Challenge: Describe in words why when you look in the mirror your left and right sides have flipped but not the top and bottom. But when you lie down horizontally, what side was on the bottom is now on the top. As if the top and bottoms have flipped.
This demonstrates that words can generate a paradox when there is none. Why is it that in one case the mirror flips horizontally and in another case, it flips vertically? How does the mirror know when and how to flip the image?
Words are instructions of imagination. It is like a magic trick when words distract you from the solution of the problem. Why does a mirror flip an image vertically or horizontally depending on a person's reference frame?
Zeno Paradoxes are a collection where the listener is instructed to imagine a reference frame that leads to a paradox when there is none in an appropriate reference frame. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zeno%27s_…
A person cannot actually tell the difference between an image in a mirror and an actual image unless there is an object in the image that has a known asymmetry of left and right.
A mirror flips what is left and what is right independently of how you look at the mirror. It does not matter if you are lying down or standing up. This is still not an adequate explanation though!
That's because when you look at the mirror from one side, you don't appear on the opposite side. You still appear on the same side of the mirror. It is not flipping left with right, it is doing something else.
It becomes obvious as to what is happening when you look into an infinite mirror.
What a mirror does is that it changes the direction in how a 3D space is viewed. So as you face the mirror, an image of you is facing back in the opposite direction.
This is a very subtle thing that even this video doesn't actually mention the word direction.
This video does a better job by explaining that direction if flipped.
Direction is related to rotation. So when a mirror flips the direction of how a 2D image is facing, it does so by also change the direction of rotation. A clockwise rotation appears counterclockwise in a mirror.
Riddle: When do clock hands rotate counterclockwise? Answer: When viewed from a mirror.
The moral of the story here is that something appears subjective when looked at from the wrong reference frame. 2D beings cannot imagine 2D mirrors.
It's also interesting that to imagine how something looks in a mirror you can just imagine looking at an object from the inside out. This is the opposite direction of how we usually look at objects (i.e. from the outside).
This brings the strangest analogy is that it captures the notion of empathy. That is, to understand someone is to look at oneself in the mirror. That is, to see yourself from the inside.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A key algorithm for general intelligence is a compensation mechanism for category error. This is because anything that learns must recognize that their habitual models of thought can be in error.
Planck remarked that science makes progress one funeral at a time. The problem with the human condition is that we are so devoted to the personal habits we invented for ourselves that we have difficulty letting them go.
Even more difficult, we embed in our language habits of thought. We are unable to break out of this jail because we cannot express new things with an old vocabulary.
The biggest effect of the global pandemic is that it disrupts how everyone frames their daily life. It breaks us out of our old habits and creates entirely new ones.
Modern humans are creatures of habit. At a very young age, we are introduced to routines that eventually become habitual. The most efficient of us learn the habits of success at a very early age. The rest of us just muddle our lives away.
The habits that we develop from childhood to the present are who we are. They are our own personal creations. This is why habits (which are all mental in nature) are something we have difficulty abandoning. They are what defines us.
SMH, seems like researchers don't know how to measure the generality of a large language model. Larger GPT-3 models are much better at discerning intent in zero-shot tasks. So I do find the paper described here as missing the target.
Generality implies greater creativity. Lying just happens to require creativity. I better measure would perhaps be a rewriting task. Smaller models don't have subspaces where rewriting even exists.
Another measure may be in joke generation. Larger models without a doubt come up with more unique jokes.
I am curious, what countries actually have restrictive rules against multi-level marketing business models? It's pervasive and legal in the USA. I ask because this docuseries about Lularue is an eye-opener to its inner workings. amazon.com/LuLaRich-Seaso…
Multi-level marketing has been around for a long time in the USA. Examples of companies that have been around a long time are Tupperware, Avon and Amway.
But it's interesting that almost every human institution is like a multi-level marketing scheme. But unlike an MLM the rules of the hierarchy are tacitly encoded and the rewards are more intangible.
What I find very weird is that people are surprised with the notion that someone taught himself a skill. As if a teacher was absolutely necessary to learn anything. As if you can't learn anything by reading and experimenting by yourself.
"Wow, he's self-taught, he must be extremely gifted!" Are people, in general, incapable of learning anything without a teacher?
But to be perfectly fair, I'm in awe with kids who self teach themselves how to play music. I don't think I have the passion to do that! So I suspect this self-taught thing has everything to do with passion and talent.
I'm coming to the realization that the GOP isn't a conservative party but rather an incoherent group of disenfranchised parties. Any group that has trouble pushing its agenda sees an opening by joining the GOP. It's also a business model to milk the disenfranchised.
Trump perhaps saw this so he reached out to any and every fringe group for their support. Any group, no matter how abhorrent their views are welcome in the GOP. But how do they handle conflicts between parties in the group?
They actually don't need to be because incoherence is the mode of operation. Trump has consistently been logically inconsistent. It is the same for parties within the GOP. They band together not because of commonality but rather because of shared disenfranchisement.