4 ms·

Nice way of depicting the dilemma (or trilemma). I dont see any straightforward way to resolve it rn.. maybe more thinking about which should work better in wha

Nice way of depicting the dilemma (or trilemma). I dont see any straightforward way to resolve it rn.. maybe more thinking about which should work better in what situations.. it does seem to depend on timescales. (There was a comment in the MITI thread about the culture of secrecy, that rings true, note that their final act was to os Prolog.. trust is situational) (But also laughable security in the academic side, feels like Jacobs is haunting them, MITI failed to bridge the dichotomy.. nothing like a smooth uni to industry prefabd pipeline for them)

082349872349872 2y ago
might be something to your viscosity conceit — orgs as non-newtonian fluids? as to situations: when training mammals, sometimes "shaping" works better: introducing novelty little by little ("salami slicing"); sometimes "flooding" works better: presenting a novel situation all at once ("ripping off the band-aid"). unf I don't have any* theory for it; it's more gut feel, and I've noticed my wife succeeds with flooding in situations where I am certain I'd have to proceed by shaping to have any hope. * any beyond "shaping is safer but slower", that is
- 082349872349872 2y ago
  oops; forgot to make the connection explicit. Shaping would be low pressure over a long time, and flooding high pressure over a short time, so they could be alternative ways to factor any given amount of Pascal-seconds.
  - gradschoolfail 2y ago
    Can you make your (proposed?) patch (to DS, presumably?) even more explicit?* [ok, y is “seconds” peeking out from the other “si unit”] To me, it makes more sense to say (<- what you said) string (representing expression) to expression ( <- destructure value to env) expression to (shorter) string ( <- eval expression ) (Trying not to make “string”/“word”/“expression” interchangeable) *i sometimes cannot ask my friends questions (similarly, but also different, to this) as it would be too embarrassing XOR explicit => better (even more symmetric?) sibboleth?
    - 082349872349872 2y ago
      that could make sense, yes. I think one way to keep them from being interchangeable is to say that a (linear) string is composed associatively: A,(B,C) == A,B,C == (A,B),C while an (arboreal) expression is not: A,[B,C] <> [A,B],C one syntax I've played around with is due to physics envy: ⟨expression∣intermediate bindings∣pattern⟩ eg fib := ⟨n*fib(n-1)∣n>1⟩ + ⟨1|n<=1⟩ gcd := ⟨gcd(x,y-x)∣x,y>x⟩ + ⟨gcd(x-y,y)∣x,y<x⟩ + ⟨x∣x,y==x⟩ ftoc := ⟨c∣ c:=t*5/9; t:=f-32 ∣f⟩ NB. °F to C note that (for codegen purposes) we can simplify expressions and (with failure provision) patterns by expanding them into the intermediate section, similar to ANF; if we were going all the way down to assembly we might want to lower through ftoc' := ⟨c∣ c:=t*m; t:=f-a; m:=0.56; a:=32.0 ∣f⟩ but on the other had could have raised to ftoc'' := ⟨(f-32)*5/9 ∣ f⟩ and, on the gripping hand, if we wished to be austere, maybe it could be worth it to even insist that in the expression place, computations be injections, in the intermediate isos (changes of representation), and in the pattern surjections? (note also that here for simplicity I've deliberately used non-overlapping patterns; there's a nice pattern-calculus that allows for both simpler programs and simpler interpreters if one allows algebraic combination with overlapping patterns. However, I've probably made my language unadoptable because no matter what the syntax, combination of patterns is always deliberately unordered — ordering can be achieved if the user insists, but as a 2nd class construct) finally, everything is given here in the identity monad for simplicity, but the same ideas carry over unchanged to other monads.
      - gradschoolfail 2y ago
        Exciting, i.e. might even play with this soonish
        082349872349872 2y ago
        alternate syntax at https://oortcloud.flounder.online/junk/ https://oortcloud.flounder.online/junk/ (sorry, very telegraphic!) [with mostly up-to-date semantics, but this year I gave up on approximating (≲), which is \refines in the suite, in the language itself; the following seems to be more productive (for technical reasons related to using an implementation-specific total order): FNull <= f && f <= f NB. <= is discrete where equality of closures is pessimistic, based on lexical source and equality of the captured environments, so: f <= g ==> f \refines g f \refines g <=> f`x ~ g`x using (`) as application] it may help to read chapter 2 of https://www.cs.utoronto.ca/~hehner/aPToP/ https://www.cs.utoronto.ca/~hehner/aPToP/ for the basic data structure inspiration; another alternate syntax would be to stick with his (for data; this all grew out of wishing to treat functions very differently) I've also been inspired by the Boom Hierarchy (in terms of trying to put laws, especially distributive/module laws, first) but as my areas of interest don't run to commercial proggys, I haven't found a use for the bag level. [Lamport stuttering, otoh, suggests that ordered but absorbing would be a useful abstraction — and I think that'd easily be buildable on top of this basis] if I can remember out my creds for oortcloud, and it would help, I can make available a browser-based precedence tool that translates expressions in the JUNK syntax into their abstract trees.
- gradschoolfail 2y ago
  Ah thanks for the metaflooding!. was trying to achieve a balance between the 2, kinda like “Number theory might be the future of physics, but fluid dynamics is the future of number theory”* I concede to a weakness for triangles, such as this < money >< math >< magic > Napoleon’s sleep schedule: i’d only heard about the 6 hours of sleep (because thats the schleppy shit that VCs want to see in designori). That TIL has a delugional [aka magical] aspect, ac, thanks! Rriight, the logistics of iDevices seduce one with the allure of “High(-functioning) Culture”, the logistics of disposable commsats do not (yet) (PPPS Compare with the more prosaic (but more sophicatedly structured) PGcal newtonian obssessions — NoTe:honest! in (conscious) bona fide hindsight this comparison was reached TIC < minting >< natural philosophy >< alchemy > ) PS:original(?) & utter speculation was that the political purges+relaxation to common sense “worked” for the revolutionary army, but not navy. Political commissars having an unexpected effect on routes to victory? (Too difficult/costly/nonsensical to give basic naval training to PCs. Naval anything is showing > telling.. do we even credibly remember what the legions marched to??) *i havent delved at all into his work, Gisin is the almost-crackpot name to look up, major patch to K,AN is what he seems to be aiming for. PPS: schlep has a “bootstrap”-py (as it were a schleppy term for magic) aspect: reducing schlep involves schlep
  - gradschoolfail 2y ago
    Update: TIC: TK-monad HK-dyad (>power<>sex<) Debreviated: Today I Compared
    - 082349872349872 2y ago
      I don't know how well attested it may be, but somewhere I ran across the notion that second-tier chimps get the most action, because the alpha chimp must spend almost all his time shoring up his (male) political base. [if NB had the same habits at home as in the field, imagine him busy with paperwork trying to run the empire from 0100-0600, during which time his Marshalls ("Ein bisschen dreist, ein bisschen Mut"?) were occupying themselves in sidesprings?]
      - 2y ago

082349872349872 2y ago

might be something to your viscosity conceit — orgs as non-newtonian fluids? as to situations: when training mammals, sometimes "shaping" works better: introducing novelty little by little ("salami slicing"); sometimes "flooding" works better: presenting a novel situation all at once ("ripping off the band-aid"). unf I don't have any* theory for it; it's more gut feel, and I've noticed my wife succeeds with flooding in situations where I am certain I'd have to proceed by shaping to have any hope. * any beyond "shaping is safer but slower", that is

082349872349872 2y ago
oops; forgot to make the connection explicit. Shaping would be low pressure over a long time, and flooding high pressure over a short time, so they could be alternative ways to factor any given amount of Pascal-seconds.
- gradschoolfail 2y ago
  Can you make your (proposed?) patch (to DS, presumably?) even more explicit?* [ok, y is “seconds” peeking out from the other “si unit”] To me, it makes more sense to say (<- what you said) string (representing expression) to expression ( <- destructure value to env) expression to (shorter) string ( <- eval expression ) (Trying not to make “string”/“word”/“expression” interchangeable) *i sometimes cannot ask my friends questions (similarly, but also different, to this) as it would be too embarrassing XOR explicit => better (even more symmetric?) sibboleth?
  - 082349872349872 2y ago
    that could make sense, yes. I think one way to keep them from being interchangeable is to say that a (linear) string is composed associatively: A,(B,C) == A,B,C == (A,B),C while an (arboreal) expression is not: A,[B,C] <> [A,B],C one syntax I've played around with is due to physics envy: ⟨expression∣intermediate bindings∣pattern⟩ eg fib := ⟨n*fib(n-1)∣n>1⟩ + ⟨1|n<=1⟩ gcd := ⟨gcd(x,y-x)∣x,y>x⟩ + ⟨gcd(x-y,y)∣x,y<x⟩ + ⟨x∣x,y==x⟩ ftoc := ⟨c∣ c:=t*5/9; t:=f-32 ∣f⟩ NB. °F to C note that (for codegen purposes) we can simplify expressions and (with failure provision) patterns by expanding them into the intermediate section, similar to ANF; if we were going all the way down to assembly we might want to lower through ftoc' := ⟨c∣ c:=t*m; t:=f-a; m:=0.56; a:=32.0 ∣f⟩ but on the other had could have raised to ftoc'' := ⟨(f-32)*5/9 ∣ f⟩ and, on the gripping hand, if we wished to be austere, maybe it could be worth it to even insist that in the expression place, computations be injections, in the intermediate isos (changes of representation), and in the pattern surjections? (note also that here for simplicity I've deliberately used non-overlapping patterns; there's a nice pattern-calculus that allows for both simpler programs and simpler interpreters if one allows algebraic combination with overlapping patterns. However, I've probably made my language unadoptable because no matter what the syntax, combination of patterns is always deliberately unordered — ordering can be achieved if the user insists, but as a 2nd class construct) finally, everything is given here in the identity monad for simplicity, but the same ideas carry over unchanged to other monads.
    - gradschoolfail 2y ago
      Exciting, i.e. might even play with this soonish
      - 082349872349872 2y ago
        alternate syntax at https://oortcloud.flounder.online/junk/ https://oortcloud.flounder.online/junk/ (sorry, very telegraphic!) [with mostly up-to-date semantics, but this year I gave up on approximating (≲), which is \refines in the suite, in the language itself; the following seems to be more productive (for technical reasons related to using an implementation-specific total order): FNull <= f && f <= f NB. <= is discrete where equality of closures is pessimistic, based on lexical source and equality of the captured environments, so: f <= g ==> f \refines g f \refines g <=> f`x ~ g`x using (`) as application] it may help to read chapter 2 of https://www.cs.utoronto.ca/~hehner/aPToP/ https://www.cs.utoronto.ca/~hehner/aPToP/ for the basic data structure inspiration; another alternate syntax would be to stick with his (for data; this all grew out of wishing to treat functions very differently) I've also been inspired by the Boom Hierarchy (in terms of trying to put laws, especially distributive/module laws, first) but as my areas of interest don't run to commercial proggys, I haven't found a use for the bag level. [Lamport stuttering, otoh, suggests that ordered but absorbing would be a useful abstraction — and I think that'd easily be buildable on top of this basis] if I can remember out my creds for oortcloud, and it would help, I can make available a browser-based precedence tool that translates expressions in the JUNK syntax into their abstract trees.
gradschoolfail 2y ago
Ah thanks for the metaflooding!. was trying to achieve a balance between the 2, kinda like “Number theory might be the future of physics, but fluid dynamics is the future of number theory”* I concede to a weakness for triangles, such as this < money >< math >< magic > Napoleon’s sleep schedule: i’d only heard about the 6 hours of sleep (because thats the schleppy shit that VCs want to see in designori). That TIL has a delugional [aka magical] aspect, ac, thanks! Rriight, the logistics of iDevices seduce one with the allure of “High(-functioning) Culture”, the logistics of disposable commsats do not (yet) (PPPS Compare with the more prosaic (but more sophicatedly structured) PGcal newtonian obssessions — NoTe:honest! in (conscious) bona fide hindsight this comparison was reached TIC < minting >< natural philosophy >< alchemy > ) PS:original(?) & utter speculation was that the political purges+relaxation to common sense “worked” for the revolutionary army, but not navy. Political commissars having an unexpected effect on routes to victory? (Too difficult/costly/nonsensical to give basic naval training to PCs. Naval anything is showing > telling.. do we even credibly remember what the legions marched to??) *i havent delved at all into his work, Gisin is the almost-crackpot name to look up, major patch to K,AN is what he seems to be aiming for. PPS: schlep has a “bootstrap”-py (as it were a schleppy term for magic) aspect: reducing schlep involves schlep
- gradschoolfail 2y ago
  Update: TIC: TK-monad HK-dyad (>power<>sex<) Debreviated: Today I Compared
  - 082349872349872 2y ago
    I don't know how well attested it may be, but somewhere I ran across the notion that second-tier chimps get the most action, because the alpha chimp must spend almost all his time shoring up his (male) political base. [if NB had the same habits at home as in the field, imagine him busy with paperwork trying to run the empire from 0100-0600, during which time his Marshalls ("Ein bisschen dreist, ein bisschen Mut"?) were occupying themselves in sidesprings?]
    - 2y ago