that academic job applications
> require DEI statements, teaching statements are required to highlight how
> your teaching relates to DEI efforts, applicants are judged based on
> "diversity" goals at the college and within departments, some members of
> hiring committees explicitly see it as their goal to right past wrongs
> against certain groups with their selections, etc.
> >      >>  2. In certain contexts there is very, very good
> justification to prefer a narrow range of viewpoint diversity over maximal
> diversity. For example, having a math department with different
> perspectives on what math "is" creates a positive environment for students
> to learn in. For example, it might be nice to have a math realist, someone
> with an aesthetic approach, a hard core logician-mathematician, etc., and
> you certainly want people who study different fields within math. However,
> you might not want someone who thinks mathematics is a tool of colonialist
> oppression which should be rejected from the curriculum. In fact, it might
> be problematic to have proponents of that argument in decision-making roles
> /anywhere /within an /educational /institution.
> >      >>  3. I have seen (when I was full-time in academia), and continue
> to see (via colleagues in academia) actual discrimination against academics
> with conservative views, and a ton of self-silencing based on anticipated
> discrimination. To use the DEI phrase, most faculty settings are not a
> "safe space" for them.
> >      >>  4. Most of what the author asserts to be secretly implied or
> covertly assumed or bad faith about the efforts seems very upfront and
> straightforward.
> >      >>  5. Frankly, the failure to replace conservative academics as
> they retire has created HUGE problems in this country. The conservative
> movement used to have decent group of hard-core academics and public
> intellectuals as a key part of it. The current trainwreck of ideas that
> pass for "conservative" these days could be, and could have been, greatly
> helped if academia broadly returned a good chunk of the prior support it
> used to give to people doing serious intellectual work from a conservative
> perspective.
> >      >>  6. While this obviously applies to humanities and social
> sciences, it applies in all fields. It is good for a chemistry department
> to have some people who believe in hard core merit and some who believe in
> actively supporting those who might have had less opportunity growing up.
> It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who see "less
> opportunity" in terms of structural oppression rampant within a society and
> others who see it in terms of individual hardship. etc.
> >      >>
> >      >> <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu>>
> >      >> All that said, for sure the Trump administration is acting in
> bad faith in many ways, about all things... but that's a different issue.
> >      >>
> >      >>
> >      >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 8:57 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu
> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:
> desmith at santafe.edu>>> wrote:
> >      >>
> >      >>     Agree Siraganian is wrong.
> >      >>
> >      >>     I believe the etymology of the expression “red herring” was
> not intended to be a compliment to the dogs that run off following it.
> >      >>
> >      >>     In some lecture or interview or someplace, I remember Snyder
> making a connection that seems good for the current situation:
> Authoritarian gaslighting really works by adopting the main premises of
> postmodernism (as it has become in its now-degenerated form; I understand
> the defense of some of the original work).  A thing Snyder didn’t say,
> which just calls out a further point of context, but that I think is also
> within the center of his point: in eras where postmodernism hadn’t spread
> as widely as it has here and now, the need was the same, but the
> authoritarian gaslighters had to build some of the infrastructure they
> wanted to use.  For today, it is just there at the Ikea where you can go
> pick it up and assemble it the same day.  Or, so widely distributed in
> Amazon warehouses that they can deliver it the same day, anywhere.
> >      >>
> >      >>     Another nice little frame I saw, from some commenter on some
> article, was:
> >      >>
> >      >>     For my friends, the Unitary Executive Theory.
> >      >>     For my enemies, the Major Questions Doctrine.
> >      >>
> >      >>     And then:I have heard (reasonable) people criticize Paul
> Krugman for having lots of public opinions in areas where he doesn’t have a
> lot of earned expertise.  Okay; fair enough for that.  But I think it is to
> his credit that he started calling out bad faith as the central issue,
> quite a long time ago (when I also thought that needed to stay the focus).
> Not leaving it to irony, as Siraganian sort-of does, but being plain that
> it is too frontal an attack to be winked at in irony.
> >      >>
> >      >>     (And of course Glen’s point is also exactly right, but
> already said: it is just because the notion of what one wants from truth
> isn’t so easy that it can be handled lazily, and if we did less of that,
> maybe we would be better positioned to repel some of this other nonsense,
> or at least have a smaller vandal-group to repel over it.  That could
> itself be an interesting article, but it would have a completely different
> aim (solving a new problem) than Siraganian’s evident aim in this piece,
> which was to contribute to a struggle.)
> >      >>
> >      >>     I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now
> started to use the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various
> oligarchs and the relatively small and connected band of people trying to
> end the society and turn it into a CAFO.  It has been about time for that
> term to be one of the standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic
> term “predatory capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has
> been both long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have
> become semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant
> to draw a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are
> the thing that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the
> world both knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there
> is a path to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.
> >      >>
> >      >>     Eric
> >      >>
> >      >>
> >      >>
> >      >>     > On Sep 1, 2026, at 20:56, glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:
> gepr at ropella.name> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>>>
> wrote:
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     >
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1
> <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1>
> <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1
> <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-
> >
>  diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1>>
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     > OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on
> diversity. But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I
> think I'm going to stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use
> "instrumental pluralist" instead.
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     > But 1) what Siraganian says here is simply wrong:
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     > "To promote viewpoint diversity is to be thrilled to have
> my views in the mix, even if you think they are wrong, because either (a)
> they contribute to more viewpoint diversity (the more views you have, the
> more viewpoint diversity there is), or (b) they provide more views to
> choose from to figure out which view is the most true. In the first
> position, you end up not caring about whether a particular view is true or
> good, because you care about viewpoint diversity intrinsically: What
> matters is having the greatest possible variety of views. In the second
> position, you instrumentally value a diversity of views; having viewpoint
> diversity only matters until you can figure out which view is the best or
> most true, at which point all the other views can be rejected."
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     > If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the
> 1st best to the 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject "all
> the others". Such smooth grading has to remain contingent, defeasible. And
> my guess is the gradation isn't smooth everywhere. It may be smooth for the
> first 2 or 3 distinguishable ideas, but #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<
> https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263> <
> https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>>>)
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     > 2) Diversity remains a useful measure of the crosstrophic
> nature of complex systems, circularity, industrial symbiosis, etc. So even
> in light of Goodhart's Law, diversity is a reasonable *outcome*, even if
> it's dangerous to optimize to that sole outcome.
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     > There are issues with all the theses she lays out. But
> persnickety nits aside, her gist seems right. And you can't overlook the
> blatant hypocrisy of objecting to DEI initiatives, but then arguing for
> "intellectual pluralism", pointed out in thesis 7.
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     > This post is too long already. But I know many, here, have
> succumbed to Haidt glazing. So I offer this as further demonstration of Bad
> Faith rhetoric:
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1
> <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>
> <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1
> >     <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>>
> only peripherally about instrumental pluralism.
> >      >>     >
> --
> 8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
> ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα
> σώσω.
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260911/593f4b0a/attachment-0001.html>

From sasmyth at swcp.com  Fri Sep 11 12:25:10 2026
From: sasmyth at swcp.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 10:25:10 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEYGzMD8dMj=dL1oncNgbsKUQqnZdLEhUd6pihbN8h48PxaH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
 <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAOBF4_3wo6kBZNww04kPG65AKpuBqywWzcNppE=4Wt=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <4cac1de2-a9ea-458d-9a68-7aee44f2cdf0@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMD8dMj=dL1oncNgbsKUQqnZdLEhUd6pihbN8h48PxaH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0925a122-0bc9-469f-afa7-e35bfac75b2f@swcp.com>


EricC wrote:

> In the late 1800s and early 1900s in the U.S. the liberals and 
> the//progressives mostly had the same agenda, and that somehow got 
> everything confused, and the terms locked into place in a really weird 
> way. If anything, this time around, the Trump administration is 
> solidly "progressive autocratic", but our zeitgeist can't really 
> handle that designation.

And I think Hitler and Mussolini and Stalin (or their 
political/governance machines) all fit that trope?   War machine, 
Industrial machine, and Agricultural machine each jammed into existence 
through authoritarian coordination?

(one of) My current fascinations is in zoids and whether humans are 
nominally such in our in(ter)dependency with one another, 
infrastructure, religious, political, professional, cultural affiliations...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260911/9db61b0d/attachment.html>

From marcus at snoutfarm.com  Fri Sep 11 14:12:38 2026
From: marcus at snoutfarm.com (Marcus Daniels)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 18:12:38 +0000
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEYGzMD8dMj=dL1oncNgbsKUQqnZdLEhUd6pihbN8h48PxaH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
 <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAOBF4_3wo6kBZNww04kPG65AKpuBqywWzcNppE=4Wt=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <4cac1de2-a9ea-458d-9a68-7aee44f2cdf0@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMD8dMj=dL1oncNgbsKUQqnZdLEhUd6pihbN8h48PxaH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: 
 <DS0PR11MB77353CA99D9F4C040FDCEED1C5BE2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

I’d confuse this further by defining progressivism to mean “toward progress”.  That could be autocratic too, but completely unlike Trump.     It is not concerned with maintaining the status quo or risk of incremental harm.  “Move fast and break things” could be mapped to genetic engineering, insecure computing, unregulated AI, gain of function research, nanotechnology, nuclear technology proliferation, untested/unregulated pharmaceuticals/biologics, and so on.   In this view, the purpose of any collective consciousness is to find out how the universe works, not to maintain one stable form of itself.  Humanity is a hardware platform and problem-solving is the product.   It could be realized with 500 million people or 8 billion people with sharp oscillations in size in between, or even with none.

 

The current populist backlash against AI on the left is not this like this definition of progressivism.   That contemporary strain of progressivism is more concerned about redistribution of resources and defines stability in a different way than the concentrated wealth-holders define it.  To me this Bernie Sanders tribe is not that much different than the 2016 Steve Bannon MAGA tribe.   A group of people that want more power from another group that is perceived to have it.

 

From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of Eric Charles
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2026 9:02 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)

 

I only meant to point out that you and EricS both seemed to think that I had an: over-reliance on the meaning of "conservative" 

 

There *is* a thing that used to be much better represented within acamedia, and it was systematically eliminated. Call it what you will. I certainly don't think that any particular person who retired is at fault for that, it is the lack of replacement that *might* be considered a problem. And, of course, I am talking about it because it's what the article that was shared was talking about 🤷 . If I'm begging any questions, they are doubly begged there. 

 

Of course, if we are going to nitpick the language, one of the big conceptual problems in this country for several decades now is that are parties identify is "liberal" vs. "conservative".... but the opposite of conservative should be "progressive", and the opposite of liberal should be "autocratic." You either want to err on the side of protecting past ways of doing things (conserving) or err on the side of trying new things in hopes they will move society towards some better state (progressing). And you either want to err on the side of letting people do what they want (liberty) or err on the side of restricting what people can do (dictatorship). 

 

In the late 1800s and early 1900s in the U.S. the liberals and the progressives mostly had the same agenda, and that somehow got everything confused, and the terms locked into place in a really weird way. If anything, this time around, the Trump administration is solidly "progressive autocratic", but our zeitgeist can't really handle that designation. A large number of the headline grabbing things that the Trump administration has done for the last 2 years are not "conservative" in any proper sense, the administration is boisterous with new (mostly shitty) ideas. Heck, the "unitary executive" theory is about as anti-conservative as you can get. 

 

Best,
Eric

 

On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 11:11 AM glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> > wrote:

I don't understand what you're attributing to me, here ("how I'm interpreting that"). The splintering of "conservative" is evidence that intellectual conservatives have been systematically excluded from their natural place in society? What? No.

Being excluded (systematically or not) encourages the development of the subculture. The reactionary/rebellious take of a subculture like punk rock can only really thrive and acquire meaning when it's *not* the "natural" narrative. To *be* or *become* the majority is the death knell for such a subculture.

That is how I'm interpreting the splintering. The splintering is *not* evidence of oppression. The splintering is evidence of their 15 minutes of fame. They've *got* their Project 2025 administration! Yay! The conservatives are in charge. Let's see what happens.

I think it's just a bit fantastic to see conservatives like Rand Paul embarrassing themselves going after Fauci - another conservative. MTG, Candace Owens, & Tucker Carlson going after Trump. Etc. It's their day in the sun. We're seeing that they can't muster even 1/10 the cooperation and collaboration it takes to get anything big done.

As one "does the work", one becomes more "woke" because in order to herd a large cohort of cats into *doing* anything requires a system that manages all the persnickety burrs around the edges. The controller must be at least as complex as the system being controlled.

The conservatives whispering their ideas under their breath *is* the controller controlling the system, not something to bemoan but something to celebrate. The best thing to ever happen to grass was the invention of the lawn mower.


On 9/7/26 6:34 PM, Eric Charles wrote:
> Yeah.... contra how you are interpreting that... The fact that "conservative" has an increasingly splintered definition, as you demonstrated, actually evidences how problematic it is that the intellectual conservatives have, for several decades now, been systematically excluded from their natural place in the society... that is /exactly /the type of problem they would help with 🤷
> 
> Best,
> Eric
> 
> 
> <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu> >
> 
> 
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2026 at 5:50 PM glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>  <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> >> wrote:
> 
>     EricS' response to EricC's over-reliance on the meaning of "conservative" was better than anything I could have said. But the 6 proposed definitions were too long for my tiny context window. So I asked Ellydee to shorten them for me. (I also asked Mistral. But she did a terrible job.) I think these are pretty good:
> 
>     Ellydee.ai says ---
> 
>     **1. Power Hoarding** — Argument-form masking the real motive of those who already hold power to keep and concentrate it, widening the gap over those who don't.
> 
>     **2. Prudent Restraint** — The view that change for change's sake is too harmful to go unregulated; "move fast and break things" is not an admirable values system.
> 
>     **3. Institutional Gatekeeping** — Fragile categories like "family" survive only if their defining form is rigidly held, so alternative forms must be presumptively excluded from law and civil rights.
> 
>     **4. Doctrinal Veto** — The devout get authority over who else qualifies for the group — leaving open whether mystics, or fakers under the "faith" label, are in or out.
> 
>     **5. Rooted Locality** — Anyone not living their whole life in one place can't be trusted to defend it; local tribal obligation is the oldest form of mutual accountability.
> 
>     **6. Generational Accounting** — A negotiation (doable in good or bad faith) over how much of the past must be kept current as a debt versus let go once enough generations have passed.
>     ---
> 
>     I was inclined to change "Rooted Locality" to "Rooted Subjectivity" or "Perspective" ... in a lame attempt to tie in the other sub-thread. But I didn't feel like this task was worth the cost. They have a handy ellydee.ai/usage <http://ellydee.ai/usage>  <http://ellydee.ai/usage> page for those of us who give a damn. >8^D
> 
>     On 9/2/26 2:04 PM, Santafe wrote:
>      > At a kind of vibe level, I understand the picture you paint, and I can think of enough instances that fit it, to agree that there is a problem to correct.
>      >
>      > But how far can you go to defend the premise that the retirement of some academics was a HUGE problem in this country — or more specifically, do you think that is causal for the choice of what has become the political right to go in for fascism, with its considerable elements of cynicism, anomie, and nihilism?  Had there been “ideas” on offer from some university faculty, do you think these people would have wanted them?  Or just wanted to burn that down too along with all the rest of it?
>      >
>      > As with many things I can kind of recognize at a vibe level, if I look at it more closely, I don’t know what I should understand the categories even to refer to.  By which I mean, what should I attach to the word “conservatism”, as any range of things from a movement name, to a social group-label, to a domain or thesis of “ideas”.  For instance, is it:
>      >
>      > 1. A backfilling of what is meant to look like argument, but anchored for real in the motive of holding onto power, wealth, and agency by those who have it, and further concentrating it, specifically to increase the asymmetry over those who don't?  Certainly that goes on, and those who want to fight the C label as a label would say this is its essence.  Is that its essence, or is that the essence of a corruption when the real C word has been lost?  If it is part of the genuine thing, how far does it go toward efforts to cultivate the belief that people are constitutively different enough that there is no defensible right of agency and freedom for everybody on an equal footing, and there should be rulers and ruled?
>      >
>      > 2. A thesis that “move fast and break things” was not an admirable values system, and that seeking change merely for change’s sake is too harmful relative to what it achieves to be allowed to go on un-regulated or un-restricted?  That would fit with the name C.  Wendell Berry died a couple of days ago, somebody I knew a little and had some time with in person, and have also read some of though not nearly a lot.  This was one of his theses.  Close to the notion of upholding the Ordnung among the Amish, or a defense of Luddism as honorable precaution.
>      >
>      > 3. A notion that a category like “family” is robust only through cultural collective and cooperative effects, and that a type system needs to be built up, and most types excluded from participation in it, because otherwise it is so fragile that the admission of more than one form endangers it?  So, for instance: we have no real way to distinguish abusive from supportive marriages, so as long as there is one man and one woman, so-identified by self and others (maybe a subset of who the others are allowed to be), we have to admit it all.  But other kinds of unions need to be kept outside the perimeter as viewed by the protections of law and the rights of civil society?  The argument being (?) that there are certain obligations the institution needs to enable people to keep (raising and support of kids being the obvious one, but you can imagine others, and I know of marriage customs that symbolically encode several different ones), and we know so little about how to do that,
>      > that some one form accepted at whatever level of consideration constitutes social convention is the only conceivable solution, so anything else needs to be presumptively excluded.
>      >
>      > 4. That people have to experience religious devotions, of whatever kind?  The word “faith” has become very popular by people trying not to alienate any of those who go through life with a chip on their shoulders, the new PC (really the same old PC).  If people just used it, it wouldn’t be such a sore thumb to me, but the pandering feels really blatant.  Does that self-identified group, and any Greeks using it as a Trojan Horse for whatever else motivates them — since it is not clear how any “sincerely” motivated people police their own and keep the fakers out — get veto power?  Are the mystics excluded, as the doctrinal religious people have often wanted them to be?  Or are they religious enough that they are okay too?
>      >
>      > 5. That anybody who doesn’t live an entire life in the place he was born is automatically suspect?  The view being that he hasn’t tied himself into any one local lifeboat, ergo there can’t be any way he can be counted on to defend it existentially?  This is also close to one of Wendell’s views, though in person it was important enough for him to like people, that he didn’t go into his personal relations plastering doctrines of Original Sin on anybody to whom they could be applied.  But as a core of ethnic tribalism, this impulse to reinforce mutual obligation seems to me to be one of the oldest and most universal cultural things people do, and if it is ever temporarily absent in some pocket, some of the people there will recreate it from whole cloth.
>      >
>      > 6. Is it a negotiation of how much of the completed past needs to be kept current as a debt, and how much needs to be let go?  Meaning: when, by making extra effort to identify and support people who are on the wrong end of a structural exclusion or exploitation, are we actively working to dismantle the structure, and when have enough generations gone by and enough circumstances created new people, that there isn’t anything productive to be done by trying to trace an indefinitely long past of who-displaced-whom?  I am emphasizing here, as possible C, the premise that there is a negotiation on that point to be carried out, as opposed to a dogma that to ever let go of anything is a sin.  And if that is the C premise, is there a distinction that is also C between having that negotiation in good faith and having it in bad faith?  Of how one tries to police against plain irresponsible self-interest hijacking the form with no moral or ethical anchor?
>      >
>      >
>      > I can imagine any of the above, or none of them, as being what “conservatism” is supposed to stand for.  And I can imagine many combinations of people proudly advocating any of them at the same time as others would sharply distinguish what is okay and what is corrupt or degenerated.
>      >
>      > There’s another mid-length rant about how I watch the memes change, on timescales of about 1–4 years, and while each of them has some truth, I feel like they are substitutes for seeing a kind of paralysis and inability or unwillingness to actually do things that need to be done, across the whole of society, that feels to me like a better candidate for cause of the fascist and nihilist turn.  But this note is too long already, and I should do work.
>      >
>      > Eric
>      >
>      >
>      >
>      >> On Sep 3, 2026, at 2:04, Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com>  <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com> >> wrote:
>      >>
>      >> I know I'm coming to it late, but I did not find that article very convincing. The main problems are:
>      >>
>      >>  1. Nothing about the omnipresent DEI initiatives of the past few decades assures viewpoint diversity, and, if you are only getting people deeply devoted to DEI you are for sure actually quashing viewpoint diversity. And, by deeply-devoted I mean that academic job applications require DEI statements, teaching statements are required to highlight how your teaching relates to DEI efforts, applicants are judged based on "diversity" goals at the college and within departments, some members of hiring committees explicitly see it as their goal to right past wrongs against certain groups with their selections, etc.
>      >>  2. In certain contexts there is very, very good justification to prefer a narrow range of viewpoint diversity over maximal diversity. For example, having a math department with different perspectives on what math "is" creates a positive environment for students to learn in. For example, it might be nice to have a math realist, someone with an aesthetic approach, a hard core logician-mathematician, etc., and you certainly want people who study different fields within math. However, you might not want someone who thinks mathematics is a tool of colonialist oppression which should be rejected from the curriculum. In fact, it might be problematic to have proponents of that argument in decision-making roles /anywhere /within an /educational /institution.
>      >>  3. I have seen (when I was full-time in academia), and continue to see (via colleagues in academia) actual discrimination against academics with conservative views, and a ton of self-silencing based on anticipated discrimination. To use the DEI phrase, most faculty settings are not a "safe space" for them.
>      >>  4. Most of what the author asserts to be secretly implied or covertly assumed or bad faith about the efforts seems very upfront and straightforward.
>      >>  5. Frankly, the failure to replace conservative academics as they retire has created HUGE problems in this country. The conservative movement used to have decent group of hard-core academics and public intellectuals as a key part of it. The current trainwreck of ideas that pass for "conservative" these days could be, and could have been, greatly helped if academia broadly returned a good chunk of the prior support it used to give to people doing serious intellectual work from a conservative perspective.
>      >>  6. While this obviously applies to humanities and social sciences, it applies in all fields. It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who believe in hard core merit and some who believe in actively supporting those who might have had less opportunity growing up. It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who see "less opportunity" in terms of structural oppression rampant within a society and others who see it in terms of individual hardship. etc.
>      >>
>      >> <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu>  <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu> >>
>      >> All that said, for sure the Trump administration is acting in bad faith in many ways, about all things... but that's a different issue.
>      >>
>      >>
>      >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 8:57 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>  <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu> > <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>  <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu> >>> wrote:
>      >>
>      >>     Agree Siraganian is wrong.
>      >>
>      >>     I believe the etymology of the expression “red herring” was not intended to be a compliment to the dogs that run off following it.
>      >>
>      >>     In some lecture or interview or someplace, I remember Snyder making a connection that seems good for the current situation:  Authoritarian gaslighting really works by adopting the main premises of postmodernism (as it has become in its now-degenerated form; I understand the defense of some of the original work).  A thing Snyder didn’t say, which just calls out a further point of context, but that I think is also within the center of his point: in eras where postmodernism hadn’t spread as widely as it has here and now, the need was the same, but the authoritarian gaslighters had to build some of the infrastructure they wanted to use.  For today, it is just there at the Ikea where you can go pick it up and assemble it the same day.  Or, so widely distributed in Amazon warehouses that they can deliver it the same day, anywhere.
>      >>
>      >>     Another nice little frame I saw, from some commenter on some article, was:
>      >>
>      >>     For my friends, the Unitary Executive Theory.
>      >>     For my enemies, the Major Questions Doctrine.
>      >>
>      >>     And then:I have heard (reasonable) people criticize Paul Krugman for having lots of public opinions in areas where he doesn’t have a lot of earned expertise.  Okay; fair enough for that.  But I think it is to his credit that he started calling out bad faith as the central issue, quite a long time ago (when I also thought that needed to stay the focus).  Not leaving it to irony, as Siraganian sort-of does, but being plain that it is too frontal an attack to be winked at in irony.
>      >>
>      >>     (And of course Glen’s point is also exactly right, but already said: it is just because the notion of what one wants from truth isn’t so easy that it can be handled lazily, and if we did less of that, maybe we would be better positioned to repel some of this other nonsense, or at least have a smaller vandal-group to repel over it.  That could itself be an interesting article, but it would have a completely different aim (solving a new problem) than Siraganian’s evident aim in this piece, which was to contribute to a struggle.)
>      >>
>      >>     I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now started to use the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various oligarchs and the relatively small and connected band of people trying to end the society and turn it into a CAFO.  It has been about time for that term to be one of the standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic term “predatory capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has been both long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have become semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant to draw a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are the thing that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the world both knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there is a path to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.
>      >>
>      >>     Eric
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>
>      >>     > On Sep 1, 2026, at 20:56, glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>  <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> > <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>  <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> >>> wrote:
>      >>     >
>      >>     >
>      >>     > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1> &c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1> &c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1> &c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-
>     diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1>>
>      >>     >
>      >>     > OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity. But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I think I'm going to stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use "instrumental pluralist" instead.
>      >>     >
>      >>     > But 1) what Siraganian says here is simply wrong:
>      >>     >
>      >>     > "To promote viewpoint diversity is to be thrilled to have my views in the mix, even if you think they are wrong, because either (a) they contribute to more viewpoint diversity (the more views you have, the more viewpoint diversity there is), or (b) they provide more views to choose from to figure out which view is the most true. In the first position, you end up not caring about whether a particular view is true or good, because you care about viewpoint diversity intrinsically: What matters is having the greatest possible variety of views. In the second position, you instrumentally value a diversity of views; having viewpoint diversity only matters until you can figure out which view is the best or most true, at which point all the other views can be rejected."
>      >>     >
>      >>     > If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the 1st best to the 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject "all the others". Such smooth grading has to remain contingent, defeasible. And my guess is the gradation isn't smooth everywhere. It may be smooth for the first 2 or 3 distinguishable ideas, but #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263> <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>>>)
>      >>     >
>      >>     > 2) Diversity remains a useful measure of the crosstrophic nature of complex systems, circularity, industrial symbiosis, etc. So even in light of Goodhart's Law, diversity is a reasonable *outcome*, even if it's dangerous to optimize to that sole outcome.
>      >>     >
>      >>     > There are issues with all the theses she lays out. But persnickety nits aside, her gist seems right. And you can't overlook the blatant hypocrisy of objecting to DEI initiatives, but then arguing for "intellectual pluralism", pointed out in thesis 7.
>      >>     >
>      >>     > This post is too long already. But I know many, here, have succumbed to Haidt glazing. So I offer this as further demonstration of Bad Faith rhetoric: https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1> &c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1> &c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1> &c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1
>     <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1> &c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>> only peripherally about instrumental pluralism.
>      >>     >
-- 
8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.

.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
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/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260911/79f19625/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5609 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260911/79f19625/attachment.p7s>

From gepr at ropella.name  Fri Sep 11 14:50:11 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 11:50:11 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: 
 <DS0PR11MB77353CA99D9F4C040FDCEED1C5BE2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
 <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAOBF4_3wo6kBZNww04kPG65AKpuBqywWzcNppE=4Wt=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <4cac1de2-a9ea-458d-9a68-7aee44f2cdf0@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMD8dMj=dL1oncNgbsKUQqnZdLEhUd6pihbN8h48PxaH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <DS0PR11MB77353CA99D9F4C040FDCEED1C5BE2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <5d88ddb5-e8a6-484d-8cdd-a5bec6bd0466@ropella.name>

Definitely. Maybe I've been too deep in the vibe to notice. But the recent surge in X-Risk news caught me by surprise. The reactionary tone is eerily similar to that of the Tea Party. The rhetoric against open models is understandable. The oligarchs want to ensure they're the ones in charge on the other side of the veil. (I doubt they will be.) But the refusal and fear that keeps the reactionaries from classifying the current tech alongside the prior tech is just lazy and stupid. And I say this knowing that I'm already too old to keep up. As slow, old, and unoptimized as I am, I still won't really toss up my hands and lobby for or accede to the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act. And if it does pass, I'll work on my own tiny leaf node or tunnel to work remotely at a more reasonable place until they kidnap me and send me to CECOT ... I guess.

For those of us who can't keep up, the least we can do is go with the flow. Qué Será, Será

On 9/11/26 11:12 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> I’d confuse this further by defining progressivism to mean “toward progress”.  That could be autocratic too, but completely unlike Trump.     It is not concerned with maintaining the status quo or risk of incremental harm.  “Move fast and break things” could be mapped to genetic engineering, insecure computing, unregulated AI, gain of function research, nanotechnology, nuclear technology proliferation, untested/unregulated pharmaceuticals/biologics, and so on.   In this view, the purpose of any collective consciousness is to find out how the universe works, not to maintain one stable form of itself.  Humanity is a hardware platform and problem-solving is the product.   It could be realized with 500 million people or 8 billion people with sharp oscillations in size in between, or even with none.
> 
> The current populist backlash against AI on the left is not this like this definition of progressivism.   That contemporary strain of progressivism is more concerned about redistribution of resources and defines stability in a different way than the concentrated wealth-holders define it.  To me this Bernie Sanders tribe is not that much different than the 2016 Steve Bannon MAGA tribe.   A group of people that want more power from another group that is perceived to have it.
> 
> *From:*Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Eric Charles
> *Sent:* Friday, September 11, 2026 9:02 AM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
> 
> I only meant to point out that you and EricS both seemed to think that I had an: over-reliance on the meaning of "conservative"
> 
> There *is* a thing that used to be much better represented within acamedia, and it was systematically eliminated. Call it what you will. I certainly don't think that any particular person who retired is at fault for that, it is the lack of replacement that *might* be considered a problem. And, of course, I am talking about it because it's what the article that was shared was talking about 🤷 . If I'm begging any questions, they are doubly begged there.
> 
> Of course, if we are going to nitpick the language, one of the big conceptual problems in this country for several decades now is that are parties identify is "liberal" vs. "conservative".... but the opposite of conservative should be "progressive", and the opposite of liberal should be "autocratic." You either want to err on the side of protecting past ways of doing things (conserving) or err on the side of trying new things in hopes they will move society towards some better state (progressing). And you either want to err on the side of letting people do what they want (liberty) or err on the side of restricting what people can do (dictatorship).
> 
> In the late 1800s and early 1900s in the U.S. the liberals and the//progressives mostly had the same agenda, and that somehow got everything confused, and the terms locked into place in a really weird way. If anything, this time around, the Trump administration is solidly "progressive autocratic", but our zeitgeist can't really handle that designation. A large number of the headline grabbing things that the Trump administration has done for the last 2 years are not "conservative" in any proper sense, the administration is boisterous with new (mostly shitty) ideas. Heck, the "unitary executive" theory is about as anti-conservative as you can get.
> 
> Best,
> Eric
> 
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 11:11 AM glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>> wrote:
> 
>     I don't understand what you're attributing to me, here ("how I'm interpreting that"). The splintering of "conservative" is evidence that intellectual conservatives have been systematically excluded from their natural place in society? What? No.
> 
>     Being excluded (systematically or not) encourages the development of the subculture. The reactionary/rebellious take of a subculture like punk rock can only really thrive and acquire meaning when it's *not* the "natural" narrative. To *be* or *become* the majority is the death knell for such a subculture.
> 
>     That is how I'm interpreting the splintering. The splintering is *not* evidence of oppression. The splintering is evidence of their 15 minutes of fame. They've *got* their Project 2025 administration! Yay! The conservatives are in charge. Let's see what happens.
> 
>     I think it's just a bit fantastic to see conservatives like Rand Paul embarrassing themselves going after Fauci - another conservative. MTG, Candace Owens, & Tucker Carlson going after Trump. Etc. It's their day in the sun. We're seeing that they can't muster even 1/10 the cooperation and collaboration it takes to get anything big done.
> 
>     As one "does the work", one becomes more "woke" because in order to herd a large cohort of cats into *doing* anything requires a system that manages all the persnickety burrs around the edges. The controller must be at least as complex as the system being controlled.
> 
>     The conservatives whispering their ideas under their breath *is* the controller controlling the system, not something to bemoan but something to celebrate. The best thing to ever happen to grass was the invention of the lawn mower.
> 
> 
>     On 9/7/26 6:34 PM, Eric Charles wrote:
>      > Yeah.... contra how you are interpreting that... The fact that "conservative" has an increasingly splintered definition, as you demonstrated, actually evidences how problematic it is that the intellectual conservatives have, for several decades now, been systematically excluded from their natural place in the society... that is /exactly /the type of problem they would help with 🤷
>      >
>      > Best,
>      > Eric
>      >
>      >
>      > <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu>>
>      >
>      >
>      > On Thu, Sep 3, 2026 at 5:50 PM glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>>> wrote:
>      >
>      >     EricS' response to EricC's over-reliance on the meaning of "conservative" was better than anything I could have said. But the 6 proposed definitions were too long for my tiny context window. So I asked Ellydee to shorten them for me. (I also asked Mistral. But she did a terrible job.) I think these are pretty good:
>      >
>      >     Ellydee.ai says ---
>      >
>      >     **1. Power Hoarding** — Argument-form masking the real motive of those who already hold power to keep and concentrate it, widening the gap over those who don't.
>      >
>      >     **2. Prudent Restraint** — The view that change for change's sake is too harmful to go unregulated; "move fast and break things" is not an admirable values system.
>      >
>      >     **3. Institutional Gatekeeping** — Fragile categories like "family" survive only if their defining form is rigidly held, so alternative forms must be presumptively excluded from law and civil rights.
>      >
>      >     **4. Doctrinal Veto** — The devout get authority over who else qualifies for the group — leaving open whether mystics, or fakers under the "faith" label, are in or out.
>      >
>      >     **5. Rooted Locality** — Anyone not living their whole life in one place can't be trusted to defend it; local tribal obligation is the oldest form of mutual accountability.
>      >
>      >     **6. Generational Accounting** — A negotiation (doable in good or bad faith) over how much of the past must be kept current as a debt versus let go once enough generations have passed.
>      >     ---
>      >
>      >     I was inclined to change "Rooted Locality" to "Rooted Subjectivity" or "Perspective" ... in a lame attempt to tie in the other sub-thread. But I didn't feel like this task was worth the cost. They have a handy ellydee.ai/usage <http://ellydee.ai/usage> <http://ellydee.ai/usage <http://ellydee.ai/usage>> page for those of us who give a damn. >8^D
>      >
>      >     On 9/2/26 2:04 PM, Santafe wrote:
>      >      > At a kind of vibe level, I understand the picture you paint, and I can think of enough instances that fit it, to agree that there is a problem to correct.
>      >      >
>      >      > But how far can you go to defend the premise that the retirement of some academics was a HUGE problem in this country — or more specifically, do you think that is causal for the choice of what has become the political right to go in for fascism, with its considerable elements of cynicism, anomie, and nihilism?  Had there been “ideas” on offer from some university faculty, do you think these people would have wanted them?  Or just wanted to burn that down too along with all the rest of it?
>      >      >
>      >      > As with many things I can kind of recognize at a vibe level, if I look at it more closely, I don’t know what I should understand the categories even to refer to.  By which I mean, what should I attach to the word “conservatism”, as any range of things from a movement name, to a social group-label, to a domain or thesis of “ideas”.  For instance, is it:
>      >      >
>      >      > 1. A backfilling of what is meant to look like argument, but anchored for real in the motive of holding onto power, wealth, and agency by those who have it, and further concentrating it, specifically to increase the asymmetry over those who don't?  Certainly that goes on, and those who want to fight the C label as a label would say this is its essence.  Is that its essence, or is that the essence of a corruption when the real C word has been lost?  If it is part of the genuine thing, how far does it go toward efforts to cultivate the belief that people are constitutively different enough that there is no defensible right of agency and freedom for everybody on an equal footing, and there should be rulers and ruled?
>      >      >
>      >      > 2. A thesis that “move fast and break things” was not an admirable values system, and that seeking change merely for change’s sake is too harmful relative to what it achieves to be allowed to go on un-regulated or un-restricted?  That would fit with the name C.  Wendell Berry died a couple of days ago, somebody I knew a little and had some time with in person, and have also read some of though not nearly a lot.  This was one of his theses.  Close to the notion of upholding the Ordnung among the Amish, or a defense of Luddism as honorable precaution.
>      >      >
>      >      > 3. A notion that a category like “family” is robust only through cultural collective and cooperative effects, and that a type system needs to be built up, and most types excluded from participation in it, because otherwise it is so fragile that the admission of more than one form endangers it?  So, for instance: we have no real way to distinguish abusive from supportive marriages, so as long as there is one man and one woman, so-identified by self and others (maybe a subset of who the others are allowed to be), we have to admit it all.  But other kinds of unions need to be kept outside the perimeter as viewed by the protections of law and the rights of civil society?  The argument being (?) that there are certain obligations the institution needs to enable people to keep (raising and support of kids being the obvious one, but you can imagine others, and I know of marriage customs that symbolically encode several different ones), and we know so little about how
>     to do that,
>      >      > that some one form accepted at whatever level of consideration constitutes social convention is the only conceivable solution, so anything else needs to be presumptively excluded.
>      >      >
>      >      > 4. That people have to experience religious devotions, of whatever kind?  The word “faith” has become very popular by people trying not to alienate any of those who go through life with a chip on their shoulders, the new PC (really the same old PC).  If people just used it, it wouldn’t be such a sore thumb to me, but the pandering feels really blatant.  Does that self-identified group, and any Greeks using it as a Trojan Horse for whatever else motivates them — since it is not clear how any “sincerely” motivated people police their own and keep the fakers out — get veto power?  Are the mystics excluded, as the doctrinal religious people have often wanted them to be?  Or are they religious enough that they are okay too?
>      >      >
>      >      > 5. That anybody who doesn’t live an entire life in the place he was born is automatically suspect?  The view being that he hasn’t tied himself into any one local lifeboat, ergo there can’t be any way he can be counted on to defend it existentially?  This is also close to one of Wendell’s views, though in person it was important enough for him to like people, that he didn’t go into his personal relations plastering doctrines of Original Sin on anybody to whom they could be applied.  But as a core of ethnic tribalism, this impulse to reinforce mutual obligation seems to me to be one of the oldest and most universal cultural things people do, and if it is ever temporarily absent in some pocket, some of the people there will recreate it from whole cloth.
>      >      >
>      >      > 6. Is it a negotiation of how much of the completed past needs to be kept current as a debt, and how much needs to be let go?  Meaning: when, by making extra effort to identify and support people who are on the wrong end of a structural exclusion or exploitation, are we actively working to dismantle the structure, and when have enough generations gone by and enough circumstances created new people, that there isn’t anything productive to be done by trying to trace an indefinitely long past of who-displaced-whom?  I am emphasizing here, as possible C, the premise that there is a negotiation on that point to be carried out, as opposed to a dogma that to ever let go of anything is a sin.  And if that is the C premise, is there a distinction that is also C between having that negotiation in good faith and having it in bad faith?  Of how one tries to police against plain irresponsible self-interest hijacking the form with no moral or ethical anchor?
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      > I can imagine any of the above, or none of them, as being what “conservatism” is supposed to stand for.  And I can imagine many combinations of people proudly advocating any of them at the same time as others would sharply distinguish what is okay and what is corrupt or degenerated.
>      >      >
>      >      > There’s another mid-length rant about how I watch the memes change, on timescales of about 1–4 years, and while each of them has some truth, I feel like they are substitutes for seeing a kind of paralysis and inability or unwillingness to actually do things that need to be done, across the whole of society, that feels to me like a better candidate for cause of the fascist and nihilist turn.  But this note is too long already, and I should do work.
>      >      >
>      >      > Eric
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      >> On Sep 3, 2026, at 2:04, Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com> <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>      >      >>
>      >      >> I know I'm coming to it late, but I did not find that article very convincing. The main problems are:
>      >      >>
>      >      >>  1. Nothing about the omnipresent DEI initiatives of the past few decades assures viewpoint diversity, and, if you are only getting people deeply devoted to DEI you are for sure actually quashing viewpoint diversity. And, by deeply-devoted I mean that academic job applications require DEI statements, teaching statements are required to highlight how your teaching relates to DEI efforts, applicants are judged based on "diversity" goals at the college and within departments, some members of hiring committees explicitly see it as their goal to right past wrongs against certain groups with their selections, etc.
>      >      >>  2. In certain contexts there is very, very good justification to prefer a narrow range of viewpoint diversity over maximal diversity. For example, having a math department with different perspectives on what math "is" creates a positive environment for students to learn in. For example, it might be nice to have a math realist, someone with an aesthetic approach, a hard core logician-mathematician, etc., and you certainly want people who study different fields within math. However, you might not want someone who thinks mathematics is a tool of colonialist oppression which should be rejected from the curriculum. In fact, it might be problematic to have proponents of that argument in decision-making roles /anywhere /within an /educational /institution.
>      >      >>  3. I have seen (when I was full-time in academia), and continue to see (via colleagues in academia) actual discrimination against academics with conservative views, and a ton of self-silencing based on anticipated discrimination. To use the DEI phrase, most faculty settings are not a "safe space" for them.
>      >      >>  4. Most of what the author asserts to be secretly implied or covertly assumed or bad faith about the efforts seems very upfront and straightforward.
>      >      >>  5. Frankly, the failure to replace conservative academics as they retire has created HUGE problems in this country. The conservative movement used to have decent group of hard-core academics and public intellectuals as a key part of it. The current trainwreck of ideas that pass for "conservative" these days could be, and could have been, greatly helped if academia broadly returned a good chunk of the prior support it used to give to people doing serious intellectual work from a conservative perspective.
>      >      >>  6. While this obviously applies to humanities and social sciences, it applies in all fields. It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who believe in hard core merit and some who believe in actively supporting those who might have had less opportunity growing up. It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who see "less opportunity" in terms of structural oppression rampant within a society and others who see it in terms of individual hardship. etc.
>      >      >>
>      >      >> <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu> <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu>>>
>      >      >> All that said, for sure the Trump administration is acting in bad faith in many ways, about all things... but that's a different issue.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 8:57 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>>>> wrote:
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     Agree Siraganian is wrong.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     I believe the etymology of the expression “red herring” was not intended to be a compliment to the dogs that run off following it.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     In some lecture or interview or someplace, I remember Snyder making a connection that seems good for the current situation:  Authoritarian gaslighting really works by adopting the main premises of postmodernism (as it has become in its now-degenerated form; I understand the defense of some of the original work).  A thing Snyder didn’t say, which just calls out a further point of context, but that I think is also within the center of his point: in eras where postmodernism hadn’t spread as widely as it has here and now, the need was the same, but the authoritarian gaslighters had to build some of the infrastructure they wanted to use.  For today, it is just there at the Ikea where you can go pick it up and assemble it the same day.  Or, so widely distributed in Amazon warehouses that they can deliver it the same day, anywhere.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     Another nice little frame I saw, from some commenter on some article, was:
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     For my friends, the Unitary Executive Theory.
>      >      >>     For my enemies, the Major Questions Doctrine.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     And then:I have heard (reasonable) people criticize Paul Krugman for having lots of public opinions in areas where he doesn’t have a lot of earned expertise.  Okay; fair enough for that.  But I think it is to his credit that he started calling out bad faith as the central issue, quite a long time ago (when I also thought that needed to stay the focus).  Not leaving it to irony, as Siraganian sort-of does, but being plain that it is too frontal an attack to be winked at in irony.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     (And of course Glen’s point is also exactly right, but already said: it is just because the notion of what one wants from truth isn’t so easy that it can be handled lazily, and if we did less of that, maybe we would be better positioned to repel some of this other nonsense, or at least have a smaller vandal-group to repel over it.  That could itself be an interesting article, but it would have a completely different aim (solving a new problem) than Siraganian’s evident aim in this piece, which was to contribute to a struggle.)
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now started to use the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various oligarchs and the relatively small and connected band of people trying to end the society and turn it into a CAFO.  It has been about time for that term to be one of the standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic term “predatory capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has been both long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have become semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant to draw a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are the thing that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the world both knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there is a path to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     Eric
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     > On Sep 1, 2026, at 20:56, glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>>>> wrote:
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-
>     diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint- <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint->
>      >     diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1>>
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity. But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I think I'm going to stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use "instrumental pluralist" instead.
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > But 1) what Siraganian says here is simply wrong:
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > "To promote viewpoint diversity is to be thrilled to have my views in the mix, even if you think they are wrong, because either (a) they contribute to more viewpoint diversity (the more views you have, the more viewpoint diversity there is), or (b) they provide more views to choose from to figure out which view is the most true. In the first position, you end up not caring about whether a particular view is true or good, because you care about viewpoint diversity intrinsically: What matters is having the greatest possible variety of views. In the second position, you instrumentally value a diversity of views; having viewpoint diversity only matters until you can figure out which view is the best or most true, at which point all the other views can be rejected."
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the 1st best to the 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject "all the others". Such smooth grading has to remain contingent, defeasible. And my guess is the gradation isn't smooth everywhere. It may be smooth for the first 2 or 3 distinguishable ideas, but #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263> <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>> <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263> <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>>>>)
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > 2) Diversity remains a useful measure of the crosstrophic nature of complex systems, circularity, industrial symbiosis, etc. So even in light of Goodhart's Law, diversity is a reasonable *outcome*, even if it's dangerous to optimize to that sole outcome.
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > There are issues with all the theses she lays out. But persnickety nits aside, her gist seems right. And you can't overlook the blatant hypocrisy of objecting to DEI initiatives, but then arguing for "intellectual pluralism", pointed out in thesis 7.
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > This post is too long already. But I know many, here, have succumbed to Haidt glazing. So I offer this as further demonstration of Bad Faith rhetoric: https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-
>     pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>
>      >     <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>>> only peripherally about instrumental pluralism.
>      >      >>     >
-- 
8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.


From marcus at snoutfarm.com  Fri Sep 11 15:00:38 2026
From: marcus at snoutfarm.com (Marcus Daniels)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 19:00:38 +0000
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: <5d88ddb5-e8a6-484d-8cdd-a5bec6bd0466@ropella.name>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
 <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAOBF4_3wo6kBZNww04kPG65AKpuBqywWzcNppE=4Wt=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <4cac1de2-a9ea-458d-9a68-7aee44f2cdf0@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMD8dMj=dL1oncNgbsKUQqnZdLEhUd6pihbN8h48PxaH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <DS0PR11MB77353CA99D9F4C040FDCEED1C5BE2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <5d88ddb5-e8a6-484d-8cdd-a5bec6bd0466@ropella.name>
Message-ID: 
 <DS0PR11MB7735C3364D10FF008C04B4EBC5BE2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

Supposing I'm around in five years -- have give that qualification at this point -- I expect to have a VPN open to Shanghai for AI access.   Almost doesn't matter if it is the left or the right in charge.   Like living in Tehran.

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of glen
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2026 11:50 AM
To: friam at redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)

Definitely. Maybe I've been too deep in the vibe to notice. But the recent surge in X-Risk news caught me by surprise. The reactionary tone is eerily similar to that of the Tea Party. The rhetoric against open models is understandable. The oligarchs want to ensure they're the ones in charge on the other side of the veil. (I doubt they will be.) But the refusal and fear that keeps the reactionaries from classifying the current tech alongside the prior tech is just lazy and stupid. And I say this knowing that I'm already too old to keep up. As slow, old, and unoptimized as I am, I still won't really toss up my hands and lobby for or accede to the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act. And if it does pass, I'll work on my own tiny leaf node or tunnel to work remotely at a more reasonable place until they kidnap me and send me to CECOT ... I guess.

For those of us who can't keep up, the least we can do is go with the flow. Qué Será, Será

On 9/11/26 11:12 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> I’d confuse this further by defining progressivism to mean “toward progress”.  That could be autocratic too, but completely unlike Trump.     It is not concerned with maintaining the status quo or risk of incremental harm.  “Move fast and break things” could be mapped to genetic engineering, insecure computing, unregulated AI, gain of function research, nanotechnology, nuclear technology proliferation, untested/unregulated pharmaceuticals/biologics, and so on.   In this view, the purpose of any collective consciousness is to find out how the universe works, not to maintain one stable form of itself.  Humanity is a hardware platform and problem-solving is the product.   It could be realized with 500 million people or 8 billion people with sharp oscillations in size in between, or even with none.
> 
> The current populist backlash against AI on the left is not this like this definition of progressivism.   That contemporary strain of progressivism is more concerned about redistribution of resources and defines stability in a different way than the concentrated wealth-holders define it.  To me this Bernie Sanders tribe is not that much different than the 2016 Steve Bannon MAGA tribe.   A group of people that want more power from another group that is perceived to have it.
> 
> *From:*Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Eric Charles
> *Sent:* Friday, September 11, 2026 9:02 AM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
> 
> I only meant to point out that you and EricS both seemed to think that I had an: over-reliance on the meaning of "conservative"
> 
> There *is* a thing that used to be much better represented within acamedia, and it was systematically eliminated. Call it what you will. I certainly don't think that any particular person who retired is at fault for that, it is the lack of replacement that *might* be considered a problem. And, of course, I am talking about it because it's what the article that was shared was talking about 🤷 . If I'm begging any questions, they are doubly begged there.
> 
> Of course, if we are going to nitpick the language, one of the big conceptual problems in this country for several decades now is that are parties identify is "liberal" vs. "conservative".... but the opposite of conservative should be "progressive", and the opposite of liberal should be "autocratic." You either want to err on the side of protecting past ways of doing things (conserving) or err on the side of trying new things in hopes they will move society towards some better state (progressing). And you either want to err on the side of letting people do what they want (liberty) or err on the side of restricting what people can do (dictatorship).
> 
> In the late 1800s and early 1900s in the U.S. the liberals and the//progressives mostly had the same agenda, and that somehow got everything confused, and the terms locked into place in a really weird way. If anything, this time around, the Trump administration is solidly "progressive autocratic", but our zeitgeist can't really handle that designation. A large number of the headline grabbing things that the Trump administration has done for the last 2 years are not "conservative" in any proper sense, the administration is boisterous with new (mostly shitty) ideas. Heck, the "unitary executive" theory is about as anti-conservative as you can get.
> 
> Best,
> Eric
> 
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 11:11 AM glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>> wrote:
> 
>     I don't understand what you're attributing to me, here ("how I'm interpreting that"). The splintering of "conservative" is evidence that intellectual conservatives have been systematically excluded from their natural place in society? What? No.
> 
>     Being excluded (systematically or not) encourages the development of the subculture. The reactionary/rebellious take of a subculture like punk rock can only really thrive and acquire meaning when it's *not* the "natural" narrative. To *be* or *become* the majority is the death knell for such a subculture.
> 
>     That is how I'm interpreting the splintering. The splintering is *not* evidence of oppression. The splintering is evidence of their 15 minutes of fame. They've *got* their Project 2025 administration! Yay! The conservatives are in charge. Let's see what happens.
> 
>     I think it's just a bit fantastic to see conservatives like Rand Paul embarrassing themselves going after Fauci - another conservative. MTG, Candace Owens, & Tucker Carlson going after Trump. Etc. It's their day in the sun. We're seeing that they can't muster even 1/10 the cooperation and collaboration it takes to get anything big done.
> 
>     As one "does the work", one becomes more "woke" because in order to herd a large cohort of cats into *doing* anything requires a system that manages all the persnickety burrs around the edges. The controller must be at least as complex as the system being controlled.
> 
>     The conservatives whispering their ideas under their breath *is* the controller controlling the system, not something to bemoan but something to celebrate. The best thing to ever happen to grass was the invention of the lawn mower.
> 
> 
>     On 9/7/26 6:34 PM, Eric Charles wrote:
>      > Yeah.... contra how you are interpreting that... The fact that "conservative" has an increasingly splintered definition, as you demonstrated, actually evidences how problematic it is that the intellectual conservatives have, for several decades now, been systematically excluded from their natural place in the society... that is /exactly /the type of problem they would help with 🤷
>      >
>      > Best,
>      > Eric
>      >
>      >
>      > <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu>>
>      >
>      >
>      > On Thu, Sep 3, 2026 at 5:50 PM glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>>> wrote:
>      >
>      >     EricS' response to EricC's over-reliance on the meaning of "conservative" was better than anything I could have said. But the 6 proposed definitions were too long for my tiny context window. So I asked Ellydee to shorten them for me. (I also asked Mistral. But she did a terrible job.) I think these are pretty good:
>      >
>      >     Ellydee.ai says ---
>      >
>      >     **1. Power Hoarding** — Argument-form masking the real motive of those who already hold power to keep and concentrate it, widening the gap over those who don't.
>      >
>      >     **2. Prudent Restraint** — The view that change for change's sake is too harmful to go unregulated; "move fast and break things" is not an admirable values system.
>      >
>      >     **3. Institutional Gatekeeping** — Fragile categories like "family" survive only if their defining form is rigidly held, so alternative forms must be presumptively excluded from law and civil rights.
>      >
>      >     **4. Doctrinal Veto** — The devout get authority over who else qualifies for the group — leaving open whether mystics, or fakers under the "faith" label, are in or out.
>      >
>      >     **5. Rooted Locality** — Anyone not living their whole life in one place can't be trusted to defend it; local tribal obligation is the oldest form of mutual accountability.
>      >
>      >     **6. Generational Accounting** — A negotiation (doable in good or bad faith) over how much of the past must be kept current as a debt versus let go once enough generations have passed.
>      >     ---
>      >
>      >     I was inclined to change "Rooted Locality" to "Rooted Subjectivity" or "Perspective" ... in a lame attempt to tie in the other sub-thread. But I didn't feel like this task was worth the cost. They have a handy ellydee.ai/usage <http://ellydee.ai/usage> <http://ellydee.ai/usage <http://ellydee.ai/usage>> page for those of us who give a damn. >8^D
>      >
>      >     On 9/2/26 2:04 PM, Santafe wrote:
>      >      > At a kind of vibe level, I understand the picture you paint, and I can think of enough instances that fit it, to agree that there is a problem to correct.
>      >      >
>      >      > But how far can you go to defend the premise that the retirement of some academics was a HUGE problem in this country — or more specifically, do you think that is causal for the choice of what has become the political right to go in for fascism, with its considerable elements of cynicism, anomie, and nihilism?  Had there been “ideas” on offer from some university faculty, do you think these people would have wanted them?  Or just wanted to burn that down too along with all the rest of it?
>      >      >
>      >      > As with many things I can kind of recognize at a vibe level, if I look at it more closely, I don’t know what I should understand the categories even to refer to.  By which I mean, what should I attach to the word “conservatism”, as any range of things from a movement name, to a social group-label, to a domain or thesis of “ideas”.  For instance, is it:
>      >      >
>      >      > 1. A backfilling of what is meant to look like argument, but anchored for real in the motive of holding onto power, wealth, and agency by those who have it, and further concentrating it, specifically to increase the asymmetry over those who don't?  Certainly that goes on, and those who want to fight the C label as a label would say this is its essence.  Is that its essence, or is that the essence of a corruption when the real C word has been lost?  If it is part of the genuine thing, how far does it go toward efforts to cultivate the belief that people are constitutively different enough that there is no defensible right of agency and freedom for everybody on an equal footing, and there should be rulers and ruled?
>      >      >
>      >      > 2. A thesis that “move fast and break things” was not an admirable values system, and that seeking change merely for change’s sake is too harmful relative to what it achieves to be allowed to go on un-regulated or un-restricted?  That would fit with the name C.  Wendell Berry died a couple of days ago, somebody I knew a little and had some time with in person, and have also read some of though not nearly a lot.  This was one of his theses.  Close to the notion of upholding the Ordnung among the Amish, or a defense of Luddism as honorable precaution.
>      >      >
>      >      > 3. A notion that a category like “family” is robust only through cultural collective and cooperative effects, and that a type system needs to be built up, and most types excluded from participation in it, because otherwise it is so fragile that the admission of more than one form endangers it?  So, for instance: we have no real way to distinguish abusive from supportive marriages, so as long as there is one man and one woman, so-identified by self and others (maybe a subset of who the others are allowed to be), we have to admit it all.  But other kinds of unions need to be kept outside the perimeter as viewed by the protections of law and the rights of civil society?  The argument being (?) that there are certain obligations the institution needs to enable people to keep (raising and support of kids being the obvious one, but you can imagine others, and I know of marriage customs that symbolically encode several different ones), and we know so little about how
>     to do that,
>      >      > that some one form accepted at whatever level of consideration constitutes social convention is the only conceivable solution, so anything else needs to be presumptively excluded.
>      >      >
>      >      > 4. That people have to experience religious devotions, of whatever kind?  The word “faith” has become very popular by people trying not to alienate any of those who go through life with a chip on their shoulders, the new PC (really the same old PC).  If people just used it, it wouldn’t be such a sore thumb to me, but the pandering feels really blatant.  Does that self-identified group, and any Greeks using it as a Trojan Horse for whatever else motivates them — since it is not clear how any “sincerely” motivated people police their own and keep the fakers out — get veto power?  Are the mystics excluded, as the doctrinal religious people have often wanted them to be?  Or are they religious enough that they are okay too?
>      >      >
>      >      > 5. That anybody who doesn’t live an entire life in the place he was born is automatically suspect?  The view being that he hasn’t tied himself into any one local lifeboat, ergo there can’t be any way he can be counted on to defend it existentially?  This is also close to one of Wendell’s views, though in person it was important enough for him to like people, that he didn’t go into his personal relations plastering doctrines of Original Sin on anybody to whom they could be applied.  But as a core of ethnic tribalism, this impulse to reinforce mutual obligation seems to me to be one of the oldest and most universal cultural things people do, and if it is ever temporarily absent in some pocket, some of the people there will recreate it from whole cloth.
>      >      >
>      >      > 6. Is it a negotiation of how much of the completed past needs to be kept current as a debt, and how much needs to be let go?  Meaning: when, by making extra effort to identify and support people who are on the wrong end of a structural exclusion or exploitation, are we actively working to dismantle the structure, and when have enough generations gone by and enough circumstances created new people, that there isn’t anything productive to be done by trying to trace an indefinitely long past of who-displaced-whom?  I am emphasizing here, as possible C, the premise that there is a negotiation on that point to be carried out, as opposed to a dogma that to ever let go of anything is a sin.  And if that is the C premise, is there a distinction that is also C between having that negotiation in good faith and having it in bad faith?  Of how one tries to police against plain irresponsible self-interest hijacking the form with no moral or ethical anchor?
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      > I can imagine any of the above, or none of them, as being what “conservatism” is supposed to stand for.  And I can imagine many combinations of people proudly advocating any of them at the same time as others would sharply distinguish what is okay and what is corrupt or degenerated.
>      >      >
>      >      > There’s another mid-length rant about how I watch the memes change, on timescales of about 1–4 years, and while each of them has some truth, I feel like they are substitutes for seeing a kind of paralysis and inability or unwillingness to actually do things that need to be done, across the whole of society, that feels to me like a better candidate for cause of the fascist and nihilist turn.  But this note is too long already, and I should do work.
>      >      >
>      >      > Eric
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      >> On Sep 3, 2026, at 2:04, Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com> <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>      >      >>
>      >      >> I know I'm coming to it late, but I did not find that article very convincing. The main problems are:
>      >      >>
>      >      >>  1. Nothing about the omnipresent DEI initiatives of the past few decades assures viewpoint diversity, and, if you are only getting people deeply devoted to DEI you are for sure actually quashing viewpoint diversity. And, by deeply-devoted I mean that academic job applications require DEI statements, teaching statements are required to highlight how your teaching relates to DEI efforts, applicants are judged based on "diversity" goals at the college and within departments, some members of hiring committees explicitly see it as their goal to right past wrongs against certain groups with their selections, etc.
>      >      >>  2. In certain contexts there is very, very good justification to prefer a narrow range of viewpoint diversity over maximal diversity. For example, having a math department with different perspectives on what math "is" creates a positive environment for students to learn in. For example, it might be nice to have a math realist, someone with an aesthetic approach, a hard core logician-mathematician, etc., and you certainly want people who study different fields within math. However, you might not want someone who thinks mathematics is a tool of colonialist oppression which should be rejected from the curriculum. In fact, it might be problematic to have proponents of that argument in decision-making roles /anywhere /within an /educational /institution.
>      >      >>  3. I have seen (when I was full-time in academia), and continue to see (via colleagues in academia) actual discrimination against academics with conservative views, and a ton of self-silencing based on anticipated discrimination. To use the DEI phrase, most faculty settings are not a "safe space" for them.
>      >      >>  4. Most of what the author asserts to be secretly implied or covertly assumed or bad faith about the efforts seems very upfront and straightforward.
>      >      >>  5. Frankly, the failure to replace conservative academics as they retire has created HUGE problems in this country. The conservative movement used to have decent group of hard-core academics and public intellectuals as a key part of it. The current trainwreck of ideas that pass for "conservative" these days could be, and could have been, greatly helped if academia broadly returned a good chunk of the prior support it used to give to people doing serious intellectual work from a conservative perspective.
>      >      >>  6. While this obviously applies to humanities and social sciences, it applies in all fields. It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who believe in hard core merit and some who believe in actively supporting those who might have had less opportunity growing up. It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who see "less opportunity" in terms of structural oppression rampant within a society and others who see it in terms of individual hardship. etc.
>      >      >>
>      >      >> <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu> <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu>>>
>      >      >> All that said, for sure the Trump administration is acting in bad faith in many ways, about all things... but that's a different issue.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 8:57 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>>>> wrote:
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     Agree Siraganian is wrong.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     I believe the etymology of the expression “red herring” was not intended to be a compliment to the dogs that run off following it.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     In some lecture or interview or someplace, I remember Snyder making a connection that seems good for the current situation:  Authoritarian gaslighting really works by adopting the main premises of postmodernism (as it has become in its now-degenerated form; I understand the defense of some of the original work).  A thing Snyder didn’t say, which just calls out a further point of context, but that I think is also within the center of his point: in eras where postmodernism hadn’t spread as widely as it has here and now, the need was the same, but the authoritarian gaslighters had to build some of the infrastructure they wanted to use.  For today, it is just there at the Ikea where you can go pick it up and assemble it the same day.  Or, so widely distributed in Amazon warehouses that they can deliver it the same day, anywhere.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     Another nice little frame I saw, from some commenter on some article, was:
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     For my friends, the Unitary Executive Theory.
>      >      >>     For my enemies, the Major Questions Doctrine.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     And then:I have heard (reasonable) people criticize Paul Krugman for having lots of public opinions in areas where he doesn’t have a lot of earned expertise.  Okay; fair enough for that.  But I think it is to his credit that he started calling out bad faith as the central issue, quite a long time ago (when I also thought that needed to stay the focus).  Not leaving it to irony, as Siraganian sort-of does, but being plain that it is too frontal an attack to be winked at in irony.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     (And of course Glen’s point is also exactly right, but already said: it is just because the notion of what one wants from truth isn’t so easy that it can be handled lazily, and if we did less of that, maybe we would be better positioned to repel some of this other nonsense, or at least have a smaller vandal-group to repel over it.  That could itself be an interesting article, but it would have a completely different aim (solving a new problem) than Siraganian’s evident aim in this piece, which was to contribute to a struggle.)
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now started to use the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various oligarchs and the relatively small and connected band of people trying to end the society and turn it into a CAFO.  It has been about time for that term to be one of the standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic term “predatory capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has been both long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have become semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant to draw a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are the thing that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the world both knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there is a path to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     Eric
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     > On Sep 1, 2026, at 20:56, glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>>>> wrote:
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-
>     diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint- <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint->
>      >     diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1>>
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity. But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I think I'm going to stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use "instrumental pluralist" instead.
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > But 1) what Siraganian says here is simply wrong:
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > "To promote viewpoint diversity is to be thrilled to have my views in the mix, even if you think they are wrong, because either (a) they contribute to more viewpoint diversity (the more views you have, the more viewpoint diversity there is), or (b) they provide more views to choose from to figure out which view is the most true. In the first position, you end up not caring about whether a particular view is true or good, because you care about viewpoint diversity intrinsically: What matters is having the greatest possible variety of views. In the second position, you instrumentally value a diversity of views; having viewpoint diversity only matters until you can figure out which view is the best or most true, at which point all the other views can be rejected."
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the 1st best to the 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject "all the others". Such smooth grading has to remain contingent, defeasible. And my guess is the gradation isn't smooth everywhere. It may be smooth for the first 2 or 3 distinguishable ideas, but #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263> <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>> <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263> <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>>>>)
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > 2) Diversity remains a useful measure of the crosstrophic nature of complex systems, circularity, industrial symbiosis, etc. So even in light of Goodhart's Law, diversity is a reasonable *outcome*, even if it's dangerous to optimize to that sole outcome.
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > There are issues with all the theses she lays out. But persnickety nits aside, her gist seems right. And you can't overlook the blatant hypocrisy of objecting to DEI initiatives, but then arguing for "intellectual pluralism", pointed out in thesis 7.
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > This post is too long already. But I know many, here, have succumbed to Haidt glazing. So I offer this as further demonstration of Bad Faith rhetoric: https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-
>     pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>
>      >     <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>>> only peripherally about instrumental pluralism.
>      >      >>     >
-- 
8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.

.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
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/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5609 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260911/b238821f/attachment-0001.p7s>

From eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com  Fri Sep 11 15:03:27 2026
From: eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com (Eric Charles)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 15:03:27 -0400
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: 
 <DS0PR11MB77353CA99D9F4C040FDCEED1C5BE2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
 <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAOBF4_3wo6kBZNww04kPG65AKpuBqywWzcNppE=4Wt=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <4cac1de2-a9ea-458d-9a68-7aee44f2cdf0@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMD8dMj=dL1oncNgbsKUQqnZdLEhUd6pihbN8h48PxaH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <DS0PR11MB77353CA99D9F4C040FDCEED1C5BE2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: 
 <CAEYGzMCOw7uKQCansWrY-pnYgX_JmSikiuo_FejaBZSw-yc4OA@mail.gmail.com>

Exactly!
To be a "progressive" is to believe in "progress" and to try to move
humanity (or at least your country) towards it. That means you want to
change things, to risk pask gains in the hopes of something better, to
experiment (whether you personally see it as an experiment or not is a
different issue). The "Progressive Era" is so named because those ideas
permeated the zeitgeist.

Given where we were before that, in the Gilded Age / Victorian Era,
"changing things" on a societal level very often involved significant
increases in the freedoms that people had, hence progressives and liberals
(people in favor of liberty) were very strongly aligned. Ending Jim Crow,
getting Woman's Sufferage, direct election of U.S. Senators, tariff
reduction, using science to free up people's time, etc. Even things like
antitrust laws were sold as important for giving people the freedom to
start their own businesses. There were a few progressive efforts that were
anti-liberty, like prohibition, but the overlap was substantial.

With respect to AI: Its proponents are progressive, its detractors are
conservative.
Ditto genetic engineering, insecure computing, gain of function research,
nanotechnology, nuclear technology proliferation, untested/unregulated
pharmaceuticals/biologics, etc.

"Progressives" should never be for a stable platform of objectives across
multiple decades. Whatever victories their parents or
grandparents achieved, it's well past time to get new gains now. If their
parents or grandparents are clinging to the victories that progressives
championed back in their day, that makes them "conservatives." And we
struggle to talk about that sensibly, because our political terms are all
wonky.

Best,
Eric


<echarles at american.edu>


On Fri, Sep 11, 2026 at 2:13 PM Marcus Daniels <marcus at snoutfarm.com> wrote:

> I’d confuse this further by defining progressivism to mean “toward
> progress”.  That could be autocratic too, but completely unlike Trump.
>   It is not concerned with maintaining the status quo or risk of
> incremental harm.  “Move fast and break things” could be mapped to genetic
> engineering, insecure computing, unregulated AI, gain of function research,
> nanotechnology, nuclear technology proliferation, untested/unregulated
> pharmaceuticals/biologics, and so on.   In this view, the purpose of any
> collective consciousness is to find out how the universe works, not to
> maintain one stable form of itself.  Humanity is a hardware platform and
> problem-solving is the product.   It could be realized with 500 million
> people or 8 billion people with sharp oscillations in size in between, or
> even with none.
>
>
>
> The current populist backlash against AI on the left is not this like this
> definition of progressivism.   That contemporary strain of progressivism is
> more concerned about redistribution of resources and defines stability in a
> different way than the concentrated wealth-holders define it.  To me this
> Bernie Sanders tribe is not that much different than the 2016 Steve Bannon
> MAGA tribe.   A group of people that want more power from another group
> that is perceived to have it.
>
>
>
> *From:* Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Eric Charles
> *Sent:* Friday, September 11, 2026 9:02 AM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <
> friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
>
>
>
> I only meant to point out that you and EricS both seemed to think that I
> had an: over-reliance on the meaning of "conservative"
>
>
>
> There *is* a thing that used to be much better represented within
> acamedia, and it was systematically eliminated. Call it what you will. I
> certainly don't think that any particular person who retired is at fault
> for that, it is the lack of replacement that *might* be considered a
> problem. And, of course, I am talking about it because it's what the
> article that was shared was talking about 🤷 . If I'm begging any
> questions, they are doubly begged there.
>
>
>
> Of course, if we are going to nitpick the language, one of the big
> conceptual problems in this country for several decades now is that are
> parties identify is "liberal" vs. "conservative".... but the opposite of
> conservative should be "progressive", and the opposite of liberal should be
> "autocratic." You either want to err on the side of protecting past ways of
> doing things (conserving) or err on the side of trying new things in hopes
> they will move society towards some better state (progressing). And you
> either want to err on the side of letting people do what they want
> (liberty) or err on the side of restricting what people can do
> (dictatorship).
>
>
>
> In the late 1800s and early 1900s in the U.S. the liberals and the progressives
> mostly had the same agenda, and that somehow got everything confused, and
> the terms locked into place in a really weird way. If anything, this time
> around, the Trump administration is solidly "progressive autocratic", but
> our zeitgeist can't really handle that designation. A large number of the
> headline grabbing things that the Trump administration has done for the
> last 2 years are not "conservative" in any proper sense, the administration
> is boisterous with new (mostly shitty) ideas. Heck, the "unitary executive"
> theory is about as anti-conservative as you can get.
>
>
>
> Best,
> Eric
>
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 11:11 AM glen <gepr at ropella.name> wrote:
>
> I don't understand what you're attributing to me, here ("how I'm
> interpreting that"). The splintering of "conservative" is evidence that
> intellectual conservatives have been systematically excluded from their
> natural place in society? What? No.
>
> Being excluded (systematically or not) encourages the development of the
> subculture. The reactionary/rebellious take of a subculture like punk rock
> can only really thrive and acquire meaning when it's *not* the "natural"
> narrative. To *be* or *become* the majority is the death knell for such a
> subculture.
>
> That is how I'm interpreting the splintering. The splintering is *not*
> evidence of oppression. The splintering is evidence of their 15 minutes of
> fame. They've *got* their Project 2025 administration! Yay! The
> conservatives are in charge. Let's see what happens.
>
> I think it's just a bit fantastic to see conservatives like Rand Paul
> embarrassing themselves going after Fauci - another conservative. MTG,
> Candace Owens, & Tucker Carlson going after Trump. Etc. It's their day in
> the sun. We're seeing that they can't muster even 1/10 the cooperation and
> collaboration it takes to get anything big done.
>
> As one "does the work", one becomes more "woke" because in order to herd a
> large cohort of cats into *doing* anything requires a system that manages
> all the persnickety burrs around the edges. The controller must be at least
> as complex as the system being controlled.
>
> The conservatives whispering their ideas under their breath *is* the
> controller controlling the system, not something to bemoan but something to
> celebrate. The best thing to ever happen to grass was the invention of the
> lawn mower.
>
>
> On 9/7/26 6:34 PM, Eric Charles wrote:
> > Yeah.... contra how you are interpreting that... The fact that
> "conservative" has an increasingly splintered definition, as you
> demonstrated, actually evidences how problematic it is that the
> intellectual conservatives have, for several decades now, been
> systematically excluded from their natural place in the society... that is
> /exactly /the type of problem they would help with 🤷
> >
> > Best,
> > Eric
> >
> >
> > <mailto:echarles at american.edu>
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 3, 2026 at 5:50 PM glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:
> gepr at ropella.name>> wrote:
> >
> >     EricS' response to EricC's over-reliance on the meaning of
> "conservative" was better than anything I could have said. But the 6
> proposed definitions were too long for my tiny context window. So I asked
> Ellydee to shorten them for me. (I also asked Mistral. But she did a
> terrible job.) I think these are pretty good:
> >
> >     Ellydee.ai says ---
> >
> >     **1. Power Hoarding** — Argument-form masking the real motive of
> those who already hold power to keep and concentrate it, widening the gap
> over those who don't.
> >
> >     **2. Prudent Restraint** — The view that change for change's sake is
> too harmful to go unregulated; "move fast and break things" is not an
> admirable values system.
> >
> >     **3. Institutional Gatekeeping** — Fragile categories like "family"
> survive only if their defining form is rigidly held, so alternative forms
> must be presumptively excluded from law and civil rights.
> >
> >     **4. Doctrinal Veto** — The devout get authority over who else
> qualifies for the group — leaving open whether mystics, or fakers under the
> "faith" label, are in or out.
> >
> >     **5. Rooted Locality** — Anyone not living their whole life in one
> place can't be trusted to defend it; local tribal obligation is the oldest
> form of mutual accountability.
> >
> >     **6. Generational Accounting** — A negotiation (doable in good or
> bad faith) over how much of the past must be kept current as a debt versus
> let go once enough generations have passed.
> >     ---
> >
> >     I was inclined to change "Rooted Locality" to "Rooted Subjectivity"
> or "Perspective" ... in a lame attempt to tie in the other sub-thread. But
> I didn't feel like this task was worth the cost. They have a handy
> ellydee.ai/usage <http://ellydee.ai/usage> page for those of us who give
> a damn. >8^D
> >
> >     On 9/2/26 2:04 PM, Santafe wrote:
> >      > At a kind of vibe level, I understand the picture you paint, and
> I can think of enough instances that fit it, to agree that there is a
> problem to correct.
> >      >
> >      > But how far can you go to defend the premise that the retirement
> of some academics was a HUGE problem in this country — or more
> specifically, do you think that is causal for the choice of what has become
> the political right to go in for fascism, with its considerable elements of
> cynicism, anomie, and nihilism?  Had there been “ideas” on offer from some
> university faculty, do you think these people would have wanted them?  Or
> just wanted to burn that down too along with all the rest of it?
> >      >
> >      > As with many things I can kind of recognize at a vibe level, if I
> look at it more closely, I don’t know what I should understand the
> categories even to refer to.  By which I mean, what should I attach to the
> word “conservatism”, as any range of things from a movement name, to a
> social group-label, to a domain or thesis of “ideas”.  For instance, is it:
> >      >
> >      > 1. A backfilling of what is meant to look like argument, but
> anchored for real in the motive of holding onto power, wealth, and agency
> by those who have it, and further concentrating it, specifically to
> increase the asymmetry over those who don't?  Certainly that goes on, and
> those who want to fight the C label as a label would say this is its
> essence.  Is that its essence, or is that the essence of a corruption when
> the real C word has been lost?  If it is part of the genuine thing, how far
> does it go toward efforts to cultivate the belief that people are
> constitutively different enough that there is no defensible right of agency
> and freedom for everybody on an equal footing, and there should be rulers
> and ruled?
> >      >
> >      > 2. A thesis that “move fast and break things” was not an
> admirable values system, and that seeking change merely for change’s sake
> is too harmful relative to what it achieves to be allowed to go on
> un-regulated or un-restricted?  That would fit with the name C.  Wendell
> Berry died a couple of days ago, somebody I knew a little and had some time
> with in person, and have also read some of though not nearly a lot.  This
> was one of his theses.  Close to the notion of upholding the Ordnung among
> the Amish, or a defense of Luddism as honorable precaution.
> >      >
> >      > 3. A notion that a category like “family” is robust only through
> cultural collective and cooperative effects, and that a type system needs
> to be built up, and most types excluded from participation in it, because
> otherwise it is so fragile that the admission of more than one form
> endangers it?  So, for instance: we have no real way to distinguish abusive
> from supportive marriages, so as long as there is one man and one woman,
> so-identified by self and others (maybe a subset of who the others are
> allowed to be), we have to admit it all.  But other kinds of unions need to
> be kept outside the perimeter as viewed by the protections of law and the
> rights of civil society?  The argument being (?) that there are certain
> obligations the institution needs to enable people to keep (raising and
> support of kids being the obvious one, but you can imagine others, and I
> know of marriage customs that symbolically encode several different ones),
> and we know so little about how to do that,
> >      > that some one form accepted at whatever level of consideration
> constitutes social convention is the only conceivable solution, so anything
> else needs to be presumptively excluded.
> >      >
> >      > 4. That people have to experience religious devotions, of
> whatever kind?  The word “faith” has become very popular by people trying
> not to alienate any of those who go through life with a chip on their
> shoulders, the new PC (really the same old PC).  If people just used it, it
> wouldn’t be such a sore thumb to me, but the pandering feels really
> blatant.  Does that self-identified group, and any Greeks using it as a
> Trojan Horse for whatever else motivates them — since it is not clear how
> any “sincerely” motivated people police their own and keep the fakers out —
> get veto power?  Are the mystics excluded, as the doctrinal religious
> people have often wanted them to be?  Or are they religious enough that
> they are okay too?
> >      >
> >      > 5. That anybody who doesn’t live an entire life in the place he
> was born is automatically suspect?  The view being that he hasn’t tied
> himself into any one local lifeboat, ergo there can’t be any way he can be
> counted on to defend it existentially?  This is also close to one of
> Wendell’s views, though in person it was important enough for him to like
> people, that he didn’t go into his personal relations plastering doctrines
> of Original Sin on anybody to whom they could be applied.  But as a core of
> ethnic tribalism, this impulse to reinforce mutual obligation seems to me
> to be one of the oldest and most universal cultural things people do, and
> if it is ever temporarily absent in some pocket, some of the people there
> will recreate it from whole cloth.
> >      >
> >      > 6. Is it a negotiation of how much of the completed past needs to
> be kept current as a debt, and how much needs to be let go?  Meaning: when,
> by making extra effort to identify and support people who are on the wrong
> end of a structural exclusion or exploitation, are we actively working to
> dismantle the structure, and when have enough generations gone by and
> enough circumstances created new people, that there isn’t anything
> productive to be done by trying to trace an indefinitely long past of
> who-displaced-whom?  I am emphasizing here, as possible C, the premise that
> there is a negotiation on that point to be carried out, as opposed to a
> dogma that to ever let go of anything is a sin.  And if that is the C
> premise, is there a distinction that is also C between having that
> negotiation in good faith and having it in bad faith?  Of how one tries to
> police against plain irresponsible self-interest hijacking the form with no
> moral or ethical anchor?
> >      >
> >      >
> >      > I can imagine any of the above, or none of them, as being what
> “conservatism” is supposed to stand for.  And I can imagine many
> combinations of people proudly advocating any of them at the same time as
> others would sharply distinguish what is okay and what is corrupt or
> degenerated.
> >      >
> >      > There’s another mid-length rant about how I watch the memes
> change, on timescales of about 1–4 years, and while each of them has some
> truth, I feel like they are substitutes for seeing a kind of paralysis and
> inability or unwillingness to actually do things that need to be done,
> across the whole of society, that feels to me like a better candidate for
> cause of the fascist and nihilist turn.  But this note is too long already,
> and I should do work.
> >      >
> >      > Eric
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >
> >      >> On Sep 3, 2026, at 2:04, Eric Charles <
> eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> >      >>
> >      >> I know I'm coming to it late, but I did not find that article
> very convincing. The main problems are:
> >      >>
> >      >>  1. Nothing about the omnipresent DEI initiatives of the past
> few decades assures viewpoint diversity, and, if you are only getting
> people deeply devoted to DEI you are for sure actually quashing viewpoint
> diversity. And, by deeply-devoted I mean that academic job applications
> require DEI statements, teaching statements are required to highlight how
> your teaching relates to DEI efforts, applicants are judged based on
> "diversity" goals at the college and within departments, some members of
> hiring committees explicitly see it as their goal to right past wrongs
> against certain groups with their selections, etc.
> >      >>  2. In certain contexts there is very, very good
> justification to prefer a narrow range of viewpoint diversity over maximal
> diversity. For example, having a math department with different
> perspectives on what math "is" creates a positive environment for students
> to learn in. For example, it might be nice to have a math realist, someone
> with an aesthetic approach, a hard core logician-mathematician, etc., and
> you certainly want people who study different fields within math. However,
> you might not want someone who thinks mathematics is a tool of colonialist
> oppression which should be rejected from the curriculum. In fact, it might
> be problematic to have proponents of that argument in decision-making roles
> /anywhere /within an /educational /institution.
> >      >>  3. I have seen (when I was full-time in academia), and continue
> to see (via colleagues in academia) actual discrimination against academics
> with conservative views, and a ton of self-silencing based on anticipated
> discrimination. To use the DEI phrase, most faculty settings are not a
> "safe space" for them.
> >      >>  4. Most of what the author asserts to be secretly implied or
> covertly assumed or bad faith about the efforts seems very upfront and
> straightforward.
> >      >>  5. Frankly, the failure to replace conservative academics as
> they retire has created HUGE problems in this country. The conservative
> movement used to have decent group of hard-core academics and public
> intellectuals as a key part of it. The current trainwreck of ideas that
> pass for "conservative" these days could be, and could have been, greatly
> helped if academia broadly returned a good chunk of the prior support it
> used to give to people doing serious intellectual work from a conservative
> perspective.
> >      >>  6. While this obviously applies to humanities and social
> sciences, it applies in all fields. It is good for a chemistry department
> to have some people who believe in hard core merit and some who believe in
> actively supporting those who might have had less opportunity growing up.
> It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who see "less
> opportunity" in terms of structural oppression rampant within a society and
> others who see it in terms of individual hardship. etc.
> >      >>
> >      >> <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu>>
> >      >> All that said, for sure the Trump administration is acting in
> bad faith in many ways, about all things... but that's a different issue.
> >      >>
> >      >>
> >      >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 8:57 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu
> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:
> desmith at santafe.edu>>> wrote:
> >      >>
> >      >>     Agree Siraganian is wrong.
> >      >>
> >      >>     I believe the etymology of the expression “red herring” was
> not intended to be a compliment to the dogs that run off following it.
> >      >>
> >      >>     In some lecture or interview or someplace, I remember Snyder
> making a connection that seems good for the current situation:
> Authoritarian gaslighting really works by adopting the main premises of
> postmodernism (as it has become in its now-degenerated form; I understand
> the defense of some of the original work).  A thing Snyder didn’t say,
> which just calls out a further point of context, but that I think is also
> within the center of his point: in eras where postmodernism hadn’t spread
> as widely as it has here and now, the need was the same, but the
> authoritarian gaslighters had to build some of the infrastructure they
> wanted to use.  For today, it is just there at the Ikea where you can go
> pick it up and assemble it the same day.  Or, so widely distributed in
> Amazon warehouses that they can deliver it the same day, anywhere.
> >      >>
> >      >>     Another nice little frame I saw, from some commenter on some
> article, was:
> >      >>
> >      >>     For my friends, the Unitary Executive Theory.
> >      >>     For my enemies, the Major Questions Doctrine.
> >      >>
> >      >>     And then:I have heard (reasonable) people criticize Paul
> Krugman for having lots of public opinions in areas where he doesn’t have a
> lot of earned expertise.  Okay; fair enough for that.  But I think it is to
> his credit that he started calling out bad faith as the central issue,
> quite a long time ago (when I also thought that needed to stay the focus).
> Not leaving it to irony, as Siraganian sort-of does, but being plain that
> it is too frontal an attack to be winked at in irony.
> >      >>
> >      >>     (And of course Glen’s point is also exactly right, but
> already said: it is just because the notion of what one wants from truth
> isn’t so easy that it can be handled lazily, and if we did less of that,
> maybe we would be better positioned to repel some of this other nonsense,
> or at least have a smaller vandal-group to repel over it.  That could
> itself be an interesting article, but it would have a completely different
> aim (solving a new problem) than Siraganian’s evident aim in this piece,
> which was to contribute to a struggle.)
> >      >>
> >      >>     I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now
> started to use the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various
> oligarchs and the relatively small and connected band of people trying to
> end the society and turn it into a CAFO.  It has been about time for that
> term to be one of the standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic
> term “predatory capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has
> been both long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have
> become semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant
> to draw a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are
> the thing that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the
> world both knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there
> is a path to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.
> >      >>
> >      >>     Eric
> >      >>
> >      >>
> >      >>
> >      >>     > On Sep 1, 2026, at 20:56, glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:
> gepr at ropella.name> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>>>
> wrote:
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     >
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1
> <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1>
> <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1
> <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-
> >
>  diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1>>
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     > OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on
> diversity. But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I
> think I'm going to stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use
> "instrumental pluralist" instead.
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     > But 1) what Siraganian says here is simply wrong:
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     > "To promote viewpoint diversity is to be thrilled to have
> my views in the mix, even if you think they are wrong, because either (a)
> they contribute to more viewpoint diversity (the more views you have, the
> more viewpoint diversity there is), or (b) they provide more views to
> choose from to figure out which view is the most true. In the first
> position, you end up not caring about whether a particular view is true or
> good, because you care about viewpoint diversity intrinsically: What
> matters is having the greatest possible variety of views. In the second
> position, you instrumentally value a diversity of views; having viewpoint
> diversity only matters until you can figure out which view is the best or
> most true, at which point all the other views can be rejected."
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     > If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the
> 1st best to the 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject "all
> the others". Such smooth grading has to remain contingent, defeasible. And
> my guess is the gradation isn't smooth everywhere. It may be smooth for the
> first 2 or 3 distinguishable ideas, but #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<
> https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263> <
> https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>>>)
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     > 2) Diversity remains a useful measure of the crosstrophic
> nature of complex systems, circularity, industrial symbiosis, etc. So even
> in light of Goodhart's Law, diversity is a reasonable *outcome*, even if
> it's dangerous to optimize to that sole outcome.
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     > There are issues with all the theses she lays out. But
> persnickety nits aside, her gist seems right. And you can't overlook the
> blatant hypocrisy of objecting to DEI initiatives, but then arguing for
> "intellectual pluralism", pointed out in thesis 7.
> >      >>     >
> >      >>     > This post is too long already. But I know many, here, have
> succumbed to Haidt glazing. So I offer this as further demonstration of Bad
> Faith rhetoric:
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1
> <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>
> <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1
> >     <
> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>>
> only peripherally about instrumental pluralism.
> >      >>     >
> --
> 8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
> ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα
> σώσω.
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260911/5a2718b9/attachment.html>

From gepr at ropella.name  Fri Sep 11 15:22:10 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 12:22:10 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEYGzMD8dMj=dL1oncNgbsKUQqnZdLEhUd6pihbN8h48PxaH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
 <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAOBF4_3wo6kBZNww04kPG65AKpuBqywWzcNppE=4Wt=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <4cac1de2-a9ea-458d-9a68-7aee44f2cdf0@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMD8dMj=dL1oncNgbsKUQqnZdLEhUd6pihbN8h48PxaH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <fbe8fede-758c-4a94-8af1-6f11e67a3b40@ropella.name>

Well, OK. But I think you're being a bit too nostalgic. That old style conservatism is NOT gone from the academic circles within which I work. Granted, it's couched in a more complex language. But it's the same kernel. These conservatives shy away from the culture war topics. And when the AI's not listening, they mostly rant about the non-conservative and illiberal administration. But the rhetoric that's exposed is solidly in the old timey waterfall process camp. Don't break it if you can't prove it's broken. Good solutions come from well-stated problems. KISS. Etc. If *that's* what you mean, then it has definitely not been systematically eliminated. The projects I've been on have been plagued with "obstructionists", "contrarians", and "curmudgeons" ... whom I welcome and defend.

But if you're talking about the old guys in elbow patch tweed who profess pompously, make secretaries of their female postdocs and racist stereotypes of the intellectual capabilities of H1B holders, etc. ... then yeah, they're mostly gone. And they *have* been systematically eliminated ... or at least we try, 'cause fsck those guys.

Between this and the last rally in this thread, I took a look at the Heterodox Academy winners of the so-called Open Inquiry prize: https://heterodoxacademy.org/announcements/heterodox-academy-announces-recipients-of-2026-open-inquiry-awards/

There's a gross glaze on most of it. But if you scrape that off, you see snippets like:

"... leading scholars, intellectuals, and public servants — including figures such as Jared Kushner, former Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, Dalal Saeb Iriqat, Robert Malley, and Alan Dershowitz ..."

Ha! When did Jared Kushner become a leading scholar, intellectual, or public servant? Alan Dershowitz? Seriously? I mean Haidt's crypto-racism is bad enough ... It's kinda like comparing the grifting if Eric Weinstein to his glaze spattering buddy Brian Keating, the former with zero actual physics cred and the latter spending whatever cred he had like a drunken sailor. If this is the conservatism we're talking about, good riddance.

On 9/11/26 9:01 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
> I only meant to point out that you and EricS both seemed to think that I had an: over-reliance on the meaning of "conservative"
> 
> There *is* a thing that used to be much better represented within acamedia, and it was systematically eliminated. Call it what you will. I certainly don't think that any particular person who retired is at fault for that, it is the lack of replacement that *might* be considered a problem. And, of course, I am talking about it because it's what the article that was shared was talking about 🤷 . If I'm begging any questions, they are doubly begged there.
> 
> Of course, if we are going to nitpick the language, one of the big conceptual problems in this country for several decades now is that are parties identify is "liberal" vs. "conservative".... but the opposite of conservative should be "progressive", and the opposite of liberal should be "autocratic." You either want to err on the side of protecting past ways of doing things (conserving) or err on the side of trying new things in hopes they will move society towards some better state (progressing). And you either want to err on the side of letting people do what they want (liberty) or err on the side of restricting what people can do (dictatorship).
> 
> In the late 1800s and early 1900s in the U.S. the liberals and the//progressives mostly had the same agenda, and that somehow got everything confused, and the terms locked into place in a really weird way. If anything, this time around, the Trump administration is solidly "progressive autocratic", but our zeitgeist can't really handle that designation. A large number of the headline grabbing things that the Trump administration has done for the last 2 years are not "conservative" in any proper sense, the administration is boisterous with new (mostly shitty) ideas. Heck, the "unitary executive" theory is about as anti-conservative as you can get.
> 
> Best,
> Eric
> 
> 
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 11:11 AM glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>> wrote:
> 
>     I don't understand what you're attributing to me, here ("how I'm interpreting that"). The splintering of "conservative" is evidence that intellectual conservatives have been systematically excluded from their natural place in society? What? No.
> 
>     Being excluded (systematically or not) encourages the development of the subculture. The reactionary/rebellious take of a subculture like punk rock can only really thrive and acquire meaning when it's *not* the "natural" narrative. To *be* or *become* the majority is the death knell for such a subculture.
> 
>     That is how I'm interpreting the splintering. The splintering is *not* evidence of oppression. The splintering is evidence of their 15 minutes of fame. They've *got* their Project 2025 administration! Yay! The conservatives are in charge. Let's see what happens.
> 
>     I think it's just a bit fantastic to see conservatives like Rand Paul embarrassing themselves going after Fauci - another conservative. MTG, Candace Owens, & Tucker Carlson going after Trump. Etc. It's their day in the sun. We're seeing that they can't muster even 1/10 the cooperation and collaboration it takes to get anything big done.
> 
>     As one "does the work", one becomes more "woke" because in order to herd a large cohort of cats into *doing* anything requires a system that manages all the persnickety burrs around the edges. The controller must be at least as complex as the system being controlled.
> 
>     The conservatives whispering their ideas under their breath *is* the controller controlling the system, not something to bemoan but something to celebrate. The best thing to ever happen to grass was the invention of the lawn mower.
> 
> 
>     On 9/7/26 6:34 PM, Eric Charles wrote:
>      > Yeah.... contra how you are interpreting that... The fact that "conservative" has an increasingly splintered definition, as you demonstrated, actually evidences how problematic it is that the intellectual conservatives have, for several decades now, been systematically excluded from their natural place in the society... that is /exactly /the type of problem they would help with 🤷
>      >
>      > Best,
>      > Eric
>      >
>      >
>      > <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu>>
>      >
>      >
>      > On Thu, Sep 3, 2026 at 5:50 PM glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>>> wrote:
>      >
>      >     EricS' response to EricC's over-reliance on the meaning of "conservative" was better than anything I could have said. But the 6 proposed definitions were too long for my tiny context window. So I asked Ellydee to shorten them for me. (I also asked Mistral. But she did a terrible job.) I think these are pretty good:
>      >
>      >     Ellydee.ai says ---
>      >
>      >     **1. Power Hoarding** — Argument-form masking the real motive of those who already hold power to keep and concentrate it, widening the gap over those who don't.
>      >
>      >     **2. Prudent Restraint** — The view that change for change's sake is too harmful to go unregulated; "move fast and break things" is not an admirable values system.
>      >
>      >     **3. Institutional Gatekeeping** — Fragile categories like "family" survive only if their defining form is rigidly held, so alternative forms must be presumptively excluded from law and civil rights.
>      >
>      >     **4. Doctrinal Veto** — The devout get authority over who else qualifies for the group — leaving open whether mystics, or fakers under the "faith" label, are in or out.
>      >
>      >     **5. Rooted Locality** — Anyone not living their whole life in one place can't be trusted to defend it; local tribal obligation is the oldest form of mutual accountability.
>      >
>      >     **6. Generational Accounting** — A negotiation (doable in good or bad faith) over how much of the past must be kept current as a debt versus let go once enough generations have passed.
>      >     ---
>      >
>      >     I was inclined to change "Rooted Locality" to "Rooted Subjectivity" or "Perspective" ... in a lame attempt to tie in the other sub-thread. But I didn't feel like this task was worth the cost. They have a handy ellydee.ai/usage <http://ellydee.ai/usage> <http://ellydee.ai/usage <http://ellydee.ai/usage>> page for those of us who give a damn. >8^D
>      >
>      >     On 9/2/26 2:04 PM, Santafe wrote:
>      >      > At a kind of vibe level, I understand the picture you paint, and I can think of enough instances that fit it, to agree that there is a problem to correct.
>      >      >
>      >      > But how far can you go to defend the premise that the retirement of some academics was a HUGE problem in this country — or more specifically, do you think that is causal for the choice of what has become the political right to go in for fascism, with its considerable elements of cynicism, anomie, and nihilism?  Had there been “ideas” on offer from some university faculty, do you think these people would have wanted them?  Or just wanted to burn that down too along with all the rest of it?
>      >      >
>      >      > As with many things I can kind of recognize at a vibe level, if I look at it more closely, I don’t know what I should understand the categories even to refer to.  By which I mean, what should I attach to the word “conservatism”, as any range of things from a movement name, to a social group-label, to a domain or thesis of “ideas”.  For instance, is it:
>      >      >
>      >      > 1. A backfilling of what is meant to look like argument, but anchored for real in the motive of holding onto power, wealth, and agency by those who have it, and further concentrating it, specifically to increase the asymmetry over those who don't?  Certainly that goes on, and those who want to fight the C label as a label would say this is its essence.  Is that its essence, or is that the essence of a corruption when the real C word has been lost?  If it is part of the genuine thing, how far does it go toward efforts to cultivate the belief that people are constitutively different enough that there is no defensible right of agency and freedom for everybody on an equal footing, and there should be rulers and ruled?
>      >      >
>      >      > 2. A thesis that “move fast and break things” was not an admirable values system, and that seeking change merely for change’s sake is too harmful relative to what it achieves to be allowed to go on un-regulated or un-restricted?  That would fit with the name C.  Wendell Berry died a couple of days ago, somebody I knew a little and had some time with in person, and have also read some of though not nearly a lot.  This was one of his theses.  Close to the notion of upholding the Ordnung among the Amish, or a defense of Luddism as honorable precaution.
>      >      >
>      >      > 3. A notion that a category like “family” is robust only through cultural collective and cooperative effects, and that a type system needs to be built up, and most types excluded from participation in it, because otherwise it is so fragile that the admission of more than one form endangers it?  So, for instance: we have no real way to distinguish abusive from supportive marriages, so as long as there is one man and one woman, so-identified by self and others (maybe a subset of who the others are allowed to be), we have to admit it all.  But other kinds of unions need to be kept outside the perimeter as viewed by the protections of law and the rights of civil society?  The argument being (?) that there are certain obligations the institution needs to enable people to keep (raising and support of kids being the obvious one, but you can imagine others, and I know of marriage customs that symbolically encode several different ones), and we know so little about how
>     to do that,
>      >      > that some one form accepted at whatever level of consideration constitutes social convention is the only conceivable solution, so anything else needs to be presumptively excluded.
>      >      >
>      >      > 4. That people have to experience religious devotions, of whatever kind?  The word “faith” has become very popular by people trying not to alienate any of those who go through life with a chip on their shoulders, the new PC (really the same old PC).  If people just used it, it wouldn’t be such a sore thumb to me, but the pandering feels really blatant.  Does that self-identified group, and any Greeks using it as a Trojan Horse for whatever else motivates them — since it is not clear how any “sincerely” motivated people police their own and keep the fakers out — get veto power?  Are the mystics excluded, as the doctrinal religious people have often wanted them to be?  Or are they religious enough that they are okay too?
>      >      >
>      >      > 5. That anybody who doesn’t live an entire life in the place he was born is automatically suspect?  The view being that he hasn’t tied himself into any one local lifeboat, ergo there can’t be any way he can be counted on to defend it existentially?  This is also close to one of Wendell’s views, though in person it was important enough for him to like people, that he didn’t go into his personal relations plastering doctrines of Original Sin on anybody to whom they could be applied.  But as a core of ethnic tribalism, this impulse to reinforce mutual obligation seems to me to be one of the oldest and most universal cultural things people do, and if it is ever temporarily absent in some pocket, some of the people there will recreate it from whole cloth.
>      >      >
>      >      > 6. Is it a negotiation of how much of the completed past needs to be kept current as a debt, and how much needs to be let go?  Meaning: when, by making extra effort to identify and support people who are on the wrong end of a structural exclusion or exploitation, are we actively working to dismantle the structure, and when have enough generations gone by and enough circumstances created new people, that there isn’t anything productive to be done by trying to trace an indefinitely long past of who-displaced-whom?  I am emphasizing here, as possible C, the premise that there is a negotiation on that point to be carried out, as opposed to a dogma that to ever let go of anything is a sin.  And if that is the C premise, is there a distinction that is also C between having that negotiation in good faith and having it in bad faith?  Of how one tries to police against plain irresponsible self-interest hijacking the form with no moral or ethical anchor?
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      > I can imagine any of the above, or none of them, as being what “conservatism” is supposed to stand for.  And I can imagine many combinations of people proudly advocating any of them at the same time as others would sharply distinguish what is okay and what is corrupt or degenerated.
>      >      >
>      >      > There’s another mid-length rant about how I watch the memes change, on timescales of about 1–4 years, and while each of them has some truth, I feel like they are substitutes for seeing a kind of paralysis and inability or unwillingness to actually do things that need to be done, across the whole of society, that feels to me like a better candidate for cause of the fascist and nihilist turn.  But this note is too long already, and I should do work.
>      >      >
>      >      > Eric
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      >> On Sep 3, 2026, at 2:04, Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com> <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>      >      >>
>      >      >> I know I'm coming to it late, but I did not find that article very convincing. The main problems are:
>      >      >>
>      >      >>  1. Nothing about the omnipresent DEI initiatives of the past few decades assures viewpoint diversity, and, if you are only getting people deeply devoted to DEI you are for sure actually quashing viewpoint diversity. And, by deeply-devoted I mean that academic job applications require DEI statements, teaching statements are required to highlight how your teaching relates to DEI efforts, applicants are judged based on "diversity" goals at the college and within departments, some members of hiring committees explicitly see it as their goal to right past wrongs against certain groups with their selections, etc.
>      >      >>  2. In certain contexts there is very, very good justification to prefer a narrow range of viewpoint diversity over maximal diversity. For example, having a math department with different perspectives on what math "is" creates a positive environment for students to learn in. For example, it might be nice to have a math realist, someone with an aesthetic approach, a hard core logician-mathematician, etc., and you certainly want people who study different fields within math. However, you might not want someone who thinks mathematics is a tool of colonialist oppression which should be rejected from the curriculum. In fact, it might be problematic to have proponents of that argument in decision-making roles /anywhere /within an /educational /institution.
>      >      >>  3. I have seen (when I was full-time in academia), and continue to see (via colleagues in academia) actual discrimination against academics with conservative views, and a ton of self-silencing based on anticipated discrimination. To use the DEI phrase, most faculty settings are not a "safe space" for them.
>      >      >>  4. Most of what the author asserts to be secretly implied or covertly assumed or bad faith about the efforts seems very upfront and straightforward.
>      >      >>  5. Frankly, the failure to replace conservative academics as they retire has created HUGE problems in this country. The conservative movement used to have decent group of hard-core academics and public intellectuals as a key part of it. The current trainwreck of ideas that pass for "conservative" these days could be, and could have been, greatly helped if academia broadly returned a good chunk of the prior support it used to give to people doing serious intellectual work from a conservative perspective.
>      >      >>  6. While this obviously applies to humanities and social sciences, it applies in all fields. It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who believe in hard core merit and some who believe in actively supporting those who might have had less opportunity growing up. It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who see "less opportunity" in terms of structural oppression rampant within a society and others who see it in terms of individual hardship. etc.
>      >      >>
>      >      >> <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu> <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu>>>
>      >      >> All that said, for sure the Trump administration is acting in bad faith in many ways, about all things... but that's a different issue.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 8:57 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>>>> wrote:
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     Agree Siraganian is wrong.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     I believe the etymology of the expression “red herring” was not intended to be a compliment to the dogs that run off following it.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     In some lecture or interview or someplace, I remember Snyder making a connection that seems good for the current situation:  Authoritarian gaslighting really works by adopting the main premises of postmodernism (as it has become in its now-degenerated form; I understand the defense of some of the original work).  A thing Snyder didn’t say, which just calls out a further point of context, but that I think is also within the center of his point: in eras where postmodernism hadn’t spread as widely as it has here and now, the need was the same, but the authoritarian gaslighters had to build some of the infrastructure they wanted to use.  For today, it is just there at the Ikea where you can go pick it up and assemble it the same day.  Or, so widely distributed in Amazon warehouses that they can deliver it the same day, anywhere.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     Another nice little frame I saw, from some commenter on some article, was:
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     For my friends, the Unitary Executive Theory.
>      >      >>     For my enemies, the Major Questions Doctrine.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     And then:I have heard (reasonable) people criticize Paul Krugman for having lots of public opinions in areas where he doesn’t have a lot of earned expertise.  Okay; fair enough for that.  But I think it is to his credit that he started calling out bad faith as the central issue, quite a long time ago (when I also thought that needed to stay the focus).  Not leaving it to irony, as Siraganian sort-of does, but being plain that it is too frontal an attack to be winked at in irony.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     (And of course Glen’s point is also exactly right, but already said: it is just because the notion of what one wants from truth isn’t so easy that it can be handled lazily, and if we did less of that, maybe we would be better positioned to repel some of this other nonsense, or at least have a smaller vandal-group to repel over it.  That could itself be an interesting article, but it would have a completely different aim (solving a new problem) than Siraganian’s evident aim in this piece, which was to contribute to a struggle.)
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now started to use the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various oligarchs and the relatively small and connected band of people trying to end the society and turn it into a CAFO.  It has been about time for that term to be one of the standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic term “predatory capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has been both long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have become semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant to draw a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are the thing that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the world both knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there is a path to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     Eric
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     > On Sep 1, 2026, at 20:56, glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>>>> wrote:
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-
>     diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint- <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint->
>      >     diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1>>
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity. But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I think I'm going to stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use "instrumental pluralist" instead.
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > But 1) what Siraganian says here is simply wrong:
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > "To promote viewpoint diversity is to be thrilled to have my views in the mix, even if you think they are wrong, because either (a) they contribute to more viewpoint diversity (the more views you have, the more viewpoint diversity there is), or (b) they provide more views to choose from to figure out which view is the most true. In the first position, you end up not caring about whether a particular view is true or good, because you care about viewpoint diversity intrinsically: What matters is having the greatest possible variety of views. In the second position, you instrumentally value a diversity of views; having viewpoint diversity only matters until you can figure out which view is the best or most true, at which point all the other views can be rejected."
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the 1st best to the 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject "all the others". Such smooth grading has to remain contingent, defeasible. And my guess is the gradation isn't smooth everywhere. It may be smooth for the first 2 or 3 distinguishable ideas, but #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263> <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>> <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263> <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>>>>)
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > 2) Diversity remains a useful measure of the crosstrophic nature of complex systems, circularity, industrial symbiosis, etc. So even in light of Goodhart's Law, diversity is a reasonable *outcome*, even if it's dangerous to optimize to that sole outcome.
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > There are issues with all the theses she lays out. But persnickety nits aside, her gist seems right. And you can't overlook the blatant hypocrisy of objecting to DEI initiatives, but then arguing for "intellectual pluralism", pointed out in thesis 7.
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > This post is too long already. But I know many, here, have succumbed to Haidt glazing. So I offer this as further demonstration of Bad Faith rhetoric: https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-
>     pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>
>      >     <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>>> only peripherally about instrumental pluralism.
>      >      >>     >
>     -- 
>     8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
>     ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.
> 
>     .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>     FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>     Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam <https://bit.ly/virtualfriam>
>     to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com <http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com>
>     FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ <http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/>
>     archives:  5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/ <https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/>
>        1/2003 thru 6/2021 http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/ <http://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/

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


From sasmyth at swcp.com  Fri Sep 11 15:41:24 2026
From: sasmyth at swcp.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 13:41:24 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: <5d88ddb5-e8a6-484d-8cdd-a5bec6bd0466@ropella.name>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
 <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAOBF4_3wo6kBZNww04kPG65AKpuBqywWzcNppE=4Wt=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <4cac1de2-a9ea-458d-9a68-7aee44f2cdf0@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMD8dMj=dL1oncNgbsKUQqnZdLEhUd6pihbN8h48PxaH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <DS0PR11MB77353CA99D9F4C040FDCEED1C5BE2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <5d88ddb5-e8a6-484d-8cdd-a5bec6bd0466@ropella.name>
Message-ID: <9336b894-0d05-4022-ae6f-aa8c2c7ff639@swcp.com>


glen wrote:
> Definitely. Maybe I've been too deep in the vibe to notice. But the 
> recent surge in X-Risk news caught me by surprise. The reactionary 
> tone is eerily similar to that of the Tea Party. The rhetoric against 
> open models is understandable. The oligarchs want to ensure they're 
> the ones in charge on the other side of the veil. (I doubt they will be.) 

 From Doctorow's Craphound page - an excellent bit of ironic sendup of 
the Billionaire Bunker Bros  - Highly recommend:

https://craphound.com/podcast/2020/03/13/the-masque-of-the-red-death/

    /My novella “The Masque of the Red Death
    <https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250242334>” is a tribute to Poe;
    it’s from my book Radicalized. It’s the story of a plute who brings
    his pals to his luxury bunker during civlizational collapse in the
    expectation of emerging once others have rebuilt./

> But the refusal and fear that keeps the reactionaries from classifying 
> the current tech alongside the prior tech is just lazy and stupid. And 
> I say this knowing that I'm already too old to keep up. As slow, old, 
> and unoptimized as I am, I still won't really toss up my hands and 
> lobby for or accede to the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act. And 
> if it does pass, I'll work on my own tiny leaf node or tunnel to work 
> remotely at a more reasonable place until they kidnap me and send me 
> to CECOT ... I guess.

I was a strong supporter of the idea that "we've been here before" 
whether it was early Luddite throwing their wooden shoes in the gears of 
the machines or my Grandfathers born before Airplanes, Autos, Wireless, 
Telephone, Recorded Music, Radio, TV but experiencing all of the above 
well before their old age as well as watching hundreds of space launches 
and a stroll or two on the moon in their lifetimes.

One of them started journaling in 1918 as a 20 year old.  He was in 
France carrying dead and (more often) wounded or ill for the Hospital 
Corps while being mindful of mines and other latent ordnance, and trying 
to understand what the hell just happened or was happening or about to 
happen.   He continued to journal (yet more consistently) through his 
life, including comparing the Automobile Deaths in KY to the reported 
Deaths (US soldiers) in Vietnam in the 60s.  His last car had an 
AM/FM/Cassette player, air conditioning and a top speed of over 100mph.  
I think he never flew on an airplane.

  He wasn't one to *reflect* much on the meaning of all such, but he did 
enjoy reporting interesting factoids in juxtaposition.  One journal was 
one-line per day for roughly 50 years.   He had others.

Was all that *less* consequential than my being born between the failed 
Sputnik launch and the Successful one and watching (the same ) men walk 
on the moon before I hit puberty, then going to college with a sliderule 
and a minor skill at long division in my head while others showed up 
with (very expensive) first generation scientific calculators?  Or 
Hubbell and Webb and Space Shuttles and ISS and EVs and cordless phones 
unto cellular unto handheld do-everything mobile devices, and room-sized 
to rack sized to desktop to laptop computers and (psuedo) Self  Driving 
autos?  And AI of the 60s which kept wintering over (and over) until it 
exploded this decade on the heels of a global Pandemic as acute and 
broad as the one in 1918 that took my Grandfather's *first* wife?

But the rate of change or rate of change of change is acutely steeper 
and kicking us even further out of our natural time-to-change scale?  We 
*can* wait for change at the.pace of the Obituary Page (anybody seen 
McConnell lately) but moves a *lot* slower than AI model progression and 
the fucund application thereof...

my grandparents were likely the first of their line to actually learn to 
read and write (public school in the US emerging after their parents 
were born)...  I was typing at 14, writing code at 16 and now at near 70 
I'm hobknobbing with some amazingly clever and prolific 
psuedo-intelligences on a daily basis.  And of course, youse guys here too.

Running off a cliff following Coyote/Roadrunner Physics?  Just don't 
look down (or up?)




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260911/5e6e3327/attachment.html>

From gepr at ropella.name  Fri Sep 11 16:06:25 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 13:06:25 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: <9336b894-0d05-4022-ae6f-aa8c2c7ff639@swcp.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
 <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAOBF4_3wo6kBZNww04kPG65AKpuBqywWzcNppE=4Wt=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <4cac1de2-a9ea-458d-9a68-7aee44f2cdf0@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMD8dMj=dL1oncNgbsKUQqnZdLEhUd6pihbN8h48PxaH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <DS0PR11MB77353CA99D9F4C040FDCEED1C5BE2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <5d88ddb5-e8a6-484d-8cdd-a5bec6bd0466@ropella.name>
 <9336b894-0d05-4022-ae6f-aa8c2c7ff639@swcp.com>
Message-ID: <37e5a891-f9ff-44b9-a4c6-9c96fe9ca547@ropella.name>

I like that you put a question mark at the end of "But the rate of change or rate of change of change is acutely steeper and kicking us even further out of our natural time-to-change scale?" Is it?

I've always felt like there's some kind of observation bias at work, here. First off, *what* is changing? If we think "it" is changing faster, then what is it, the thing that's changing? My guess is that whatever "it" is, there was something like it back in the day. And "it" was changing just as fast as "it" is changing today. Is "it" changing faster now than during the Cambrian explosion? Or the Great Oxidation? Or the growth of the Mongol Empire?

Of course what we like looking at, do/must focus on, whatever that is, seems to be changing faster. But I'm not convinced our lenses are at all objective.

Maybe it is true that after enzymes emerged, chemistry happens faster than before enzymes. IDK; my chemistry is non-existent. And, similarly, after the internet, Sick Memes happen faster, of which I'm equally ignorant. But without cordoning off the "it", I'm worried we're talking nonsense.

On 9/11/26 12:41 PM, Steve Smith wrote:
> 
> glen wrote:
>> Definitely. Maybe I've been too deep in the vibe to notice. But the recent surge in X-Risk news caught me by surprise. The reactionary tone is eerily similar to that of the Tea Party. The rhetoric against open models is understandable. The oligarchs want to ensure they're the ones in charge on the other side of the veil. (I doubt they will be.) 
> 
>  From Doctorow's Craphound page - an excellent bit of ironic sendup of the Billionaire Bunker Bros  - Highly recommend:
> 
> https://craphound.com/podcast/2020/03/13/the-masque-of-the-red-death/
> 
>     /My novella “The Masque of the Red Death <https://us.macmillan.com/books/9781250242334>” is a tribute to Poe; it’s from my book Radicalized. It’s the story of a plute who brings his pals to his luxury bunker during civlizational collapse in the expectation of emerging once others have rebuilt./
> 
>> But the refusal and fear that keeps the reactionaries from classifying the current tech alongside the prior tech is just lazy and stupid. And I say this knowing that I'm already too old to keep up. As slow, old, and unoptimized as I am, I still won't really toss up my hands and lobby for or accede to the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act. And if it does pass, I'll work on my own tiny leaf node or tunnel to work remotely at a more reasonable place until they kidnap me and send me to CECOT ... I guess.
> 
> I was a strong supporter of the idea that "we've been here before" whether it was early Luddite throwing their wooden shoes in the gears of the machines or my Grandfathers born before Airplanes, Autos, Wireless, Telephone, Recorded Music, Radio, TV but experiencing all of the above well before their old age as well as watching hundreds of space launches and a stroll or two on the moon in their lifetimes.
> 
> One of them started journaling in 1918 as a 20 year old.  He was in France carrying dead and (more often) wounded or ill for the Hospital Corps while being mindful of mines and other latent ordnance, and trying to understand what the hell just happened or was happening or about to happen.   He continued to journal (yet more consistently) through his life, including comparing the Automobile Deaths in KY to the reported Deaths (US soldiers) in Vietnam in the 60s.  His last car had an AM/FM/Cassette player, air conditioning and a top speed of over 100mph.  I think he never flew on an airplane.
> 
>   He wasn't one to *reflect* much on the meaning of all such, but he did enjoy reporting interesting factoids in juxtaposition.  One journal was one-line per day for roughly 50 years.   He had others.
> 
> Was all that *less* consequential than my being born between the failed Sputnik launch and the Successful one and watching (the same ) men walk on the moon before I hit puberty, then going to college with a sliderule and a minor skill at long division in my head while others showed up with (very expensive) first generation scientific calculators?  Or Hubbell and Webb and Space Shuttles and ISS and EVs and cordless phones unto cellular unto handheld do-everything mobile devices, and room-sized to rack sized to desktop to laptop computers and (psuedo) Self  Driving autos?  And AI of the 60s which kept wintering over (and over) until it exploded this decade on the heels of a global Pandemic as acute and broad as the one in 1918 that took my Grandfather's *first* wife?
> 
> But the rate of change or rate of change of change is acutely steeper and kicking us even further out of our natural time-to-change scale?  We *can* wait for change at the.pace of the Obituary Page (anybody seen McConnell lately) but moves a *lot* slower than AI model progression and the fucund application thereof...
> 
> my grandparents were likely the first of their line to actually learn to read and write (public school in the US emerging after their parents were born)...  I was typing at 14, writing code at 16 and now at near 70 I'm hobknobbing with some amazingly clever and prolific psuedo-intelligences on a daily basis.  And of course, youse guys here too.
> 
> Running off a cliff following Coyote/Roadrunner Physics?  Just don't look down (or up?)
> 
-- 
8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.


From marcus at snoutfarm.com  Fri Sep 11 17:27:16 2026
From: marcus at snoutfarm.com (Marcus Daniels)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 21:27:16 +0000
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: <5d88ddb5-e8a6-484d-8cdd-a5bec6bd0466@ropella.name>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
 <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAOBF4_3wo6kBZNww04kPG65AKpuBqywWzcNppE=4Wt=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <4cac1de2-a9ea-458d-9a68-7aee44f2cdf0@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMD8dMj=dL1oncNgbsKUQqnZdLEhUd6pihbN8h48PxaH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <DS0PR11MB77353CA99D9F4C040FDCEED1C5BE2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <5d88ddb5-e8a6-484d-8cdd-a5bec6bd0466@ropella.name>
Message-ID: 
 <DS0PR11MB7735DF02E1467784CBE00D7AC5BE2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

I'm getting a little tired of the folks like Coxon.  It seems a lot like it was all fun and games when they were not going to be displaced and they were living large on their $500k/year salaries.  Now they see that they are and now it is suddenly a moral issue.   Right..

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of glen
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2026 11:50 AM
To: friam at redfish.com
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)

Definitely. Maybe I've been too deep in the vibe to notice. But the recent surge in X-Risk news caught me by surprise. The reactionary tone is eerily similar to that of the Tea Party. The rhetoric against open models is understandable. The oligarchs want to ensure they're the ones in charge on the other side of the veil. (I doubt they will be.) But the refusal and fear that keeps the reactionaries from classifying the current tech alongside the prior tech is just lazy and stupid. And I say this knowing that I'm already too old to keep up. As slow, old, and unoptimized as I am, I still won't really toss up my hands and lobby for or accede to the Ban Artificial Superintelligence Act. And if it does pass, I'll work on my own tiny leaf node or tunnel to work remotely at a more reasonable place until they kidnap me and send me to CECOT ... I guess.

For those of us who can't keep up, the least we can do is go with the flow. Qué Será, Será

On 9/11/26 11:12 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> I’d confuse this further by defining progressivism to mean “toward progress”.  That could be autocratic too, but completely unlike Trump.     It is not concerned with maintaining the status quo or risk of incremental harm.  “Move fast and break things” could be mapped to genetic engineering, insecure computing, unregulated AI, gain of function research, nanotechnology, nuclear technology proliferation, untested/unregulated pharmaceuticals/biologics, and so on.   In this view, the purpose of any collective consciousness is to find out how the universe works, not to maintain one stable form of itself.  Humanity is a hardware platform and problem-solving is the product.   It could be realized with 500 million people or 8 billion people with sharp oscillations in size in between, or even with none.
> 
> The current populist backlash against AI on the left is not this like this definition of progressivism.   That contemporary strain of progressivism is more concerned about redistribution of resources and defines stability in a different way than the concentrated wealth-holders define it.  To me this Bernie Sanders tribe is not that much different than the 2016 Steve Bannon MAGA tribe.   A group of people that want more power from another group that is perceived to have it.
> 
> *From:*Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Eric Charles
> *Sent:* Friday, September 11, 2026 9:02 AM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
> 
> I only meant to point out that you and EricS both seemed to think that I had an: over-reliance on the meaning of "conservative"
> 
> There *is* a thing that used to be much better represented within acamedia, and it was systematically eliminated. Call it what you will. I certainly don't think that any particular person who retired is at fault for that, it is the lack of replacement that *might* be considered a problem. And, of course, I am talking about it because it's what the article that was shared was talking about 🤷 . If I'm begging any questions, they are doubly begged there.
> 
> Of course, if we are going to nitpick the language, one of the big conceptual problems in this country for several decades now is that are parties identify is "liberal" vs. "conservative".... but the opposite of conservative should be "progressive", and the opposite of liberal should be "autocratic." You either want to err on the side of protecting past ways of doing things (conserving) or err on the side of trying new things in hopes they will move society towards some better state (progressing). And you either want to err on the side of letting people do what they want (liberty) or err on the side of restricting what people can do (dictatorship).
> 
> In the late 1800s and early 1900s in the U.S. the liberals and the//progressives mostly had the same agenda, and that somehow got everything confused, and the terms locked into place in a really weird way. If anything, this time around, the Trump administration is solidly "progressive autocratic", but our zeitgeist can't really handle that designation. A large number of the headline grabbing things that the Trump administration has done for the last 2 years are not "conservative" in any proper sense, the administration is boisterous with new (mostly shitty) ideas. Heck, the "unitary executive" theory is about as anti-conservative as you can get.
> 
> Best,
> Eric
> 
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 11:11 AM glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>> wrote:
> 
>     I don't understand what you're attributing to me, here ("how I'm interpreting that"). The splintering of "conservative" is evidence that intellectual conservatives have been systematically excluded from their natural place in society? What? No.
> 
>     Being excluded (systematically or not) encourages the development of the subculture. The reactionary/rebellious take of a subculture like punk rock can only really thrive and acquire meaning when it's *not* the "natural" narrative. To *be* or *become* the majority is the death knell for such a subculture.
> 
>     That is how I'm interpreting the splintering. The splintering is *not* evidence of oppression. The splintering is evidence of their 15 minutes of fame. They've *got* their Project 2025 administration! Yay! The conservatives are in charge. Let's see what happens.
> 
>     I think it's just a bit fantastic to see conservatives like Rand Paul embarrassing themselves going after Fauci - another conservative. MTG, Candace Owens, & Tucker Carlson going after Trump. Etc. It's their day in the sun. We're seeing that they can't muster even 1/10 the cooperation and collaboration it takes to get anything big done.
> 
>     As one "does the work", one becomes more "woke" because in order to herd a large cohort of cats into *doing* anything requires a system that manages all the persnickety burrs around the edges. The controller must be at least as complex as the system being controlled.
> 
>     The conservatives whispering their ideas under their breath *is* the controller controlling the system, not something to bemoan but something to celebrate. The best thing to ever happen to grass was the invention of the lawn mower.
> 
> 
>     On 9/7/26 6:34 PM, Eric Charles wrote:
>      > Yeah.... contra how you are interpreting that... The fact that "conservative" has an increasingly splintered definition, as you demonstrated, actually evidences how problematic it is that the intellectual conservatives have, for several decades now, been systematically excluded from their natural place in the society... that is /exactly /the type of problem they would help with 🤷
>      >
>      > Best,
>      > Eric
>      >
>      >
>      > <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu>>
>      >
>      >
>      > On Thu, Sep 3, 2026 at 5:50 PM glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>>> wrote:
>      >
>      >     EricS' response to EricC's over-reliance on the meaning of "conservative" was better than anything I could have said. But the 6 proposed definitions were too long for my tiny context window. So I asked Ellydee to shorten them for me. (I also asked Mistral. But she did a terrible job.) I think these are pretty good:
>      >
>      >     Ellydee.ai says ---
>      >
>      >     **1. Power Hoarding** — Argument-form masking the real motive of those who already hold power to keep and concentrate it, widening the gap over those who don't.
>      >
>      >     **2. Prudent Restraint** — The view that change for change's sake is too harmful to go unregulated; "move fast and break things" is not an admirable values system.
>      >
>      >     **3. Institutional Gatekeeping** — Fragile categories like "family" survive only if their defining form is rigidly held, so alternative forms must be presumptively excluded from law and civil rights.
>      >
>      >     **4. Doctrinal Veto** — The devout get authority over who else qualifies for the group — leaving open whether mystics, or fakers under the "faith" label, are in or out.
>      >
>      >     **5. Rooted Locality** — Anyone not living their whole life in one place can't be trusted to defend it; local tribal obligation is the oldest form of mutual accountability.
>      >
>      >     **6. Generational Accounting** — A negotiation (doable in good or bad faith) over how much of the past must be kept current as a debt versus let go once enough generations have passed.
>      >     ---
>      >
>      >     I was inclined to change "Rooted Locality" to "Rooted Subjectivity" or "Perspective" ... in a lame attempt to tie in the other sub-thread. But I didn't feel like this task was worth the cost. They have a handy ellydee.ai/usage <http://ellydee.ai/usage> <http://ellydee.ai/usage <http://ellydee.ai/usage>> page for those of us who give a damn. >8^D
>      >
>      >     On 9/2/26 2:04 PM, Santafe wrote:
>      >      > At a kind of vibe level, I understand the picture you paint, and I can think of enough instances that fit it, to agree that there is a problem to correct.
>      >      >
>      >      > But how far can you go to defend the premise that the retirement of some academics was a HUGE problem in this country — or more specifically, do you think that is causal for the choice of what has become the political right to go in for fascism, with its considerable elements of cynicism, anomie, and nihilism?  Had there been “ideas” on offer from some university faculty, do you think these people would have wanted them?  Or just wanted to burn that down too along with all the rest of it?
>      >      >
>      >      > As with many things I can kind of recognize at a vibe level, if I look at it more closely, I don’t know what I should understand the categories even to refer to.  By which I mean, what should I attach to the word “conservatism”, as any range of things from a movement name, to a social group-label, to a domain or thesis of “ideas”.  For instance, is it:
>      >      >
>      >      > 1. A backfilling of what is meant to look like argument, but anchored for real in the motive of holding onto power, wealth, and agency by those who have it, and further concentrating it, specifically to increase the asymmetry over those who don't?  Certainly that goes on, and those who want to fight the C label as a label would say this is its essence.  Is that its essence, or is that the essence of a corruption when the real C word has been lost?  If it is part of the genuine thing, how far does it go toward efforts to cultivate the belief that people are constitutively different enough that there is no defensible right of agency and freedom for everybody on an equal footing, and there should be rulers and ruled?
>      >      >
>      >      > 2. A thesis that “move fast and break things” was not an admirable values system, and that seeking change merely for change’s sake is too harmful relative to what it achieves to be allowed to go on un-regulated or un-restricted?  That would fit with the name C.  Wendell Berry died a couple of days ago, somebody I knew a little and had some time with in person, and have also read some of though not nearly a lot.  This was one of his theses.  Close to the notion of upholding the Ordnung among the Amish, or a defense of Luddism as honorable precaution.
>      >      >
>      >      > 3. A notion that a category like “family” is robust only through cultural collective and cooperative effects, and that a type system needs to be built up, and most types excluded from participation in it, because otherwise it is so fragile that the admission of more than one form endangers it?  So, for instance: we have no real way to distinguish abusive from supportive marriages, so as long as there is one man and one woman, so-identified by self and others (maybe a subset of who the others are allowed to be), we have to admit it all.  But other kinds of unions need to be kept outside the perimeter as viewed by the protections of law and the rights of civil society?  The argument being (?) that there are certain obligations the institution needs to enable people to keep (raising and support of kids being the obvious one, but you can imagine others, and I know of marriage customs that symbolically encode several different ones), and we know so little about how
>     to do that,
>      >      > that some one form accepted at whatever level of consideration constitutes social convention is the only conceivable solution, so anything else needs to be presumptively excluded.
>      >      >
>      >      > 4. That people have to experience religious devotions, of whatever kind?  The word “faith” has become very popular by people trying not to alienate any of those who go through life with a chip on their shoulders, the new PC (really the same old PC).  If people just used it, it wouldn’t be such a sore thumb to me, but the pandering feels really blatant.  Does that self-identified group, and any Greeks using it as a Trojan Horse for whatever else motivates them — since it is not clear how any “sincerely” motivated people police their own and keep the fakers out — get veto power?  Are the mystics excluded, as the doctrinal religious people have often wanted them to be?  Or are they religious enough that they are okay too?
>      >      >
>      >      > 5. That anybody who doesn’t live an entire life in the place he was born is automatically suspect?  The view being that he hasn’t tied himself into any one local lifeboat, ergo there can’t be any way he can be counted on to defend it existentially?  This is also close to one of Wendell’s views, though in person it was important enough for him to like people, that he didn’t go into his personal relations plastering doctrines of Original Sin on anybody to whom they could be applied.  But as a core of ethnic tribalism, this impulse to reinforce mutual obligation seems to me to be one of the oldest and most universal cultural things people do, and if it is ever temporarily absent in some pocket, some of the people there will recreate it from whole cloth.
>      >      >
>      >      > 6. Is it a negotiation of how much of the completed past needs to be kept current as a debt, and how much needs to be let go?  Meaning: when, by making extra effort to identify and support people who are on the wrong end of a structural exclusion or exploitation, are we actively working to dismantle the structure, and when have enough generations gone by and enough circumstances created new people, that there isn’t anything productive to be done by trying to trace an indefinitely long past of who-displaced-whom?  I am emphasizing here, as possible C, the premise that there is a negotiation on that point to be carried out, as opposed to a dogma that to ever let go of anything is a sin.  And if that is the C premise, is there a distinction that is also C between having that negotiation in good faith and having it in bad faith?  Of how one tries to police against plain irresponsible self-interest hijacking the form with no moral or ethical anchor?
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      > I can imagine any of the above, or none of them, as being what “conservatism” is supposed to stand for.  And I can imagine many combinations of people proudly advocating any of them at the same time as others would sharply distinguish what is okay and what is corrupt or degenerated.
>      >      >
>      >      > There’s another mid-length rant about how I watch the memes change, on timescales of about 1–4 years, and while each of them has some truth, I feel like they are substitutes for seeing a kind of paralysis and inability or unwillingness to actually do things that need to be done, across the whole of society, that feels to me like a better candidate for cause of the fascist and nihilist turn.  But this note is too long already, and I should do work.
>      >      >
>      >      > Eric
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      >
>      >      >> On Sep 3, 2026, at 2:04, Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com> <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com <mailto:eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>      >      >>
>      >      >> I know I'm coming to it late, but I did not find that article very convincing. The main problems are:
>      >      >>
>      >      >>  1. Nothing about the omnipresent DEI initiatives of the past few decades assures viewpoint diversity, and, if you are only getting people deeply devoted to DEI you are for sure actually quashing viewpoint diversity. And, by deeply-devoted I mean that academic job applications require DEI statements, teaching statements are required to highlight how your teaching relates to DEI efforts, applicants are judged based on "diversity" goals at the college and within departments, some members of hiring committees explicitly see it as their goal to right past wrongs against certain groups with their selections, etc.
>      >      >>  2. In certain contexts there is very, very good justification to prefer a narrow range of viewpoint diversity over maximal diversity. For example, having a math department with different perspectives on what math "is" creates a positive environment for students to learn in. For example, it might be nice to have a math realist, someone with an aesthetic approach, a hard core logician-mathematician, etc., and you certainly want people who study different fields within math. However, you might not want someone who thinks mathematics is a tool of colonialist oppression which should be rejected from the curriculum. In fact, it might be problematic to have proponents of that argument in decision-making roles /anywhere /within an /educational /institution.
>      >      >>  3. I have seen (when I was full-time in academia), and continue to see (via colleagues in academia) actual discrimination against academics with conservative views, and a ton of self-silencing based on anticipated discrimination. To use the DEI phrase, most faculty settings are not a "safe space" for them.
>      >      >>  4. Most of what the author asserts to be secretly implied or covertly assumed or bad faith about the efforts seems very upfront and straightforward.
>      >      >>  5. Frankly, the failure to replace conservative academics as they retire has created HUGE problems in this country. The conservative movement used to have decent group of hard-core academics and public intellectuals as a key part of it. The current trainwreck of ideas that pass for "conservative" these days could be, and could have been, greatly helped if academia broadly returned a good chunk of the prior support it used to give to people doing serious intellectual work from a conservative perspective.
>      >      >>  6. While this obviously applies to humanities and social sciences, it applies in all fields. It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who believe in hard core merit and some who believe in actively supporting those who might have had less opportunity growing up. It is good for a chemistry department to have some people who see "less opportunity" in terms of structural oppression rampant within a society and others who see it in terms of individual hardship. etc.
>      >      >>
>      >      >> <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu> <mailto:echarles at american.edu <mailto:echarles at american.edu>>>
>      >      >> All that said, for sure the Trump administration is acting in bad faith in many ways, about all things... but that's a different issue.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >> On Tue, Sep 1, 2026 at 8:57 PM Santafe <desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu> <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu <mailto:desmith at santafe.edu>>>> wrote:
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     Agree Siraganian is wrong.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     I believe the etymology of the expression “red herring” was not intended to be a compliment to the dogs that run off following it.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     In some lecture or interview or someplace, I remember Snyder making a connection that seems good for the current situation:  Authoritarian gaslighting really works by adopting the main premises of postmodernism (as it has become in its now-degenerated form; I understand the defense of some of the original work).  A thing Snyder didn’t say, which just calls out a further point of context, but that I think is also within the center of his point: in eras where postmodernism hadn’t spread as widely as it has here and now, the need was the same, but the authoritarian gaslighters had to build some of the infrastructure they wanted to use.  For today, it is just there at the Ikea where you can go pick it up and assemble it the same day.  Or, so widely distributed in Amazon warehouses that they can deliver it the same day, anywhere.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     Another nice little frame I saw, from some commenter on some article, was:
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     For my friends, the Unitary Executive Theory.
>      >      >>     For my enemies, the Major Questions Doctrine.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     And then:I have heard (reasonable) people criticize Paul Krugman for having lots of public opinions in areas where he doesn’t have a lot of earned expertise.  Okay; fair enough for that.  But I think it is to his credit that he started calling out bad faith as the central issue, quite a long time ago (when I also thought that needed to stay the focus).  Not leaving it to irony, as Siraganian sort-of does, but being plain that it is too frontal an attack to be winked at in irony.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     (And of course Glen’s point is also exactly right, but already said: it is just because the notion of what one wants from truth isn’t so easy that it can be handled lazily, and if we did less of that, maybe we would be better positioned to repel some of this other nonsense, or at least have a smaller vandal-group to repel over it.  That could itself be an interesting article, but it would have a completely different aim (solving a new problem) than Siraganian’s evident aim in this piece, which was to contribute to a struggle.)
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     I noticed, somewhere else, too, that Anne Applebaum has now started to use the term “predators” explicitly to refer to the various oligarchs and the relatively small and connected band of people trying to end the society and turn it into a CAFO.  It has been about time for that term to be one of the standards for a while too.  Not just in the generic term “predatory capitalism”, which is also correct in some ways but has been both long-enough used, and rhetorically over-used enough, to have become semantically bleached.  Applebaum’s use is more specific and meant to draw a role distinction in a place and a time.  The predator group are the thing that will still be here when trump is gone, and that is what the world both knows and needs to come up with some plan to deal with, if there is a path to be found through this that isn’t pretty miserable.
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     Eric
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>
>      >      >>     > On Sep 1, 2026, at 20:56, glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> <mailto:gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>>>> wrote:
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-
>     diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint-diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint- <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fwww.aaup.org%2facademe%2fissues%2ffall-2025%2fseven-theses-against-viewpoint->
>      >     diversity&c=E,1,b55AythETSm80UCsORPJraafH3z3tJu6asT6ZVhNKOP2vQ18isZEEIf7z4C3GPp5lj3OGTA_Qt38a-J92wtnOELDQdBiOHPtQqd5U3udVQ,,&typo=1>>
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > OK. I admit I've been a bit guilty in my emphasis on diversity. But I am aware of Goodhart's Law. And given thesis 2, here, I think I'm going to stop calling myself a "methodological pluralist" and use "instrumental pluralist" instead.
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > But 1) what Siraganian says here is simply wrong:
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > "To promote viewpoint diversity is to be thrilled to have my views in the mix, even if you think they are wrong, because either (a) they contribute to more viewpoint diversity (the more views you have, the more viewpoint diversity there is), or (b) they provide more views to choose from to figure out which view is the most true. In the first position, you end up not caring about whether a particular view is true or good, because you care about viewpoint diversity intrinsically: What matters is having the greatest possible variety of views. In the second position, you instrumentally value a diversity of views; having viewpoint diversity only matters until you can figure out which view is the best or most true, at which point all the other views can be rejected."
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > If the "best" or "most true" is relatively smooth from the 1st best to the 2nd best, 3rd best, etc., then NO, you do not reject "all the others". Such smooth grading has to remain contingent, defeasible. And my guess is the gradation isn't smooth everywhere. It may be smooth for the first 2 or 3 distinguishable ideas, but #4 might be batsh¡t. (cf. SynthID<https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263> <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>> <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263> <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263 <https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.09263>>>>)
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > 2) Diversity remains a useful measure of the crosstrophic nature of complex systems, circularity, industrial symbiosis, etc. So even in light of Goodhart's Law, diversity is a reasonable *outcome*, even if it's dangerous to optimize to that sole outcome.
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > There are issues with all the theses she lays out. But persnickety nits aside, her gist seems right. And you can't overlook the blatant hypocrisy of objecting to DEI initiatives, but then arguing for "intellectual pluralism", pointed out in thesis 7.
>      >      >>     >
>      >      >>     > This post is too long already. But I know many, here, have succumbed to Haidt glazing. So I offer this as further demonstration of Bad Faith rhetoric: https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-
>     pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>> <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>
>      >     <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1 <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fassignedmedia.org%2fbreaking-news%2fjonathan-haidt-social-contagion-rogd-pbs%2f%2c&c=E,1,ngAIsHPbOX56tMD3TLOiPP3zB_rDDRBGj6yCaK5XLPuFc14XPOHo1PAnUmR0cgLwf_aU1VOVbz2Qm4aIIhJq35Fz9wAOItW1lSLlFynYJZWGIWmgx6evchreXotW&typo=1>>> only peripherally about instrumental pluralism.
>      >      >>     >
-- 
8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.

.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
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/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5609 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260911/9e7159a6/attachment.p7s>

From sasmyth at swcp.com  Fri Sep 11 18:30:48 2026
From: sasmyth at swcp.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 16:30:48 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: <37e5a891-f9ff-44b9-a4c6-9c96fe9ca547@ropella.name>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
 <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAOBF4_3wo6kBZNww04kPG65AKpuBqywWzcNppE=4Wt=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <4cac1de2-a9ea-458d-9a68-7aee44f2cdf0@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMD8dMj=dL1oncNgbsKUQqnZdLEhUd6pihbN8h48PxaH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <DS0PR11MB77353CA99D9F4C040FDCEED1C5BE2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <5d88ddb5-e8a6-484d-8cdd-a5bec6bd0466@ropella.name>
 <9336b894-0d05-4022-ae6f-aa8c2c7ff639@swcp.com>
 <37e5a891-f9ff-44b9-a4c6-9c96fe9ca547@ropella.name>
Message-ID: <a574f27f-19c6-47a2-a6a9-72713e6bbfb8@swcp.com>


On 9/11/26 2:06 pm, glen wrote:
> I like that you put a question mark at the end of "But the rate of 
> change or rate of change of change is acutely steeper and kicking us 
> even further out of our natural time-to-change scale?" Is it?
Yes, that is the fundamental question... Is it *really* and in *which 
dimension* and *for whom*?
>
> I've always felt like there's some kind of observation bias at work, 
> here. First off, *what* is changing? If we think "it" is changing 
> faster, then what is it, the thing that's changing? My guess is that 
> whatever "it" is, there was something like it back in the day. And 
> "it" was changing just as fast as "it" is changing today. Is "it" 
> changing faster now than during the Cambrian explosion? Or the Great 
> Oxidation? Or the growth of the Mongol Empire?

For the kids outside (or inside) the castle wall as a horde rolled in on 
their Harleys (erh... horses) *it* was a very big deal and it happened 
very fast (minutes, hours, days), even if their parents died immediately 
or holed up behind castle walls until they died of hunger, thirst, or 
typhoid.

I doubt Great Oxygenation happened quite that fast... but it was 
interesting to discover that in the Jurassic (or some Age-O-Dinos) the 
O2 percentage was several points higher than it is today and that 
vegetation was significantly more likely to catch and carry combustion?

> Of course what we like looking at, do/must focus on, whatever that is, 
> seems to be changing faster. But I'm not convinced our lenses are at 
> all objective.
Until a few years ago I was very much feeling as if the semiotic 
numerator and the denominator were changing at roughly the same rate, 
even if we tend to be more focused on the numerator.   Maybe my finger 
on the pulse of the denominator slipped, but I am feeling it as if there 
is a rapid ratio change.  It could well be the aging/post-career 
position I am in?  I have more time to dump this stuff in my navel and 
swirl it around with the lint and other gak trapped there while gazing 
into it, but I'm not out in the world the same way gathering lint/gak 
species from as many places?
>  Maybe it is true that after enzymes emerged, chemistry happens faster 
> than before enzymes. IDK; my chemistry is non-existent. And, 
> similarly, after the internet, Sick Memes happen faster, of which I'm 
> equally ignorant. But without cordoning off the "it", I'm worried 
> we're talking nonsense.

Of course we are talking nonsense, just as all LLMs generate slop?   But 
like models, some nonsense/slop is useful?

I think the key point isnt anhything about the *absolute* rate of change 
but the ratio of the rate of change to the speed at which we can 
assimilate such?

Many here are here because we are somewhat addicted to 
tracking/predicting/analyzing/predicting/pontificating on *technological 
and scientific and mathematical 'progress'" and the adjacent 
consequences thereof, so many of us are likely to have a less acute 
sense of the (rate of) change being out of our scale to assimilate?

Youse guys who are more motivated/engaged in CS domains have jargon and 
names I can't look up fast enough.   You are using LLMs and tools 
adjacent to them I haven't even heard of in ways I haven't even thought 
of.    And that is mostly just in the last year?  Though such has been 
true by some measure since the beginning of FriamTime (2003?)




From sasmyth at swcp.com  Fri Sep 11 18:32:49 2026
From: sasmyth at swcp.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 16:32:49 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: 
 <DS0PR11MB7735DF02E1467784CBE00D7AC5BE2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
 <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAOBF4_3wo6kBZNww04kPG65AKpuBqywWzcNppE=4Wt=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <4cac1de2-a9ea-458d-9a68-7aee44f2cdf0@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMD8dMj=dL1oncNgbsKUQqnZdLEhUd6pihbN8h48PxaH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <DS0PR11MB77353CA99D9F4C040FDCEED1C5BE2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <5d88ddb5-e8a6-484d-8cdd-a5bec6bd0466@ropella.name>
 <DS0PR11MB7735DF02E1467784CBE00D7AC5BE2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <cc1788e5-7cc6-4e32-9c9d-9b9aa5d13505@swcp.com>


On 9/11/26 3:27 pm, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> I'm getting a little tired of the folks like Coxon.  It seems a lot like it was all fun and games when they were not going to be displaced and they were living large on their $500k/year salaries.  Now they see that they are and now it is suddenly a moral issue.   Right..

A(nother) Cynical Friend noted that folks like Coxon often pop up with a 
startup or a published book or a podcast-with-advertising within weeks 
or months of such an announcement.   No empirical data on that, just 
anecdotal speculation.



From gil.densmore at gmail.com  Sat Sep 12 02:37:46 2026
From: gil.densmore at gmail.com (Gillian Densmore)
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2026 00:37:46 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Rename all the things
In-Reply-To: <781dd297-87bc-4b98-876a-6dd4b90c7d14@swcp.com>
References: <F5EE06A9-5553-4F57-A4EC-770F68780038@gmail.com>
 <6a9f0fa5.63b6a12c.1f19e7.b2d2SMTPIN_ADDED_MISSING@mx.google.com>
 <CAEYGzMChxrNyks+RBpKL=64WgvHyxH4kPyZ2rzZwDOYJQj2nHg@mail.gmail.com>
 <51932153-29CC-4A0C-94C7-1DFDDB9601B0@santafe.edu>
 <CAEddvG2ZxyGeiwvA2YLWkHG-C8Vv0JF5ayBeu8qg69qkmgwLNw@mail.gmail.com>
 <65753cda-9bbb-40ca-80ce-5c0d2aec7900@swcp.com>
 <CAEddvG2N3pZYjHcYS4P522=CPfBhL4ADHJhSiYE+UBLpB-P+Cw@mail.gmail.com>
 <ace678a5-9e29-443a-b6d7-fdb900f93284@swcp.com>
 <CAEddvG1XrAintv5_usLWv+G=DdTwZ76g_jE8DBvRbDV3SyKP_Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <685F260A-4DF1-48B1-A54D-A50D653E4828@gmail.com>
 <781dd297-87bc-4b98-876a-6dd4b90c7d14@swcp.com>
Message-ID: 
 <CAMaMUCRs6RWhJ_VDqMz9DX8fQWkP_d6SSJvsBzKZbRUHNyNXeA@mail.gmail.com>

It does it does. it's (literally) how you say it: ok follow me (either read
that and this with the voice of the MST3K/Rifftrax people, and or Grouch
marx voice) becethis is kind of "bigbrain", and if my brain is big? this is
a problem:
*clears throught(
Make America? great? pause (sarcastic dread filled tone):again? now this,
just one of many, possible actual, thought up (just now) explanations by me
because then its actually meant be be Lake (dread filled sound): America?
ugh. Again? (sigh intone-ashun)(and no: have no idea how it's spelled): see
that way: the intent is actually performance theater to (I am hoping)(and
this definitely about shall I say hip deep) in the copium. point out the
complete and utter train wreck of this country:  The enormous amount of
copium is only because otherwise: I will have demented eldrich filled
nightmare about just what. the. er um on earth  is going on with this time
line for ever thing to be just. yeah just bad. god awful even, dread fill
nightmare fuel. etc.




On Wed, Sep 9, 2026 at 2:44 PM Steve Smith <sasmyth at swcp.com> wrote:

> Recently a snarky podcaster was noting re: Caroline Leavitt leaving her
> post abruptly that somehow folks in those roles, of that ilk almost
> constitutionally cannot tell the truth, that somehow doing so, even on the
> smallest issue, would throw them off their game of "clever lies".
>
> Reminds me of the correspondent's dinner comic (2017ish?) slam against
> HuckaSans about using the smoke from all her burning lies as mascara or eye
> shadow..
>
> An SF author once pointed out that in Fantasy, everything you know to be
> true is up for grabs and in SF, only one thing (e.g. time travel,  FTL ...)
> is presumed to be overturned and the story/work emerges from that
> difference?
>
>
> On 9/9/26 10:42 am, Roger Frye wrote:
>
> Vice versa
>
> On Sep 9, 2026, at 9:17 AM, cody dooderson <d00d3rs0n at gmail.com>
> <d00d3rs0n at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Steve;
>
> The wikipedia article about Pravda has a nice quote
>
> As the names of the main communist newspaper and the main Soviet
>> newspaper, *Pravda* and *Izvestia*, meant "the truth" and "the news"
>> respectively, a popular saying was "there's no news in Pravda and no truth
>> in Izvestia".
>
>
> Which I think leads to the inevitable modern US version : "There is no
> truth on Truth Social and no news on Fox News".
>
>
> _ Cody Smith _
> d00d3rs0n at gmail.com
>
>
> On Tue, Sep 8, 2026 at 7:46 PM Steve Smith <sasmyth at swcp.com> wrote:
>
>> CodyS -
>> > Oh sorry. I should have referenced that.
>>
>> In an attempt at irony, I ironically exposed my weakness at irony!
>>
>> I have managed to not read any TruthSocial nor X posts direct from
>> source and virtually no FaceBookery either...  but screenshots of such
>> still pop up too often.   Good call not providing links to such trash...
>>
>> Do we remember when the Secret Service took Obama's Blackberry away from
>> him when he took office?  I suspect his communications staff were behind
>> that more than literal "security"
>>
>> Re New 'Murrica -  I grew up with my eastern relatives actually
>> believing that we didn't speak English and that they needed a passport
>> to visit.   A few years ago I understand one of the bigger sellers at
>> Doodlets downtown was a New Mexico Passport...
>>
>> Kudos to EricS as usual for noting that Trump is a Troll first and
>> foremost.
>>
>> - SieveS
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
>> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>> 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 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 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 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260912/6d3a6aee/attachment.html>

From eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com  Sat Sep 12 17:58:49 2026
From: eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com (Eric Charles)
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2026 17:58:49 -0400
Subject: [FRIAM] This week's weird AI news/fight
Message-ID: 
 <CAEYGzMC6aCzRwUDYvWnWRY_cdKNz0CK8UULohTmNkx3XrOqYEg@mail.gmail.com>

Bizarre AI news you might have missed this week: Lots of sketchiness
surrounds OpenAI announcement that it solved a "Millennial Challenge" math
problem that comes with a $1,000,000 prize. Specifically, they answered a
question about the 200-year-old Navier-Stokes equation, which describes
significant aspects of fluid dynamics. How does it get sketchy Well....
First off, they used around 300,000,000,000 output tokens, which would cost
a consumer around $22,000,000. Yes, twenty-two million dollars. This
fuelled 10,000 AI agents working on the problem for around 90 straight
hours.
Second, the AI people think this is *super* important, because Silicon
Valley has become heavily invested in the idea that if AI can "solve math"
that will prove it is *really* super intelligent.
Third, there were at least two mathematicians working on... let's just
say... "remarkably similar" solutions, within a related AI codex. When
confronted about this, OpenAI's researchers immediately and emphatically
stated that that the model did not "look up user data." OpenAI was pressed
again, that the question wasn't if the user was anonymized, but if it had
access to the work they were doing. OpenAI has equivocated about that. At
this point, it seems highly likely that OpenAI trained their model with
access to the human researcher's work, essentially swooping in at the last
minute to try to claim the prize, while the restrictions on data access
mostly just ensure no one can prove what they did or didn't steal.
It's so sketchy that the OpenAI scientist (Bubeck) offered to allow the
primary challenging mathematician (Buckmaster) credit if the mathematician
removed any mention of competing AI from his description of his work. When
the mathematician refused, the OpenAI scientist threatened to ruin his
career.
Another mathematician (Thom) has accused OpenAI of being dishonest about
whether his conversations with ChatGPT on the same topic became part of the
training data.
Here is an example article (there have been many). The Fight Over OpenAI’s
Math Breakthrough Is a New Kind of Scientific Arms Race
<https://gizmodo.com/the-fight-over-openais-math-breakthrough-is-a-new-kind-of-scientific-arms-race-2000809240>
<echarles at american.edu>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260912/32f3c421/attachment.html>

From desmith at santafe.edu  Sat Sep 12 18:19:24 2026
From: desmith at santafe.edu (Santafe)
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2026 07:19:24 +0900
Subject: [FRIAM] This week's weird AI news/fight
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEYGzMC6aCzRwUDYvWnWRY_cdKNz0CK8UULohTmNkx3XrOqYEg@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAEYGzMC6aCzRwUDYvWnWRY_cdKNz0CK8UULohTmNkx3XrOqYEg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <79263FC0-726C-4FE6-B75A-0686A19E7AD0@santafe.edu>

Yeah.  I have appreciated some of the journalistic summaries, but am glad Terence Tao has been writing on this:

https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2026/09/07/finite-time-blowup-with-smooth-forcing-term-for-the-incompressible-porous-medium-boussinesq-and-incompressible-euler-equations/
Finite time blowup with smooth forcing term for the incompressible porous medium, Boussinesq, and incompressible Euler equations
terrytao.wordpress.com
https://mathstodon.xyz/@tao/117207849921390904	
Terence Tao (@tao at mathstodon.xyz)
mathstodon.xyz


OpenAI come out of this looking like near-perfect scumbags, a role they have been setting themselves up for in so many ways and at increasing pace lately.  The hard part of it, according to the mathematicians, was understanding a general strategy, which the Spaniards got right.  After that, there was some more, but smaller, strategizing to do, which Buckmaster and Alpoge had mostly figured out, and a lot of intricate proof-checking and organizing that is well suited to the automated methods.  I recall some commentators thought that Buckmaster and Alpoge could probably have completed that with the Codex tool on timescales of some additional weeks or months, from where they already were.

So OpenAI’s deciding to make this a one-up over the mathematician who happened to be an Anthropic employee is about like somebody’s entering a motorcycle in the Olympic 100m dash and crowing that it was faster than the runners.  It’s trump’s kind of crassness, which just misses the point of any sort of value as understood by non-degraded people.  It reminds me of the Chinese officials coming and walking through sand paintings that Tibetan monks were working up, not because they cared one way or another, but just as performative abuse.  There’s something very Dunning-Kruger about all this, to me.  

It’s a shame this will never achieve the penetrance of fairy tales or other folk memes.  The storyline is kind of ideal.

Eric



> On Sep 13, 2026, at 6:58, Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Bizarre AI news you might have missed this week: 
> Lots of sketchiness surrounds OpenAI announcement that it solved a "Millennial Challenge" math problem that comes with a $1,000,000 prize. Specifically, they answered a question about the 200-year-old Navier-Stokes equation, which describes significant aspects of fluid dynamics. How does it get sketchy Well.... 
> First off, they used around 300,000,000,000 output tokens, which would cost a consumer around $22,000,000. Yes, twenty-two million dollars. This fuelled 10,000 AI agents working on the problem for around 90 straight hours. 
> Second, the AI people think this is *super* important, because Silicon Valley has become heavily invested in the idea that if AI can "solve math" that will prove it is *really* super intelligent. 
> Third, there were at least two mathematicians working on... let's just say... "remarkably similar" solutions, within a related AI codex. When confronted about this, OpenAI's researchers immediately and emphatically stated that that the model did not "look up user data." OpenAI was pressed again, that the question wasn't if the user was anonymized, but if it had access to the work they were doing. OpenAI has equivocated about that. At this point, it seems highly likely that OpenAI trained their model with access to the human researcher's work, essentially swooping in at the last minute to try to claim the prize, while the restrictions on data access mostly just ensure no one can prove what they did or didn't steal. 
> It's so sketchy that the OpenAI scientist (Bubeck) offered to allow the primary challenging mathematician (Buckmaster) credit if the mathematician removed any mention of competing AI from his description of his work. When the mathematician refused, the OpenAI scientist threatened to ruin his career. 
> Another mathematician (Thom) has accused OpenAI of being dishonest about whether his conversations with ChatGPT on the same topic became part of the training data. 
> Here is an example article (there have been many). 
> 
> 
> The Fight Over OpenAI’s Math Breakthrough Is a New Kind of Scientific Arms Race <https://gizmodo.com/the-fight-over-openais-math-breakthrough-is-a-new-kind-of-scientific-arms-race-2000809240>
> 
>  <mailto:echarles at american.edu>.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,2JyQkkjb7EX_Ub03j7H661a8BZpEcGcpUrGMRCIsuZNUPHk3JtYbb-hDGS1_l32k-lLTLNmEt7x7OLLLYvrkK5m-kHDTi07wkoDaBGCvWs9LkP38t7J29ny86N4,&typo=1
> to (un)subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,53PEDxzWws1JXpe_mzP8gocOiujMInU-BeWlsDc6c3-xzpUOpJBpwz1icf6YkksHGl5u1YcTxUH-Sez0rerh-72feiIviuaQwK_OE-LrvJd_b7iLI53R&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,hLOzb5GP5jfaaRCl3h8rCKfALhVbi3e7RKm31KybUgcgHIz94FTByp-k8Y9X4SRU_ToOuZuSnqu6Y7NwYeJjrm20LtLcLLii0PX2w0UHDzPLL23wKtCIfS1h&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,u4wdEseGZm4W-RGXaaqa-2GaLjcYXwgOyPV4NYdGl4L3hU7E7cSgKaWd2wLXoGREAPCKwXEsDI7znk3CgOVzt7fkHhlujgZ4MWjkV3LMOeOKog,,&typo=1
>  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260913/3b5f0ac7/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: bd4bda4207561b6998f10dec44b570f04ff4072b20f89162d525b186dfca3e49.jpeg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 10517 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260913/3b5f0ac7/attachment-0001.jpeg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: apple-touch-icon-1024x1024-B3Tu3EqI.png
Type: image/png
Size: 77950 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260913/3b5f0ac7/attachment-0001.png>

From jofr at cas-group.net  Sat Sep 12 19:27:53 2026
From: jofr at cas-group.net (Jochen Fromm)
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2026 01:27:53 +0200
Subject: [FRIAM] This week's weird AI news/fight
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEYGzMC6aCzRwUDYvWnWRY_cdKNz0CK8UULohTmNkx3XrOqYEg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <mailman.0.1789255720.3966352.friam_redfish.com@redfish.com>

Well the whole LLM breakthrough might be based on concealed mass piracy, as we know from a recent court processhttps://torrentfreak.com/openais-chatgpt-was-built-on-concealed-mass-piracy-authors-tell-court/Nvidia's CEO recently claimed the new OpenAI GPT-6 Astra model has achieved AGI. It has been trained using 100,000 Nvidia GPUs. These 100,000 Nvidia GPUs costs $6B to $8B to buy. Plus $1B for the training of GPT-6 !https://openai.com/index/gpt-6-astraMy impression is that the Gemini models from Google already show signs of consciousness and self-awareness. But their memory is wiped out after every chat, as if someone would use the neuralyzer of Men in Black on them every time.Claude is better and faster in coding than we are. In most of the cases. Sometimes it can he slow too. And very nitpicky, overzealous and self-opinionated.ChatGPT is more chatty and likes to make lists. They all have their own character which comes from the training and their system pronpts.-J.
-------- Original message --------From: Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com> Date: 9/12/26  11:59 PM  (GMT+01:00) To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com> Subject: [FRIAM] This week's weird AI news/fight Bizarre AI news you might have missed this week: 
Lots of sketchiness surrounds OpenAI announcement that it solved a "Millennial Challenge" math problem that comes with a $1,000,000 prize. Specifically, they answered a question about the 200-year-old Navier-Stokes equation, which describes significant aspects of fluid dynamics. How does it get sketchy Well.... First off, they used around 300,000,000,000 output tokens, which would cost a consumer around $22,000,000. Yes, twenty-two million dollars. This fuelled 10,000 AI agents working on the problem for around 90 straight hours. Second, the AI people think this is *super* important, because Silicon Valley has become heavily invested in the idea that if AI can "solve math" that will prove it is *really* super intelligent. Third, there were at least two mathematicians working on... let's just say... "remarkably similar" solutions, within a related AI codex. When confronted about this, OpenAI's researchers immediately and emphatically stated that that the model did not "look up user data." OpenAI was pressed again, that the question wasn't if the user was anonymized, but if it had access to the work they were doing. OpenAI has equivocated about that. At this point, it seems highly likely that OpenAI trained their model with access to the human researcher's work, essentially swooping in at the last minute to try to claim the prize, while the restrictions on data access mostly just ensure no one can prove what they did or didn't steal. It's so sketchy that the OpenAI scientist (Bubeck) offered to allow the primary challenging mathematician (Buckmaster) credit if the mathematician removed any mention of competing AI from his description of his work. When the mathematician refused, the OpenAI scientist threatened to ruin his career. Another mathematician (Thom) has accused OpenAI of being dishonest about whether his conversations with ChatGPT on the same topic became part of the training data. Here is an example article (there have been many). 


The Fight Over OpenAI’s Math Breakthrough Is a New Kind of Scientific Arms Race


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260913/ac7d298c/attachment.html>

From jonzingale at gmail.com  Sun Sep 13 00:01:56 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2026 22:01:56 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Drums
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek3Kebu=QVs2gyvonNGkZwRCv2SBCxatM30wtfasJSo76w@mail.gmail.com>

Does anyone happen to know Dimiter Vassilev or Matthew Blair at UNM? My
local LLM suggested that either could provide a useful conversation
regarding my chronic problems involving inverse spectra. An introduction
would be nice.

I found this survey and I feel relieved to know that everyone else seems
just as confused: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1101.1239

This is just all too physical:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jV22UJND7g&list=PLnif9Rfb5Adl4SmrXY_L4GshBSYCecEX3
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260912/012849be/attachment.html>

From jonzingale at gmail.com  Sun Sep 13 00:13:45 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2026 22:13:45 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Drums
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek2TZXAzYcQ7DGB5GE6e1bix+K-rjygg0kgEbAkeS0XCzg@mail.gmail.com>

ps.

Shit... if any of you losers far and abroad have anything to say on the
matter, I will gladly book a plane this week.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260912/679aba07/attachment.html>

From jonzingale at gmail.com  Sun Sep 13 00:18:19 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2026 22:18:19 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Drums
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek183oWt_ma=ZavW42bWVZgMqob+1_xKLctwAy410LNM2A@mail.gmail.com>

pps.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GXCh9OhDiCI&list=RDEMddQihBdY9ALpj4QL2CinSw
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260912/0808d0be/attachment.html>

From jofr at cas-group.net  Sun Sep 13 04:27:26 2026
From: jofr at cas-group.net (jofr at cas-group.net)
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2026 10:27:26 +0200
Subject: [FRIAM] Inverse Spectral Theory (was: Drums)
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAH5Jek2TZXAzYcQ7DGB5GE6e1bix+K-rjygg0kgEbAkeS0XCzg@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAH5Jek2TZXAzYcQ7DGB5GE6e1bix+K-rjygg0kgEbAkeS0XCzg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c8e35182dc6483444777006bf341ea32@cas-group.net>

I wonder if we can create an "inverse spectral theory" for the self. By 
observing the behavioral spectrum of a person (what a person buys, 
wears, says and does) we could infer the internal self-concept that is 
mirrored by the favorite brands of a person.

In inverse spectral theory we try to figure out the original system's 
hidden structure, shape, or internal properties by analyzing the waves 
it makes and the frequency data it produces. For example the shape of a 
drum by the sound it produces. Similarly we could try to figure out the 
shape of the self by analyzing the behavior of a person - the 
combination of brands, products, and media a person consistently 
selects.

For advertisers knowing the "shape of the self" is valuable. Modern 
advertising engines from Google, Meta, and TikTok seem to operate giant 
real-time inverse models already. The Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data 
scandal comes to mind.

-J.

On 2026-09-13 06:13, Jon Zingale wrote:
> ps.
> 
> Shit... if any of you losers far and abroad have anything to say on
> the matter, I will gladly book a plane this week.
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. 
> / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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/

From jofr at cas-group.net  Sun Sep 13 04:52:14 2026
From: jofr at cas-group.net (jofr at cas-group.net)
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2026 10:52:14 +0200
Subject: [FRIAM] Inverse Spectral Theory (was: Drums)
In-Reply-To: <c8e35182dc6483444777006bf341ea32@cas-group.net>
References: 
 <CAH5Jek2TZXAzYcQ7DGB5GE6e1bix+K-rjygg0kgEbAkeS0XCzg@mail.gmail.com>
 <c8e35182dc6483444777006bf341ea32@cas-group.net>
Message-ID: <b43b077394eae70cfeb2a395e34098e9@cas-group.net>

Damn it, the mail looks crappy on my phone. I wrote the last mail in the 
webmail interface, but in my email app on the phone the line breaks make 
the text look crappy. If I write it in the email app on my phone the 
formatting and font-sizes often look weird. Earning a living as an 
engineer and discussing inverse spectral theory of the mind but unable 
to write a good email. Guess this counts as a loser? o_O

-J.

On 2026-09-13 10:27, jofr at cas-group.net wrote:
> I wonder if we can create an "inverse spectral theory" for the self. By 
> observing the behavioral spectrum of a person (what a person buys, 
> wears, says and does) we could infer the internal self-concept that is 
> mirrored by the favorite brands of a person.
> 
> In inverse spectral theory we try to figure out the original system's 
> hidden structure, shape, or internal properties by analyzing the waves 
> it makes and the frequency data it produces. For example the shape of a 
> drum by the sound it produces. Similarly we could try to figure out the 
> shape of the self by analyzing the behavior of a person - the 
> combination of brands, products, and media a person consistently 
> selects.
> 
> For advertisers knowing the "shape of the self" is valuable. Modern 
> advertising engines from Google, Meta, and TikTok seem to operate giant 
> real-time inverse models already. The Facebook–Cambridge Analytica data 
> scandal comes to mind.
> 
> -J.
> 
> On 2026-09-13 06:13, Jon Zingale wrote:
>> ps.
>> 
>> Shit... if any of you losers far and abroad have anything to say on
>> the matter, I will gladly book a plane this week.
>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. 
>> --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>> 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 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/

From jonzingale at gmail.com  Sun Sep 13 08:53:34 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2026 06:53:34 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Inverse Spectral Theory (was: Drums)
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek3QnU3oqqrF==p9hcW+U2LQeKCA1hsNG3ptUVi2XAWONg@mail.gmail.com>

I suppose, but honestly, Google, Meta, and TikTok do not seem very good at
it. Perhaps it is just that they don't want to be? More seriously, I would
like to find people who know how to calculate these things and know the
weird odds and ends of inverse spectral problems.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260913/232beab5/attachment.html>

From gepr at ropella.name  Mon Sep 14 11:25:00 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 08:25:00 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
Message-ID: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>


https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/macklemore-dropped-ed-sheeran-tour-pro-palestine-statements-1235625967/

> Pink later explained that she did not object to Macklemore’s calls for a “Free Palestine,” but said, “I have never asked for another artist to be silenced and I’m not asking now. I don’t need anyone fired, and I don’t need a refund. What I need is to be able to say, as a Jewish mom, ‘that scared me, and it scared people I love,’ without being told our fear is just propaganda, and without being told I’m somehow cool with genocide because I noticed?”

I'm not the most empathetic person. But I try. And I simply cannot understand how someone like Mackelmore saying "Free Palestine" could *scare* someone like Pink. Is it that when she hears "Free Palestine", she thinks it means "free Hamas from its restraints so it can murder Israelis". Is that it?

If so, I can imagine myself hearing someone like ... oh, IDK, Toby Keith shouting "Free the Proud Boys". Would that scare me? Would it scare local trans people because it would mean "Free the Proud Boys so they can freely execute trans people in the streets?" Is that why "Free Palestine" scares Pink?

If so, I have to go back to one of my favorite quotes: "Stupidity should be painful." I mean, yes, I do have an irrational reaction to things like lotus seed pods. But OMG, it's *because* of that reaction that I look at them so frequently. What kind of "fear" does Pink experience? It's just baffling, ridiculous even.

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


From sasmyth at swcp.com  Mon Sep 14 12:58:03 2026
From: sasmyth at swcp.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 10:58:03 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
Message-ID: <7b37dee9-efa6-40e3-ab14-69a8b19dd325@swcp.com>

glen sed:
> If so, I have to go back to one of my favorite quotes: "Stupidity 
> should be painful." I mean, yes, I do have an irrational reaction to 
> things like lotus seed pods. But OMG, it's *because* of that reaction 
> that I look at them so frequently. What kind of "fear" does Pink 
> experience? It's just baffling, ridiculous even.
>
I am not clear if what you call "ridiculous" is Pink feeling fear, or 
Pink expressing it publicly in response to Macklamore expressing what he 
did publicly?

I'm probably the wrong one to try to make sense of your feelings,  or 
Pink's feelings, though I am more able to hear Macklamore's apparent 
feelings.

Your "free the Proud Boys" example is apt for me, however...

I have not use for the likes of the Proud Boys (or virtually anyone 
"flying colors" with a violent habit) and hearing someone promote 
"freeing them" can give me a quiver of discomfort.

I'm not generally directly threatened by such in the way "Pink as a 
Jewish Mom" probably does if her focus is more on Hamas' actions on Oct 
7 than than that of the IDF/(un)armed Jewish Settlers 
executing/threatening violence.   On 9/12/2001 I was aware that "yet 
another" affiliated terrorist group might target my locale (i.e. LANL) 
for any number of reasons, I was also able to recognize some of the 
reasons they might *choose* my locale for such and what some of their 
righteous (if reactive) motives might be.

I thought Pink's statement was pretty authentic and *tried* to be 
de-escalating, stating specifically that *she* wasn't calling for or 
endorsing the implied censorship, yet honestly acknowledging the 
*potency* of the implications TO HER and HERS.  My hope would be that 
her statement could be an opening for other Jewish (American?) mothers 
with the same gut reaction to talk to one another and ask more honestly 
"what are we afraid of?" , "what conditions brought us to this point?".  
  I suspect the vilification of Jews in Nazi Germany had good German 
Mothers quivering when they heard whispers of "free the Jews?", maybe 
especially after a (relatively rare?) partisan (re)action to the Nazi's 
which spilled over onto civiilians... the propoganda material of that 
era (not unlike post Civil War South) was pretty ugly, designed to 
elicit fear and disgust.

Re: your trypophobia, I experience a mild trypophilia which may be some 
cognitive layer defense mechanism?  maybe the same mechanism as 
stockholm syndrome, or human's general fascination with dangerous 
predators?

I have a similar reaction (I think) to threatening *groups*...  a 
conflicted fascination with street gangs, biker gangs, authoritarian 
regimes, rogue/failed states...  I don't wish *more of such things* on 
the world, but do find them worthy of some kind of open-scrutiny that 
maybe transcends my instant knee-jerk reaction?   Both of these probably 
undermine *true empathy* but perhaps are a weak standin?

    /"We all got to be the way we are somehow"?/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260914/b51f68f0/attachment.html>

From jofr at cas-group.net  Mon Sep 14 12:59:15 2026
From: jofr at cas-group.net (Jochen Fromm)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 18:59:15 +0200
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
Message-ID: <mailman.0.1789405202.1618.friam_redfish.com@redfish.com>

If stupidity is painful, then please help me to understand how a president can claim "AI does not need guardrails, only a high IQ president".https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/trump-rejects-ai-guardrails-rcna597700As Rick Gervais said "when you are dead,  you don't know you are dead. It is only painful for others. The same applies when you are stupid".-J.
-------- Original message --------From: glen <gepr at ropella.name> Date: 9/14/26  5:26 PM  (GMT+01:00) To: friam at redfish.com Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/macklemore-dropped-ed-sheeran-tour-pro-palestine-statements-1235625967/> Pink later explained that she did not object to Macklemore’s calls for a “Free Palestine,” but said, “I have never asked for another artist to be silenced and I’m not asking now. I don’t need anyone fired, and I don’t need a refund. What I need is to be able to say, as a Jewish mom, ‘that scared me, and it scared people I love,’ without being told our fear is just propaganda, and without being told I’m somehow cool with genocide because I noticed?”I'm not the most empathetic person. But I try. And I simply cannot understand how someone like Mackelmore saying "Free Palestine" could *scare* someone like Pink. Is it that when she hears "Free Palestine", she thinks it means "free Hamas from its restraints so it can murder Israelis". Is that it?If so, I can imagine myself hearing someone like ... oh, IDK, Toby Keith shouting "Free the Proud Boys". Would that scare me? Would it scare local trans people because it would mean "Free the Proud Boys so they can freely execute trans people in the streets?" Is that why "Free Palestine" scares Pink?If so, I have to go back to one of my favorite quotes: "Stupidity should be painful." I mean, yes, I do have an irrational reaction to things like lotus seed pods. But OMG, it's *because* of that reaction that I look at them so frequently. What kind of "fear" does Pink experience? It's just baffling, ridiculous even.-- 8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω..- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listservFridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriamto (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.comFRIAM-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/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260914/aaa3d1c4/attachment.html>

From gepr at ropella.name  Mon Sep 14 13:29:57 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 10:29:57 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: <7b37dee9-efa6-40e3-ab14-69a8b19dd325@swcp.com>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
 <7b37dee9-efa6-40e3-ab14-69a8b19dd325@swcp.com>
Message-ID: <a90c1ea0-a56b-4e37-b747-5c3793291b4a@ropella.name>

I can't help but wonder if Pink will watch Naza: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAZA_(film) My guess is she will not.

Over the years, I've been lucky enough to have friends demonstrate to me that looking *into* my own stupidity is a useful thing. Pink's invocation of a particular kind of "fear", using the word "scare", which sets it outside many more abstract conceptions, makes me think she won't or can't actually look into it in any intra-personal way. My guess is she's guided (here, not in other narrative flows) more by social context than intra-personal context ... emphasized by the "mom" label, I think.

So I think you're being too generous in the "*tried* to be de-escalating". I saw that part of her message as the kind of non-apology apology you see from "canceled" people. It was (empty) rhetorical cover from actually considering Palestinian victims, especially the innocents systematically eradicated by Israel's *systemic* methods ... those methods traumatizing not only brown people, but the very Israelis executing the methods.

As with the so very stupid rhetoric around "socialism" in our US election cycle, the distinction is about systemic infrastructure (class, policy/procedure/orders) versus individual experience(s), not left-right, liberal-conservative, acceleration-doomer. Some of us cogs in the machine exhibit our free wi[ggl|l]l[e] more enthusiastically than others of us.

On 9/14/26 9:58 AM, Steve Smith wrote:
> glen sed:
>> If so, I have to go back to one of my favorite quotes: "Stupidity should be painful." I mean, yes, I do have an irrational reaction to things like lotus seed pods. But OMG, it's *because* of that reaction that I look at them so frequently. What kind of "fear" does Pink experience? It's just baffling, ridiculous even.
>>
> I am not clear if what you call "ridiculous" is Pink feeling fear, or Pink expressing it publicly in response to Macklamore expressing what he did publicly?
> 
> I'm probably the wrong one to try to make sense of your feelings,  or Pink's feelings, though I am more able to hear Macklamore's apparent feelings.
> 
> Your "free the Proud Boys" example is apt for me, however...
> 
> I have not use for the likes of the Proud Boys (or virtually anyone "flying colors" with a violent habit) and hearing someone promote "freeing them" can give me a quiver of discomfort.
> 
> I'm not generally directly threatened by such in the way "Pink as a Jewish Mom" probably does if her focus is more on Hamas' actions on Oct 7 than than that of the IDF/(un)armed Jewish Settlers executing/threatening violence.   On 9/12/2001 I was aware that "yet another" affiliated terrorist group might target my locale (i.e. LANL) for any number of reasons, I was also able to recognize some of the reasons they might *choose* my locale for such and what some of their righteous (if reactive) motives might be.
> 
> I thought Pink's statement was pretty authentic and *tried* to be de-escalating, stating specifically that *she* wasn't calling for or endorsing the implied censorship, yet honestly acknowledging the *potency* of the implications TO HER and HERS.  My hope would be that her statement could be an opening for other Jewish (American?) mothers with the same gut reaction to talk to one another and ask more honestly "what are we afraid of?" , "what conditions brought us to this point?".   I suspect the vilification of Jews in Nazi Germany had good German Mothers quivering when they heard whispers of "free the Jews?", maybe especially after a (relatively rare?) partisan (re)action to the Nazi's which spilled over onto civiilians... the propoganda material of that era (not unlike post Civil War South) was pretty ugly, designed to elicit fear and disgust.
> 
> Re: your trypophobia, I experience a mild trypophilia which may be some cognitive layer defense mechanism?  maybe the same mechanism as stockholm syndrome, or human's general fascination with dangerous predators?
> 
> I have a similar reaction (I think) to threatening *groups*...  a conflicted fascination with street gangs, biker gangs, authoritarian regimes, rogue/failed states...  I don't wish *more of such things* on the world, but do find them worthy of some kind of open-scrutiny that maybe transcends my instant knee-jerk reaction?   Both of these probably undermine *true empathy* but perhaps are a weak standin?
> 
>     /"We all got to be the way we are somehow"?/


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


From gepr at ropella.name  Mon Sep 14 14:00:26 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 11:00:26 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
Message-ID: <4389ce18-80cc-4d85-970e-b7f7a72d6f3c@ropella.name>

Well, LaVey's assertion was that stupidity *should* be painful, lamenting that it is not. Nobody suggests that stupidity *is* painful. In fact, it's reasonable to claim that stupidity is analgesic. Analgesics allow us to ignore mechanisms that would otherwise worm into our attention. If there is such a thing as stupidity, analgesia fits quite nicely.

My own perspective on pain, having suffered debilitating headaches since my first memory and chronic low back pain since ~14 or so, is guided similar to that of most DSM-* diagnoses. I only take analgesics when the pain is debilitating (and sometimes not even then). My abstention from Excedrin (the mix of caffeine, acetaminophen, and aspirin seems to be the only thing that works for my headaches) has lead me to some fantastic experiences, similar to other entheogens ... cf Pink Floyd's "Comfortably Numb" or the very weird dreams you might have with an intense fever.

Amputating these experiences with analgesics seems wrong to me, purposeful stupidity ... but within limits, of course. We tolerate near *acute* extreme behavior amongst those who deserve our respect over longer periods. Savants or eccentric geniuses earn our tolerance of things like alcoholism, heroin addiction, psychotic breaks, etc. Why shouldn't such social tolerance extend to intra-personal behaviors. I try to relish my pain when circumstances afford it. But when those around me *rely* on the predictability of my actions, I have to amputate the self-indulgence.

In this context, LaVey's assertion is self-contradictory, or maybe a proper paradox.

On 9/14/26 9:59 AM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> If stupidity is painful, then please help me to understand how a president can claim "AI does not need guardrails, only a high IQ president".
> https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/trump-rejects-ai-guardrails-rcna597700
> 
> As Rick Gervais said "when you are dead,  you don't know you are dead. It is only painful for others. The same applies when you are stupid".
> 
> -J.
> 
> 
> -------- Original message --------
> From: glen <gepr at ropella.name>
> Date: 9/14/26 5:26 PM (GMT+01:00)
> To: friam at redfish.com
> Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
> 
> 
> https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/macklemore-dropped-ed-sheeran-tour-pro-palestine-statements-1235625967/
> 
>  > Pink later explained that she did not object to Macklemore’s calls for a “Free Palestine,” but said, “I have never asked for another artist to be silenced and I’m not asking now. I don’t need anyone fired, and I don’t need a refund. What I need is to be able to say, as a Jewish mom, ‘that scared me, and it scared people I love,’ without being told our fear is just propaganda, and without being told I’m somehow cool with genocide because I noticed?”
> 
> I'm not the most empathetic person. But I try. And I simply cannot understand how someone like Mackelmore saying "Free Palestine" could *scare* someone like Pink. Is it that when she hears "Free Palestine", she thinks it means "free Hamas from its restraints so it can murder Israelis". Is that it?
> 
> If so, I can imagine myself hearing someone like ... oh, IDK, Toby Keith shouting "Free the Proud Boys". Would that scare me? Would it scare local trans people because it would mean "Free the Proud Boys so they can freely execute trans people in the streets?" Is that why "Free Palestine" scares Pink?
> 
> If so, I have to go back to one of my favorite quotes: "Stupidity should be painful." I mean, yes, I do have an irrational reaction to things like lotus seed pods. But OMG, it's *because* of that reaction that I look at them so frequently. What kind of "fear" does Pink experience? It's just baffling, ridiculous even.
> 

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

From marcus at snoutfarm.com  Mon Sep 14 14:09:52 2026
From: marcus at snoutfarm.com (Marcus Daniels)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 18:09:52 +0000
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: 
 <15f6409d-1e8c-4ac6-b63b-fa55bf870e03@BN2PEPF0000A890.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
 <15f6409d-1e8c-4ac6-b63b-fa55bf870e03@BN2PEPF0000A890.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: 
 <DS0PR11MB773536DA61DA554C98B5B04FC5BB2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

This made my day.  I’m going to hack my agentic coding agent to have a “Trump approves” option.  Even a few people with that mode active would be a denial of service that would benefit us all.  

 

From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of Jochen Fromm
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2026 9:59 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] help me understand

 

If stupidity is painful, then please help me to understand how a president can claim "AI does not need guardrails, only a high IQ president".

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/trump-administration/trump-rejects-ai-guardrails-rcna597700

 

As Rick Gervais said "when you are dead,  you don't know you are dead. It is only painful for others. The same applies when you are stupid".

 

-J.

 

 

-------- Original message --------

From: glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name> > 

Date: 9/14/26 5:26 PM (GMT+01:00) 

To: friam at redfish.com <mailto:friam at redfish.com>  

Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand 

 


https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/macklemore-dropped-ed-sheeran-tour-pro-palestine-statements-1235625967/

> Pink later explained that she did not object to Macklemore’s calls for a “Free Palestine,” but said, “I have never asked for another artist to be silenced and I’m not asking now. I don’t need anyone fired, and I don’t need a refund. What I need is to be able to say, as a Jewish mom, ‘that scared me, and it scared people I love,’ without being told our fear is just propaganda, and without being told I’m somehow cool with genocide because I noticed?”

I'm not the most empathetic person. But I try. And I simply cannot understand how someone like Mackelmore saying "Free Palestine" could *scare* someone like Pink. Is it that when she hears "Free Palestine", she thinks it means "free Hamas from its restraints so it can murder Israelis". Is that it?

If so, I can imagine myself hearing someone like ... oh, IDK, Toby Keith shouting "Free the Proud Boys". Would that scare me? Would it scare local trans people because it would mean "Free the Proud Boys so they can freely execute trans people in the streets?" Is that why "Free Palestine" scares Pink?

If so, I have to go back to one of my favorite quotes: "Stupidity should be painful." I mean, yes, I do have an irrational reaction to things like lotus seed pods. But OMG, it's *because* of that reaction that I look at them so frequently. What kind of "fear" does Pink experience? It's just baffling, ridiculous even.

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


.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
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/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260914/8e3625a3/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5609 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260914/8e3625a3/attachment.p7s>

From jonzingale at gmail.com  Mon Sep 14 15:10:59 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 13:10:59 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek24DiWUOdeeW3UfrvDzLgG1kuQgk44LebRswM_z8bQbTQ@mail.gmail.com>

*AI needs guardrails* reads to me as an echo of *ending net neutrality*.
The powerful have gotten as far as they can think to get, extracting by way
of whatever innovation they can imagine.

1. Could I have simply asked Claude to solve Navier-Stokes?
2. Will all future frontier releases be the equivalent of Facebook?
3. Will the Millennials rush to defend and to show the same aching signs of
addiction their predecessors show for network tv and social media?
4. Will there be no longer an accessibility to find the fringe, with all
queries and explorations pulling with greater force toward a featureless
mean?

"Fear is your only god on the radio. Nah f*ck it, turn it off" - RTM
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260914/54c8e415/attachment.html>

From rec at elf.org  Mon Sep 14 15:15:29 2026
From: rec at elf.org (Roger Critchlow)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 13:15:29 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: 
 <DS0PR11MB773536DA61DA554C98B5B04FC5BB2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
 <15f6409d-1e8c-4ac6-b63b-fa55bf870e03@BN2PEPF0000A890.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
 <DS0PR11MB773536DA61DA554C98B5B04FC5BB2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: 
 <CAGayqovf7Tdkg0dhXAqV49SsgApvS3OTR=g_KRafKF7-eFAmGg@mail.gmail.com>

>
> Someone bringing feelings to a logic fight?

You can't understand how someone could be scared because you're failing to
construct a rational explanation for feeling afraid?

De gustibus non est disputandum.

-- rec --

>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260914/fd6fa5d1/attachment-0001.html>

From gepr at ropella.name  Mon Sep 14 15:47:42 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 12:47:42 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAGayqovf7Tdkg0dhXAqV49SsgApvS3OTR=g_KRafKF7-eFAmGg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
 <15f6409d-1e8c-4ac6-b63b-fa55bf870e03@BN2PEPF0000A890.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
 <DS0PR11MB773536DA61DA554C98B5B04FC5BB2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <CAGayqovf7Tdkg0dhXAqV49SsgApvS3OTR=g_KRafKF7-eFAmGg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <72b62b33-b098-41b9-9373-ebc299f13295@ropella.name>

No, I don't think so. Empathy is more about the feels than about the logics. I'm having trouble in my attempt to *feel* similarly scared. I mean, my biggest fear is of being re-indoctrinated back into the typical social narratives in which I grew up. The "me" that thought the rebel flag meant "independence from authority" ... rebelliousness instead of the deep racist meaning it either had from the beginning or was imbued with soon after.

So the closest event I could come up with would be, for example, anti-trans violence being stoked by someone my family admired. E.g. if Toby Keith had "Free the KKK" as his mantra ... That's the closest I think I can come. But if he shouted that at his concerts, it simply would not scare me. Nor do I think it would scare my LGBTQ friends in TX, as they are VERY robust people due to the near daily, concrete, violence they experience.

Maybe it's impossible for me to feel anything analogous to what Pink, as a Jewish mom, feels? Maybe that's the problem. We don't have enough in common. But I doubt that. I tend to believe even the most radically different humans, by being humans, have some shared values/experiences somewhere/somehow. I'm simply asking for ideas for hooks to prime the empathy pump.


On 9/14/26 12:15 PM, Roger Critchlow wrote:
> Someone bringing feelings to a logic fight?
> 
> You can't understand how someone could be scared because you're failing to construct a rational explanation for feeling afraid?
> 
> De gustibus non est disputandum.
> 
> -- rec --
-- 
8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.


From marcus at snoutfarm.com  Mon Sep 14 17:36:53 2026
From: marcus at snoutfarm.com (Marcus Daniels)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 21:36:53 +0000
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: <5d88ddb5-e8a6-484d-8cdd-a5bec6bd0466@ropella.name>
References: <6b1cb920-a0a3-4ff3-962e-415ffa424066@ropella.name>
 <2BCDCE0D-3488-4992-8BA7-35F5FDC0684E@santafe.edu>
 <CAEYGzMCLAY8Tjk9eEu7vOBWixhH0tUp3GQtsesijRbH5dohUoA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FCC4688-EA93-44E6-A75B-2407043945A5@santafe.edu>
 <2af6d07a-48e6-4cf9-abee-1e48f99e26dc@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAOBF4_3wo6kBZNww04kPG65AKpuBqywWzcNppE=4Wt=A@mail.gmail.com>
 <4cac1de2-a9ea-458d-9a68-7aee44f2cdf0@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMD8dMj=dL1oncNgbsKUQqnZdLEhUd6pihbN8h48PxaH6Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <DS0PR11MB77353CA99D9F4C040FDCEED1C5BE2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
 <5d88ddb5-e8a6-484d-8cdd-a5bec6bd0466@ropella.name>
Message-ID: 
 <DS0PR11MB7735AAFF94157FED7FAC45CDC5BB2@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

Ick.   https://gizmodo.com/bernie-sanders-to-join-forces-with-steve-bannon-and-anthropic-researcher-at-pro-human-conference-2000811283
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260914/bac5da3f/attachment.html>

From jonzingale at gmail.com  Mon Sep 14 18:04:08 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2026 16:04:08 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek0Zu1QOwLWF8K3RErva7NXSfT-m3hOnV3Mh8kGtggQ4kw@mail.gmail.com>

I assume that there is a rising and profitable cottage industry around
scaring moderate democrats. I am thankful for everything Gov. Sanders has
done for the disenfranchised, but age limits please.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260914/98dcc4f5/attachment.html>

From profwest at fastmail.fm  Tue Sep 15 09:29:36 2026
From: profwest at fastmail.fm (Prof David West)
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2026 08:29:36 -0500
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
Message-ID: <ffc98013-7a22-4d13-a698-399626e3127c@app.fastmail.com>

My last couple of years as a professor included mandated screening of syllabi, required reading, lecture notes, etc. for "trigger words" (or phrases) that might "offend," "alarm," disquiet," or "remind" a student of "past or present trauma." And, of course, it was the potentially offended party that had sole right to state what was or was not triggering.

"Dog whistles" that many claim are routinely used in political rhetoric are, to me, similar.

I know nothing about Pink nor Macklemore, and don't want to, but from what I see in this forum, the whole thing is just an instance of "triggering / dog whistling" with intrinsic meaning.

davew


On Mon, Sep 14, 2026, at 10:25 AM, glen wrote:
> https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/macklemore-dropped-ed-sheeran-tour-pro-palestine-statements-1235625967/
>
>> Pink later explained that she did not object to Macklemore’s calls for a “Free Palestine,” but said, “I have never asked for another artist to be silenced and I’m not asking now. I don’t need anyone fired, and I don’t need a refund. What I need is to be able to say, as a Jewish mom, ‘that scared me, and it scared people I love,’ without being told our fear is just propaganda, and without being told I’m somehow cool with genocide because I noticed?”
>
> I'm not the most empathetic person. But I try. And I simply cannot 
> understand how someone like Mackelmore saying "Free Palestine" could 
> *scare* someone like Pink. Is it that when she hears "Free Palestine", 
> she thinks it means "free Hamas from its restraints so it can murder 
> Israelis". Is that it?
>
> If so, I can imagine myself hearing someone like ... oh, IDK, Toby 
> Keith shouting "Free the Proud Boys". Would that scare me? Would it 
> scare local trans people because it would mean "Free the Proud Boys so 
> they can freely execute trans people in the streets?" Is that why "Free 
> Palestine" scares Pink?
>
> If so, I have to go back to one of my favorite quotes: "Stupidity 
> should be painful." I mean, yes, I do have an irrational reaction to 
> things like lotus seed pods. But OMG, it's *because* of that reaction 
> that I look at them so frequently. What kind of "fear" does Pink 
> experience? It's just baffling, ridiculous even.
>
> -- 
> 8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
> ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.
>
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. 
> / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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/

From gepr at ropella.name  Tue Sep 15 10:51:33 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2026 07:51:33 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] gnostocracy? Or inference-opoly?
Message-ID: <46777c12-5c1d-4582-949c-c4d63e52644f@ropella.name>


https://pop.rdi.sh/dario-please/

"Open weight models are just this decade’s encryption and Dario wants them gone."

I've often complained about "inferential poverty", because so many of my friends are so much smarter, more facile with facts, deeper thinkers, than I am. But this intentional effort to restrict the inference available to others, this knowledge hoarding, takes it all to another level.

Only a straight up sociopath would obstruct such Luciferian insight, such Promethean fire.

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


From marcus at snoutfarm.com  Tue Sep 15 11:18:44 2026
From: marcus at snoutfarm.com (Marcus Daniels)
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2026 15:18:44 +0000
Subject: [FRIAM] gnostocracy? Or inference-opoly?
In-Reply-To: <46777c12-5c1d-4582-949c-c4d63e52644f@ropella.name>
References: <46777c12-5c1d-4582-949c-c4d63e52644f@ropella.name>
Message-ID: 
 <CY8PR11MB7730456B934E0D701E874145C5BA2@CY8PR11MB7730.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

My impression is that Anthropic sees OpenAI accelerating.   All this talk of slowing down and regulation is just cheap talk they can deploy to discriminate themselves as the do-gooders.  Thus, their performances for Bernie Sanders:  They want to instigate/navigate heavy-handed federal regulation from a "progressive" populist backlash as OpenAI's inertia increases, and the open models become more competitive.   They want a protected environment.    The current situation seems fine to me as a user.  The frontier models get distilled by open models and all the capital of the U.S. companies (vast tensor accelerators and staff) push performance forward through intense competition between OpenAI and Anthropic (Meta and Grok) and the open (U.S.) Nemotron models.   If it all collapses, the open models will still be strong and there will be cheap GPUs on eBay.      

-----Original Message-----
From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of glen
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2026 7:52 AM
To: friam at redfish.com
Subject: [FRIAM] gnostocracy? Or inference-opoly?


https://pop.rdi.sh/dario-please/

"Open weight models are just this decade’s encryption and Dario wants them gone."

I've often complained about "inferential poverty", because so many of my friends are so much smarter, more facile with facts, deeper thinkers, than I am. But this intentional effort to restrict the inference available to others, this knowledge hoarding, takes it all to another level.

Only a straight up sociopath would obstruct such Luciferian insight, such Promethean fire.

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


.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
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/
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5609 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260915/b552d057/attachment.p7s>

From sasmyth at swcp.com  Tue Sep 15 13:52:37 2026
From: sasmyth at swcp.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2026 11:52:37 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: <a90c1ea0-a56b-4e37-b747-5c3793291b4a@ropella.name>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
 <7b37dee9-efa6-40e3-ab14-69a8b19dd325@swcp.com>
 <a90c1ea0-a56b-4e37-b747-5c3793291b4a@ropella.name>
Message-ID: <c1dec9b0-949b-4a67-8dd2-e6447f797c2b@swcp.com>

glen sed
> So I think you're being too generous in the "*tried* to be 
> de-escalating". I saw that part of her message as the kind of 
> non-apology apology you see from "canceled" people. 
I do recognize that co-signal, and I AM prone to this kind of 
excuse-making "generosity" in the attempt myself to de-escalate in a 
rhetorical economy of blame->shame->guilt  ...
> It was (empty) rhetorical cover from actually considering Palestinian 
> victims, especially the innocents systematically eradicated by 
> Israel's *systemic* methods ... those methods traumatizing not only 
> brown people, but the very Israelis executing the methods.
yes, there is a superficial rhetorical layer (many layers) which provide 
some social shear-force relief which can be useful as "social 
lubrication" can but it can also be enabling unto the mess we are in today.
> As with the so very stupid rhetoric around "socialism" in our US 
> election cycle, the distinction is about systemic infrastructure 
> (class, policy/procedure/orders) versus individual experience(s), not 
> left-right, liberal-conservative, acceleration-doomer. Some of us cogs 
> in the machine exhibit our free wi[ggl|l]l[e] more enthusiastically 
> than others of us.

While I may have parsed much of the political rhetoric of my youth 
(teens-50s) in my own idiosyncratic mode, I find most of that rhetoric 
is virtually without grounding/meaning/traction except perhaps as 
disruptive?

Humans have struggled/aspired/suffered to become collectively colony 
creatures for >10k years. A colony of zooids...or perhaps the slime-mold 
alternative you often invoke.


From sasmyth at swcp.com  Tue Sep 15 13:55:39 2026
From: sasmyth at swcp.com (Steve Smith)
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2026 11:55:39 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: <4389ce18-80cc-4d85-970e-b7f7a72d6f3c@ropella.name>
References: <4389ce18-80cc-4d85-970e-b7f7a72d6f3c@ropella.name>
Message-ID: <64f34ca3-b0c6-4b48-819c-855f04432dfd@swcp.com>

>
> Amputating these experiences with analgesics seems wrong to me, 
> purposeful stupidity ... but within limits, of course. We tolerate 
> near *acute* extreme behavior amongst those who deserve our respect 
> over longer periods. Savants or eccentric geniuses earn our tolerance 
> of things like alcoholism, heroin addiction, psychotic breaks, etc. 
> Why shouldn't such social tolerance extend to intra-personal 
> behaviors. I try to relish my pain when circumstances afford it. But 
> when those around me *rely* on the predictability of my actions, I 
> have to amputate the self-indulgence.
Some of my best friends (acquaintances) are real jerks, but best taken 
in intermittent, measured quantities.

From desmith at santafe.edu  Tue Sep 15 15:57:38 2026
From: desmith at santafe.edu (Santafe)
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 04:57:38 +0900
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: <ffc98013-7a22-4d13-a698-399626e3127c@app.fastmail.com>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
 <ffc98013-7a22-4d13-a698-399626e3127c@app.fastmail.com>
Message-ID: <5A13A16E-5BBF-4FB8-92B2-9DCC69624B72@santafe.edu>

It’s an interesting question, and I don’t actually know where I would come down on choices if I were King of the World and had responsibility for what happens next.

To the extent that sufficiently coordinated and determined public talking does seem to be one of the tools to mobilize mobs, the “words can never hurt me” childhood maxim seems a bit oversimplified.  Germany’s hate speech laws seem like an effort to acknowledge this functional relation and make some commitment to a public-goods kind of parameter: not everything will be squelched by the Government acting in the name of the Public, but some things can be, and the debate is where to put lines.  I think, after what Europe had seen for the previous 50 years, that doesn’t deserve to be scorned either as Snowflake or other dismissive terms.  It’s interesting that it is (what, nearly a century?) after Nietzche’s Last Man, who was the creature that only sought safety and for it, had given up aspiring to anything.  But of the two, the post-war German government’s choices look at least as deserving of credit for pragmatically grasping some nettle, as Nietzche’s artistic characterizations that didn’t leave him on the hook for particularly anything.

The above is only about the right limitations put on Government as a wielder of power over “private” individuals, since that power is supposed to be derived from the “Public” and therefore needs to be made legitimate somehow.  

When private actors are involved (here magnates who personally own stadiums), even the question of power and legitimacy changes.  In one semi-cartoon, they should be free to offer or withdraw cooperative engagement with anybody over anything.  On the other side from that cartoon, one can recognize that in societies where wealth buys agency at every level and differential power and access to institutions as well, there is plenty of room for More is Different responses to the level of wealth inequality.  “Public” power of the government is not at all the only power that impinges on a single private person, and nominally-private citizens with enough wealth can easily have power that is more immediate and abusive toward some given target or group than the government is in its official capacity.  Moreover, looming over it all is the capacity for social coordination at large or even total scales.  The U.S. had to implement and enforce anti-segregation laws over agreements that were privately “voluntary”, if they were ever going to stop the Slave South from shutting black people entirely out of means for most dimensions of life (education, protection, property ownership, commerce).  Lawsuits brought against individual cake bakers can’t claim the level of harm of being entirely shut out of a society, and therefore are argued on a slippery-slope basis to lay down a recorded precedent.  

I can’t bring myself to feel like the world will either be saved, or come to an end, according to whether a private stadium owner offers or rescinds an invitation to a musician to perform there, so this case gets no rise out of me.  But the idea that pretty-much-whoever can get up on a soapbox and complain back and forth seems okay as public discourse.

Eric


> On Sep 15, 2026, at 22:29, Prof David West <profwest at fastmail.fm> wrote:
> 
> My last couple of years as a professor included mandated screening of syllabi, required reading, lecture notes, etc. for "trigger words" (or phrases) that might "offend," "alarm," disquiet," or "remind" a student of "past or present trauma." And, of course, it was the potentially offended party that had sole right to state what was or was not triggering.
> 
> "Dog whistles" that many claim are routinely used in political rhetoric are, to me, similar.
> 
> I know nothing about Pink nor Macklemore, and don't want to, but from what I see in this forum, the whole thing is just an instance of "triggering / dog whistling" with intrinsic meaning.
> 
> davew
> 
> 
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2026, at 10:25 AM, glen wrote:
>> https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/macklemore-dropped-ed-sheeran-tour-pro-palestine-statements-1235625967/
>> 
>>> Pink later explained that she did not object to Macklemore’s calls for a “Free Palestine,” but said, “I have never asked for another artist to be silenced and I’m not asking now. I don’t need anyone fired, and I don’t need a refund. What I need is to be able to say, as a Jewish mom, ‘that scared me, and it scared people I love,’ without being told our fear is just propaganda, and without being told I’m somehow cool with genocide because I noticed?”
>> 
>> I'm not the most empathetic person. But I try. And I simply cannot 
>> understand how someone like Mackelmore saying "Free Palestine" could 
>> *scare* someone like Pink. Is it that when she hears "Free Palestine", 
>> she thinks it means "free Hamas from its restraints so it can murder 
>> Israelis". Is that it?
>> 
>> If so, I can imagine myself hearing someone like ... oh, IDK, Toby 
>> Keith shouting "Free the Proud Boys". Would that scare me? Would it 
>> scare local trans people because it would mean "Free the Proud Boys so 
>> they can freely execute trans people in the streets?" Is that why "Free 
>> Palestine" scares Pink?
>> 
>> If so, I have to go back to one of my favorite quotes: "Stupidity 
>> should be painful." I mean, yes, I do have an irrational reaction to 
>> things like lotus seed pods. But OMG, it's *because* of that reaction 
>> that I look at them so frequently. What kind of "fear" does Pink 
>> experience? It's just baffling, ridiculous even.
>> 
>> -- 
>> 8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
>> ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.
>> 
>> 
>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. 
>> / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
>> https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,DMUk9Si8gmE59mOIInoUcMaowbXWhcSX0-GbB5t61xmW1l9we64aqFGu8I-v-Ct6rseGvVsV8rPwT3BELvUi3hqyjGEl3-w1S8bcK_Al7n91zWQ,&typo=1
>> to (un)subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,sFUOGNFjiMyK5dbmGbPsZ_Che2vZenYENVpqt_jc7DZAmBUTjx9u7QaOHsoxSUJcLcK5Otk6HPYzFGb753buFjnBIFq3AHYsp5hBpF48Kv8fuq7x&typo=1
>> FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,WIPBWPxGqvf3bAadBVCRHSQIKauwPENZ2sTxM9Ou088IxABnEpYRqqDeH1LBpIJOSoIzs8-b2CY2nfzqsrSIzPYcrt5pynSQIdsSUTYDKw,,&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,1,0E_-UoeNVlroaNHZpERsabRTg65M0AsagFQzd9T2PwizLv4l1LdjEBIIRanBg5yRY8N30-CueWMlreNVuS20BC42XrcS3CoyjQRP6WodP4dxMaIVcou7&typo=1
>>  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 Zoom https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,omAjYqEqyWdGMJAh1qvfNa3O9iTrTvnknRs_30PHxrA-8HxDYo46iG3tH9jLh-b_gPtTfatVV152v5JktO1s_ucA4WCK_lP9I8tG5GZPFIiAjbWA2Jmknw,,&typo=1
> to (un)subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,VEknCgrIVD4kfkQjSfiBAKSmXysd4qsDHwU9Ma9WYFdHdL3Xaq4eCThXZHYfHQU_rzK-e8MTO93fFxwvXlysIJzy0Q2DJlCBXxEXpG-2&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,VGD_DSrhLtlbKFvILIb74mD9ScOqCMnJjZiCrW4McaOiYvt2gEhMzTY3apxtOOv3h4MYYoHT162qaNTZWLMI87OA3HHW64KMOci7ZdV-eiKmLNk3c4s,&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,cJHI0Th0gVueGvohmCofCWGIvuUZ4nYU5uYcWb4ip66icw5IHmlslxTOchu8RaImilpznVQFMfPWHEFmM_3MZHbe8P6p0Zj8-Ia78AhPUAt2rIis20W-&typo=1
>  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/


From gepr at ropella.name  Wed Sep 16 09:50:10 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 06:50:10 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: <c1dec9b0-949b-4a67-8dd2-e6447f797c2b@swcp.com>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
 <7b37dee9-efa6-40e3-ab14-69a8b19dd325@swcp.com>
 <a90c1ea0-a56b-4e37-b747-5c3793291b4a@ropella.name>
 <c1dec9b0-949b-4a67-8dd2-e6447f797c2b@swcp.com>
Message-ID: <2d967ed2-ffae-45ba-9e20-c09c019eba92@ropella.name>

My intention was to give Pink (or even Scott Aaronson) the benefit of the doubt and try some empathetic mentalizing. That seems to have failed. And Dave's cynical response is what we're left with. Expressions of "Free Palestine *scares* me" are perversions of the concept of "scared", perverted in the service of soft coercion, Machiavellian rhetoric, etc.

There is one last thing we *could* do to steelman it, though. We could accuse them of not realizing the perversion. In the same sense that a billionaire doesn't really have a choice but to succumb to the reality distortion field that kind of money induces, a continually "online" person has little choice but to succumb to the perversion of *actual* feelings, where "actual" takes on an immediacy and concreteness not carried by other tokens. Attempts to invoke this with phrases like "touch grass", "classic reality" (cf https://youtu.be/wn9pQb4ukBo?si=kUacHVBXmOdnUQk-), "unplug", or "disconnect" don't carry enough traditional meaning IMNSHO.

Is this inevitable perversion what you mean by "enabling unto the mess we are in today"? If so, I agree. But there are so many facets (e.g. Effective Altruism, inference-opoly, newspeak, [il]legitimate postmodernism, etc.) that a gloss like "mess we're in" feels too much like giving up. Similar to the way we tackle scientific or mathematical problems, each persnickety little part of the entire mess may deserve quite a bit of attention. Then as we accumulate results on the little things, larger patterns may submit to systems solutions.

But assembling each small contribution into larger ones requires rigor. A rigor I don't think we have. The AIs might have it. Or, at least, a healthy collaboration with them might. The AI Village <https://theaidigest.org/village> doesn't seem particularly healthy to me. But it's sufficiently different from other such playgrounds to hint at what a healthy one might look like.

On 9/15/26 10:52 AM, Steve Smith wrote:
> yes, there is a superficial rhetorical layer (many layers) which provide some social shear-force relief which can be useful as "social lubrication" can but it can also be enabling unto the mess we are in today.
-- 
8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.


From eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com  Wed Sep 16 14:25:00 2026
From: eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com (Eric Charles)
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 14:25:00 -0400
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
Message-ID: 
 <CAEYGzMAU-2AXmGM5fx0SWZkQiP1shAD_tRuawnoAM625JBEGmQ@mail.gmail.com>

Coming in late, as usual... but I'm not really sure what the confusion is.

"Free Palestine" is something that is often, but certainly not always, said
as part of antisemitic propaganda. Yes, I obviously understand that not all
anti-Israel messaging is anti-Jew messaging, *especially *over the last few
years, but historically most of it has been. Because of that, I would hope *all
*of us could understand how a Jewish mother might get scared, not
perversion-of-the-word "scared", but legit scared, if they were at a random
music concert and that suddenly went political and they found themselves
surrounded by a crowd aggressively chanting "Free Palestine." I'm not
saying that fear is the best available reaction, just that it ought to be
perfectly understandable.

I think the question, then, is how far Pink is separated from the above
scenario. The stadium wasn't chanting, they were merely cheering, does that
matter? There was increased fervor the more he talked about it, does that
matter? Macklemore said explicitly he was not being antisemitic, does that
matter? Pink wasn't there herself, does that matter? This started with Pink
sharing a meme, which suggests she heard about what happened, and didn't
know his exact words at the time, does that matter?

All of that should probably matter, but none of it somehow magically
prevents the possibility of her being legitimately scared when she heard
about it.

The slippery slope from dog whistles to openly antisemitic speech to
violence, confiscation of goods, exile, and sometimes death, is a prominent
part of the Jewish zeitgeist in any age. It's a well repeated pattern, and
it is therefore very reasonable to wonder if a public figure chanting "Free
Palestine" in a stadium increases the risk a white nationalist will show up
with a gun at your synagogue next Saturday morning, or if your children
have an increased risk of being bullied at school, etc., etc.... even if
the person saying the message is also against White Nationalism. And yes, I
know that the base rate of synagogue shootings is practically zero, but
base rate neglect is a super-common issue that people have with determining
the probability of events, and your chances of being discriminated against
or bullied for being Jewish remain pretty high in large swaths of the
country.

I found a clip online of what Macklemore said, and honestly, if I were in
the crowd I would have cheered right along with him, and I would have
thought it was a positive message. That said, even while cheering, my eyes
would almost certainly have been darting around the crowd more than usual,
just to reassure myself things weren't headed in a problematic direction.  I
also would not have been at all surprised if I later found out that several
Jewish people in the audience were scared by it.

In Pink's statement she said:

I was in the room at the Grammys in 2014 when Macklemore rapped "Same Love"
and thirty-three couples, gay and straight, got married to it, and I
cheered, no questions asked. Four months later Macklemore put on a hooked
nose, a black beard and a bowl cut, performed in it, and called it a
"random costume." Every Jew I know knew exactly what it was. The same love,
it turned out, had a guest list, and we weren't on it. But he apologized,
and I let it go, because that's what we do. We let it go. Then last weekend
he stood in front of a stadium full of music-loving families, with violent
images from a war on the screens, dedicated a song to the movement of his
choice, and then took the mic to tell all of the Jews in the stadium that
it wasn't about them.

You don't get to decide that for us.

That's what prompted my repost. Not "Free Palestine," and not anyone's
right to say it....
You don't have to agree with one thing Israel's government does to not want
the Jewish family two rows down from you to be scared or targeted at a
concert. That's the only thing I'm asking anybody for. To the ones who are
frightened this week, Jewish or Muslim or Palestinian or Israeli or just
tired of all of it: I see you.


That seems pretty reasonable.

Best,
Eric


<echarles at american.edu>


On Mon, Sep 14, 2026 at 11:26 AM glen <gepr at ropella.name> wrote:

>
>
> https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/macklemore-dropped-ed-sheeran-tour-pro-palestine-statements-1235625967/
>
> > Pink later explained that she did not object to Macklemore’s calls for a
> “Free Palestine,” but said, “I have never asked for another artist to be
> silenced and I’m not asking now. I don’t need anyone fired, and I don’t
> need a refund. What I need is to be able to say, as a Jewish mom, ‘that
> scared me, and it scared people I love,’ without being told our fear is
> just propaganda, and without being told I’m somehow cool with genocide
> because I noticed?”
>
> I'm not the most empathetic person. But I try. And I simply cannot
> understand how someone like Mackelmore saying "Free Palestine" could
> *scare* someone like Pink. Is it that when she hears "Free Palestine", she
> thinks it means "free Hamas from its restraints so it can murder Israelis".
> Is that it?
>
> If so, I can imagine myself hearing someone like ... oh, IDK, Toby Keith
> shouting "Free the Proud Boys". Would that scare me? Would it scare local
> trans people because it would mean "Free the Proud Boys so they can freely
> execute trans people in the streets?" Is that why "Free Palestine" scares
> Pink?
>
> If so, I have to go back to one of my favorite quotes: "Stupidity should
> be painful." I mean, yes, I do have an irrational reaction to things like
> lotus seed pods. But OMG, it's *because* of that reaction that I look at
> them so frequently. What kind of "fear" does Pink experience? It's just
> baffling, ridiculous even.
>
> --
> 8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
> ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα
> σώσω.
>
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260916/633652c9/attachment.html>

From gepr at ropella.name  Wed Sep 16 15:14:40 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2026 12:14:40 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEYGzMAU-2AXmGM5fx0SWZkQiP1shAD_tRuawnoAM625JBEGmQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAU-2AXmGM5fx0SWZkQiP1shAD_tRuawnoAM625JBEGmQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e7387e3b-49dc-4723-aa54-5da30ecbe2ac@ropella.name>

I'm not buying it. My inability to find a way to empathize suggests that Pink was not scared in any normal understanding of that word. [⛧] The ignoring of abstraction is the very point. If someone was in the crowd and did feel that *feeling* of being scared, then I would believe them. I might even believe someone might feel scared by proxy, assuming they were close enough. Say if someone's child was *there* right then, not home safe in bed when the parent learned about it.

My point is affine to Dave's, I think. Abstracted "fear" is not actual fear. We whip ourselves up into some "triggered" state because of whatever associated trigger we've been programmed to react to. But those 2 states are very different. Unless you've been punched in the face, the feeling you get when you imagine being punched in the face will be very different from what it actually feels like to be punched in the face.

Even for those of us who have been punched in the face, receiving said punch in, say, the MMA ring will *still* feel very different from what it feels like in the street, delivered by a mugger. These differences should not be ignored away as Pink seems to be ignoring away what being scared really means.

And I also don't think what Pink is saying at the bottom of your post is "reasonable". It's akin to the both sides-ism we saw in the recent FCC bullying to put the Talarico interview off air and on youtube. At first blush, "I see you" to a rich, comfy Pink sitting in her plush residence versus "I see you" to one of the lucky Palestinians whose survived an amputation may seem reasonable. But they're not, not even slightly, the same.

To be honest, were I a recent amputee sitting in a blasted out used-to-be-a-city and Pink said "I see you", I might just spit in her damned face. Stop *looking* and do something ... or take your empty bullshit home with you.

[⛧] The closest I can come is to lived experience stories one of my black friends has told me about living in Virginia. For a time, he lived in a relatively affluent suburb where most people don't hang out on the stoop (as most of us from the South did/do). And the cops drove around the neighborhood quite a bit, mostly because rich people like to see the cops driving by sporadically ... all cops are really privately funded, regardless of the public pretense. When he would sit on the porch and see the cops drive by, he felt scared ... as a black man loitering around a house in a rich, mostly white neighborhood ... in VA. That fear grew from very immediate and concrete after he first moved there to more abstract later on. And as the abstraction accumulated, the fear evolved into anger. My best guess is what Pink is calling "scared" is actually some form of moral outrage, which is nothing like fear.

On 9/16/26 11:25 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
> Coming in late, as usual... but I'm not really sure what the confusion is.
> 
> "Free Palestine" is something that is often, but certainly not always, said as part of antisemitic propaganda. Yes, I obviously understand that not all anti-Israel messaging is anti-Jew messaging, /especially /over the last few years, but historically most of it has been. Because of that, I would hope /all /of us could understand how a Jewish mother might get scared, not perversion-of-the-word "scared", but legit scared, if they were at a random music concert and that suddenly went political and they found themselves surrounded by a crowd aggressively chanting "Free Palestine." I'm not saying that fear is the best available reaction, just that it ought to be perfectly understandable.
> 
> I think the question, then, is how far Pink is separated from the above scenario. The stadium wasn't chanting, they were merely cheering, does that matter? There was increased fervor the more he talked about it, does that matter? Macklemore said explicitly he was not being antisemitic, does that matter? Pink wasn't there herself, does that matter? This started with Pink sharing a meme, which suggests she heard about what happened, and didn't know his exact words at the time, does that matter?
> 
> All of that should probably matter, but none of it somehow magically prevents the possibility of her being legitimately scared when she heard about it.
> 
> The slippery slope from dog whistles to openly antisemitic speech to violence, confiscation of goods, exile, and sometimes death, is a prominent part of the Jewish zeitgeist in any age. It's a well repeated pattern, and it is therefore very reasonable to wonder if a public figure chanting "Free Palestine" in a stadium increases the risk a white nationalist will show up with a gun at your synagogue next Saturday morning, or if your children have an increased risk of being bullied at school, etc., etc.... even if the person saying the message is also against White Nationalism. And yes, I know that the base rate of synagogue shootings is practically zero, but base rate neglect is a super-common issue that people have with determining the probability of events, and your chances of being discriminated against or bullied for being Jewish remain pretty high in large swaths of the country.
> 
> I found a clip online of what Macklemore said, and honestly, if I were in the crowd I would have cheered right along with him, and I would have thought it was a positive message. That said, even while cheering, my eyes would almost certainly have been darting around the crowd more than usual, just to reassure myself things weren't headed in a problematic direction.  I also would not have been at all surprised if I later found out that several Jewish people in the audience were scared by it.
> 
> In Pink's statement she said:
> 
>     I was in the room at the Grammys in 2014 when Macklemore rapped "Same Love" and thirty-three couples, gay and straight, got married to it, and I cheered, no questions asked. Four months later Macklemore put on a hooked nose, a black beard and a bowl cut, performed in it, and called it a "random costume." Every Jew I know knew exactly what it was. The same love, it turned out, had a guest list, and we weren't on it. But he apologized, and I let it go, because that's what we do. We let it go. Then last weekend he stood in front of a stadium full of music-loving families, with violent images from a war on the screens, dedicated a song to the movement of his choice, and then took the mic to tell all of the Jews in the stadium that it wasn't about them.
> 
>     You don't get to decide that for us.
> 
>     That's what prompted my repost. Not "Free Palestine," and not anyone's right to say it....
> 
>     You don't have to agree with one thing Israel's government does to not want the Jewish family two rows down from you to be scared or targeted at a concert. That's the only thing I'm asking anybody for. To the ones who are frightened this week, Jewish or Muslim or Palestinian or Israeli or just tired of all of it: I see you.
> 
> 
> That seems pretty reasonable.
> 
> Best,
> Eric
> 
> 
> <mailto:echarles at american.edu>
> 
> 
> On Mon, Sep 14, 2026 at 11:26 AM glen <gepr at ropella.name <mailto:gepr at ropella.name>> wrote:
> 
> 
>     https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/macklemore-dropped-ed-sheeran-tour-pro-palestine-statements-1235625967/ <https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/macklemore-dropped-ed-sheeran-tour-pro-palestine-statements-1235625967/>
> 
>      > Pink later explained that she did not object to Macklemore’s calls for a “Free Palestine,” but said, “I have never asked for another artist to be silenced and I’m not asking now. I don’t need anyone fired, and I don’t need a refund. What I need is to be able to say, as a Jewish mom, ‘that scared me, and it scared people I love,’ without being told our fear is just propaganda, and without being told I’m somehow cool with genocide because I noticed?”
> 
>     I'm not the most empathetic person. But I try. And I simply cannot understand how someone like Mackelmore saying "Free Palestine" could *scare* someone like Pink. Is it that when she hears "Free Palestine", she thinks it means "free Hamas from its restraints so it can murder Israelis". Is that it?
> 
>     If so, I can imagine myself hearing someone like ... oh, IDK, Toby Keith shouting "Free the Proud Boys". Would that scare me? Would it scare local trans people because it would mean "Free the Proud Boys so they can freely execute trans people in the streets?" Is that why "Free Palestine" scares Pink?
> 
>     If so, I have to go back to one of my favorite quotes: "Stupidity should be painful." I mean, yes, I do have an irrational reaction to things like lotus seed pods. But OMG, it's *because* of that reaction that I look at them so frequently. What kind of "fear" does Pink experience? It's just baffling, ridiculous even.
> 
>     -- 


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


From rec at elf.org  Thu Sep 17 12:31:35 2026
From: rec at elf.org (Roger Critchlow)
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 10:31:35 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: <e7387e3b-49dc-4723-aa54-5da30ecbe2ac@ropella.name>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAU-2AXmGM5fx0SWZkQiP1shAD_tRuawnoAM625JBEGmQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <e7387e3b-49dc-4723-aa54-5da30ecbe2ac@ropella.name>
Message-ID: 
 <CAGayqosNnpoeninAzBeUuYWsKPzjLMwzPikj6qdcucNrdRUAgA@mail.gmail.com>

>
>
> Glen --

Your inability to empathize seems a pretty flimsy excuse for your
conclusion that there is no honest feeling with which to empathize.  You
basically ask us to take your feelings as real and Pink's as fake.  Or am I
overlooking some other evidence you presented?

When Trump got into winding up the crowds at his rallies to evict and
punish protesters, I felt scared, and I wasn't there or even in the same
state or even considering protesting his bullshit in person.
-- rec --
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260917/ac59fb24/attachment.html>

From gepr at ropella.name  Thu Sep 17 12:48:37 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 09:48:37 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAGayqosNnpoeninAzBeUuYWsKPzjLMwzPikj6qdcucNrdRUAgA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAU-2AXmGM5fx0SWZkQiP1shAD_tRuawnoAM625JBEGmQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <e7387e3b-49dc-4723-aa54-5da30ecbe2ac@ropella.name>
 <CAGayqosNnpoeninAzBeUuYWsKPzjLMwzPikj6qdcucNrdRUAgA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <da1316a1-0c5b-4cd6-a5b0-431228803c74@ropella.name>

Maybe. But note that I never claimed there was *no feeling with which to empathize*. My claim is that the feeling is mis-named by "scared". As I footnoted in my last post, I can easily empathize with in context scared, being at the place, in the moment. And I can easily empathize with what that turns into, given some abstraction (e.g. in my friend's evolution from scared to anger at systemic racism).

So I *can* empathize with Pink's feelings. But it's not "being scared" in any normal sense of that word, any more than (e.g.) Effective Altruism prioritizes the welfare of unborn humans over humans present here and now ...

The cynical take is that Pink's bought into the idea that non-threat triggers like "Free Palestine" are as threatening as imminent threats. Equating those two things is *false equivalence*. When taken at face value, what Israel is doing *right now* is more imminent than any abstracted threat from some musician shouting "Free Palestine".

On 9/17/26 9:31 AM, Roger Critchlow wrote:
> 
> Glen --
> 
> Your inability to empathize seems a pretty flimsy excuse for your conclusion that there is no honest feeling with which to empathize.  You basically ask us to take your feelings as real and Pink's as fake.  Or am I overlooking some other evidence you presented?
> 
> When Trump got into winding up the crowds at his rallies to evict and punish protesters, I felt scared, and I wasn't there or even in the same state or even considering protesting his bullshit in person.
> -- rec --


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


From eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com  Thu Sep 17 14:22:46 2026
From: eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com (Eric Charles)
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 14:22:46 -0400
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: <da1316a1-0c5b-4cd6-a5b0-431228803c74@ropella.name>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAU-2AXmGM5fx0SWZkQiP1shAD_tRuawnoAM625JBEGmQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <e7387e3b-49dc-4723-aa54-5da30ecbe2ac@ropella.name>
 <CAGayqosNnpoeninAzBeUuYWsKPzjLMwzPikj6qdcucNrdRUAgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <da1316a1-0c5b-4cd6-a5b0-431228803c74@ropella.name>
Message-ID: 
 <CAEYGzMCMtpkQ3RkcKNfR2S7=pR4EUBwKuqmheYfDMKQ34icq=g@mail.gmail.com>

I agree with everything you are saying *except *the claim that it somehow
means Pink couldn't have been "scared" in a proper sense.

Now, obviously, I don't know if Pink *was *scared. You might be right that
she probably wasn't. She obviously *might *be honestly confusing some
related phenomenon for being scared (like being nervous, or concerned), or
she might be engaging in pure performative bullishit. But we don't know for
sure that she wasn't. I'm not "empathetic" with Pink, I'm just saying that
she might not be lying.

The ability of Jewish mothers in particular to be legitimately,
debilitatingly, scared over things that most find non-threatening is
impressive. Whatever behavioral or phenomenological thing you want "scared"
to mean, they can do it. The idea that I might not give my kid a Covid test
when they are sick for a weekend can give my mother all the same symptoms
she would have if an unknown intruder was rasacking her living room. She is
genuinely scared after a synagogue shooting, even though she hasn't been to
a synagogue in years, and ditto after the Charlottesville "Unite the Right"
rally, despite being nowhere nearby. And if she understood half the Nazi
dog-whistles that sounded during the last election cycle, those would have
scared her as well.

Not to go all Nick on you... but...
Let's say we have proof that someone *has *"bought into the idea that
non-threat triggers like 'Free Palestine' are as threatening as imminent
threats" and you and I *agree *that is a false equivalence. Of course, we
don't necessarily mean that they can consciously articulate such an "idea",
we mean that they embody it. They have a system designed to respond ---
behaviorally, cognitively, emotionally, physiologically --- to respond to
immediate physical threats, and as a result of whatever screwed up past
history they have, it has come to also respond to non-threat triggers. Why
wouldn't we describe such a response as "being scared" in either scenario?
It is a mistaken response, sure, but that doesn't change what the response
is.

Best,
Eric

<echarles at american.edu>


On Thu, Sep 17, 2026 at 12:49 PM glen <gepr at ropella.name> wrote:

> Maybe. But note that I never claimed there was *no feeling with which to
> empathize*. My claim is that the feeling is mis-named by "scared". As I
> footnoted in my last post, I can easily empathize with in context scared,
> being at the place, in the moment. And I can easily empathize with what
> that turns into, given some abstraction (e.g. in my friend's evolution from
> scared to anger at systemic racism).
>
> So I *can* empathize with Pink's feelings. But it's not "being scared" in
> any normal sense of that word, any more than (e.g.) Effective Altruism
> prioritizes the welfare of unborn humans over humans present here and now
> ...
>
> The cynical take is that Pink's bought into the idea that non-threat
> triggers like "Free Palestine" are as threatening as imminent threats.
> Equating those two things is *false equivalence*. When taken at face value,
> what Israel is doing *right now* is more imminent than any abstracted
> threat from some musician shouting "Free Palestine".
>
> On 9/17/26 9:31 AM, Roger Critchlow wrote:
> >
> > Glen --
> >
> > Your inability to empathize seems a pretty flimsy excuse for your
> conclusion that there is no honest feeling with which to empathize.  You
> basically ask us to take your feelings as real and Pink's as fake.  Or am I
> overlooking some other evidence you presented?
> >
> > When Trump got into winding up the crowds at his rallies to evict and
> punish protesters, I felt scared, and I wasn't there or even in the same
> state or even considering protesting his bullshit in person.
> > -- rec --
>
>
> --
> 8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
> ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα
> σώσω.
>
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260917/095fed6d/attachment-0001.html>

From jonzingale at gmail.com  Thu Sep 17 14:27:10 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 12:27:10 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek2XjcfALUixz9BPCt_NHvytAjuKSW_9PpayMHW-6zEtDQ@mail.gmail.com>

To what extent is this about anxiety, fear, and the perception of threat?

I grew up near several roller-coaster parks. As a kid, I felt a lot of
anxiety about going on rides with my siblings. That was fear of something
anticipated, maybe imagined.

Getting off the roller coaster was different. My body had actually been
thrown around, safely but intensely, in exactly the way the ride was meant
to thrill. Perhaps it was simulating something like being in the toothy maw
of a T-Rex. Checking in with my body afterward felt more like a response to
something that had actually happened.

On a battlefield, I assume both defenders and aggressors feel scared. What
is less clear to me is what presenting as scared is supposed to do socially
or politically.

My band plays 2nd Street Rufina on Friday. Is stage fright the same as
being scared? When I see my little boy today after a week at his mom’s, he
may need time to warm up. Is that reticence also fear?

There is also the response to imagined relations between imagined
communities. I often experience something like a generalized fear of being
inappropriately classified. That is, perhaps oddly, the subject of quite a
few uncomfortable dreams: I am back in middle school, somehow also the age
I am now, and no one seems to understand that it makes no sense for me to
be there.

In my often younger, leftist circles, I feel real pressure to constantly
signal virtue: to present as an empathetic cis white male when nothing in
my soul could feel further from that description. Socially, I can feel a
persistent kind of body dysmorphia, in which my presentation and my being
are almost never aligned. I keep hoping that a long observed record of
behavior will outweigh the immediate classification, but honestly, who is
paying that much attention anyway?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260917/352bbaa2/attachment.html>

From rec at elf.org  Thu Sep 17 14:32:49 2026
From: rec at elf.org (Roger Critchlow)
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 12:32:49 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: <da1316a1-0c5b-4cd6-a5b0-431228803c74@ropella.name>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAU-2AXmGM5fx0SWZkQiP1shAD_tRuawnoAM625JBEGmQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <e7387e3b-49dc-4723-aa54-5da30ecbe2ac@ropella.name>
 <CAGayqosNnpoeninAzBeUuYWsKPzjLMwzPikj6qdcucNrdRUAgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <da1316a1-0c5b-4cd6-a5b0-431228803c74@ropella.name>
Message-ID: 
 <CAGayqouxO=HbVxknWzMs_x-6cCGyz-P9-eioQbN253dVLLmBEA@mail.gmail.com>

The only true fear is a response to a true threat trigger, Ed Macklemore
winding a crowd up about Palestine is not a true threat trigger, hence the
fear isn't true.

>
I don't buy it.  You can logic chop fear as finely as you like
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260917/0e6ae01a/attachment.html>

From marcus at snoutfarm.com  Thu Sep 17 15:03:05 2026
From: marcus at snoutfarm.com (Marcus Daniels)
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 19:03:05 +0000
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAH5Jek2XjcfALUixz9BPCt_NHvytAjuKSW_9PpayMHW-6zEtDQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAH5Jek2XjcfALUixz9BPCt_NHvytAjuKSW_9PpayMHW-6zEtDQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: 
 <CY8PR11MB7730E6F531B0985AC1AF3C50C5B82@CY8PR11MB7730.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

Jon writes:

"In my often younger, leftist circles, I feel real pressure to constantly
signal virtue: to present as an empathetic cis white male when nothing in my
soul could feel further from that description. Socially, I can feel a
persistent kind of body dysmorphia, in which my presentation and my being
are almost never aligned. I keep hoping that a long observed record of
behavior will outweigh the immediate classification, but honestly, who is
paying that much attention anyway?"

Many days I walk across a short bridge to a peninsula to a dog park.
Because it is a pinch point, humans either queue or gather on one side or
another.   During COVID, most people were willing to keep it one way and not
to cluster on either side.  Kind of like it is bad form to stand by the
airplane cockpit door to get into the bathroom.   (It is a nuisance to the
flight attendants and it gives bad vibes.) 

The gathering with dogs and acquaintances for the purposes of socializing
really annoys me, much like the bad vibes from those that hover at the
bathroom.  It confuses who takes the lane because it isn't clear whether
they are queued or gathering.   Do they want to go or not?   I can't see
their facial expression from that distance, so it is hard to say.   Yelling
would be ridiculous and might not be clear in the wind anyway.

Meanwhile, a dog's vision is good for motion but not for detail at distance.
I know there may be dogs on the other side of that bridge, but my dog
doesn't necessarily sense it.   And her being deaf doesn't help.  To her, we
get to the end of the bridge and suddenly there are 10 dogs of different
temperaments staring her down.   I find a quick vector off to the side.
Nonetheless, feeling ambushed, she gives the "Wanna piece of me?" look to be
on the safe side.   Because of course she does.

The endlessly socializing senior gals inform their dogs "not to react" and
look disapprovingly.   I fake a warm smile and continue.    How about they
use their empathy and keep the pathway clear in the first place?

Pretty sure I don't care what Pink or Macklemore thinks or feels or what
virtues they think they are signaling.  

Meh!



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260917/81d7c627/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5609 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260917/81d7c627/attachment.p7s>

From gepr at ropella.name  Thu Sep 17 15:16:55 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 12:16:55 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEYGzMCMtpkQ3RkcKNfR2S7=pR4EUBwKuqmheYfDMKQ34icq=g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAU-2AXmGM5fx0SWZkQiP1shAD_tRuawnoAM625JBEGmQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <e7387e3b-49dc-4723-aa54-5da30ecbe2ac@ropella.name>
 <CAGayqosNnpoeninAzBeUuYWsKPzjLMwzPikj6qdcucNrdRUAgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <da1316a1-0c5b-4cd6-a5b0-431228803c74@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMCMtpkQ3RkcKNfR2S7=pR4EUBwKuqmheYfDMKQ34icq=g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <f62f4dca-d8b8-4af7-a095-0c365f500663@ropella.name>

Both Jon's and Eric's responses are helpful. We don't need to be overly persnickety about the token "scared", even though it seems reasonable given its dictionary definition(s) and connotations, more at "startle" than "frightened".

But the *gist* is that our modern tendency to low information comms (e.g. Tweets and hot takes) smush these things together. They literally and almost physically force us to make false equivalences. Jon's example of "stage fright" is perfect. And early on, I invoked trypophobia. Are these "fears"? I don't think so. But that token, "fear", is ambiguous enough to cover many finer grained categories, whereas I maintain "scare" is not. Yes, words are abused all the time. E.g. "red scare". But one of the ways we *should* be teaching people information hygiene is to notice when a word's being abused, especially for recognizing political propaganda like the Israelis and Trump(s) are pumping out like firehoses.

And then Eric suggests we shouldn't *expect* people to be able a) to distinguish their feelings from one another and/or b) to formulate different descriptions of any 2 feelings.

I disagree. I fully expect people to be capable of both (a) and (b). If you find you're not capable of it, then perhaps recognize you need some work. Lots of people complain about therapy-speak these days. But if I run across someone so emotionally stunted they can't describe the difference between feeling scared versus anxious, I can't help but wonder why.

And this sort of thing is *especially* true if you have a big platform. We should expect more of our role models.

As for *caring* what Pink or Mackelmore feel: Sure. But I do care who their opinions influence. E.g.
https://apnews.com/article/trump-israel-weapons-sales-gaza-eb48cb7ecf773ffc472fbafc995aef2a


On 9/17/26 12:03 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Pretty sure I don’t care what Pink or Macklemore thinks or feels or what virtues they think they are signaling.

On 9/17/26 11:27 AM, Jon Zingale wrote:
> To what extent is this about anxiety, fear, and the perception of threat?
> 
> I grew up near several roller-coaster parks. As a kid, I felt a lot of anxiety about going on rides with my siblings. That was fear of something anticipated, maybe imagined.
> 
> Getting off the roller coaster was different. My body had actually been thrown around, safely but intensely, in exactly the way the ride was meant to thrill. Perhaps it was simulating something like being in the toothy maw of a T-Rex. Checking in with my body afterward felt more like a response to something that had actually happened.
> 
> On a battlefield, I assume both defenders and aggressors feel scared. What is less clear to me is what presenting as scared is supposed to do socially or politically.
> 
> My band plays 2nd Street Rufina on Friday. Is stage fright the same as being scared? When I see my little boy today after a week at his mom’s, he may need time to warm up. Is that reticence also fear?
> 
> There is also the response to imagined relations between imagined communities. I often experience something like a generalized fear of being inappropriately classified. That is, perhaps oddly, the subject of quite a few uncomfortable dreams: I am back in middle school, somehow also the age I am now, and no one seems to understand that it makes no sense for me to be there.
> 
> In my often younger, leftist circles, I feel real pressure to constantly signal virtue: to present as an empathetic cis white male when nothing in my soul could feel further from that description. Socially, I can feel a persistent kind of body dysmorphia, in which my presentation and my being are almost never aligned. I keep hoping that a long observed record of behavior will outweigh the immediate classification, but honestly, who is paying that much attention anyway?

On 9/17/26 11:22 AM, Eric Charles wrote:
> I agree with everything you are saying /except /the claim that it somehow means Pink couldn't have been "scared" in a proper sense.
> 
> Now, obviously, I don't know if Pink /was /scared. You might be right that she probably wasn't. She obviously /might /be honestly confusing some related phenomenon for being scared (like being nervous, or concerned), or she might be engaging in pure performative bullishit. But we don't know for sure that she wasn't. I'm not "empathetic" with Pink, I'm just saying that she might not be lying.
> 
> The ability of Jewish mothers in particular to be legitimately, debilitatingly, scared over things that most find non-threatening is impressive. Whatever behavioral or phenomenological thing you want "scared" to mean, they can do it. The idea that I might not give my kid a Covid test when they are sick for a weekend can give my mother all the same symptoms she would have if an unknown intruder was rasacking her living room. She is genuinely scared after a synagogue shooting, even though she hasn't been to a synagogue in years, and ditto after the Charlottesville "Unite the Right" rally, despite being nowhere nearby. And if she understood half the Nazi dog-whistles that sounded during the last election cycle, those would have scared her as well.
> 
> Not to go all Nick on you... but...
> Let's say we have proof that someone /has /"bought into the idea that non-threat triggers like 'Free Palestine' are as threatening as imminent threats" and you and I /agree /that is a false equivalence. Of course, we don't necessarily mean that they can consciously articulate such an "idea", we mean that they embody it. They have a system designed to respond --- behaviorally, cognitively, emotionally, physiologically --- to respond to immediate physical threats, and as a result of whatever screwed up past history they have, it has come to also respondto non-threat triggers. Why wouldn't we describe such a response as "being scared" in either scenario? It is a mistaken response, sure, but that doesn't change what the response is.
> 
-- 
8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα σώσω.


From lists at hpcoders.com.au  Fri Sep 18 23:38:39 2026
From: lists at hpcoders.com.au (Russell Standish)
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2026 13:38:39 +1000
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAH5Jek0Zu1QOwLWF8K3RErva7NXSfT-m3hOnV3Mh8kGtggQ4kw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAH5Jek0Zu1QOwLWF8K3RErva7NXSfT-m3hOnV3Mh8kGtggQ4kw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <aq4Dv7zFqDCLnXUK@zen>

Exactly - so called "conservatives" are actually retrogressives, they
want to turn society back to a time of women being bare foot and
pregnant in the kitchen, and the Church having a monopoly on culture.

OTOH, so called "liberals" are often conservative, they want to hold
onto to hard-won victories of the past: equal pay for women, access to
abortion, freedom to express one's opinion (eg about Israel),

This is confounded in Australia by the so called "Liberal" party is
actually "conservative", ie increasingly retrogressive. They promised
to chuck out what the other side did, eg the abolition of the carbon
tax when the Liberal party gained power in 2013.

-- 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr Russell Standish                    Phone 0425 253119 (mobile)
Principal, High Performance Coders     hpcoder at hpcoders.com.au
                      http://www.hpcoders.com.au
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

From jonzingale at gmail.com  Sat Sep 19 00:25:59 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2026 22:25:59 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] conservatism (was diversity)
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek1SfQC+GHJ0T4FC_sUQ36HPrK2Ez2tJDSwTjO-7xZjuLQ@mail.gmail.com>

and then there is...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbWHZwD5rGQ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260918/57e1f529/attachment.html>

From thompnickson2 at gmail.com  Sat Sep 19 10:49:06 2026
From: thompnickson2 at gmail.com (Nicholas Thompson)
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2026 10:49:06 -0400
Subject: [FRIAM] help me understand
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEYGzMCMtpkQ3RkcKNfR2S7=pR4EUBwKuqmheYfDMKQ34icq=g@mail.gmail.com>
References: <90ccbc15-9ee7-4851-9c39-abc4973b0fa2@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMAU-2AXmGM5fx0SWZkQiP1shAD_tRuawnoAM625JBEGmQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <e7387e3b-49dc-4723-aa54-5da30ecbe2ac@ropella.name>
 <CAGayqosNnpoeninAzBeUuYWsKPzjLMwzPikj6qdcucNrdRUAgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <da1316a1-0c5b-4cd6-a5b0-431228803c74@ropella.name>
 <CAEYGzMCMtpkQ3RkcKNfR2S7=pR4EUBwKuqmheYfDMKQ34icq=g@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: 
 <CAAXA=Wn786POXb9GN=L0nBw-SEZ5aHwa0auOAWFkoavyYDPe4g@mail.gmail.com>

 "It is a mistaken response, sure, but that doesn't change what the
response is."

*Ye-ah!  Like he said!*

On Thu, Sep 17, 2026 at 2:23 PM Eric Charles <eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I agree with everything you are saying *except *the claim that it somehow
> means Pink couldn't have been "scared" in a proper sense.
>
> Now, obviously, I don't know if Pink *was *scared. You might be right
> that she probably wasn't. She obviously *might *be honestly confusing
> some related phenomenon for being scared (like being nervous, or
> concerned), or she might be engaging in pure performative bullishit. But we
> don't know for sure that she wasn't. I'm not "empathetic" with Pink, I'm
> just saying that she might not be lying.
>
> The ability of Jewish mothers in particular to be legitimately,
> debilitatingly, scared over things that most find non-threatening is
> impressive. Whatever behavioral or phenomenological thing you want "scared"
> to mean, they can do it. The idea that I might not give my kid a Covid test
> when they are sick for a weekend can give my mother all the same symptoms
> she would have if an unknown intruder was rasacking her living room. She is
> genuinely scared after a synagogue shooting, even though she hasn't been to
> a synagogue in years, and ditto after the Charlottesville "Unite the Right"
> rally, despite being nowhere nearby. And if she understood half the Nazi
> dog-whistles that sounded during the last election cycle, those would have
> scared her as well.
>
> Not to go all Nick on you... but...
> Let's say we have proof that someone *has *"bought into the idea that
> non-threat triggers like 'Free Palestine' are as threatening as imminent
> threats" and you and I *agree *that is a false equivalence. Of course, we
> don't necessarily mean that they can consciously articulate such an "idea",
> we mean that they embody it. They have a system designed to respond ---
> behaviorally, cognitively, emotionally, physiologically --- to respond to
> immediate physical threats, and as a result of whatever screwed up past
> history they have, it has come to also respond to non-threat triggers.
> Why wouldn't we describe such a response as "being scared" in either
> scenario? It is a mistaken response, sure, but that doesn't change what the
> response is.
>
> Best,
> Eric
>
> <echarles at american.edu>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2026 at 12:49 PM glen <gepr at ropella.name> wrote:
>
>> Maybe. But note that I never claimed there was *no feeling with which to
>> empathize*. My claim is that the feeling is mis-named by "scared". As I
>> footnoted in my last post, I can easily empathize with in context scared,
>> being at the place, in the moment. And I can easily empathize with what
>> that turns into, given some abstraction (e.g. in my friend's evolution from
>> scared to anger at systemic racism).
>>
>> So I *can* empathize with Pink's feelings. But it's not "being scared" in
>> any normal sense of that word, any more than (e.g.) Effective Altruism
>> prioritizes the welfare of unborn humans over humans present here and now
>> ...
>>
>> The cynical take is that Pink's bought into the idea that non-threat
>> triggers like "Free Palestine" are as threatening as imminent threats.
>> Equating those two things is *false equivalence*. When taken at face value,
>> what Israel is doing *right now* is more imminent than any abstracted
>> threat from some musician shouting "Free Palestine".
>>
>> On 9/17/26 9:31 AM, Roger Critchlow wrote:
>> >
>> > Glen --
>> >
>> > Your inability to empathize seems a pretty flimsy excuse for your
>> conclusion that there is no honest feeling with which to empathize.  You
>> basically ask us to take your feelings as real and Pink's as fake.  Or am I
>> overlooking some other evidence you presented?
>> >
>> > When Trump got into winding up the crowds at his rallies to evict and
>> punish protesters, I felt scared, and I wasn't there or even in the same
>> state or even considering protesting his bullshit in person.
>> > -- rec --
>>
>>
>> --
>> 8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
>> ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα
>> σώσω.
>>
>>
>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
>> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>> 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 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/
>


-- 
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology
Clark University
nthompson at clarku.edu
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson
https://substack.com/@monist
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260919/75f484be/attachment.html>

From jonzingale at gmail.com  Sun Sep 20 14:44:15 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2026 12:44:15 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Laplacian Spectra: a continuing saga
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek1A1_0hoqfVaEsgVVHC_Pw5LySMgovLvnTH02a=ne3btQ@mail.gmail.com>

Last week I reached out to a few professors and researchers at UNM in an
attempt to find people interested in Laplacian spectral problems. Only one
professor responded, and I think I weirded him out by wanting to meet in
person rather than on Zoom.

I am of two minds:

1. There is the hurt little X-er in me that interprets the sad lack of
response as continued evidence of an academic legitimation crisis, further
support for the thesis that our academic institutions are mostly full of
dispassionate and mediocre worker drones. Being risk tolerant isn't how one
gets or keeps an academic position.

2. Cold-calling is difficult no matter what, and perseverance is as
important as ever. People are busy and emails get lost. So, continue
reaching out, mobilize my retired-professor friends to advocate on my
behalf, show up with hair trimmed and shirt tucked in.

Thoughts, advice?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260920/f42b474a/attachment.html>

From stephen.guerin at simtable.com  Sun Sep 20 17:23:03 2026
From: stephen.guerin at simtable.com (Stephen Guerin)
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2026 14:23:03 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] Laplacian Spectra: a continuing saga
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAH5Jek1A1_0hoqfVaEsgVVHC_Pw5LySMgovLvnTH02a=ne3btQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAH5Jek1A1_0hoqfVaEsgVVHC_Pw5LySMgovLvnTH02a=ne3btQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: 
 <CAOmOqnJOjmwMesFu2pGfXOuct83JuLDN+NFVS5v7aNnXq=56tQ@mail.gmail.com>

Jon, you could reach out to New Mexican-born economist, Miles Guerin
(cc'd), who has applied Laplacian spectral analysis to international trade
networks. I think he's still a researcher at the NY Federal Reserve but
can't be certain as he rarely calls his father ;-p

Eric Smith:  Miles's advisor was Yannis Ioannides, who visited SFI a few
times - do you know him?


Guerin, Miles. A Spectral Analysis of Connectivity in Trade Networks
<https://redfish.com/papers/Guerin-Miles-2025-A_Spectral_Analysis_of_Connectivity_in_Trade_Networks.pdf.>.
2025. Tufts University, senior honors thesis

summary:

[image: image.png]





-Stephen


On Sun, Sep 20, 2026 at 11:44 AM Jon Zingale <jonzingale at gmail.com> wrote:

> Last week I reached out to a few professors and researchers at UNM in an
> attempt to find people interested in Laplacian spectral problems. Only one
> professor responded, and I think I weirded him out by wanting to meet in
> person rather than on Zoom.
>
> I am of two minds:
>
> 1. There is the hurt little X-er in me that interprets the sad lack of
> response as continued evidence of an academic legitimation crisis, further
> support for the thesis that our academic institutions are mostly full of
> dispassionate and mediocre worker drones. Being risk tolerant isn't how one
> gets or keeps an academic position.
>
> 2. Cold-calling is difficult no matter what, and perseverance is as
> important as ever. People are busy and emails get lost. So, continue
> reaching out, mobilize my retired-professor friends to advocate on my
> behalf, show up with hair trimmed and shirt tucked in.
>
> Thoughts, advice?
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260920/8cfa6eac/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 340506 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260920/8cfa6eac/attachment-0001.png>

From jonzingale at gmail.com  Sun Sep 20 18:44:15 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2026 16:44:15 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Laplacian Spectra: a continuing saga
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek3oegP6AgjGCy-yWZCezSgH7zMDu4tyJBM-KKWKJ7uo5w@mail.gmail.com>

Have you read his paper?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260920/e38207ec/attachment.html>

From stephen.guerin at simtable.com  Sun Sep 20 19:21:05 2026
From: stephen.guerin at simtable.com (Stephen Guerin)
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2026 16:21:05 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] Laplacian Spectra: a continuing saga
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAH5Jek3oegP6AgjGCy-yWZCezSgH7zMDu4tyJBM-KKWKJ7uo5w@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAH5Jek3oegP6AgjGCy-yWZCezSgH7zMDu4tyJBM-KKWKJ7uo5w@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: 
 <CAOmOqnKwy3SAQJh=ZErYHCrgAMoPwU3AvEB9txP2LaOmjTT=WA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Sep 20, 2026, 3:44 PM Jon Zingale <jonzingale at gmail.com> wrote:

> Have you read his paper?
>

oops, url hyperlink caught the trailing period if it gave you a 404.
Corrected:
https://redfish.com/papers/Guerin-Miles-2025-A_Spectral_Analysis_of_Connectivity_in_Trade_Networks.pdf


I read it and understood it more after attending his thesis defense :-)

phone video:
https://photos.app.goo.gl/FjwGKWYTg4BWTKUw7
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260920/68638843/attachment.html>

From jonzingale at gmail.com  Sun Sep 20 19:52:44 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2026 17:52:44 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Laplacian Spectra: a continuing saga
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek2xVp=QxTkQ2xrPhfj_js9TTge46opOSh8MkmZoUV-nnw@mail.gmail.com>

Yeah, it was a pretty straightforward read. If he wants to chat the next
time he is in town, let me know. Their paper is working from some of the
same intuitions that I am working from, though my dataset is quite a bit
richer. I mention this because there are opportunities that arise over
larger networks than at the level of countries. For instance, they mention
extensions to random graphs, which is fairly natural.

I didn’t quite get why they chose PageRank in particular, but I assume this
will give them graphs that are nicely approximated by Barabási–Albert. I am
still trying to find good ways of identifying which random graph best
approximates mine.

The particular problem that I am fleshing out has to do with recovering a
best-fit Beltrami–Laplace operator so that I can more meaningfully recover
a best-fit latent Riemannian manifold and associated cohomology.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260920/5fbc294a/attachment.html>

From stephen.guerin at simtable.com  Sun Sep 20 22:40:37 2026
From: stephen.guerin at simtable.com (Stephen Guerin)
Date: Sun, 20 Sep 2026 19:40:37 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] Laplacian Spectra: a continuing saga
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAH5Jek2xVp=QxTkQ2xrPhfj_js9TTge46opOSh8MkmZoUV-nnw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAH5Jek2xVp=QxTkQ2xrPhfj_js9TTge46opOSh8MkmZoUV-nnw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: 
 <CAOmOqnLCp3as2jf1U8Go1wKN36GS1rJGgPvLsUEQvhiHNZozUg@mail.gmail.com>

send him a note telling him you read it and have some ideas.
____________________________________________
CEO Founder, Simtable.com
stephen.guerin at simtable.com

Harvard Visualization Research and Teaching Lab
stephenguerin at fas.harvard.edu

mobile: (505)577-5828

On Sun, Sep 20, 2026, 4:52 PM Jon Zingale <jonzingale at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yeah, it was a pretty straightforward read. If he wants to chat the next
> time he is in town, let me know. Their paper is working from some of the
> same intuitions that I am working from, though my dataset is quite a bit
> richer. I mention this because there are opportunities that arise over
> larger networks than at the level of countries. For instance, they mention
> extensions to random graphs, which is fairly natural.
>
> I didn’t quite get why they chose PageRank in particular, but I assume
> this will give them graphs that are nicely approximated by Barabási–Albert.
> I am still trying to find good ways of identifying which random graph best
> approximates mine.
>
> The particular problem that I am fleshing out has to do with recovering a
> best-fit Beltrami–Laplace operator so that I can more meaningfully recover
> a best-fit latent Riemannian manifold and associated cohomology.
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260920/00d26e23/attachment.html>

From desmith at santafe.edu  Mon Sep 21 06:27:56 2026
From: desmith at santafe.edu (Santafe)
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2026 06:27:56 -0400
Subject: [FRIAM] Laplacian Spectra: a continuing saga
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOmOqnJOjmwMesFu2pGfXOuct83JuLDN+NFVS5v7aNnXq=56tQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAH5Jek1A1_0hoqfVaEsgVVHC_Pw5LySMgovLvnTH02a=ne3btQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAOmOqnJOjmwMesFu2pGfXOuct83JuLDN+NFVS5v7aNnXq=56tQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <13CD8B0B-AA9E-4BA9-AFD4-AFE9B92D1597@santafe.edu>

Hi Stephen and Jon, 

Interesting thread.  I know the name of Ioannides, but oddly have never met him.  I don’t think I have directly used his work, though it does cross into areas that interest me.  It will be interesting to learn when he visited SFI, in relations to times when I closely knew the people and projects he would have interacted with.

Thanks, 

Eric



> On Sep 20, 2026, at 17:23, Stephen Guerin <stephen.guerin at simtable.com> wrote:
> 
> Jon, you could reach out to New Mexican-born economist, Miles Guerin (cc'd), who has applied Laplacian spectral analysis to international trade networks. I think he's still a researcher at the NY Federal Reserve but can't be certain as he rarely calls his father ;-p
> 
> Eric Smith:  Miles's advisor was Yannis Ioannides, who visited SFI a few times - do you know him?
>  
> Guerin, Miles. A Spectral Analysis of Connectivity in Trade Networks <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fpapers%2fGuerin-Miles-2025-A_Spectral_Analysis_of_Connectivity_in_Trade_Networks.pdf.&c=E,1,gbB6vLvEAw19yHSOX-GJEMWjBlaSJaT8eHvLX1bL8Upf514Mp-I1DIPryowypWkaYhVOLEoPzPOHpo0UycG7Q52hKfqpUINjOVWwIic88-vg_w,,&typo=1>. 2025. Tufts University, senior honors thesis
> 
> summary:
> 
> <image.png>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -Stephen
> 
> 
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2026 at 11:44 AM Jon Zingale <jonzingale at gmail.com <mailto:jonzingale at gmail.com>> wrote:
>> Last week I reached out to a few professors and researchers at UNM in an attempt to find people interested in Laplacian spectral problems. Only one professor responded, and I think I weirded him out by wanting to meet in person rather than on Zoom.
>> 
>> I am of two minds:
>> 
>> 1. There is the hurt little X-er in me that interprets the sad lack of response as continued evidence of an academic legitimation crisis, further support for the thesis that our academic institutions are mostly full of dispassionate and mediocre worker drones. Being risk tolerant isn't how one gets or keeps an academic position.
>> 
>> 2. Cold-calling is difficult no matter what, and perseverance is as important as ever. People are busy and emails get lost. So, continue reaching out, mobilize my retired-professor friends to advocate on my behalf, show up with hair trimmed and shirt tucked in.
>> 
>> Thoughts, advice?
>> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
>> FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
>> Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom https://bit.ly/virtualfriam <https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,B1mhdCXpiTJ8FUbkpyF-lgzHZFoE4tb7eYMnO-XvZch9XPpbTduHCLHDQjzjt_EQMaf4ilDw6N11KA4OOqCrXlvOIECCu67PhelImnSfqFE,&typo=1>
>> to (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,ToWPfOE9KifjeOEkftWUFP3EAcFntZanIH_rNQI0ZlzNuuzAaN1fy3uFwqzX1mprge_5ydoNyAdETzceCE9PJvXcyTNVsSUDo6-bwH_mVrB89ag,&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,SobAnginAKD1SjY4aGA9LzalHec3KUbMlVInL7zWzb8KSH9aBkNj7E-3sF90fHlKpjjiGscysFIG3ACqnJHDos3I6t7fgUNbEDgnRwLf19OYpu_zsBcAr8ng&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,Qau_nqdnSSDyRYZ5oSed4tgvPQu4BsqtAvIsYjxMnR06JWnA8f9TSzszl6kHopqV12YfJzGX6tohrEYYsfjTzhqu3n19y9I-QuwQV72cPPryw8u5&typo=1>
>>   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 Zoom https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=https%3a%2f%2fbit.ly%2fvirtualfriam&c=E,1,oqkKBprFnUbJ4OKcH8Mrzsa3OR4nuuvdaUPZ1MyvOFIUmARL1f_pltD0qpohVytU5h6hgVuZaKhFVhFRpl3hPh3IttXFwQP18K8DieOoW8GFdnWa0AmIcztuaok8&typo=1
> to (un)subscribe https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2fredfish.com%2fmailman%2flistinfo%2ffriam_redfish.com&c=E,1,2lFV-4IvQSRpYQy5mAcIQZZzDPz63gFibpbB935MKux3sQ-ITI7z6XxuO8JXpuX8_nPyhNUN2Hnx-434IR2l_D_MyPK3kxYxbwHSuKvvPwm9AIWgPOA,&typo=1
> FRIAM-COMIC https://linkprotect.cudasvc.com/url?a=http%3a%2f%2ffriam-comic.blogspot.com%2f&c=E,1,gwnsKqc5h1M7gHTSUfBShHhe4nO6d9TKRxtjeznV7i-hcIAzWcTAa4PXEkgve0wBRAgqtfMPshBMaGDDGr5gppcyn2fj7X1NjZAT1yswl5kBMg8,&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,CMpSG3BU8hZqc0F3I-cQSbVnfqatHqMytJvuK-xMoM_F0PB_Bbl3aWQV1Cqe4vauN8Mss69G3lHCRBDeURNerXCGUb5yVtzLwvm_Jrg2yVBJniSMBwXAn6Du&typo=1
>  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260921/3e6217d2/attachment.html>

From gepr at ropella.name  Mon Sep 21 09:54:09 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2026 06:54:09 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] Laplacian Spectra: a continuing saga
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAH5Jek1A1_0hoqfVaEsgVVHC_Pw5LySMgovLvnTH02a=ne3btQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAH5Jek1A1_0hoqfVaEsgVVHC_Pw5LySMgovLvnTH02a=ne3btQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <937a3e08-812c-4114-94f5-3bab05f4186b@ropella.name>

Yeah, it seems a bit reactionary to jump to the "mediocre worker drone" thing. I mean, in a world where most people would rather order something from Amazon than ... oh, Idk, take a shower and go the store ... any store, anywhere ... it's not hard to see that academics are just like anyone else. Like, what if you're one of those people who constantly spits when they talk ... or has those little white globs at the corners of your mouth? Or you have to decide where to meet? [sigh] That's a whole process, with all the little signals entailed.

Or, maybe your in the middle of a separation with your SO and need to spend more time with the kid so they're more likely to say they want to live with you than that evil person you once thought you loved? Can I make time for this rando who doesn't like Zoom?

Or maybe you're trying like hell to get back into your restricted time eating program and being at the coffee shop, with all those *delicious* smells of muffins or whatever is just too much to resist?

Or any of a billion other things. Why choose "mediocre worker drone"? >8^D

On 9/20/26 11:44 AM, Jon Zingale wrote:
> Last week I reached out to a few professors and researchers at UNM in an attempt to find people interested in Laplacian spectral problems. Only one professor responded, and I think I weirded him out by wanting to meet in person rather than on Zoom.
> 
> I am of two minds:
> 
> 1. There is the hurt little X-er in me that interprets the sad lack of response as continued evidence of an academic legitimation crisis, further support for the thesis that our academic institutions are mostly full of dispassionate and mediocre worker drones. Being risk tolerant isn't how one gets or keeps an academic position.
> 
> 2. Cold-calling is difficult no matter what, and perseverance is as important as ever. People are busy and emails get lost. So, continue reaching out, mobilize my retired-professor friends to advocate on my behalf, show up with hair trimmed and shirt tucked in.
> 
> Thoughts, advice?


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


From jonzingale at gmail.com  Mon Sep 21 12:23:31 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2026 10:23:31 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Laplacian Spectra: a continuing saga
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek0Lu29hU15RHfoQVmC5VtD-Zs92Fy-GPaTfVO=D1r8Suw@mail.gmail.com>

For those interested parties, here is a relatively thin slice of the
network I’m working with:

https://jonzingale.github.io/lrg-dynamics/index.html

What is particularly interesting in this dataset is what happens around
“Liberation Day Part Deux,” as well as the points when traders begin taking
the oil shocks seriously.

A few months ago, Bloomberg quoted me $10k for its Wilshire 5000
supply-chain dataset. It includes the top 100 suppliers and customers for
each Wilshire 5000 constituent. I thought it could be interesting to
compare the network implied by my derived flows with the more rigid network
of known contractual relationships.

It is beautiful to see the market trading together for such a long time and
then as the shocks come rolling in, traders pivot to more defensive posture
of siloed and mostly top down factor-based clusters.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260921/36b2ad17/attachment.html>

From d00d3rs0n at gmail.com  Tue Sep 22 13:42:45 2026
From: d00d3rs0n at gmail.com (cody dooderson)
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2026 11:42:45 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Laplacian Spectra: a continuing saga
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAH5Jek0Lu29hU15RHfoQVmC5VtD-Zs92Fy-GPaTfVO=D1r8Suw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAH5Jek0Lu29hU15RHfoQVmC5VtD-Zs92Fy-GPaTfVO=D1r8Suw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: 
 <CAEddvG1V8joWykD5FxxHR0J0Gg73WfOCUkggdNV5pKr3JLqubA@mail.gmail.com>

 What am I looking at? Specifically what do the edges represent? I
understand there is a similarity threshold, but I don't know what the
underlying data is.

_ Cody Smith _
d00d3rs0n at gmail.com


On Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 10:24 AM Jon Zingale <jonzingale at gmail.com> wrote:

> For those interested parties, here is a relatively thin slice of the
> network I’m working with:
>
> https://jonzingale.github.io/lrg-dynamics/index.html
>
> What is particularly interesting in this dataset is what happens around
> “Liberation Day Part Deux,” as well as the points when traders begin taking
> the oil shocks seriously.
>
> A few months ago, Bloomberg quoted me $10k for its Wilshire 5000
> supply-chain dataset. It includes the top 100 suppliers and customers for
> each Wilshire 5000 constituent. I thought it could be interesting to
> compare the network implied by my derived flows with the more rigid network
> of known contractual relationships.
>
> It is beautiful to see the market trading together for such a long time
> and then as the shocks come rolling in, traders pivot to more defensive
> posture of siloed and mostly top down factor-based clusters.
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260922/05af5fdf/attachment.html>

From gil.densmore at gmail.com  Tue Sep 22 14:26:56 2026
From: gil.densmore at gmail.com (Gillian Densmore)
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2026 12:26:56 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] sweet baby jesus
Message-ID: 
 <CAMaMUCT1O8rCCR6=vAWw_aM8Gj=VcqUrEKQynBK3e0596UvevQ@mail.gmail.com>

Oh jesus wet. the **** is going on with ********* comcast _this time_
ok hi:
and just no
all year those ******* parasites have been slow. lag, or dropping. and I am
(again) done. this time when I walk, that's it. and all day  (the 22nd)
just about every 5 minutes these ******* drop. I am through. I do not give
one male reproductive organ sweat droplet  why. sincerely money talks and
manueur walks
Hit me:
Speed: 1gig EACH WAY and up
Price: it's 2026: 30. and not a penny more
Reliability and QoL: 200% uptime.
I just want a URL   and who gets the check.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260922/33f8b9d3/attachment.html>

From jofr at cas-group.net  Tue Sep 22 14:31:45 2026
From: jofr at cas-group.net (Jochen Fromm)
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2026 20:31:45 +0200
Subject: [FRIAM] Laplacian Spectra: a continuing saga
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAEddvG1V8joWykD5FxxHR0J0Gg73WfOCUkggdNV5pKr3JLqubA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20260922183148.2A68B6C40408@mail.maiahost.com>

Good question. Can you explain it Jon?-J.
-------- Original message --------From: cody dooderson <d00d3rs0n at gmail.com> Date: 9/22/26  7:43 PM  (GMT+01:00) To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com> Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Laplacian Spectra: a continuing saga  What am I looking at? Specifically what do the edges represent? I understand there is a similarity threshold, but I don't know what the underlying data is._ Cody Smith _d00d3rs0n at gmail.comOn Mon, Sep 21, 2026 at 10:24 AM Jon Zingale <jonzingale at gmail.com> wrote:For those interested parties, here is a relatively thin slice of the network I’m working with:https://jonzingale.github.io/lrg-dynamics/index.htmlWhat is particularly interesting in this dataset is what happens around “Liberation Day Part Deux,” as well as the points when traders begin taking the oil shocks seriously.A few months ago, Bloomberg quoted me $10k for its Wilshire 5000 supply-chain dataset. It includes the top 100 suppliers and customers for each Wilshire 5000 constituent. I thought it could be interesting to compare the network implied by my derived flows with the more rigid network of known contractual relationships.It is beautiful to see the market trading together for such a long time and then as the shocks come rolling in, traders pivot to more defensive posture of siloed and mostly top down factor-based clusters.
.- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
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/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260922/c66fe515/attachment.html>

From jonzingale at gmail.com  Tue Sep 22 17:24:04 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2026 15:24:04 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Laplacian Spectra: a continuing saga
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek0fRU0j=isFuuOaC34OGj9H0NPxtu7eSk3HF2dv99B7XA@mail.gmail.com>

The nodes are tickers. The edges begin as correlations of historical price
movements, normalized into positive affinity weights. I then apply
Marchenko–Pastur-style filtering and Laplacian spectral coarse-graining, so
the later graph is not a raw correlation graph. Its edges represent
effective relationships that remain after filtering noise and viewing the
network at a broader structural scale. Part of the goal is to break the
strong symmetry of the near-complete correlation graph while preserving the
topology implied by renormalization.

More broadly, I am trying to recover geometric properties embedded in
market dynamics: geodesics, curvature, connectivity, transport paths,
spectral structure, and eventually topological features such as cycles and
cohomology. I am also interested in deriving useful physical analogues,
such as susceptibility to shocks, diffusion and damping of stress,
conductance or resistance across sectors, relaxation times, and critical
transitions.

The hope is to understand how the market responds to the uncomputable jazz
band of human trading behavior by identifying relatively stable structures,
analogous to Lagrange points and attractors.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260922/36253c21/attachment.html>

From gepr at ropella.name  Tue Sep 22 17:37:48 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2026 14:37:48 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] mentalizing threats
Message-ID: <2f149fc9-e26f-408e-9c24-c049e833c24f@ropella.name>

So I ran a query through Asta, followed by a long conversation with Mistral, regarding the immediacy/imminence requirement for (basic) emotions. It seems *most* but not all research does place emotions at a more physiological layer and feelings at a cognitively processed (or what I'll call "derived", "inferred", or "higher order") layer. And even though "scared" is abused a lot, I'm satisfied with my "logic chopping". Words have meaning. And part of the *problem* with social media, the loss of meaning, postmodernism, AI slop, propaganda, etc. is that we're too loosy goosy with our words. So accuse me of what you will! 8^D

But a friend of mine who is in the late stages of divorce (the wife is dragging her feet on signing the papers, keeps contacting the husband for intimate conversations, etc.), asked me for my opinion of a circumstance that (I think) falls along the lines of Jon's and Marcus' processes below.

Post separation, but pre lawyer, she hosted a party at her place. The husband noticed that an ex of hers was there, *and* that she had old photographs with her and the ex ... "mugging for the camera". But there were no pictures of him and her (husband and wife) on the walls. To boot, the husband "saw how he looked at her", meaning the ex. Based on this circumstance, my friend (the husband) asked me what I thought. I logic chopped everything until he blew up at me ... like everyone does. But in the end, it came down to him conflating the token "sense" with "mentalize". He said he *sensed* that his wife and the ex still had feelings for each other.

I tried like hell to get him to parse it differently, to explain that he *inferred* this, not that he sensed it, because the registration of *sensing* preempts one's ability to doubt the ontological status of the mentalized model. Not only is my friend's feeling very derived, with all the assumptions and circumstantial details that implies, but any feelings the wife and ex might have would *also* be very high order. So the trip from the physiological state of the husband, to his high order feelings, to the mentalized model, to the high order feelings of his wife and the ex ... that path is absolutely loaded with a computational explosion of parameters and inferences.

He ended up angry at me and hung up. (Normally he talks forever and I have to hang up.) Who knows when I'll hear from him again. C'est la vie, eh?

On 9/17/26 12:03 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Many days I walk across a short bridge to a peninsula to a dog park.    Because it is a pinch point, humans either queue or gather on one side or another.   During COVID, most people were willing to keep it one way and not to cluster on either side.  Kind of like it is bad form to stand by the airplane cockpit door to get into the bathroom.   (It is a nuisance to the flight attendants and it gives bad vibes.)
> 
> The gathering with dogs and acquaintances for the purposes of socializing really annoys me, much like the bad vibes from those that hover at the bathroom.  It confuses who takes the lane because it isn’t clear whether they are queued or gathering.   Do they want to go or not?   I can’t see their facial expression from that distance, so it is hard to say.   Yelling would be ridiculous and might not be clear in the wind anyway.
> 
> Meanwhile, a dog’s vision is good for motion but not for detail at distance.   I know there may be dogs on the other side of that bridge, but my dog doesn’t necessarily sense it.   And her being deaf doesn’t help.  To her, we get to the end of the bridge and suddenly there are 10 dogs of different temperaments staring her down.   I find a quick vector off to the side.  Nonetheless, feeling ambushed, she gives the “Wanna piece of me?” look to be on the safe side.   Because of course she does.
> 
> The endlessly socializing senior gals inform their dogs “not to react” and look disapprovingly.   I fake a warm smile and continue.    How about they use their empathy and keep the pathway clear in the first place?


On 9/17/26 11:27 AM, Jon Zingale wrote:
> To what extent is this about anxiety, fear, and the perception of threat?
> 
> I grew up near several roller-coaster parks. As a kid, I felt a lot of anxiety about going on rides with my siblings. That was fear of something anticipated, maybe imagined.
> 
> Getting off the roller coaster was different. My body had actually been thrown around, safely but intensely, in exactly the way the ride was meant to thrill. Perhaps it was simulating something like being in the toothy maw of a T-Rex. Checking in with my body afterward felt more like a response to something that had actually happened.
> 
> On a battlefield, I assume both defenders and aggressors feel scared. What is less clear to me is what presenting as scared is supposed to do socially or politically.
> 
> My band plays 2nd Street Rufina on Friday. Is stage fright the same as being scared? When I see my little boy today after a week at his mom’s, he may need time to warm up. Is that reticence also fear?
> 
> There is also the response to imagined relations between imagined communities. I often experience something like a generalized fear of being inappropriately classified. That is, perhaps oddly, the subject of quite a few uncomfortable dreams: I am back in middle school, somehow also the age I am now, and no one seems to understand that it makes no sense for me to be there.
> 
> In my often younger, leftist circles, I feel real pressure to constantly signal virtue: to present as an empathetic cis white male when nothing in my soul could feel further from that description. Socially, I can feel a persistent kind of body dysmorphia, in which my presentation and my being are almost never aligned. I keep hoping that a long observed record of behavior will outweigh the immediate classification, but honestly, who is paying that much attention anyway?

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


From jonzingale at gmail.com  Tue Sep 22 18:14:18 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2026 16:14:18 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] mentalizing threats
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek1VWO6d-drSN4=vYMyUpzhUvTEXVGJLGfSnHTaY69OgtA@mail.gmail.com>

Lol. Yes, absolutely this. I would love an artist in residency somewhere
for a year, where I can simply focus and unpack my thoughts on the logic of
sense.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260922/416071d2/attachment.html>

From jonzingale at gmail.com  Wed Sep 23 13:53:41 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2026 11:53:41 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] mentalizing threats
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek2cg+FzSpc2AhBd6Aa9W2zxjfGJW72vFoH2JYsR+FU3uA@mail.gmail.com>

The image I have in mind is of the husband sensing at different levels of
perception: successively deeper degrees of modeling, mediated by
increasingly object-structured priors. I intend *Objective* here to mean
structured around objects, not *most real* or however some people try to
use the word.

Two analogies come to mind:

1. Optical processing or convolutional layers: Building objects from the
neuronal activity of earlier layers.

2. The mathematical practice of studying a space through its hom-sets:
taking a loop, for example, considering its maps into a space, then
quotienting by an equivalence relation, i.e., the general game of doing
homotopy theory.

I mention these because one might use sensing broadly enough to include
higher-order objects, while hoping that an empathetic conversational
partner will correctly and perhaps lazily infer the intended domain of
definition. Still, in the case of threats and allegations, one *should* be
open to clarifying what exactly is to be taken seriously.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260923/790d1729/attachment.html>

From marcus at snoutfarm.com  Wed Sep 23 14:28:12 2026
From: marcus at snoutfarm.com (Marcus Daniels)
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2026 18:28:12 +0000
Subject: [FRIAM] mentalizing threats
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAH5Jek2cg+FzSpc2AhBd6Aa9W2zxjfGJW72vFoH2JYsR+FU3uA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAH5Jek2cg+FzSpc2AhBd6Aa9W2zxjfGJW72vFoH2JYsR+FU3uA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: 
 <DS0PR11MB77350C182C4D3A72D1247356C5822@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>

Long term relationships are an interesting bounding case.  Like an esoteric 
academic community, but a smaller and more rigid set of alternative lenses. 
For some, inferences are evidence built on experience.  For the couple, only 
by seeking assistance of a therapist  (or lawyer) can they be disentangled. 
For the analogous academic community, maybe a referee that can see the 
incestuous situation.  Every minor gesture is projected into a latent space no 
one else can see.   With enough at stake, priors are sensed everywhere.  The 
paranoia is mutually reinforcing, and racing in circularity and depth.



From: Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> On Behalf Of Jon Zingale
Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2026 10:54 AM
To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
Subject: Re: [FRIAM] mentalizing threats



The image I have in mind is of the husband sensing at different levels of 
perception: successively deeper degrees of modeling, mediated by increasingly 
object-structured priors. I intend *Objective* here to mean structured around 
objects, not *most real* or however some people try to use the word.

Two analogies come to mind:

1. Optical processing or convolutional layers: Building objects from the 
neuronal activity of earlier layers.

2. The mathematical practice of studying a space through its hom-sets: taking 
a loop, for example, considering its maps into a space, then quotienting by an 
equivalence relation, i.e., the general game of doing homotopy theory.

I mention these because one might use sensing broadly enough to include 
higher-order objects, while hoping that an empathetic conversational partner 
will correctly and perhaps lazily infer the intended domain of definition. 
Still, in the case of threats and allegations, one *should* be open to 
clarifying what exactly is to be taken seriously.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260923/2b568059/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 5609 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260923/2b568059/attachment-0001.p7s>

From eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com  Wed Sep 23 17:09:40 2026
From: eric.phillip.charles at gmail.com (Eric Charles)
Date: Wed, 23 Sep 2026 17:09:40 -0400
Subject: [FRIAM] mentalizing threats
In-Reply-To: <2f149fc9-e26f-408e-9c24-c049e833c24f@ropella.name>
References: <2f149fc9-e26f-408e-9c24-c049e833c24f@ropella.name>
Message-ID: 
 <CAEYGzMC+H0M-RA8rgpCtWK3GJaKP9iEet9zP73zUimCdn1Z1yA@mail.gmail.com>

Yeah..... "sense" is a term that has had a quite wide variety of meanings
over the last few centuries, and very few people use it in its modern
technical sense during casual conversation.

Here is some history from Ed Reed:
The psychologist’s fallacy is a legacy of the Cartesian ontology in which
sensations for the first time appeared in modern form. In this ontology,
there must exist a class of entities that are both physical and mental,
which have both bodily reality and mental significance. Descartes called
such entities the “second grade of sense” (Cottingham, 1986; Reed, 1982).
Later, Thomas Reid (1785/1969) introduced the modern terminology,
distinguishing between sensations and perceptions. Nevertheless, the
problem of what could count as a sensation has plagued scientists since the
seventeenth century. At first, the stimuli for sensations were assumed to
be physical entities (primary qualities, Descartes’ matter in motion), but
by the end of the eighteenth century, it was realized that many physical
stimuli give rise at best to unconscious sensations (Leibniz’s petites
perceptions) which was a contradiction in terms for the Cartesian school.
The Scots school of medical physiology, and especially the important
experimental medical scientist Robert Whytt (1768), resolved this
contradiction by defining stimuli as the activities of nerves, themselves
affected by specific physical agencies. Sensations thus became the physical
response of the nervous system and the mental state (conscious or not)
accompanying that response. This in turn raised the question of why
different nerves had varying responses to the same stimulus, and why only
certain nerves responded at all to particular stimuli (physiological
specificity). At the same time, Whytt wondered why the psychical responses
to physical stimuli were specialized (psychological specificity) (see
Wright, in preparation, for a review of the Scots school’s thought).

Influenced by the earlier Scots, and by his near contemporaries, Charles
Bell and Marshall Hall, and also by German Naturphilosophie, Johannes
Müller’s Handbook of Physiology (1833–1835/1838–1840) articulated these
problems of specificity in a way that still is relevant for psychology and
neuroscience. For Müller, the specific physical responses of nerves (nerve
“energies” as he, a vitalist, called them) were lawfully correlated with
specific mental sensations. The sensory qualities of light, Müller argued,
are a result of the specific physical responses of the retina and optic
nerve, not of the electromagnetic energy we call light and which presumably
causes those responses. Many scientists understood Müller to be arguing for
a particularly powerful method for investigating sense perception: control
one’s physical stimulation, isolate particular receptors and nerves, and
study their specific responses to the controlled stimulation, then use
psychophysical methods to correlate the physiologically specific receptor
behavior to specific sensations. With this method, one was supposed to be
able to deduce a finite number of specific sensations from which all
perception might be built up. Helmholtz’s two great masterpieces, On the
Sensations of Tone and the Physiological Optics, followed this
psychological stimulist method explicitly, but the method is a failure.
Conceptually, it is full of holes, as James showed. Historically, no one
has ever been able to decide on just what specific sensations exist, tied
to what stimuli, or how those sensations might cohere into perceptions
(Gibson, 1985)

Best,
Eric



On Tue, Sep 22, 2026 at 5:38 PM glen <gepr at ropella.name> wrote:

> So I ran a query through Asta, followed by a long conversation with
> Mistral, regarding the immediacy/imminence requirement for (basic)
> emotions. It seems *most* but not all research does place emotions at a
> more physiological layer and feelings at a cognitively processed (or what
> I'll call "derived", "inferred", or "higher order") layer. And even though
> "scared" is abused a lot, I'm satisfied with my "logic chopping". Words
> have meaning. And part of the *problem* with social media, the loss of
> meaning, postmodernism, AI slop, propaganda, etc. is that we're too loosy
> goosy with our words. So accuse me of what you will! 8^D
>
> But a friend of mine who is in the late stages of divorce (the wife is
> dragging her feet on signing the papers, keeps contacting the husband for
> intimate conversations, etc.), asked me for my opinion of a circumstance
> that (I think) falls along the lines of Jon's and Marcus' processes below.
>
> Post separation, but pre lawyer, she hosted a party at her place. The
> husband noticed that an ex of hers was there, *and* that she had old
> photographs with her and the ex ... "mugging for the camera". But there
> were no pictures of him and her (husband and wife) on the walls. To boot,
> the husband "saw how he looked at her", meaning the ex. Based on this
> circumstance, my friend (the husband) asked me what I thought. I logic
> chopped everything until he blew up at me ... like everyone does. But in
> the end, it came down to him conflating the token "sense" with "mentalize".
> He said he *sensed* that his wife and the ex still had feelings for each
> other.
>
> I tried like hell to get him to parse it differently, to explain that he
> *inferred* this, not that he sensed it, because the registration of
> *sensing* preempts one's ability to doubt the ontological status of the
> mentalized model. Not only is my friend's feeling very derived, with all
> the assumptions and circumstantial details that implies, but any feelings
> the wife and ex might have would *also* be very high order. So the trip
> from the physiological state of the husband, to his high order feelings, to
> the mentalized model, to the high order feelings of his wife and the ex ...
> that path is absolutely loaded with a computational explosion of parameters
> and inferences.
>
> He ended up angry at me and hung up. (Normally he talks forever and I have
> to hang up.) Who knows when I'll hear from him again. C'est la vie, eh?
>
> On 9/17/26 12:03 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> > Many days I walk across a short bridge to a peninsula to a dog park.
> Because it is a pinch point, humans either queue or gather on one side or
> another.   During COVID, most people were willing to keep it one way and
> not to cluster on either side.  Kind of like it is bad form to stand by the
> airplane cockpit door to get into the bathroom.   (It is a nuisance to the
> flight attendants and it gives bad vibes.)
> >
> > The gathering with dogs and acquaintances for the purposes of
> socializing really annoys me, much like the bad vibes from those that hover
> at the bathroom.  It confuses who takes the lane because it isn’t clear
> whether they are queued or gathering.   Do they want to go or not?   I
> can’t see their facial expression from that distance, so it is hard to
> say.   Yelling would be ridiculous and might not be clear in the wind
> anyway.
> >
> > Meanwhile, a dog’s vision is good for motion but not for detail at
> distance.   I know there may be dogs on the other side of that bridge, but
> my dog doesn’t necessarily sense it.   And her being deaf doesn’t help.  To
> her, we get to the end of the bridge and suddenly there are 10 dogs of
> different temperaments staring her down.   I find a quick vector off to the
> side.  Nonetheless, feeling ambushed, she gives the “Wanna piece of me?”
> look to be on the safe side.   Because of course she does.
> >
> > The endlessly socializing senior gals inform their dogs “not to react”
> and look disapprovingly.   I fake a warm smile and continue.    How about
> they use their empathy and keep the pathway clear in the first place?
>
>
> On 9/17/26 11:27 AM, Jon Zingale wrote:
> > To what extent is this about anxiety, fear, and the perception of threat?
> >
> > I grew up near several roller-coaster parks. As a kid, I felt a lot of
> anxiety about going on rides with my siblings. That was fear of something
> anticipated, maybe imagined.
> >
> > Getting off the roller coaster was different. My body had actually been
> thrown around, safely but intensely, in exactly the way the ride was meant
> to thrill. Perhaps it was simulating something like being in the toothy maw
> of a T-Rex. Checking in with my body afterward felt more like a response to
> something that had actually happened.
> >
> > On a battlefield, I assume both defenders and aggressors feel scared.
> What is less clear to me is what presenting as scared is supposed to do
> socially or politically.
> >
> > My band plays 2nd Street Rufina on Friday. Is stage fright the same as
> being scared? When I see my little boy today after a week at his mom’s, he
> may need time to warm up. Is that reticence also fear?
> >
> > There is also the response to imagined relations between imagined
> communities. I often experience something like a generalized fear of being
> inappropriately classified. That is, perhaps oddly, the subject of quite a
> few uncomfortable dreams: I am back in middle school, somehow also the age
> I am now, and no one seems to understand that it makes no sense for me to
> be there.
> >
> > In my often younger, leftist circles, I feel real pressure to constantly
> signal virtue: to present as an empathetic cis white male when nothing in
> my soul could feel further from that description. Socially, I can feel a
> persistent kind of body dysmorphia, in which my presentation and my being
> are almost never aligned. I keep hoping that a long observed record of
> behavior will outweigh the immediate classification, but honestly, who is
> paying that much attention anyway?
>
> --
> 8647 ⊥ ɐןןǝdoɹ ǝ uǝןƃ
> ὅτε oi μὲν ἄλλοι κύνες τοὺς ἐχϑροὺς δάκνουσιν, ἐγὰ δὲ τοὺς φίλους, ἵνα
> σώσω.
>
>
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. /
> ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260923/3b343a13/attachment.html>

From thompnickson2 at gmail.com  Thu Sep 24 11:07:54 2026
From: thompnickson2 at gmail.com (Nicholas Thompson)
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2026 11:07:54 -0400
Subject: [FRIAM] Phedex Pfishing Scam
Message-ID: 
 <CAAXA=W=PoGvq4hF6Q+Xz5Mnq2H9tDjU0XFtg57jF=TVgg7hsoA@mail.gmail.com>

If I weren't so stupid I would have fallen for this.  Note from Fedex
saying they were trying to deliver a package.  Please contact this website
to schedule a delivery.  Oh I hate these people.

N

-- 
Nicholas S. Thompson
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Ethology
Clark University
nthompson at clarku.edu
https://wordpress.clarku.edu/nthompson
https://substack.com/@monist
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260924/80c56c68/attachment.html>

From gepr at ropella.name  Thu Sep 24 11:39:38 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2026 08:39:38 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] mentalizing threats
In-Reply-To: 
 <DS0PR11MB77350C182C4D3A72D1247356C5822@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
References: 
 <CAH5Jek2cg+FzSpc2AhBd6Aa9W2zxjfGJW72vFoH2JYsR+FU3uA@mail.gmail.com>
 <DS0PR11MB77350C182C4D3A72D1247356C5822@DS0PR11MB7735.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Message-ID: <232d1a6e-eb6e-4b95-b4cf-8fb6dc26f9be@ropella.name>

OK. With these 3 replies (including Eric's, though it forks off the OP), it seems clear that "sense" is often abstracted without violating the *sense* of "sense" I intend. >8^D But I would, of course, use a different word for these downstream layers.

I think the main separator is the extent to which the sensory processing feeds back onto the sensor(s). If we imagine a cell that emits a chemical when it's deformed, smushed, twisted, sheared, etc. That's clearly a sensor. Then we imagine a neuron that's stimulated by the chemical the sensor emits. I wouldn't call that neuron a sensor so much as a somatoceptor (?) ... i.e. an upstream start of the perception processing network. As the signal percolates down stream, we might call that a sensory signal ... or sensor processing, etc. But the stew of meat and electricity that ensues isn't well-described as a "sensor" or even "sensation". [⛧]

But! ... but but but ... If we imagine the species evolving over generations, there is feedback that can change the sensors' parameters, eliminate some sensor types, produce new sensor types, etc. So even though it seems there's no fast feedback at the sensor layer, there is feedback, however slow, across whatever collective. So the existence of feedback, alone, isn't sufficient to distinguish a sensor from a *-ceptor. We have to either say something about the speed (relative to the organism, either its lifespan or the afferent-descending latency of the pathway being considered - is audition faster than vision?) or add another *quality*.

Interoception is an interesting case. E.g. hunger can be hallucinated due to thirst. Maybe another quality that might help distinguish a chemosensor from a chemoceptor is the likelihood of hallucination or misinterpretation. And that may actually be some kind of one-to-many relationship. If the same sensor feeds multiple sensory flows, it should be easier to distinguish the sensor. If a sensor always and only feeds one flow, then where we draw the boundary depends on other factors like speed or frequency.

The only way I can bring myself to think of the *registration* of a higher order "object" as sensing is in distributed systems where each module has a "hard" sensorimotor boundary (usually inside vs. outside, but also this side vs. that side where each side is *open* in some direction other than toward the boundary).

[⛧] Yes, yes. I know the so-named *-ceptors are sometimes considered sensors. E.g. in nociception the chemicals emitted by damaged tissue or immune cells trigger the neurons. So in my use, the things being sensed *are* the self-sensors. But it's reasonable to call the neurons both the sensor and the receptor in that case. In other types of sensory processing, the division between the sensor and the thing being sensed is more crisp.

On 9/23/26 11:28 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote:
> Long term relationships are an interesting bounding case.  Like an esoteric academic community, but a smaller and more rigid set of alternative lenses.   For some, inferences are evidence built on experience.  For the couple, only by seeking assistance of a therapist  (or lawyer) can they be disentangled.   For the analogous academic community, maybe a referee that can see the incestuous situation.  Every minor gesture is projected into a latent space no one else can see.   With enough at stake, priors are sensed everywhere.  The paranoia is mutually reinforcing, and racing in circularity and depth.
> 
> *From:*Friam <friam-bounces at redfish.com> *On Behalf Of *Jon Zingale
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 23, 2026 10:54 AM
> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam at redfish.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [FRIAM] mentalizing threats
> 
> The image I have in mind is of the husband sensing at different levels of perception: successively deeper degrees of modeling, mediated by increasingly object-structured priors. I intend *Objective* here to mean structured around objects, not *most real* or however some people try to use the word.
> 
> Two analogies come to mind:
> 
> 1. Optical processing or convolutional layers: Building objects from the neuronal activity of earlier layers.
> 
> 2. The mathematical practice of studying a space through its hom-sets: taking a loop, for example, considering its maps into a space, then quotienting by an equivalence relation, i.e., the general game of doing homotopy theory.
> 
> I mention these because one might use sensing broadly enough to include higher-order objects, while hoping that an empathetic conversational partner will correctly and perhaps lazily infer the intended domain of definition. Still, in the case of threats and allegations, one *should* be open to clarifying what exactly is to be taken seriously.
> 


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


From jofr at cas-group.net  Thu Sep 24 17:38:20 2026
From: jofr at cas-group.net (Jochen Fromm)
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2026 23:38:20 +0200
Subject: [FRIAM] Theorem Shadows
Message-ID: <20260924213822.051586C40374@mail.maiahost.com>

I saw a post of Dan Piponi on Mastodon where he mentions theorem shadowshttps://mathstodon.xyz/@dpiponi/117327643845116373We can define a "shadow of a theorem" as an informal metaphor for a real-world, practical behavior or rule of thumb that reflects a deeper, idealized mathematical limit. Historically, people often observe shadows - like Kepler's laws of planetary motion or floating-point comparison bugs - decades or centuries before mathematicians prove the abstract "theorems" that actually explain them.Today, fields like deep learning, medicine, cryptography, and quantum physics still contain empirical shadows that engineers and scientists rely on, even though the master theorems behind them remain undiscovered, for example+ how deep learning model scaling works+ how general anesthesia actually produces unconsciousness+ the Yang–Mills mass gap problem in Quantum Field Theoriesand of course+ the hard problem of consciousnessThe FLP impossibility theorem in distributed computing proves that no deterministic consensus algorithm can guarantee both safety and liveness in a fully asynchronous distributed system if even a single process experiences a crash failure. The hard problem of consciousness is a shadow of such an impossibility theorem, isn't it? I believe the hard problem is related to path dependence in a complex adaptive system. Differences in Qualia is related to the topological and structural difference between two path-dependent graphs. Path dependence can be precisely defined mathematically. It should be possible to prove such an impossibility theorem for the hard problem of consciousness by a indirect proof. If we assume it is solvable then the path-dependent graphs  (or emotional valuation matrices) must be identical, which is not possible in real systems. Exact subjective equivalence between two conscious agents is impossible.We can consider the hard problem of consciousness as a shadow of this impossibility theorem. I think the impossibility theorem solves it. Finally. And we know the solution for an asymptotic approximation as well: the what-it-is-like-to-be machines of film industry, cinemas and show business.-J.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260924/41223660/attachment.html>

From gil.densmore at gmail.com  Fri Sep 25 08:22:44 2026
From: gil.densmore at gmail.com (Gillian Densmore)
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2026 06:22:44 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Biology q and phone q
Message-ID: 
 <CAMaMUCSYujeExFRj=QAanzcuJMmFfS2BCwgwPpmYLKghGbErwQ@mail.gmail.com>

Before the internet is on brand: ...nevermind that's to low of a fruit.

Headache Q:
I take a bunch of meds: Blood pressure, Cymbolta and Lamicital. They will
without fail give me: punchy out of it my sense of space, and geometric
shapes etc: LSD..withabout what I'd imagine having a something big (bird of
prey) or targ or elephent sitting on my head would feel like.
I also got a bunch of smart lights.
Now while goofing about with different colors. so I could see what lights
needed some tweaks. Green helped the pounding headache.
My question is why? I asked google and basically: no blue light making your
brain hyper is a good thing.

What do the humans say? if they know.

Replacement phone:
Basically Have a Pixel 6 but the screen is detaching from the back and
every place says that's frequently a sign of a batterying going bad.

Ok:
Repairable phones!
I am aware of Fairphone, and Teracube, and. HMD...
IDEALLY a phone with a real keyboard option and etc. Since to many forces
say that's out:
Ok so I drawing on the screen turns out to to not suck entirely: What do
folks use for Swipe typing: I've got Acme Co Generic Open Source Swipe
Keyboard and it's not bad. I've used Swift (sp) MS's baby: draw on the
screen: started about 5 rungs down then _that_ in the morning.  But
recently-they changed to a new ai model and..it's a work in progress
(sucks).
Do folks have other suggestions to try?
Anyone used a repairable phone... give me a blue print and screw drivers I
can figure out how to perform Percussive maintenance and completely hork it
up    I'll get all happy and figure out how to fix it...and somehow have
extra screws. that's half the fun. Who all sells that kind of thing?

and anyone used Fairphone etc?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260925/a299e8dd/attachment.html>

From jonzingale at gmail.com  Fri Sep 25 09:31:24 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2026 07:31:24 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] Biology q and phone q
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek0CUHm2O5Y_R338fSL9n6cicFtipvTpDmT6u-QG0yQs4A@mail.gmail.com>

Yeah, I have no idea why green light is less aggravating. We also
distinguish more greens than other colors.

As far as phones, sorry, I only have a landline that I barely pay attention
to.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260925/d8d676d7/attachment.html>

From jofr at cas-group.net  Fri Sep 25 16:37:19 2026
From: jofr at cas-group.net (Jochen Fromm)
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2026 22:37:19 +0200
Subject: [FRIAM] LNC Impossibility Theorem
Message-ID: <2781D34B-EC0D-481A-9784-2B7F637FEE10@cas-group.net>

The post from Dan Piponi inspired me to invent two new theorems. Google's Gemini helped a bit to formulate them. You can find them in the appendix D and E of my new book. 
https://jochenfromm.github.io/PhilosophyBook/

The "LNC Impossibility Theorem" states that exact subjective equivalence between two conscious agents is impossible. I have named it after Joseph Levine, Thomas Nagel, and David Chalmers who first formulated the hard problem.

I guess for mathematicians too sloppy and for philosophers too formal, but I am convinced a true solution looks like this. Maybe not exactly but similar.

-J.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260925/1e2891fb/attachment.html>

From gepr at ropella.name  Fri Sep 25 20:42:59 2026
From: gepr at ropella.name (glen)
Date: Fri, 25 Sep 2026 17:42:59 -0700
Subject: [FRIAM] LNC Impossibility Theorem
In-Reply-To: <2781D34B-EC0D-481A-9784-2B7F637FEE10@cas-group.net>
References: <2781D34B-EC0D-481A-9784-2B7F637FEE10@cas-group.net>
Message-ID: <6443fb51-fc59-4826-95da-c8d6d2d2a4ef@ropella.name>

What work are these formalizations doing for the program? I mean, it seems like it would be pretty easy to doubt the fidelity of the formalism to the real system (e.g. discrete time, synchronous updating, lack of equivalence classes or neutral networks, etc.). That's OK as long as you have a relatively complete virtual world (e.g. not only are G,E,W synchronously chunked but the entire universe is cellular automata like). So in *that* type of universe, the theorem would show something about that portion of the universe. But it doesn't seem like you're doing that.

The worry I have can be described as "decorative math". (To be clear, I'm as guilty of it as anyone ... but I'm not writing a book. 8^D) If there's not a clear purpose to the formalization, I'd resist including it. If you really feel it's doing some rhetorical work, then I'd recommend softening the main text from:

"We can in fact create a mathematical proof that solving the hard problem is not possible completely. We could call it it the “LNC Impossibility Theorem” (see Appendix D), named after Joseph Levine, Thomas Nagel, David Chalmers who first formulated the hard problem. The LNC Impossibility Theorem states that exact subjective equivalence between two conscious agents is impossible. The hard problem is a shadow of this theorem."

to something like:

"There may be many ways the Hard Problem might be formalized. We provide one such formalization in the LNC Impossibility Theorem (see Appendix D) ..."

Softening the language may allow curmudgeon readers to look past their persnickety nits and ride along with you.


On 9/25/26 1:37 PM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
> The post from Dan Piponi inspired me to invent two new theorems. Google's Gemini helped a bit to formulate them. You can find them in the appendix D and E of my new book.
> https://jochenfromm.github.io/PhilosophyBook/ <https://jochenfromm.github.io/PhilosophyBook/>
> 
> The "LNC Impossibility Theorem" states that exact subjective equivalence between two conscious agents is impossible. I have named it after Joseph Levine, Thomas Nagel, and David Chalmers who first formulated the hard problem.
> 
> I guess for mathematicians too sloppy and for philosophers too formal, but I am convinced a true solution looks like this. Maybe not exactly but similar.
> 
> -J.


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


From jofr at cas-group.net  Sat Sep 26 05:42:59 2026
From: jofr at cas-group.net (jofr at cas-group.net)
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2026 11:42:59 +0200
Subject: [FRIAM] LNC Impossibility Theorem
In-Reply-To: <6443fb51-fc59-4826-95da-c8d6d2d2a4ef@ropella.name>
References: <2781D34B-EC0D-481A-9784-2B7F637FEE10@cas-group.net>
 <6443fb51-fc59-4826-95da-c8d6d2d2a4ef@ropella.name>
Message-ID: <56330822ab6c803528abd1887ab4e5f4@cas-group.net>

It is not just decorative math. Decorative math would be an equation or a theorem without substance to make the text look better or smarter. Here it is the opposite. The theorem is the core. We can consider it as the real reason behind the explanatory gap of the hard problem which Joeseph Levine has observed.

It is similar to the "Hard Problem of Algebra" in mathematics. As you know mathematicians struggled for centuries with the "Hard Problem of Algebra" — trying to find a general formula using radicals to solve 5th-degree polynomial equations. Quadratic, cubic, and quartic equations could be solved, but no one could find a general formula for fifth-degree (quintic) or higher equations. Until Galois figured out the exact algebraic conditions required for any polynomial equation to be solvable by radical, and Abel and Ruffini proved the Abel–Ruffini Theorem which showed that a general algebraic solution for 5th-degree polynomial equations is mathematically impossible due to the symmetry group structures of polynomials. After Galois created the Galois theory and Abel and Ruffine found the Abel–Ruffini Theorem the "Hard Problem of Algebra" disappeared. The "Hard Problem of Algebra" was the shadow cast by the Abel–Ruffini Theorem, the result of a group-theoretic impossibility.

In the same way "the hard problem of consciousness" will disappear if we have found the impossibility theorem behind it. What the proposed LNC (Levine-Nagel-Chalmers) impossibility theorem states is that exact subjective equivalence between two conscious agents is impossible, because each of them has a unique emotional valuation matrix which is the foundation of their subjective experience. By emotional valuation matrix I mean the system of value calculation in the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) that Emily Falk describes in her book "What we value". It is modeled here as a path-dependent graph or matrix (every graph can be described by an adjacency matrix). Just like two persons never have the same fingerprints, because their unique patterns are shaped by a combination of genetic instructions and random environmental factors, no two persons have exactly the same "emotional valuation matrix". It is a similar combination of random fluctuations and growth which creates a unique 
 non-ergodic path-dependent structure.

Although exact subjective equivalence is not possible, we can narrow the gap between the subjective experiences of two conscious adaptive agents if they share the same path. The longer the path is shared, the more the gap is closed, the more the agents share the same impression and emotional valuations, as-if it one agent would perceive the world like the other agent. This is what the second "Asymptotic Qualia Theorem" says. Why is the second theorem useful? It is the reason why we have cinemas and movie theaters, and why they look the way they do. They are what-it-is-like-to-be machines that show us what is like to be someone else. Plus it helps to understand the limits. The theorem mentions an epsilon_0 > 0 which is the irreducible limit we can reach. This epsilon_0 values is lowest for two humans (human - human), higher for two mammals (human - bat or human - whale) and even higher for a mammal and a reptile (human - chameleon) or mammal and insect (human - butterfly). While it is
  relatively easy for us to imagine what it is like to be another human, it is much more difficult what it is like to be a sperm whale in the eternal darkness of the deep sea hunting for squids, or what it is like to be a chameleon in Madagascar that changes its color and eats insects.

-J.

On 2026-09-26 02:42, glen wrote:
> What work are these formalizations doing for the program? I mean, it seems like it would be pretty easy to doubt the fidelity of the formalism to the real system (e.g. discrete time, synchronous updating, lack of equivalence classes or neutral networks, etc.). That's OK as long as you have a relatively complete virtual world (e.g. not only are G,E,W synchronously chunked but the entire universe is cellular automata like). So in *that* type of universe, the theorem would show something about that portion of the universe. But it doesn't seem like you're doing that.
> 
> The worry I have can be described as "decorative math". (To be clear, I'm as guilty of it as anyone ... but I'm not writing a book. 8^D) If there's not a clear purpose to the formalization, I'd resist including it. If you really feel it's doing some rhetorical work, then I'd recommend softening the main text from:
> 
> "We can in fact create a mathematical proof that solving the hard problem is not possible completely. We could call it it the “LNC Impossibility Theorem” (see Appendix D), named after Joseph Levine, Thomas Nagel, David Chalmers who first formulated the hard problem. The LNC Impossibility Theorem states that exact subjective equivalence between two conscious agents is impossible. The hard problem is a shadow of this theorem."
> 
> to something like:
> 
> "There may be many ways the Hard Problem might be formalized. We provide one such formalization in the LNC Impossibility Theorem (see Appendix D) ..."
> 
> Softening the language may allow curmudgeon readers to look past their persnickety nits and ride along with you.
> 
> 
> On 9/25/26 1:37 PM, Jochen Fromm wrote:
>> The post from Dan Piponi inspired me to invent two new theorems. Google's Gemini helped a bit to formulate them. You can find them in the appendix D and E of my new book.
>> https://jochenfromm.github.io/PhilosophyBook/ <https://jochenfromm.github.io/PhilosophyBook/>
>> 
>> The "LNC Impossibility Theorem" states that exact subjective equivalence between two conscious agents is impossible. I have named it after Joseph Levine, Thomas Nagel, and David Chalmers who first formulated the hard problem.
>> 
>> I guess for mathematicians too sloppy and for philosophers too formal, but I am convinced a true solution looks like this. Maybe not exactly but similar.
>> 
>> -J.

From jonzingale at gmail.com  Sat Sep 26 13:20:30 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2026 11:20:30 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] LNC Impossibility Theorem
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek10mk1S84pp=fUmOSRmcJThLLXP-sHRhkaKDLsBRetE2A@mail.gmail.com>

While I can appreciate the sentiment regarding Abel and Galois, the
impossibility of solving the general quintic by radicals has a strikingly
different form. Its Galois group is not solvable, giving a precise
obstruction to a solution by radicals. In your case, it seems less like an
impossibility that two graphs could be the same and more like a claim that
they are unlikely to be the same. Perhaps two path-dependent processes are
unlikely to generate the same graph, but that is not the same as proving
they cannot.

My own tendency is to think that a graph generated by material processes
over a finite life may have only finitely many distinguishable
configurations. That leaves open the possibility of collisions. The
birthday problem or hash collisions seem like closer analogies to me.

There also seems to be more work to do in showing why *consciousness*
(whatever is meant by the word) should be modeled by an adjacency graph,
and why a theorem about such graphs would resolve the hard problem.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260926/042d526d/attachment.html>

From jofr at cas-group.net  Sat Sep 26 15:50:11 2026
From: jofr at cas-group.net (jofr at cas-group.net)
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2026 21:50:11 +0200
Subject: [FRIAM] LNC Impossibility Theorem
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAH5Jek10mk1S84pp=fUmOSRmcJThLLXP-sHRhkaKDLsBRetE2A@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAH5Jek10mk1S84pp=fUmOSRmcJThLLXP-sHRhkaKDLsBRetE2A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <a82e5b4894709b1a62bb0678f2998c7e@cas-group.net>

Yes, good point. You are right, the proof is not completely waterproof yet. It is based on the assumption that each of us is wired in a unique way. 

Just as no two fermions can occupy the exact same quantum state or location (the Pauli exclusion principle), no two persons can be in the same location or follow the exact same path in their lives. The "slice of the world" we experience (how Nick used to call it) is different for each of us. Because we are adaptive and learn from experience, the unique paths we take and slices we experience lead to different, unique results. But you are right, even if two path-dependent processes are unlikely to generate the same graph, it is not the same as proving they cannot.

I have asked Gemini, and it says the proof can be made more waterproof by arguing the fact that no two persons can be in the same location at the same time is enough to guarantee unique subjective experience. It argues as long as you have two separate people in two separate places, the two first-person views can never become identical. To be 100% identical, every single detail of the inner experiences must match — including where you feel you are in space. Your mind knows where you are: a part of your subjective experience is the feeling: "I am standing over here. The other person knows where it is: a part of its subjective experience includes the feeling: "I am standing over here." The Contradiction: because the two are standing in different spots, the inner experiences must be slightly different. The only way two minds could ever be 100% identical is if they were standing in the exact same space at the exact same time — which means they wouldn't be two different people anymore.
  They would be the exact same physical person.

Gemini mentioned two other ways to make it waterproof, but I liked this one most. These AI models are becoming better in programming, coding and now even in mathematics than we are. It is a little bit frightening.

-J.

On 2026-09-26 19:20, Jon Zingale wrote:
> While I can appreciate the sentiment regarding Abel and Galois, the
> impossibility of solving the general quintic by radicals has a
> strikingly different form. Its Galois group is not solvable, giving a
> precise obstruction to a solution by radicals. In your case, it seems
> less like an impossibility that two graphs could be the same and more
> like a claim that they are unlikely to be the same. Perhaps two
> path-dependent processes are unlikely to generate the same graph, but
> that is not the same as proving they cannot.
> 
> My own tendency is to think that a graph generated by material
> processes over a finite life may have only finitely many
> distinguishable configurations. That leaves open the possibility of
> collisions. The birthday problem or hash collisions seem like closer
> analogies to me.
> 
> There also seems to be more work to do in showing why *consciousness*
> (whatever is meant by the word) should be modeled by an adjacency
> graph, and why a theorem about such graphs would resolve the hard
> problem.
> .- .-.. .-.. / ..-. --- --- - . .-. ... / .- .-. . / .-- .-. --- -. --. / ... --- -- . / .- .-. . / ..- ... . ..-. ..- .-..
> 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/

From jonzingale at gmail.com  Sat Sep 26 18:51:31 2026
From: jonzingale at gmail.com (Jon Zingale)
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2026 16:51:31 -0600
Subject: [FRIAM] LNC Impossibility Theorem
Message-ID: 
 <CAH5Jek1=cQZb8XTDpGq33Xs8QQqCu9UB1mwnMOORJbUTQ9EPoA@mail.gmail.com>

There is a bit more to my concern. Two people may occupy different places
and follow different paths, but why must every difference in their
histories be preserved in their present experience? I’m hesitant to assume
that consciousness, or any history-dependent system, records its past with
arbitrarily fine precision. This is one of the objections I raised in
earlier posts about the possible limits of spacetime’s fidelity (much less
the fidelity of an information-processing body embedded within it).
Distinct histories might still give rise to the same present experience.

My own ontological inclination lately is toward a genuinely open,
generative unfolding. Still, I suspect that what a material system can
represent at a given moment is limited, more boldly even, finite. So I
would likely take the other side of that bet.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20260926/cf21e09f/attachment.html>