Re: [FRIAM] basis for prediction — forked from the tail end of anthropological observtions

Tip the scales, Florida! https://www.newsweek.com/florida-beaches-florida-moron-twitter-1498750 https://twitter.com/search?q=%23FloridaMorons=typed_query On 4/18/20, 4:07 PM, "Friam on behalf of Prof David West" wrote: Consider three entities making 2016 political predictions and their

Re: [FRIAM] Influential Covid-19 model shouldn't guide U.S. policies, critics say - STAT

And yea for ABMs. From: Friam on behalf of "thompnicks...@gmail.com" Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Date: Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 8:09 PM To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' Subject: [FRIAM] Influential Covid-19 model shouldn't guide

[FRIAM] Influential Covid-19 model shouldn't guide U.S. policies, critics say - STAT

Hi, all, https://www.statnews.com/2020/04/17/influential-covid-19-model-uses-flawed-m ethods-shouldnt-guide-policies-critics-say/ This article is interesting for two reasons, first, because it relates to a model that we have been using in our thinking about covid19, and second because it

Re: [FRIAM] basis for prediction — forked from the tail end of anthropological observtions

Dave, No, wait a minute! Thou slenderest me! For you, Science is a bunch of nasty people with vested interests. Science, on that understanding, has the power to exclude. For me, Science is a set of practices that lead to understandings of experience that endure the test of time. It is

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

The opposite of TLDR is the technique described by Scott Adams. This leads me to posit that those that complain things are TLDR are likely just the incurious, the impatient, and the entitled, and likely to be part of the problem. Is there some particular crisis of their Valuable Attention

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

> Unfortunately, after a couple of attempts to read it, I couldn't understand > anything in your post except this part. My previous post was just under 300 > words. So, I decided to try to make the next one under that mark as well. > > On 4/18/20 1:22 PM, Steven A Smith wrote: >> From whence

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Unfortunately, after a couple of attempts to read it, I couldn't understand anything in your post except this part. My previous post was just under 300 words. So, I decided to try to make the next one under that mark as well. On 4/18/20 1:22 PM, Steven A Smith wrote: > From whence (or wherest?)

Re: [FRIAM] basis for prediction — forked from the tail end of anthropological observtions

Nick, I won't lose the argument, because I pre-believe that, IF alternative means with some kind of criteria for falsifiability and repeatability THEN they should be incorporated into that which is deemed "Science" — ergo there is no argument to lose. If there is an argument — and there is

Re: [FRIAM] basis for prediction — forked from the tail end of anthropological observtions

Dave, You're going to lose this argument with me eventually, because any investigatory practice that works in the long run I am going to declare to be part of "the scientific method." So if you declare that discovery is enhanced by lying in a warm suds bath smoking pot, and you can describe

Re: [FRIAM] basis for prediction — forked from the tail end of anthropological observtions

Dave writes: "Scott Adams used none of those methods/tools but, as described in his book — Win Bigly — the language and rhetoric analysis tools/techniques he did use." If that is the world people want, maybe the world just needs to go ahead and burn. Take off the masks, go back to work.

[FRIAM] basis for prediction — forked from the tail end of anthropological observtions

Consider three entities making 2016 political predictions and their predictions. 1- "cognoscenti" those citing poll data, Nate Silver (albeit as everyone notes, the citation was more interpretation than citation), pundits, et. al. — Trump, at various times, has 1/1000 to 1/3 chance of winning

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Yes, both Eric C. and Marcus have already answered this better than what I am about to say, because they have already abstracted it into concepts. But I will put only a particular. I got this from the polymath Elwyn Berlekamp (who did run a hedge fund) in the kitchen on an Erdos-like visit by

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Eric - > Cranky Nick, you really need to join a church. I think Nick's church IS this mail-list/congregation... and he (reluctantly) stands-in as a lay-preacher, though I think he spends more time trying to recruit others to that role.   It functions a bit like a UU church in some ways (a lot of

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Maybe ask a hedge fund? From: Friam on behalf of "thompnicks...@gmail.com" Reply-To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group Date: Saturday, April 18, 2020 at 1:16 PM To: 'The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group' Subject: Re:

Re: [FRIAM] FRIAM Regular Session 9 a

Sorry I missed - still drowning in information for the new job Original Message Subject: [FRIAM] FRIAM Regular Session 9 a From: "Tom Johnson (via Google Docs)" Date: Thu, April 16, 2020 5:52 pm To: friam@redfish.com jtjohnson...@gmail.com has

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Nick- Interesting (apt?) choice of poker-hands to attribute to "the Hillary" and to "the Donald". - Sieve On 4/18/20 12:31 PM, thompnicks...@gmail.com wrote: > > So, Eric [Charles], > >   > > What exactly were the /practicial/ consequences of declaring that > Hillary was “probably” going to win

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

This list/thread(s) has been so prolific and pithy of late, I can hardly begin to respond to one thing before another (dozen shiny objects) catches my eye. ☣ ƃlǝu (reads like "blau"?) thus wroteth: > Now Marcus is just being sadistic. >8^D > > My own guess at a summary of Eric's stance is that

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

But Eric, If, over his career, Nate's site gives a 2/3 vs 1/3 split 1,000 ti mes, and something near 333 times the 1/3 split wins, I think he gets to declare himself accurate How is that practicial? I.e., how can we base a practice on it? Nate’s career isn’t over yet? Nick

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

If, over his career, Nate's site gives a 2/3 vs 1/3 split 1,000 ti mes, and something near 333 times the 1/3 split wins, I think he gets to declare himself accurate. Similarly, a modern poker pro isn't trying to guess what the opponent has. The modern player is trying to put the opponent on a

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Glen - > I think it's interesting that you seemed to have *flipped* your thinking > within the same post. You restate my point about conceptual metaphors by > saying models/computation merely *justifies* decisions/rhetoric. Then a few > paragraphs later, you suggest that's conflating language

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

So, Eric [Charles], What exactly were the practicial consequences of declaring that Hillary was “probably” going to win the election or that a full house was probably going to win the pot given she lost and the dealer held a strait flush? Nick Nicholas Thompson Emeritus Professor

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Now Marcus is just being sadistic. >8^D My own guess at a summary of Eric's stance is that where we see qualities, we can, at will, invert the vision and see quantities. Fontana is a great source for distinguishing construction from evolution. But for me, BC Smith [†] is better for maintaining

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Nick says - Nate constantly says that making such predictions is, strictly speaking, not his job. As long as what happens falls within the error of his prediction, he feels justified in having made it. He will say things like, "actually we were right." I would prefer him to

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

I agree. Nate's not much more rigorous than the rest of us. And just like Justin Bieber or Britney Spears, he was probably ill-equipped to handle the steep increase in fame. Morlocks don't handle that sort of thing very well. We can get confused about who we are and what we do, maybe even

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Glen, I admittedly way out of my depth here and so deserve to be picked on. You guys are kind to let me play in your sandbox. Ok, to be completely honest, I listen to a LOT of Nate Silver and he says a LOT of different things. So, at the very minimum, I am probably guilty of

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

I think the point is that the relations or contingencies you mention can be cast as posterior probabilities from observed many-body correlations. Distributional thinking works fine in that case too, it is just that some of those conditional probabilities get very close to 1. Others relations

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

I think it's interesting that you seemed to have *flipped* your thinking within the same post. You restate my point about conceptual metaphors by saying models/computation merely *justifies* decisions/rhetoric. Then a few paragraphs later, you suggest that's conflating language with thought.

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Jon, Can you explain to me what in thunderation Eric’s comments on objects has to do with my comments on contingencies. I am sure there IS a connection, but I just can’t see it. Nick Nicholas Thompson Emeritus Professor of Ethology and Psychology Clark University

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Eric, Bravo. Sure, maybe TLDR, but a wonderful read anyway. Jon .-. .- -. -.. --- -- -..-. -.. --- - ... -..-. .- -. -.. -..-. -.. .- ... . ... FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam unsubscribe

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Glen - Your diatribe reminds me of the way I used to frame my (rare) pitches in DC back during my time working in the "Decision Support Systems" division at  LANL.   I started out with "I'm here to help you NOT make a decision".   This appalled them, becuase "by golly, by gosh, they were Decision

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Said the man who dropped a chainsaw through his leg.. Sent from my iPhone On Apr 18, 2020, at 12:02 AM, Stephen Guerin wrote:  Oops, weird slip. Meant Bill Macready On Sat, Apr 18, 2020, 12:55 AM Stephen Guerin mailto:stephen.gue...@simtable.com>> wrote: Eric, Was it Barrier to Objects?

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

I don’t know, Steve, I looked at that one, and at all the early ones I could find, and in quick skimming I didn’t find what I thought was a quote in the epigraph position. I am beginning to wonder if it was a draft of something that never got published in the manuscript version I saw. A

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Oops, weird slip. Meant Bill Macready On Sat, Apr 18, 2020, 12:55 AM Stephen Guerin wrote: > Eric, > > Was it Barrier to Objects? > > https://scholar.harvard.edu/walterfontana/publications/barrier-objects-dynamical-systems-bounded-organizations > > That was the constructivist lambda calculus

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Eric, Was it Barrier to Objects? https://scholar.harvard.edu/walterfontana/publications/barrier-objects-dynamical-systems-bounded-organizations That was the constructivist lambda calculus paper. Bill Mckelvey extended to pi calculus On Sat, Apr 18, 2020, 12:36 AM David Eric Smith wrote: >

Re: [FRIAM] anthropological observations

Very good Nick. You see, unfortunately it appears that the reason I was put on Earth was to be the evangelist of distributional thinking. In one of Walter Fontana’s early papers, which I probably saw in 1998, he opened with a quote “Ever focused on objects, we something something