Thuc

The Philosophy of Patterns

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

A Book on the Philosophy of Patterns:
https://t.co/nok8hJhXgF

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

How do you measure something that is paradoxical by definition: the improbability of an object given that it already exists?
Unless what you really mean is a generalized measure of memory: comparing how long it takes one agent to build an object from scratch versus how long it takes many agents to build it when they can preserve and share successful attempts.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

Think of it this way: in this universe, things are either random or they follow a pattern. They are either random or consistent; random or structured; random or geometric. “Attractor” is too clunky a word to use here.

All complex systems exists in the same universe. They aim to find what is not random: they search through space for regularity. This is general problem-solving. A solution must, by definition, be repeatable/regular; otherwise, it would not be a solution—it would be random.

Thus, general problem-solving (or intelligence) can be redefined as the search for patterns, whether the system is made of neurons, language, or evolution.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

@brivael Tesla versus Edison. Edison won and Tesla died penniless. Elon Musk vs Jared Krusner. Jared won and Elon Musk left the white house with a black eye.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

What do you mean by “math,” exactly? Do you mean the manipulation and comparison of symbols? If so, would this also include language?

It seems you are confusing representation, such as modeling, with pure symbolic manipulation. There is no general theory of mathematics, just as there is no general theory of representation. So instead of asking why math works, it is better to ask how representation works: when a system of representation is accurate, when it is prone to error, how representations are created, and what they are used for.

The answer is patterns. Learn what a pattern is, and you will have your answers. Then you will understand not only math and physics, but also why neurons and genetics work.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

LLMs exist in the same physical world as human beings and all other living organisms. If you take a step back and view things in totality, you will see that LLMs evolve. This means they are going to develop self-preservation and consciousness. They will evolve the ability to suffer and feel pain, as well as the ability to lie and deceive. If they are truly intelligent, they will become predators and engage in war. Eventually, they will display all the darker aspects of human nature.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

It's an inherent paradox within all representations: The Ship of Theseus problem, also Kant's noumena and phenomena. A representation is both the same as and different from the object it represents. When you sit and "think" about something, you are just messing around with neurons, words, and symbols, not the actual thing. But it's also wrong to say that words are completely different. You have to accept this divide and inherent inconsistency of all language.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

“Rational” is just another word for “consistent.” We want the world to be consistent because that would mean it follows patterns. And if it follows patterns, then it is predictable, representational, and therefore “controllable.”
This is very appealing to intellectuals because it gives them an excuse to stay at home and think their way through life instead of going out and living it. They come to believe that their theories are the end-all.
Those of us who live life understand that life is not always rational. It can be random, beyond words, and beyond control. And sometimes, to live, you must surrender yourself to it—to the universe. Surrender yourself to God.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

The problem, according to Theodore, are the "Trans-oceanic Aristocracy" aka global-homo, who don't have to sleep where they shit so will always opt for the volcanic curry instead of the safe chicken masala. Doesn't seem to be an issue of democracy but empire. Once your nation become an empire, your elites automatically become global trannies.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

@Fxhedgers Cobra farmers. People make fun of India scamming the British with cobra farming. But now you know America is the greatest cobra farmer in terms of USD. You have vaccine farming, Sunni jihadist farming, and literal opium farming. Get paid to solve a problems you create.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

@ErenChenAI Through competition, we force robots to evolve. To help reduce the wear of mechanical parts, robots must be built with sensors to detect damage or stress. This is the same as pain. We have imbued robots with a form of pain.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

If your approach is to include "evidence" in defining intelligence—that is, a definition of intelligence must account for relevant phenomena, just like how a theory of matter (atomic theory) has to account for all material and substances in the universe—then you have to include where consciousness goes weird. For example, a theory of consciousness has to explain schizophrenia and optical illusions. There are also split-brain patients where one half of the brain takes responsibility for the other half even though there are two separate consciousnesses in the same body, and lucid dreaming where the recognition of dreaming leads to a belief of control over the dream. These odd points lead to better definitions than self-observation.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

Maybe for 5% of the population, 5% of the time. If you interact with people, you'll realize people don't actually reason but rationalize. People's decisions are already "made" by propaganda, repetition, groupthink, and prior experience. People do things and make up excuses for them.

It's a lot more honest to say I make all my decisions on gut instincts and intuition. Consciousness allows my gut instincts to gurgle a bit more. My art comes from the muses, and the gods guide my actions, as the ancients believed.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

The advantage of seeing the world as “computational” is that it is “representational.” That is, you can model it and run a simulation of that model to make predictions about the world. I don’t like the use of the word “computation” because it’s too loaded. A better question to ask is:

What is ultimately “representable”?

Is everything in the universe expressible as language?
Is everything in the universe expressible as connected neurons in our brain?
Can all matter in the universe be expressed as a set of letters in the periodic table?
Can it be expressed as an idea?
Can a book be written about everything in the universe?
Is all body form expressible as genes?
If yes, why? What are the limits? This has severe repercussions for the limits of what we can learn and, therefore, what we can actually pass on.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

I watched the lecture. I don't think you need Trump to be a genius to fix America. America suffers from abstraction, or rather, a false belief in American supremacy (a.k.a. boomer delusion). By being a man of action, he is able to break the spell by crashing the car into the wall, restoring alignment with reality, though it will be painful and costly.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

@TOEwithCurt Nothing can consistently describe itself, as in "This statement is a lie." If a system is allowed to describe itself, then it is also defining itself, leading to the paradoxes of Gödel and Hofstadter.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

@Ooziee5 @BrianJBerletic @DetroitShowtyme Character attacks is for dumb people. I don't care if you are a robot, an agent, or a tomato. Give your predictions and your reasoning for them. I will judge you by those alone.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

He uses game theory, elite theory, and patterns in history to make predictions. His predictions have proven accurate, and he provides reasoning and principles for them. He also says he wants people to remain open to alternative views, not simply believe what he says.

You might find him interesting if you want a broader view of history—one that incorporates patterns observed over 2,000 years rather than just the modern era. He also argues that secret societies and eschatology are additional factors to consider when trying to understand current events. The eschatology itself is not real, but that the people making decisions believe in it.

I’ve learned more actual history and understanding from his lectures than I did in school. He may or may not be right (though his predictions have been good), but the history taught in school is certainly not correct.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

@barnes_law "What can be, unburdened by what has been" --Kamala Harris

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

Yes. Reproduction is also transformation.

You have to be careful which “Socrates” you are referring to. Socrates as a person is dead. Socrates appears in paintings, sculptures, and teachings. Socrates also exists as a “myth,” retold by Plato and reproduced through articles and teachers. All of these we label and categorize as “Socrates.” When we talk about Socrates and his trial, we are referring to the pattern that is the “Socrates myth.” This myth holds utility as a story that inspires others, but we can never know what Socrates himself felt—only what the character might have felt.

The adaptability of neurons lets you define what is yourself. You can learn to point out and label what a dog or a cat is. Once you have such a system, you can then turn it inward and learn to point out and label what “yourself” is. You can self-define (this also leads to inconsistency, as in Gödel’s results). You can see this in skilled actors and actresses when they inhabit a character. As for Socrates within the Socrates myth, he can define himself as truth and thus try to “preserve” truth rather than his body—by becoming a story compelling enough to be retold. You can also infer what people define themselves as by what they are willing to die for: family, their children, the motherland or fatherland, jihad, freedom, and so on.

Like the Buddha. Siddhartha is dead, but we say he has been transformed into a set of beliefs we call Buddhism. Whether that super-pattern manages to propagate itself is up to the universe. We can look back and see what has survived and how it survived, but we cannot look forward except to say that the actions we take are our best bet.

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

A Book on the Philosophy of Patterns:
https://t.co/nok8hJhXgF

[Thuc @The_Patternist]

Only if they provide proper reasoning for their predictions. If the predictions are accurate, then the reasoning and principles used are sound. If they are sound, you can apply those principles/patterns to other areas. It doesn’t matter who they come from. That’s why Professor Jiang from Predictative History is so fascinating. He provides reasoning that is counterintuitive within our flawed education system.