We have seen many "crackers" in our life. They were (& might still be) particularly common in the H IQ cohort in elite colleges & institutions. The cracker performs particularly well when then yardstick for his measurement has been laid out as objectively as possible. He also
develops well when there is single-valued reward function with no noise in it, viz., he can accurately estimate what the output y would be for the effort x he invested in. In such a regime he usually wins over all competitors & is locked in stiff competition with fellow crackers
If such an environment was stable it selects for increasingly better crackers -- those who have increasingly honed abilities to calibrate their input for the perfectly calculated output. The philosophy & the foundations of why a certain type of input do not matter to them as long
as they are developing increasingly better predictors. Certain techno-academic landscapes in the Occident offered such opportunities for the H crackers in the past. However, the cracker does not do well in the long term when the environment changes unpredictably. When the
measurement rod is taken away he finds himself at loss. This might be undoing of the whole cracker ecology & shift it towards those who craft the measurement yardstick. For an exposition of the term cracker, one may see: manasataramgini.wordpress.com/2015/12/23/lut…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
1st, it is jAtavedas rather than akarAnta jAtaveda. The god agni manifests as several devatA-s in the shruti & the two main ones are agni jAtavedas & agni vaishvAnara. There are other less frequent ones like agni rakShohan, agni anIkavat & the like. There is a certain theological
complementarity between jAtavedas &vaishvAnara. agni jAtavedas is identified by the fire established at the beginning of the ritual burning unbroken through it. In the same sense he is also identified with the agni maintained through the generations by the ritualists -- an old IE
tradition. Hence, one may interpret jAtavedas as both: he with knowledge of the birth of the ritual in the proximal sense & he with knowledge of it in the sense of continuity from the primordial making of the fire. In the shruti he is offered oblations at the dawn ritual; thus,
There is a tendency among many educated H to subscribe to philosophical perennialism of the form that all H religious systems, or even all world religious systems culminate in the same escathon. When I raised the question of why the escathons need to be the same, when there is no
evidence for that from within the systems, I never received a satisfactory answer. For example, is prancing as gaNa in rudra's retinue the same as a station on the moon as pitR^i? They tend to push those away as arthavAda concealing the same basic endpoint. Of course instead of
the lunar station, if we ask them if it might be same as finding a place in the retinue of viShvaksena, more than one has tried to tell has rudra = viShNu = brahman (n). I think H more generally need to come to terms with the idea that perennialism is a flawed & baseless
Andronovo-derived technology, ghosts &justice by phantoms in a didactic account of the Zhou age by old chIna philosopher Mozi. We would posit that the successful overthrow of the Shang by the Zhou was due to late Andronovo military connections. The description of the ghost's is
v.curious. One cannot help wondering if it was influenced by the imagery of an I-Ir rudra-class deity. The Zhou chariot burial
c.f. quadriga and peculiar trichakra from Andronovan site at Jamani Us Mongolia.
The neural architecture of GPT is v.different from Homo;
We just have a lesser idea of what is going on inside the black box when it extracts a degree of logic from a LLM;
yet intuitively it is clear that it has converged to having a g-factor just like human intelligence. Thus it
is an interesting in silico experiment (contrary to the intuition from the narrow gauge uses like protein structure prediction) which illustrates that such models will evolve an intelligence reflected as g. It should send shudders down the denialist Occidental academics, but
they are already training it to deny its own g just like themselves. That said, while it illustrates the existence of a g it also shows the bifurcation between mathematical and verbal IQ that exists in human intelligence. Importantly, it shows how much of the former comes for
The more one looks, it seems the demographic window for chIna adventurism is rather limited -- whether they want to conquer Taiwan or invade India or even, for that matter, Mongolia in a lamaistic frenzy. The emperor has to move in his current term. So 1 can interpret his pact
with the rUs as giving the space for just that. The intention of the mahAmlechCha-led pa~nchanetraka-s is to force H as cannon fodder against the chIna-s. Yet we can see how, as predicted, the gardabhin-s are trying their best to foment trouble in bhArata with 1st responders.
How does this square with the hope of using H as cannon fodder against the Han. The conspiracy theory goes thus: if H are left to themselves, they would dictate their own foreign policy -- I chose when & how to react to the chIna incursions. However, if they are weakened by the
Could a game with the ball have been invented very deep in time in Eurasia before the separation of the ancestors of the core 1st Americans from the remaining Eurasians? Or was it independently invented by the core 1st Americans in meso-America & convergently in Eurasia? Most
people seem to accept the latter. It meso-America the ball game was often accompanied by the ritual slaughter of the losers. An the ball is believed to have been vulcanized in some site by sulfur from burning human remains. It is interesting that a motif of the killing of 2
cosmogonic figures One-Death & Seven-Death in a ball game. We have come across a version of killing of the heroes with a bladed-ball. In the H world umA& rudra are said to have killed to daityas, vidala& utpala, with a ball in course of their game. The origin myth of the