Netflix's Queen's Gambit must be the ultimate mathematical nerd series. One cannot underestimate the detail of this movie and how it takes you back to a different time.
The movie takes place in the decade of the 1960s. Where a young child mother dies and is sent to an orphanage. What's incredible is how this movie reveals the changes in 60s, the technology, architecture, interior decoration, music and fashion style.
But that's just a slice of the movie, it's about a gifted chess player. Few may have noticed that her natural mother wrote a Ph.D. thesis in group theory. This reveals her unique innate ability.
The thing which surprised me about the orphanage was they prescribed daily vitamins and tranquilizers to their children. Did they do that in the 1960s. The tranquilizers allowed Harmon the ability to halucinate and accelerate her learning of chess.
The orphanage had little opportunities for intellectual engagement. if you lived in the 60s or even decades later you will recognize this. You see none of the distractions and stimulus that we experience today.
Harmon learned to play from the Janitor who read books about Chess. This movie has a lot of use of chess vocabulary. I did play chess in my youth and the terms and openings were familiar to me. I'm not sure how this plays for people without that exposure.
What I did not know was that there were chess magazines in the US. I did not know that it was that popular even in the US. Despite this, the movie reveals how the rest of the world took chess more seriously than the US. This certainly was true.
It's fascinating how this movie explores how Harmon becomes better at chess. Through different mentors that exposes her to new approaches. Even though the use of sense-deprivation methods like going underwater.
The movie talks about the intuitive chess player. The player that has no fear in sacrificing her pieces. The player that breaks the rule. Queen's gambit reveals to the audience the incredible passion, work and ability of people to become master of this game.
Then after this movie sinks in. Watch the movie AlphaGo: Queen's Gambit is a perfect back story for the story of how profound the changes are in this world. The movie was about the remarkable changes over 50 years ago.
In the past, the changes were visible for all to see. In the present, it is not as obvious. Perhaps it is beyond our human comprehension.
This series will be loved by all the nerds who grew up approximately around that time or grew up in chess. It was a unique experience and this movie let's us re-experience again those wonderful times.
We use the word causality as a means of understanding cognition but we don't really understand its distinctions. Let's look at what C.S.Peirce had to say about causality.
What @yudapearl says is that to understand a system one needs to hypothesize a model of the system and then see how this model is in agreement. Statistics is just one of the methods of testing. But it's not how one formulates the original model.
Peirce called this cognitive capability to hypothesize about the world as Abduction. Bayes rule is in fact a kind of abduction. When Bayesians talk about formulating priors, they are actually implicitly talking about an impoverished form of abduction.
(1) All technologies are combinations. Individual technologies are combined from components. (2) Each component of technology is itself in miniature technology. (3) All technologies harness and exploit some natural effect or phenomenon.
His framework is general enough so that we can recognize things that we don't conventionally consider as technology. These include culture, human organizations, processes, language and biology.
John Krakauer in a recent Learning Salon conversation focused on the huge gap between participatory learning and propositional learning. It occurred to me that propositional learning is a kind of hypnosis!
Coincidentally, today's currents events are a consequence of hypnosis. @scottadamssays was the first to notice Trump's apparent use of hypnosis methods. fortune.com/2020/09/27/don…
Both evolution and the brain are massively parallel discovery processes. But what is the difference between the two?
As a model to understand evolution, let's take the super organism known as bacteria and its adversarial viruses. This process involves horizontal gene transfer and endosymbiosis. Often overlooked by many models of evolution that confine themselves only to mutation.
In an abstract sense, the 3 mechanisms of evolution to drive innovation involves: chance (i.e. mutation), local information propagation (i.e. HGT), information reuse (i.e. Endosymbiosis). What are the equivalences for this in brains?