Reductionism   this is why I don’t believe in love… or to be precise, I don’t do as many things as most people do in the name of love…:-)

This is a response to a comment requesting elaboration. Here goes. I believe mind/brain is a phenomena that came out(am trying avoid the word emergent here) of a lot many layers of physical processes we understand (Quarks,electrons,ions,dna,cells,neurons,brain areas,hormone system,endocrine system etc.).
To quote, some recent(therefore not widely accepted/replicated studies:
There have been studies on perceived attractiveness(aka love at first sight) that indicate a correlation between anxiety and attractiveness rating.

Love on the other hand is a widely(read carelessly) used term in today’s world. I guess why so many people use it from the context, but whenever i have it’s always felt like social mimicking and nothing more. I am biased, but that’s one reason i concluded that may be it’s like one of those rare outlier cases in statistics. Most cases of reported love, i contend would be just regular,convenient, comfortable transactions with a pinch of delusions of specialness that create the need to report/call it love.


I can’t remember awaiting this eagerly for any novel chapter, since high school, when i used to read ‘ponniyin selvan’ or some other thriller by balakumaran or sujatha.. Unfortunately this one isn’t regular and Elliezer is no full-time writer.. Darn, i wish i had 1.6M $ i could spare…:-P


Am a fucking introvert
that means, i don’t want more interaction,
that means, if you’re a stranger, stop making irrelevant comments,
that means, unless we have met, stick to the business we are discussing,
fucking stop the extraneous comments, taunting,teasing etc..
Stranger —
that means, i don’t know your base rates of comments/patterns,

that means, anything you say is a new dataset, that requires a lot of processing,to get to the truth of,
that means, stick to the point, and don’t bullshit, lest i think you’re a salesman.
that means, if you don’t know what you are talking about, fucking learn, do your basic research,
that means, expect me to have done the basic research already and have formed a fucking opinion on the topic.

It does not mean, i like to sit in a corner and just think,
It does not mean, i hate people,
It does not mean, i think implicit is better than explicit,
It does not mean, i hate interacting with people,
It just means, i like to have a upper limit of my people interactions.:-)

PG at pycon

Listening to Paul Graham speaking on PyCon.. first observation, he’s clearly not a spontaneous speaker.. Just notice the amount of uhmm.. he says…
It’s a prepared speech, with notes, so it’s weird, especially, if you are more used to reading his blogs. I wonder how deliberate/ self-aware he’s on the stage?? He punctuates every sentence with a uh..umm… sometimes he’s indeed spontaneous..

I guess part of it attributed to the distinction Venkatesh rao makes here(can’t find link,perhaps this?? ) about him being a thinker first and then a writer.

Next Google — Well am already using blekko more often.

That reminds me of what venkatesh rao’s ribbon farm mentions about PG being a thinking first writer.
Dinosaur egg– Well… may be..

Messaging protocol– that sounds a lot like trust protocol.. Something where a set of control groups of access control lists with priority mails??

Universities — Well, one of the mistake is relative grading, that never challenged people like me.and instead let me breeze along half-assing. getting me stuck in terms

Hollywood– ok this part he sounds like honest and spontaneous where he talks about.Also, am tired of the nature of most of entertainment… interactive entertainment is gonna attract me.. the 3D movies seem to make me want to go to the theatre..
And even there a 2-3 hr timeline is still painful… but i can live with that for the sake of 3D movies…

New Apple:
Well, really?? not sure how that works out.. i have never been a fan of apple, never got that… so can’t comment much about it… and don’t think, we can have a product visionary like steve jobs, someone taking up the problem, has tougher problems.. Remember the reality distortion field? i think that’s going to be a lot harder in the current generation..Obviously missed the Augustus joke..

Moore’s law:
A library?? for compiler targeting multi-processors.. And more i think about it, it’s will be just a huge very hard and mess with talking to multiple processor architectures..

Humans idea was interesting.. .marketplace…and writing bots to replace humans to optimize…Got love that craziness..

Ongoing Diagnosis:
That sounds the least craziest idea of all.. i don’t mind iterating especially the pig-heart disease + sausage idea…
Cancer– Radars??
fishing expedition in medicine?? well, am not against it a lot.. i know there’ll be a lot of false positives… but i think it would be ok…

Like the tactic though. something to the west.. i’ll sail westwards.. there’s something to the fractal math/curve am moving towards..

making a Bachelor’s Degree a distributed model much like ph.d is interesting, but sounds backward.. though i guess it makes sense in a way, that’s probably because of the rich, multiple,drowning information-filled, exhausting world we live in…
And i love it because, i was sick of my professor’s within about 5 minutes of 1-on-1 talks with them. True, i was being naive and ridiculously ambitious and all that, but those few 5-minute talks shaped my career choices and to think that by the end of first year, i had given up on learning anything from professors and had spent most of my time reading in the library, is something worrying.

UPDATE: PG wrote a piece about speaking vs writing here it is. I have to say, i agree with most of it. I find that am more precise in my communications when i am writing. When i speak, there’s this awkwardness of silence, that forces one to say something or the other(even if it doesn’t make sense). I am beginning to learn to manage that in public speeches(note, i rarely give public speeches), but in conversations, it seems to be a problem still.

Overestimating the Short-term vs Underestimating the Long term

Venkatesh Rao
refers to this quote by Roy Amara

“We always overestimate the change that will occur in the next two years and
underestimate the change that will occur in the next ten.”

Anecdotally it’s true and Venkatesh hypothesizes that this is because
even though we(our brains) are comfortable with arithmetic, they are
handicapped when it comes to exponential thinking.

Now this stuck me as a testable hypothesis. Atleast as far as the number
arithmetic goes. For the exponential thinking, it gets more muddled.
By context we do get a sense of what he means, but trying to measure it is a harder task.

And another thought is the question of actionability. I know it’s a management
buzz word, so use affordance instead, if you prefer,but the point am trying to make here is, we humans are biased towards
calculations/predictions that allow us to make clear actions. In some ways,
this can be equated to the fear of the uncertain.Evolutionarily it seems common
sense to assume a roar that sounds like a tiger to be a tiger, while a flower
that seems to be that of an edible fruit doesn’t make any immediate action
possible and has the potential to be a pain(imagine a poisonous plant ) if you’re wrong.sure,it might also be a useful fruit, but there’s a waiting time involved. So overestimate the
short-term negative potential and underestimate the long-term positive
potential. That way you can take evasive action.

Not sure evolutionary biologists would agree with that reasoning or not.Please chirp in if you are one.

On the other hand, the first thing that it reminded me is of
Kahnemann-Tversky’s prospect Utility theory.

And just jumping the gun to the next part i found interesting is that
free-association comment. I haven’t really tried just-add writing till now,
because i have wanted structure in my writing and unstructured writing disturb
me.Anyway, it seems to be true free-association is necessary, but also it will
be hindering the reader if it’s too free (Think flight of ideas which incidentally is a symptom of schizophrenia). I remember reading Virginia Woolf and
found that writing hindering. On the other hand, Douglas Adams employs this
free-association(although in a limited sense), but he uses it in a very
satirical manner.

P.S: I was curious about his motif being more general comment(I thought outside music it was just a metaphor,but was wrong) and looked it up. Turns out it just means something that occurs repeatedly and is salient. Or as merriam-webster puts it “usually recurring salient thematic element” interestingly it originates from french “motive” A whole interesting post can be spun on the roots and it’s current meaning(i.e main repeated theme in a music.).