Titus

不退転

[Devon Eriksen @Devon_Eriksen_]

The problem with universal suffrage is that the more technologically advanced a civilization becomes, the smaller the fraction of people there are in it with the native intelligence to understand how it works.

When the majority of humanity was employed in whacking at the dirt with a pointed stick, and the height of technology was a slightly better pointed stick, anyone with a triple digit IQ could understand what was going on.

Now, we have things like stock markets, the internet, transportation infrastructure, and the Linux kernel, but most people who vote are unable to conceive of these as anything but large piles of chocolate coins, or something else they can put their mouths.

Because that's how the average monkey interacts with money. They stack the blocks, the research assistant gives them a token, they exchange the token for a banana.

It's no good trying to explain to the monkeys what supply chain is, or how a trillion dollars worth of rockets can't magically be converted into a trillion dollars worth of bananas just because they're both measured in dollars, as if a six-foot man and a six-foot plank of wood were interchangeable.

Finding a slightly different explanation, or getting the monkeys to sit still and really listen, doesn't really help.

Because the problem isn't just that the monkeys aren't paying attention. The problem is that the monkeys are monkeys.

Their brains simply don't have the developmental capacity to grow the neural connections they would need in order to grasp and manipulate the concept.

In the long term, this is why universal democracy is doomed. Because societies that let retards vote will fail, and be replaced by those that don't.

You may think that we, as a society, face a great variety of problems. We do not. We have only one. Retards. Every other problem we have is downstream from their inability to understand the consequences of their political opinions.

But to fully grasp the implications of this, you have to understand that the definition of "retard" changes over time, as technology advances, because the IQ level required to grasp what's really going on gets steadily higher and higher.

Eventually, the category "retard" grows until it includes the average person.

This has already happened.

Nick Knudsen isn't dumber than the average guy. But the average guy, the 100 IQ salt of the earth guy that's sitting on the next bar stool over, can no longer understand the modern economy. And this isn't correctable, because the problem isn't ignorance, it's complexity.

You can't make Nick Knudsen smarter by telling him things. You can't even make him less ignorant, because the bare facts aren't believable to someone who doesn't have the framework to understand how they fit together.

The people who understand what's going on are so much smarter than him that he doesn't even think they sound smart.

He thinks they sound crazy.

[Titus @71tu5]

Why does this image look so small, instead of looking MONUMENTAL???

[The Year of the Graph @TheYotg]

Context Graphs are a convergence, and convergence needs architecture

Charles Betz of Forrester Research published a piece titled "Context Graphs Are a Convergence, Not an Invention", and it deserves to be read widely.

Having a VP-level analyst at a major research firm put it in writing, with the historical inventory to back it up, is genuinely significant. It signals that this conversation has moved from the practitioner fringe into the mainstream enterprise consciousness.

Betz traces the lineage back 40 years: Zachman's enterprise architecture framework in 1987, the ITIL push for configuration management databases in the 1990s, APM in the early 2000s, process mining, ChatOps, organisational network analysis, FinOps, software bills of materials, and architecture decision records.

His central observation: none of these systems talk to each other, and the convergence the VC community is declaring as a greenfield opportunity is in fact the long-overdue integration of work that's been accumulating in silos for four decades.

Kurt Cagle extends the argument, identifying three structural gaps that "context graph" as a term does not resolve:

The entity resolution gap -- a flat context graph doesn't solve it. You need a formal registration mechanism: a way to declare that an entity exists, give it a canonical identifier, and establish that the various local identifiers in legacy systems refer to it.

The events-versus-state gap -- process mining logs and APM traces are event records. CMDBs and EA capability maps are state records. Conflating the two in a single knowledge graph doesn't unify them; it obscures the distinction that makes each useful.

The governance gap -- "Who owns this graph?" is actually several questions at once. Governance has to be built into the architecture itself, not answered after the fact.

The proposed answer is holonic architecture -- a unit that has stable, dereferenceable identity, a formal separation between infrastructure layer and payload, a machine-enforceable boundary, and governed, audited portals between domains. The W3C RDF stack (RDF 1.2, OWL 2, SHACL 1.2, SPARQL 1.2) is the only implementation substrate that arrives vendor-neutral, with formal semantics and decades of standardisation behind it.

The question before the context graph community is whether the convergence happens as a coherent, formally specified, openly governed architecture -- or as a collection of incompatible vendor implementations, each claiming to be the "system of record for decisions," none of them able to talk to the others.

The map is not the territory. But a good map needs more than a title; it needs a cartographic system.

By Kurt Cagle

https://t.co/XDAVaohLQm

#EnterpriseArchitecture #SemanticWeb #ContextGraphs #OpenStandards

--

Join the Conversation

Subscribe to the Year of the Graph newsletter for quarterly insights on #KnowledgeGraphs, #GraphDB, Graph #Analytics, #AI, #DataScience and #SemTech .

📧 Subscribe: https://t.co/7pg6gqWYvw 

💼 Sponsorship inquiries: https://t.co/LCvoLhhBBt

[Titus @71tu5]

@brivael LLMs are the most accomplished polymaths (when well directed)...

[Titus @71tu5]

@RasmussenT56381 Congratulations!
You are inspiring. 🙂

[Titus @71tu5]

@codexeditor @R_W_Daffurn My pleasure: the work you are doing is super exciting.

[Titus @71tu5]

@codexeditor @R_W_Daffurn Also, and I know I'm pushing my luck here, if you could be more zoomed out, with the characters closer to the camera, then zoom in, following the characters, then the (slow) motion around the island... 🙂
(the scars left by doing motion graphics for far too long...)

[Elon Musk @elonmusk]

SpaceX was less than 10 people back then. We didn’t even have office furniture.

[Titus @71tu5]

@codexeditor Revolting, bloody Hungarian! 🤣🤣🤣

[Titus @71tu5]

@TimurNegru @joehas "Do. Or not do. There is no try."
Who, really, does it?

[Titus @71tu5]

@codexeditor "madeleines" are small cookies. 🙂

[Deconstruct @spydenator]

Sand watch in TouchDesigner //- Yunsu

[Titus @71tu5]

@codexeditor That's the kind of moustache I'm growing! 🤣

[G. Kim @artisin_ai]

She’s just taking a break

Thank you @dreamina_ai!

#DreaminaCPP

[ar0cket1 @ar0cket1]

@askalphaxiv @pangram ai detectors are the peak of ai slop

[Titus @71tu5]

@codexeditor @artisin_ai Superb! Thank you. 🙂

[Titus @71tu5]

@robimargz @remoteoliver Doesn't really look like it, does it?

"Spent 3 days with AI editing videos. Costs millions of tokens, takes ages to run tests, tons of mistakes, poor cadence, no creativity."

[Titus @71tu5]

@VadimCarazan do you honestly think your post builds trust?

[Titus @71tu5]

@Inhumansoflate1 🤣🤣🤣