6 ms·

I'm guessing it's about the general rule of thumb that hw is faster than sw, and so can react to urgent situations in a timely fashion. As for why sw might be s

I'm guessing it's about the general rule of thumb that hw is faster than sw, and so can react to urgent situations in a timely fashion. As for why sw might be shorthand for consciousness: sw can modify itself (and thus react to strategic issues) ... so yeah, hw is more or less defined as something that cannot modify itself.

mistermann 2y ago
Firmware is exceptional though.
- 082349872349872 2y ago
  Fair enough, and we could get into microcoded architectures too. But basically the analogy (originally built around TLB handling) is supposed to be: software slow & flexible conscious response hardware fast & inflexible reflex response We're altricial, not precocial, so over our lifetimes we can (and hopefully do) alter many of our own "reflex" behaviours. In particular, details of the 4 F's are firmware configurable. Does that make sense? Lagniappe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__KfrDZoBgQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__KfrDZoBgQ (for mistermann)
  - mistermann 2y ago
    Yes but "4 F's"? Also, there's lots of potential for failure (and I'd say it is overwhelmingly observable that we have and do) in "can (and hopefully do)". Who knows what our absolute capabilities are, especially if we hardly or maybe even never try (at least certain things)? Writing the capabilities to firmware is a step after this, but only after the first step is accomplished.
    - vinnyvichy 2y ago
      Glad we moved the discussion into the Overton window of firmware. Maybe it's too early to start shipping metaphors in wetware, but developing general heuristics for productive+reproducible+survivable self-fuzzing? (*) "n X's" might still be a useful template to keep in mind, yes? Here are some good resources to explore the pain-gain frontier. (Or its baby versions, the supplies-surprise dilemma, shiprate quantification, etc.) [0-1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41567-024-02525-w https://www.nature.com/articles/s41567-024-02525-w https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.15070 https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.15070 [2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=Critical%20period&sort=byPopularity&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... [0] caveat lector: "nature physics" is where economics that's almost certain to be rejected for very good proboscidean-tail-wiggling reasons would be dumped. (*) Going back to the "Blindsight tangent", the social-political plane might already be an ideal platform to begin quantitative experimentation. ("Bylaws as wetware")
      - mistermann 2y ago
        > Maybe it's too early to start shipping metaphors in wetware I have some bad news for you, we've been at it for a long time. > but developing general heuristics for Oh God please no, we have too many already. I'm also generally speaking not a fan of apply principles from physics to metaphysics. I suspect I'm mostly misunderstanding you though, so take the above accordingly. (HN search can uncover/surface some very interesting phenomena, it is a very underappreciated tool.)
        vinnyvichy 2y ago
        >Who knows what our absolute capabilities are, especially if we hardly or maybe even never try (at least certain things)? Ego quoque, for misunderstanding what you meant by "certain things" (>) I stress that I manifestly do not want to see physicists and tech bros publish bio-meta-how-tos just yet, did you mean high quality professionally conducted BSL training? As for 082349872349872, I think exploring the Taoist metaphysics of marginally injurious mutual surprise as an epsilon over Buddhist tainted reinterpretations could be at most a waste of time. And what's more, I can vouch that he's not a physicist, not even vicariously. >though an ideology taking root in the mind is necessary to exploit its capabilities to their maximum. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=Mistermann%20capabilities&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... Okay so give me an example of an interesting ideology, as opposed to merely a conspiracy theory, such as "applying skepticism to your own beliefs" ) I could hit the News, but I am interested in how you think. E.g. did I misunderstand that you are interested in locating the precise quantitative boundaries of Systems I vs II? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27489329 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27489329
        mistermann 2y ago
        > Ego quoque, for misunderstanding what you meant by "certain things" (>) > I stress that I manifestly do not want to see physicists and tech bros publish bio-meta-how-tos just yet, did you mean high quality professionally conducted BSL training? How to say....more like curiosity about, and the pursuit of correctness (or at least, accurate representation) of affairs within the metaphysical realm. Something like "Enlightenment 2.0 - The Final Chapter" lol > I think exploring the Taoist metaphysics of marginally injurious mutual surprise as an epsilon over Buddhist tainted reinterpretations could be at most a waste of time. As a Taoist, I am very interested in whether you're interested in the truth value of this belief (and if so, to what degree). (Or were you perhaps using ambiguous language deliberately, for fun: "could be" could be a reference to a subset of the whole, or the whole itself....which did you mean? edit: "at most" seems to imply the whole?) > And what's more, I can vouch that he's not a physicist, not even vicariously. Can I trust you though? > Okay so give me an example of an interesting ideology, as opposed to merely a conspiracy theory, such as "applying skepticism to your own beliefs" ) Ok: I am interested in ~"Non-binary, Comprehensive Truth". Not only is it interesting (to me), it is essentially blasphemous in Western Culture, 2024, so much so that I suspect it may lead to me getting banned from this forum some day (I've certainly been given fair warning at least, so "no one to blame but myself"). > as opposed to merely a conspiracy theory, such as "applying skepticism to your own beliefs" As a Conspiracy Theorist and a Pedant, I lol'd. What a great start to the day!! > I could hit the News, but I am interested in how you think. Me too! I am extremely curious about what "thinking" is". I suspect it is quite other than what it seems to be, and is told to be (pardon the redundancy). > E.g. did I misunderstand that you are interested in locating the precise quantitative boundaries of Systems I vs II? I take a more vague perspective: I am interested in the nature of the distinction, and ways we could optimize it (individually and collectively). If you think about it, our current era (in the Blinded by Science and destroying our ecosystem as a consequence Western World at least) is fascinating: one one hand the humans have extensive knowledge that thinking is what separates us from other (known) life forms on the planet, and yet we pay it essentially no mind (at least at the public level...I suspect what goes on behind closed doors, perhaps within various Three Letter Agencies, perhaps elsewhere, is very different. But then that sort of thing is a conspiracy theory, and we all know what that means epistemically). I often what would happen if we were to do otherwise. But how to accomplish such a thing? How to even desire to try?
    - 082349872349872 2y ago
      > Who knows what our absolute capabilities are... Our (individual) absolute capabilities or our (collective) absolute capabilities? (assuming that "2 hominids: 3 opinions" doesn't mean the former essentially bounds the latter)
      - mistermann 2y ago
        > Our (individual) absolute capabilities or our (collective) absolute capabilities? Both, though the two are necessarily and intimately intermingled, and more so every day (except for exceptions, like for example if the United States government is successful in putting down TikTok, because {silly lies that easily fool child-like, conditioned since birth minds}). I'm thinking of it from a possible worlds perspective, so "capabilities" gets a bit complex due to ~multidimensional & temporal dependencies, but hopefully you get my drift. I hope The Normies are enjoying our "word salad". ;)
        082349872349872 2y ago
        If I get your drift, I think a precondition is that we need to figure out a way to keep the Bartle Taxonomy Killers (♣) happy just playing power-{possession/craving} games with each other, instead of feeling the need to drag everyone else into the Sith spirit; compare https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40019115 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40019115
        mistermann 2y ago
        If I get your drift, I agree. > instead of feeling the need to drag everyone else into the Sith spirit You may like: https://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win https://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win (Note: I have some disagreements with that here and there in the context we're discussing.)
        vinnyvichy 2y ago
        Alright seeing that I have to do some major unrelated symbol-pushing in the toplevel today... I might have to take a few days to process what has been said here. I know folks do not mind, but thought a heads-up would be in order. Praying to the gods of HN to keep this thread alive )* EDIT: the delvings into ancient "Taoist" texts, I would do so myself, if I didn't feel that my models have been heavily polluted by god-knows-what. Those conspiracy theories are very compelling. Maybe a search for the actual battle records of 姜子牙 is in order)[0] *As a Procrustist or Protist lol [0] https://m.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_24715199 https://m.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_24715199 says (likely CCP propaganda, but sometimes fun to read) 史记 should be the first cache to look up. (The rest of that has mostly been quoted to me, but I iterate to motivate mistermann's possible context updates) "鸷鸟将击，卑飞敛翼；猛兽将搏，弭耳俯伏；圣人将动，必有愚色。”

mistermann 2y ago

Firmware is exceptional though.

082349872349872 2y ago
Fair enough, and we could get into microcoded architectures too. But basically the analogy (originally built around TLB handling) is supposed to be: software slow & flexible conscious response hardware fast & inflexible reflex response We're altricial, not precocial, so over our lifetimes we can (and hopefully do) alter many of our own "reflex" behaviours. In particular, details of the 4 F's are firmware configurable. Does that make sense? Lagniappe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__KfrDZoBgQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__KfrDZoBgQ (for mistermann)
- mistermann 2y ago
  Yes but "4 F's"? Also, there's lots of potential for failure (and I'd say it is overwhelmingly observable that we have and do) in "can (and hopefully do)". Who knows what our absolute capabilities are, especially if we hardly or maybe even never try (at least certain things)? Writing the capabilities to firmware is a step after this, but only after the first step is accomplished.
  - vinnyvichy 2y ago
    Glad we moved the discussion into the Overton window of firmware. Maybe it's too early to start shipping metaphors in wetware, but developing general heuristics for productive+reproducible+survivable self-fuzzing? (*) "n X's" might still be a useful template to keep in mind, yes? Here are some good resources to explore the pain-gain frontier. (Or its baby versions, the supplies-surprise dilemma, shiprate quantification, etc.) [0-1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41567-024-02525-w https://www.nature.com/articles/s41567-024-02525-w https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.15070 https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.15070 [2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=Critical%20period&sort=byPopularity&type=story https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... [0] caveat lector: "nature physics" is where economics that's almost certain to be rejected for very good proboscidean-tail-wiggling reasons would be dumped. (*) Going back to the "Blindsight tangent", the social-political plane might already be an ideal platform to begin quantitative experimentation. ("Bylaws as wetware")
    - mistermann 2y ago
      > Maybe it's too early to start shipping metaphors in wetware I have some bad news for you, we've been at it for a long time. > but developing general heuristics for Oh God please no, we have too many already. I'm also generally speaking not a fan of apply principles from physics to metaphysics. I suspect I'm mostly misunderstanding you though, so take the above accordingly. (HN search can uncover/surface some very interesting phenomena, it is a very underappreciated tool.)
      - vinnyvichy 2y ago
        >Who knows what our absolute capabilities are, especially if we hardly or maybe even never try (at least certain things)? Ego quoque, for misunderstanding what you meant by "certain things" (>) I stress that I manifestly do not want to see physicists and tech bros publish bio-meta-how-tos just yet, did you mean high quality professionally conducted BSL training? As for 082349872349872, I think exploring the Taoist metaphysics of marginally injurious mutual surprise as an epsilon over Buddhist tainted reinterpretations could be at most a waste of time. And what's more, I can vouch that he's not a physicist, not even vicariously. >though an ideology taking root in the mind is necessary to exploit its capabilities to their maximum. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=Mistermann%20capabilities&sort=byDate&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... Okay so give me an example of an interesting ideology, as opposed to merely a conspiracy theory, such as "applying skepticism to your own beliefs" ) I could hit the News, but I am interested in how you think. E.g. did I misunderstand that you are interested in locating the precise quantitative boundaries of Systems I vs II? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27489329 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27489329
        mistermann 2y ago
        > Ego quoque, for misunderstanding what you meant by "certain things" (>) > I stress that I manifestly do not want to see physicists and tech bros publish bio-meta-how-tos just yet, did you mean high quality professionally conducted BSL training? How to say....more like curiosity about, and the pursuit of correctness (or at least, accurate representation) of affairs within the metaphysical realm. Something like "Enlightenment 2.0 - The Final Chapter" lol > I think exploring the Taoist metaphysics of marginally injurious mutual surprise as an epsilon over Buddhist tainted reinterpretations could be at most a waste of time. As a Taoist, I am very interested in whether you're interested in the truth value of this belief (and if so, to what degree). (Or were you perhaps using ambiguous language deliberately, for fun: "could be" could be a reference to a subset of the whole, or the whole itself....which did you mean? edit: "at most" seems to imply the whole?) > And what's more, I can vouch that he's not a physicist, not even vicariously. Can I trust you though? > Okay so give me an example of an interesting ideology, as opposed to merely a conspiracy theory, such as "applying skepticism to your own beliefs" ) Ok: I am interested in ~"Non-binary, Comprehensive Truth". Not only is it interesting (to me), it is essentially blasphemous in Western Culture, 2024, so much so that I suspect it may lead to me getting banned from this forum some day (I've certainly been given fair warning at least, so "no one to blame but myself"). > as opposed to merely a conspiracy theory, such as "applying skepticism to your own beliefs" As a Conspiracy Theorist and a Pedant, I lol'd. What a great start to the day!! > I could hit the News, but I am interested in how you think. Me too! I am extremely curious about what "thinking" is". I suspect it is quite other than what it seems to be, and is told to be (pardon the redundancy). > E.g. did I misunderstand that you are interested in locating the precise quantitative boundaries of Systems I vs II? I take a more vague perspective: I am interested in the nature of the distinction, and ways we could optimize it (individually and collectively). If you think about it, our current era (in the Blinded by Science and destroying our ecosystem as a consequence Western World at least) is fascinating: one one hand the humans have extensive knowledge that thinking is what separates us from other (known) life forms on the planet, and yet we pay it essentially no mind (at least at the public level...I suspect what goes on behind closed doors, perhaps within various Three Letter Agencies, perhaps elsewhere, is very different. But then that sort of thing is a conspiracy theory, and we all know what that means epistemically). I often what would happen if we were to do otherwise. But how to accomplish such a thing? How to even desire to try?
  - 082349872349872 2y ago
    > Who knows what our absolute capabilities are... Our (individual) absolute capabilities or our (collective) absolute capabilities? (assuming that "2 hominids: 3 opinions" doesn't mean the former essentially bounds the latter)
    - mistermann 2y ago
      > Our (individual) absolute capabilities or our (collective) absolute capabilities? Both, though the two are necessarily and intimately intermingled, and more so every day (except for exceptions, like for example if the United States government is successful in putting down TikTok, because {silly lies that easily fool child-like, conditioned since birth minds}). I'm thinking of it from a possible worlds perspective, so "capabilities" gets a bit complex due to ~multidimensional & temporal dependencies, but hopefully you get my drift. I hope The Normies are enjoying our "word salad". ;)
      - 082349872349872 2y ago
        If I get your drift, I think a precondition is that we need to figure out a way to keep the Bartle Taxonomy Killers (♣) happy just playing power-{possession/craving} games with each other, instead of feeling the need to drag everyone else into the Sith spirit; compare https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40019115 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40019115
        mistermann 2y ago
        If I get your drift, I agree. > instead of feeling the need to drag everyone else into the Sith spirit You may like: https://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win https://www.sirlin.net/articles/playing-to-win (Note: I have some disagreements with that here and there in the context we're discussing.)
        vinnyvichy 2y ago
        Alright seeing that I have to do some major unrelated symbol-pushing in the toplevel today... I might have to take a few days to process what has been said here. I know folks do not mind, but thought a heads-up would be in order. Praying to the gods of HN to keep this thread alive )* EDIT: the delvings into ancient "Taoist" texts, I would do so myself, if I didn't feel that my models have been heavily polluted by god-knows-what. Those conspiracy theories are very compelling. Maybe a search for the actual battle records of 姜子牙 is in order)[0] *As a Procrustist or Protist lol [0] https://m.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_24715199 https://m.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_24715199 says (likely CCP propaganda, but sometimes fun to read) 史记 should be the first cache to look up. (The rest of that has mostly been quoted to me, but I iterate to motivate mistermann's possible context updates) "鸷鸟将击，卑飞敛翼；猛兽将搏，弭耳俯伏；圣人将动，必有愚色。”