Dear Robert, Pulling my self up to my full height as an evolutionary psychologist, I assert that:
1. Things arent so clear about the bees and ants. In the first place female bees can mate with more than one male; if they mate with more that two, then the workers in a hive are LESS closely related than mammalian siblings. 2. Things arent so clear about the principles underlying group action and self sacrifice. Relatedness is one of THREE accepted principles, one other being reciprocal altruism, the other being group selection. Much of human behavior seems group seleected and the historical circumstances of human evolution -- extreme unpredictibility in the environment -- would pull for group selection. 3. What appears to be true is that human beings are constantly balanced on the tipping point from individual directed to group directed action. For this reason, it is imperative that we think carefully about the conditions we put people under. Environmental conditions can trigger adolescents into group directed behavior (gang formation, etc.) and indiviidual directed behavior (preparing for medical school). What cues we give our kids about the nature of the world they are entering and its contingencies may be crucial. Now I will deflate myself. thank you for your patience. Nick > > 1. Re: Swarm Intelligence in National Geographic (Robert Howard) > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 10:16:42 -0700 > From: "Robert Howard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Swarm Intelligence in National Geographic > To: "'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group'" > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > I'm suspicious of the ant and bee analogy for humans. It should (and does) > work for routing trucks and autonomous supply chain; but humans? > > Here's my hypothesis. With ants and bees, we expect a random individual to > be a female. In fact, only the queen and a few male drones reproduce. The > rest exists to propagate the genes of these few elite siblings. > > I see no evolutionary benefit for any ordinary female to "defect" from the > collective. > > An ordinary ant has everything to gain from laying down its life for the > queen. > > This is not the case with humans, which is why we observe non-ant-and-bee > things like revolts, revolutions, and certain extreme command-structured > governments respond by punishing the children of their subjects for actions > of dissent. > > With humans (and caribou), we expect a random individual to participate in > natural selection for the genes that each carry individually. > > When individuals propagate their own genes, predator/prey dynamics evolve > within the species; unlike ants and bees. > > > > Robert Howard > Phoenix, Arizona > > > > _____ > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Joshua Thorp > Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2007 8:53 PM > To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > Subject: [FRIAM] Swarm Intelligence in National Geographic > > > > Interesting article in National Geographic: > > http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0707/feature5/ > > > > >From slashdot with interesting commentary: > > http://hardware.slashdot.org/hardware/07/07/05/1244224.shtml > > > > --joshua > > > > --- > > Joshua Thorp > > Redfish Group > > 624 Agua Fria, Santa Fe, NM > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20070706/08bf91f7 /attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 11:30:38 -0600 > From: "Bruce Abell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [FRIAM] Anyone want an older OK computer? Free > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > FRIAMers-- > > I've kept my older desktop computer for a spare and thought I might use it > to experiment with a different operating system. But now it has become a > back-up spare with the acquisition of yet another one, so I've got to find > it a new home or bury it. > > Free. Just pick it up and pretend it will have a good home. It works > fine. I wrote a nice book on it. > > HP Pavilion 6630 > Celeron 500 MHz > Win 98 SE > 192 Meg Ram > 10 Gig HD > Ethernet card > Modem > CD R/W drive > Floppy drive > 17-inch CRT monitor--a monster, but it still displays pretty well. No one > can take the computer without taking the monitor! > Manuals, OS, etc. > > Send me an e-mail if you're interested. > > --Bruce Abell > > -- > Bruce Abell > 7 Morning Glory > Santa Fe, NM 87506 > Tel: 505 986 9039 > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20070706/6c9a7a2e /attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 14:59:31 -0400 > From: "Stephen Guerin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [FRIAM] Whitfield's PLOS article mentioning Eric Smith and > Dewar > To: [email protected] > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 > > Whitfield's PLOS article mentioning Eric Smith and Roderick Dewar's > work. > > http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get- > document&doi=10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.0050142 > > I'm now reading Whitfield's book, "In the Beat of a Heart: Life, > Energy, and the Unity of Nature" (www.inthebeatofaheart.com), but it > appears so far to be much more focused on quarter-power scaling than > maximum entropy production... > > -S > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 16:30:13 -0600 > From: "Tom Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] Anyone want an older OK computer? Free > To: "The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group" > <[email protected]> > Message-ID: > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Bruce: > > If you don't get any takers, you might try Craig's List. It has a "free" > section. > http://santafe.craigslist.org/zip/ > > -tj > > On 7/6/07, Bruce Abell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > FRIAMers-- > > > > I've kept my older desktop computer for a spare and thought I might use it > > to experiment with a different operating system. But now it has become a > > back-up spare with the acquisition of yet another one, so I've got to find > > it a new home or bury it. > > > > Free. Just pick it up and pretend it will have a good home. It works > > fine. I wrote a nice book on it. > > > > HP Pavilion 6630 > > Celeron 500 MHz > > Win 98 SE > > 192 Meg Ram > > 10 Gig HD > > Ethernet card > > Modem > > CD R/W drive > > Floppy drive > > 17-inch CRT monitor--a monster, but it still displays pretty well. No one > > can take the computer without taking the monitor! > > Manuals, OS, etc. > > > > Send me an e-mail if you're interested. > > > > --Bruce Abell > > > > -- > > Bruce Abell > > 7 Morning Glory > > Santa Fe, NM 87506 > > Tel: 505 986 9039 > > > > ============================================================ > > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > > > > > > -- > ========================================== > J. T. Johnson > Institute for Analytic Journalism -- Santa Fe, NM USA > www.analyticjournalism.com > 505.577.6482(c) 505.473.9646(h) > http://www.jtjohnson.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "You never change things by fighting the existing reality. > To change something, build a new model that makes the > existing model obsolete." > -- Buckminster Fuller > ========================================== > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20070706/8251dfc0 /attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 16:02:50 -0700 > From: "Stephen Guerin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: [FRIAM] local boy makes good > To: <[email protected]> > Cc: 'Dan Kunkle' <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > > Just happened across this news tidbit: > http://tinyurl.com/2b7ywl (Boston Globe) > http://www.physorg.com/news99843195.html > http://plus.maths.org/latestnews/may-aug07/rubik/index.html > > Cool work, Dan!! > > -S > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Fri, 06 Jul 2007 19:59:30 -0400 > From: "Phil Henshaw" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] JASSS (and despair) > To: "'Robert Holmes'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "'The Friday Morning > Applied Complexity Coffee Group'" <[email protected]> > Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > I somehow didn't send this to the forum before - and it needed an edit > anyway > > --------- > The ambiguity about whether computer models are thought to be exploring > actual social systems or not is definitely all over the place in the > journal, and not discussed. That's what I usually take as a sign of > confusion, so I'd have to tentatively conclude that the journal isn't > concerned with the difference and assumes that their theories are the > structures of human societies. To check exactly what they say, in the > banner of the journal for example, top of the front page, it says > "JASSS....an inter-disciplinary journal for the exploration and > understanding of social processes by means of computer simulation." > That specifically says the exploring of the social system is done by > computer, but maybe the mean that they'd study models of how they think > real systems work to help them study what makes actual systems > different. That's my method, and could be what they mean to say. > > That view is also hinted at in the article on model realism, "How > Realistic Should Knowledge Diffusion Models Be?" with the following > abstract: > > Knowledge diffusion models typically involve two main features: an > underlying social network topology on one side, and a particular design > of interaction rules driving knowledge transmission on the other side. > Acknowledging the need for realistic topologies and adoption behaviors > backed by empirical measurements, it becomes unclear how accurately > existing models render real-world phenomena: if indeed both topology and > transmission mechanisms have a key impact on these phenomena, to which > extent does the use of more or less stylized assumptions affect modeling > results? In order to evaluate various classical topologies and > mechanisms, we push the comparison to more empirical benchmarks: > real-world network structures and empirically measured mechanisms. > Special attention is paid to appraising the discrepancy between > diffusion phenomena (i) on some real network topologies vs. various > kinds of scale-free networks, and (ii) using an empirically-measured > transmission mechanism, compared with canonical appropriate models such > as threshold models. We find very sensible differences between the more > realistic settings and their traditional stylized counterparts. On the > whole, our point is thus also epistemological by insisting that models > should be tested against simulation-based empirical benchmarks. > > Here again I find confusion, though, in terms of clear ambiguities not > discussed. It appears that the 'real world phenomena' are equated > with general statistical measures in terms of 'benchmarks' rather than > behaviors, and these may be "simulation-based empirical benchmarks". > It's like the analysis of that plankton evolution data I studied, where > the complex eruptions of developmental processes in the evolutionary > succession I uncovered were for many years firmly defended as definite > random walks because the statistical benchmark for their range of > fluctuation was within the range reasonably likely for random walks. > Benchmarks, are sometimes very useful for actual diffusion processes, > of course, and much has been learned with them. What they are most > definitely misleading for is as indicators of complex system design > (lacking the 'requisite variety' I guess you'd say), and for any > behavior that is pathway dependent. The whole field of systems and > complexity is really supposed to be about building knowledge of the > pathway dependent properties of nature. These authors clearly are not > asking about that, so I guess I'd have to agree with you that the > journal is unaware of the difference. > > Is knowledge 'diffusion' pathway dependent? You bet. So I guess the > subject it not a 'diffusion' process at all, but a development process, > and nearly any kind of 'benchmarks' will be reliably misleading. > > > > Phil Henshaw ????.?? ? `?.???? > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > 680 Ft. Washington Ave > NY NY 10040 > tel: 212-795-4844 > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > explorations: www.synapse9.com <http://www.synapse9.com/> > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of > Robert Holmes > Sent: Tuesday, July 03, 2007 8:06 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] JASSS (and despair) > > > Read the articles and tell me what you think. But I believe the answer > to your last question is "No". > > Robert > > > On 7/3/07, Phil Henshaw < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The task of associating abstract and real things is rather complicated, > and often made more so by using the same names for them, so it appears > that when you're referring to a physical system you're discussing > entirely some network of abstract rules, for example. Even though you > say the article refers to physical systems, is it possible they just > switch back and forth between ways of referring to things, while being > consistent with an 'information world' model they assume everyone > understands to be the baseline of abstract discussion? > > > > Phil Henshaw ????.?? ? `?.???? > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: http://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/attachments/20070706/6b468548 /attachment-0001.html > > ------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Friam mailing list > [email protected] > http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com > > > End of Friam Digest, Vol 49, Issue 6 > ************************************ ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
