From a7fdd45bf2176469a4a0c338053d4807e6f33795 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Vincent Ambo Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2022 01:50:04 +0300 Subject: [PATCH] feat(tazjin/blog): add some thoughts Change-Id: If161fd8b6c96d66aa63cfb22f8a8bb26d71c5caf Reviewed-on: https://cl.tvl.fyi/c/depot/+/6885 Reviewed-by: tazjin Autosubmit: tazjin Tested-by: BuildkiteCI --- users/tazjin/blog/posts.nix | 7 ++ users/tazjin/blog/posts/thoughts.md | 142 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 149 insertions(+) create mode 100644 users/tazjin/blog/posts/thoughts.md diff --git a/users/tazjin/blog/posts.nix b/users/tazjin/blog/posts.nix index eeba60028..f7f50d6f1 100644 --- a/users/tazjin/blog/posts.nix +++ b/users/tazjin/blog/posts.nix @@ -54,4 +54,11 @@ content = ./posts/nsa-zettabytes.md; oldKey = "1375310627"; } + { + key = "thoughts"; + title = "Some thoughts"; + date = 1665095948; + content = ./posts/thoughts.md; + listed = false; + } ] diff --git a/users/tazjin/blog/posts/thoughts.md b/users/tazjin/blog/posts/thoughts.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..7ce23f9c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/users/tazjin/blog/posts/thoughts.md @@ -0,0 +1,142 @@ + +WARNING: This is not intended for a large audience. If you stumble +upon this page by chance, please keep the sharing to a minimum. + +TIP: It's always work-in-progress. Things come and go. Or change. Who +knows? + +--------- + +### Three things + +*[mid/late 2020]* + +All things in the universe take the shape of one of approximately +three things. If you had Hoogle for the entire universe, you'd +probably find that one of them is `fmap`. + +There might be a few more, or a few less (or some may have been +deprecated), but you get the idea. I guess [five][] would be a good +number. + +[five]: https://principiadiscordia.com/book/23.php + +---------------------- + +### Free energy principle + +*[mid/late 2020]* + +Karl Friston wrote: + +> The free-energy principle says that any self-organizing system that +> is at equilibrium with its environment must minimize its free +> energy. + +Or, somewhat paraphrased: + +> Any Markov blanket capable of modeling its environment aims to +> reduce its level of surprise by either adapting its model, or +> through other action. + +Seems reasonable to me. + +### More bizarre universe + +*[many years ago]* + +Douglas Adams wrote: + +> There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly +> what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly +> disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and +> inexplicable. There is another theory which states that this has +> already happened. + +### Alpha decay + +*[late 2022]* + +Finance people say: + +> Alpha Decay is commonly referred to as the loss of prediction power +> of a trading strategy over time. As a consequence, the profitability +> of a strategy tends to gradually decrease. Given enough time, the +> strategy converges to having no superior predictive power and +> returns when compared to a suitable benchmark. + +A market is a big optimiser. Any successful trading strategy adds +friction in a place that the optimiser wants to remove. + +Alpha decay is unavoidable without changing and adapting the strategy. + +### Optimising universe + +*[late 2022]* + +*(thanks edef for helping me think through this one!)* + +Assume that the universe acts as a giant optimiser, and consider that +the three things above are related and specialisations of more generic +ideas: + +1. Every delineable entity in the universe (i.e. every *Markov + blanket*) attempts to reduce its level of surprise (the free energy + principle). + +2. The universe needs replacement (a more bizarre universe) if global + surprise drops to a minimum[^heat]. + +3. Without improvement that outpaces the optimiser of the universe, + any strategy leading to (2) will get eroded by alpha decay long + before. + +4. We don't know if it is possible to outpace the optimiser from + within. + +On a personal note, it seems to me that achieving (2) is likely +undesirable. It probably takes god[^god] a lot of resources to create +an ever more complex universe and this process might be much less +enjoyable than "running" (for lack of a better word) a universe. Under +this assumption, a universe that achieves (2) faster than others might +be a failure, and on a higher level conditions leading to its creation +might be subject to another optimiser. + +Or it could be the other way around, but this seems more likely to me +personally. + +### Superintelligence + +*[late 2022]* + +Under the previous assumption, achieving superintelligence is likely a +bad idea for anyone feeling some kind of attachment to *this* +universe. + +Or it might be the exact opposite, but I don't think so. + +------------------------------- + +[^heat]: Note that this is consistent with the heat death of the + universe. + +[^god]: I'm using the word "god" as the best English approximation of + a concept that different religions and philosophies all attempt to + approach. I think that for many cognitive purposes, an + anthropomorphised idea (as in the abrahamic religions) is useful, + but ideas from some Eastern religions or modern philosophers like + Bach or Watts are likely more aligned with the "nature of things" + as such.