Tweet

https://twitter.com/pataguccigoon/status/1590446583229075456

More from @MattPirkowski

Matthew Pirkowski

Oct 31

@elonmusk

There's no one on the planet better positioned to implement an epistemic betting market than @elonmusk, with Twitter newly in hand.

We don't need censors. We need markets capable of assessing the quality / value of information over meaningful time horizons.

Here's why, and how:

First, the "why" of it all.

Attempting to centrally verify "truth" is a losing bet, bound to backfire.

Doing so decreases trust in institutions, increases conspiratorial thinking, and plays into the hands of those who tend toward totalitarian control.

The truth must *emerge*.

It's therefore incumbent upon humanity to build the tools most capable of catalyzing the emergence of *truthful representations*, i.e. high-fidelity representations that hold up to scrutiny over time, which help us use the past to more skillfully navigate both present and future.

Read 20 tweets

Matthew Pirkowski

@MattPirkowski

Sep 6

@speakerjohnash

@speakerjohnash @DerringerPax Yes, this is called proof by contradiction.

Both of those options *contradict* other statements you've made.

Both can't be true while the other things you've said in this conversation remain true.

https://twitter.com/MattPirkowski/status/1566963758983180288?s=20&t=cpUJlZ2mDOeepOrUG2vyuA

@speakerjohnash

@speakerjohnash @DerringerPax If it supplants all functions of money, it is either totalizing insofar as it replaces money in a way that governs processes without intermediate representations, or it uses such representations and is quite a bit like money.

Not sure why that's so impossible to hear.

@speakerjohnash

@speakerjohnash @DerringerPax e.g. why should I care what an iris (or network thereof) thinks I should do, if it has no capacity to impose consequences?

If it can unilaterally impose consequences, we're essentially talking about placing ourselves into an AI dictatorship of sorts.

Read 5 tweets

Matthew Pirkowski

@MattPirkowski

Apr 18

To help communicate the value of the Active Inference paradigm wrt generating and empirically assessing our theories about the world, I'd like to tell you a story.

It's a story about You, a leaf, and a frog.

But at a deeper level, it's about perception as an active process:

Imagine walking along the edge of a forest.

Your senses flooded w/ a continuous stream of info from all directions.

Light bouncing off leaves, grass, rocks, birds, frogs.

Sounds of rustling, stirring, scratching, whooshing.

Feelings of cool breeze, warm Sun, Earth underfoot.

Scents of floral attraction, grassy disruption, slight decomposition.

A slightly acidic minerality, carried by wind into your nose and mouth with each inhalation.

But even this description assumes we already know the sources of these complex interminglings of sensory data.

Read 27 tweets

Matthew Pirkowski

@MattPirkowski

Apr 18

Debate over "inclusivity" recapitulates lumpers vs splitters, but within an acutely dumbed down frame of reference.

Normatively, inclusivity is neither better nor worse than exclusivity, and those who believe differently merely reveal to you the coarseness of their thinking.

Even the use of the word "inclusivity" requires that one exclude all other concepts from the semiotic location of its embodied expression, such that the meaning of the term may emerge in the mind of another via a resource constrained channel of symbolic expression / perception.

This is to say that thought itself––to say nothing of the complex embodied systems we produce using thought––depends critically upon what we exclude and include at any given point in time, and that naively worshipping either side of this balance erodes our capacity to think.

Read 5 tweets

Matthew Pirkowski

@MattPirkowski

Feb 24, 2021

The word "government" is often more obfuscating than enlightening.

It establishes (or regenerates) the inertia of a top-down phenomenological frame, divorced from its processes of emergence.

Let's explore what the concept of "government" means, from an emergent perspective...

We begin with the simple fact that we are not each other.

This observation warrants unpacking: we each represent an exploratory tendril of our biological species, but are physically incarnated such that our perspectives *never* fully align.

This holds even for conjoined twins.

Now, let's assume that we may measure this "experiential delta", labeling it ΔE (more later on its potential formal representation).

We may then ask how ΔE relates to:
- The "natural inertia" of an individuated being
- The unique information obtained along an individuated path

Read 22 tweets

Matthew Pirkowski

@MattPirkowski

Jul 16, 2020

Do you ever wonder why it feels like the Internet has made us collectively dumber, despite the fact that it increases individual access to information?

The answer lies in the concept of a Complexity Catastrophe, and how our present Internet usage patterns create one.

A thread:

Before describing exactly what a Complexity Catastrophe (CC) is, why CCs emerge, and how they're relevant to our present Internet landscape, we must first unpack a few theoretical concepts from evolutionary biology.

First up, the Adaptive Landscape model of evolution.

The Adaptive Landscape allows us to discuss how a given combination of (typically genetic) traits perform in a given environment (fitness), relative to other combinations of said traits.

As shown below, you can think of the possible combinations as a "mountainous landscape"...

Read 37 tweets

Share this page!

Matthew Pirkowski

People who liked this thread also liked...

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @MattPirkowski

Matthew Pirkowski

Matthew Pirkowski

Matthew Pirkowski

Matthew Pirkowski

Matthew Pirkowski

Matthew Pirkowski

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!