On Saturday, June 13, 2026, at 10:16 AM, James Bowery wrote: > From the Hume's Guillotine README: > Yes, people can *and will* argue over what data to include or exclude -- but > the Algorithmic Information Criterion traps the intellectually dishonest by > making their job much harder since they must include *exponentially* much > more data that is biased towards their particular agenda in order to wash out > data coherence (and interdisciplinary consilience) in the rest of the > dataset. The ever-increasing diversity of data sources *identifies* the > sources of bias -- and then starts predicting the behavior of data sources in > terms of their bias, *as* bias. Trap sprung! This is much the same argument > as that leveled against conspiracy theories: At some point it becomes simply > impractical to hide a lie against the increasing diversity of observations > and perspectives.
OK I think you’re right. I just got that relieved feeling you experience after spending hours to days to weeks trying to debug some complicated distributed realtime system issue where it’s working generally but there is some deeper problem effecting it’s overall functionality. You’re digging though logs, tracing code, writing test code, running captures, reading dumps, alerts, docs, reports, specs, RFC’s, service reports, queries, and you’re like “What the hell is going on with this thing? Doesn’t make sense.” And then you realize the solution is something simple as is often the case and say “Oh, it’s just frigging that.” AIC for model selection is the bugfix for screwed up governments.. (In contrast to AOC) The problem is all the dependent systems explode after applying the patch, so it would have to be phased in :) ------------------------------------------ Artificial General Intelligence List: AGI Permalink: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/T5b182c3fd14f61e9-M920c2fd518ed6cf9665be37c Delivery options: https://agi.topicbox.com/groups/agi/subscription
