4 ms·

Please tell us what sources you follow that provide you with (a) comparably lucid ideas and (b) not only that, but also in a shorter, clearer form. I for one w

by jng 12y ago

Please tell us what sources you follow that provide you with (a) comparably lucid ideas and (b) not only that, but also in a shorter, clearer form. I for one want to follow them too if they really exist.

soganess 12y ago
One does not solely get their understanding of novelty or content/length relation from single newsfeed style sources. There are more than a few books and even more wikipedia entries that provide a wealth of understanding for a relative pittance in word count. Not to mention all the non-classical forms that do the same. The article was okay, but the standard you implicitly set forth is lacking in fairness to the commenter, to the original story, and truly to one-off forms of valuable information that don't provide a serialized source of continued information. One of my personal favorites: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2%80%93Howard_correspondence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2%80%93Howard_correspond...
- jng 12y ago
  Books and Wikipedia articles are sources too. I didn't say anything about single newsfeed style sources. I find the linked-to article to be a gem of lucidity amidst a barrage of mostly noise, busywork, and lottery-playing. Not only that, but the topic of the foundations of morality is going to become a central issue soon, with multiple strong global trends taking us towards that difficult issue. The article you linked to is nice, but Curry-Howard isomorphism is neither novel nor as important as the topic covered by the original article. As fragile agents inhabiting a ball of mass and fire organized in billions of partly-autonomous somewhat-intelligent resource-sharing systems flying through space and time, just recently coming up with scarily and growingly powerful new ways to rearrange control which may destroy existing controlling systems, including us, we should care very, very much about this. And the article provides powerful new tools to tackle this.
  - dogecoinbase 12y ago
    "Follow" is not a verb used in the context of books or Wikipedia articles. Any neither characteristically provides ideas in a "shorter, clearer form". Your request was, to any reasonable observer, explicitly a request for a content-driven site or blog (i.e., a "single newsfeed style source"). Denying it when it's so clearly a falsehood only undermines the rest of your assertions, and casts into doubt your commitment to the (accurate) assertion that we should care about methods of disrupting existing controlling systems... perhaps to the point where it would not be unreasonable to conclude that you're explicitly attempting to undermine good-faith attempts to produce new stable systems. So who are you working for?
    - jng 12y ago
      Just myself. EDIT: The answer to the rest is not generally interesting.
    - mentat 12y ago
      "Follow" is used in the context of authors of classical works in academia and has been used prior to any use in the forms you claim are its exclusive domain.
  - JackFr 12y ago
    "foundations of morality is going to become a central issue soon" -- for many people it has been the central issue for three thousand years. For anyone who has studied philosophy or ethics -- even casually -- this article was terribly naive and hopelessly unaware of its own ignorance. Beyond that, the applied linear algebra was not interesting, no real game or decision theory to speak of and the whole 'eigenmoses' and 'eigenjesus' was too cute by half. Iterated prisoner's dilemma? Not my idea of a powerful tool. Was there more? I may have missed it.

by jng 12y ago

soganess 12y ago

One does not solely get their understanding of novelty or content/length relation from single newsfeed style sources. There are more than a few books and even more wikipedia entries that provide a wealth of understanding for a relative pittance in word count. Not to mention all the non-classical forms that do the same. The article was okay, but the standard you implicitly set forth is lacking in fairness to the commenter, to the original story, and truly to one-off forms of valuable information that don't provide a serialized source of continued information. One of my personal favorites: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2%80%93Howard_correspondence http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curry%E2%80%93Howard_correspond...

jng 12y ago
Books and Wikipedia articles are sources too. I didn't say anything about single newsfeed style sources. I find the linked-to article to be a gem of lucidity amidst a barrage of mostly noise, busywork, and lottery-playing. Not only that, but the topic of the foundations of morality is going to become a central issue soon, with multiple strong global trends taking us towards that difficult issue. The article you linked to is nice, but Curry-Howard isomorphism is neither novel nor as important as the topic covered by the original article. As fragile agents inhabiting a ball of mass and fire organized in billions of partly-autonomous somewhat-intelligent resource-sharing systems flying through space and time, just recently coming up with scarily and growingly powerful new ways to rearrange control which may destroy existing controlling systems, including us, we should care very, very much about this. And the article provides powerful new tools to tackle this.
- dogecoinbase 12y ago
  "Follow" is not a verb used in the context of books or Wikipedia articles. Any neither characteristically provides ideas in a "shorter, clearer form". Your request was, to any reasonable observer, explicitly a request for a content-driven site or blog (i.e., a "single newsfeed style source"). Denying it when it's so clearly a falsehood only undermines the rest of your assertions, and casts into doubt your commitment to the (accurate) assertion that we should care about methods of disrupting existing controlling systems... perhaps to the point where it would not be unreasonable to conclude that you're explicitly attempting to undermine good-faith attempts to produce new stable systems. So who are you working for?
  - jng 12y ago
    Just myself. EDIT: The answer to the rest is not generally interesting.
  - mentat 12y ago
    "Follow" is used in the context of authors of classical works in academia and has been used prior to any use in the forms you claim are its exclusive domain.
- JackFr 12y ago
  "foundations of morality is going to become a central issue soon" -- for many people it has been the central issue for three thousand years. For anyone who has studied philosophy or ethics -- even casually -- this article was terribly naive and hopelessly unaware of its own ignorance. Beyond that, the applied linear algebra was not interesting, no real game or decision theory to speak of and the whole 'eigenmoses' and 'eigenjesus' was too cute by half. Iterated prisoner's dilemma? Not my idea of a powerful tool. Was there more? I may have missed it.