Tuesday, June 28, 2016

motion to recommit, with instructions

Hey, it's another spare blog!  So I can dump some posts here which are ... interesting enough to be public, but not really "Medium" post-worthy.  Here goes.  originally written October 21, 2015.

and how do you like your blue-eyed boy mister death

and how do you like your blue-eyed boy mister death
the chorus of the rowdy revelers is loud tonight
maybe i should have joined them
each conversation becomes a word in their song
and i can hear the energy and i can feel the energy as if
i were there

this whole city howls(*)
with the best minds of my generation
in houses hidden away ...
... or even reveling on the street
a celebration of some event unknown to all but those
who celebrate it tonight
a bacchanalian festivity
screaming maenads tending the flames

i see and feel things i spend my days blind to
preferring to stare at other walls in the cave
walls of iron and stone
walls of logic and reality
walls of the light that shines so bright that it blinds you to everything around it

what is this thing that you love anyway

... when the character plays the actor, or the other way around?  does the meaning change for the thing being only the thing in the play?  is teaching just a series of buffer override attacks?  "what is your name?" "my name is NOBODY" "ok hi nobody" "bye!" "hey NOBODY stabbed me" ... and now you have the riddle: what does "NOBODY" mean?  and if you can't figure it out, you die.  or you just kill the guy the next time he tries it.

... and a king came forth, and he said "for thousands of years this city has been run on the grounds of equality.  now we suffer.  we starve when we should feast.  promise me that every year i shall get one wish, and in 20 years we shall feast instead of starve".  and they decide to let this guy who claims to be "king" to be claiming to be king.  and then you have all sorts of terrible rules that he enacts because he's kind of an asshole. [or are they not terrible?]  so you try to get around the rules, but they have other rules about that.  and at some point, the king comes to him and says "ok, i see you know what's going on.  we only care about the rules for the peasants.  do you want to be 'a manager'?  we just don't care about the rules for you".

... that got definitely not about crop rotation leading to the development of feudalism.  i'm projecting ideas into ideals into views of my life. that could be mathier.  so i know what the vector [crop rotation -> feudalism] is, by some concept of meaning.  and then i see what that concept means when applied to my situation.  and if it's an accurate philosophy (eigenvector?) it should work.  and if it's inaccurate, it should work occasionally by chance.  and we have to use this same damn algorithm to figure out what the winning condition is.

i win.  i win i win i win.  that annoying "i win" button.  that makes your head hurt.  use that key on the edge flip

didn't want to type that but flip

anyhow.  i have projections that are described in a constant way across all of my thoughts.  you have two parts.  defining what a "thought" is, and what a projection is.

to long timed out didn't quite figure it out sorry.

yeah you have vectors.  and somehow they do have fundamental meanings or at least are fundamentally equivalent to a pointer lookup.  a shared memory for the whole system on a delay.  so you can just do "call 0033" and then that executes on an 8 stroke lag.  or whatever.  and the lag is tunable.  so we've boot-strapped a programming language on top of this.  and we need to use that language to write a higher language.

except the higher language isn't at all like python or whatever.  maybe mysql.  an imperative language.

the three key operations.  lookup (tree lookup? pattern lookup?).  based on a series, look up a pattern.  this is stored as a tree.  the pattern can have a "repeat" symbol.  as long as you send data, you get data back.  something like an 8-second lag.  and the meta-program is just "input data until we know what program you want, and then run that program" and that solves the "repeat" and the "what data to send back" part.  so yeah, you send "10110101abcadag" and we run whatever "10110101" is and you can link that to everything as a shared memory.  and the fractal program thing should be able to do it if you always include a backlink up.  and of course sometimes we just get in a section with no working links out.  that's a program.

it's just like those room choose your own adventure things.  text adventures.  you're exploring a tree and it has back-links and all of a sudden now you're trapped and you can't get out until something changes everything.  and the only back-link we need is the one back up to the parent or a copy of the parent or ... no we have something doing a random-walk over the neural network, and that value is the return value of the network as a whole.  that's the computational model here.  we get some data and then it sends down to some function and that function may or may not even bother to listen to the input data at all but it sends out values by some pattern, until we stop listening to it.

and so all the input has to be in unary, 11010110101011101111 ... which is like 3/5 or something.  i don't want to count.  but the ratio of 1s to 0s is the value.  and when we have a program we can also call input() which takes all the input up to this point and returns a value.  we have a shared input read as well.  and most of the neurons ignore the input. ... you're just walking a pattern.  you're just walking a pattern.  and the pattern exercises lots of useful skills like remembering english.  and we have enough space to actually learn words.  so many that we're still inventing useful words to be able to teach them.

so we have


neurons + inter-connections


and global input is only connected to the head.  or rather, the head is where the global input is.  we have lots of these topologies.  so we have a monad? input

nope.  too much.

so you have 96 neurons.  all hopelessly mangled.  but each node has either 1 input or 1 output attached to it.  and you have inter-connections hopefully pre-weighted to tie inputs and outputs together.  and then you may or may not be able to solve it it shouldn't be that hard these are just giant clos networks and you can do a lot of interesting things with that many connections that much bandwidth mental bandwidth we're building up cables wires things and that's biologically maybe how we can send signals because we have a highway of 24 neurons and they serve as 24 parallel bits of input and we can just use a 24-dimensional vector and then do all the math at a higher level.  (and we get a 24x speedup by using binary rather than unary.  or maybe we do stick to unary for now. ... unary lets you program the *timing*.  which is important.  anything at a value of 2/3 on the unary input runs at 2/3 the speed as if it had input of 1.  because you have quantum neurons.  not like microphysics, like

because funny things happen with large integers because there is still a smallest integer even though it's really small.  and unary doesn't have large integers.

well the algorithms for doing it in unary would be interesting.  every 16 bits, you take the average, you get 1/4, and you spit that back out elsewhere.  and you have some conservation of energy here so you have parallel directions of "1" and "0" so you can violate that as long as the attention spent still sums up. because really you're just hiding things.

algorithms.  yeah, algorithms.  we have a stream of 4-bit integers.  we want to calculate what the next integer will be.  so we have 3 8 3 8 3 8 3 ? ... well, 8.  or maybe 9 or 7, counting is hard.  or maybe just 15 since it will be bigger.  or maybe 0 because this was a phone number.


so other than lookup, the other two key operations are:
* addition.  a + b has to be defined.  there are many ways of doing that.  mean, error function, etc.  we need to hard code 2 or 3 ways everywhere.  a + b = (a + b) / 2 is good.  a + b = (a - b) / (a + b) can work.  we have two signals and we need to combine them.  a merge gate.  2 inputs, 1 output. though possibly you can just do any one of these, even a + b = max(a, b).  if you can hard code 6 or 8 and keep track of the math to pick them, do that.  parallel dimensions are your friend.
* learning.  truth.  what is the desired value here.

hah.  really.  truth and love.  and algorithms.


i hate when i figure out what i'm thinking of and it's so disgusting that's related to what i was thinking.  or i'm just connecting ideas in my head and then typing them out so there's some sense of whether it's working and most of it should mostly be true by the rules i am using.


... when was the 4-field crop rotation invented?

the feudal lord, part 2: st anselm's feudom.

after 478 years, the feudal lord has made 478 rules.  some of the rules apply to some people, some to others.  some people fancy themselves duchess, presidents, kings.  can you topple the feudal lord?  or do you just want to be the king.  and if you can't topple the system, do you still want to be king.  the system will progress without you.  but you get to be the king.  or the avatar of the gods.  do you really want to have to do that?  and you might even get to guess what direction the feudal lord might change his mind next.  and maybe it will be to some madness that will cause empires to fall.  or maybe it will be a rule that moves it forward.  and maybe it will be a rule to put things on auto-pilot until things start to collapse.  and you get to live like a king.

this is once again on that uncomfortable border of "giving myself suggestions i don't believe"

... the feudal lord, part 3: when i mention st. anselm i'm lying.

for seriously.  it's a fundamental logical paradox.  that all things exist.  if all things exist, then "the thing that doesn't exist" exists.  then you have a contradiction.  it's godel mark-0.

so some things are fiction.

set theoretically that's: with E for there exists and A for for all

not E S: A x: x in S

we first assume
A x: x in S
"x: x not in S" <- b="" is="" p="" that="" thing="">b in S
g in b  # Logical error if we have the empty set!
g in S
g not in S
... therefore not S.

if you apply formal logic to formal logic you get Godel.  and then you starve yourself to death, and consider yourself lucky not to have been died like Keats and Ramanujan.

so the paradox is:
There exists the empty set.
There exists the full set.
The system can be fully expressed by a language written in the system.


and then "what is the nature of the good?  what is 1 and what is 0 and what is -1"

... the lie is the full set.  the empty set exists all the time.  it is the world of ideas.  anything you can imagine that is not real, is the empty set.

is this the difference between "pursuing truth" and "defeating falsehoods"?  is this once again some map that we build up. we have a map of "the truth" and we have a "not" button that flips us to the other map.  and then we progress there, but with everything backwards and in high heels.  and once we're done with that, we flip back to the main part.  that word again.  in the right spot.  we pursue truth in the world.  we defeat falsehoods in our minds.  you will never find truths in your mind unless you find falsehoods so outrageous that people are determined to prove you wrong.  and then you may or may not know how they will prove you wrong.  anything outrageous must be an invitation to be proved wrong.  you're searching on a map and sometimes you go beyond what the borders of the map are supposed to be, and maybe you live and maybe you die.  and maybe you missed something about the map and it was actually on the map after all.  this is a literal "go off the map" metaphor isn't it.  like "take the piece of paper, flip it upside down, and go to sleep" off the map.  this is literally an "it's 11:30pm the part of me that wants to go to sleep is suddenly triggered".

i should just sleep now NOW see if it's great.

No comments:

Post a Comment