Show newer

>As business struggles to adapt to a rapidly changing world, managers are bombarded with a bewildering array of schemes for how to be a boss and make an organization tick. It’s tempting to be seduced by *futurist fantasies where every company has the culture of a startup, and where employees in wacky, whimsical office settings, liberated from hierarchies* and bosses that oppress them, are the foundation for breakthrough performance.
>
>***“Get real,”*** warn Nicolai J. Foss and Peter G. Klein. These fads ironically lead to micromanaging and, often, to disaster. Companies and societies, they show, need authority and hierarchy to coordinate work, including creative work. And, *counterintuitively, Foss and Klein illustrate how the creative use of authority and hierarchy helps companies to be more agile and flexible*, enabling educated, motivated people and teams to thrive.

google.ca/books/edition/Why_Ma

"The Turing test is not a good test for testing the supposed "intelligence" of an artificial system. This is well known in the Artificial Intelligence scientific community (I analyze this issue in my book “Cognitive Design for Artificial Minds”, Routledge, 2021). Trivially, one of the problems of the test concerns the fact that it is entirely "behavioral": that is, it looks only at the final behavior (the output) of a system without analyzing what are the mechanisms that led to that output."

Translated with: "Simple Translate" Extension for Firefox:
simple-translate.sienori.com/

, , ,

Antonio Lieto  
Una mia intervista divulgativa su #languagemodels e #chatgpt (in italiano) http://www.smarknews.it/smark/facciamo-chiarezza-su-chatgpt-limiti-pote...

is a necessary condition and comes before which is in turn necessary for the acquisition of :

>Language use is an aspect of human collective behaviour, and it only makes sense in the wider context of the human social activity of which it forms a part (*Wittgenstein, 1953*). A human infant is born into a community of language users with which it shares a world, and it acquires language by interacting with this community and with the world it shares with them.

Trying to "reverse engineer" intelligence from LLMs seems like a futile endeavor. Instead of , it may be more useful to redirect efforts to building ()

Show thread

When we say that
>we are asking the model to remind us of the lyrics of a well-known nursery rhyme, ... what we are really doing is asking it the following question:
>>Given the statistical distribution of words in the public corpus, what words are most likely to follow the sequence “Twinkle twinkle ”?
To which an accurate answer is “little star” 😀

arxiv.org/abs/2212.03551

According to , is blocking the flow of from the (environmental) to the (internal, protected) . There are two primary forms of blocking the effect of the disturbance on the system:
1️⃣ Passive (by sheltering from), and
2️⃣ Active (on par with)
From:
W. Ross Ashby (1956) - An Introduction to Cybernetics, (Chapman & Hall, London) - available electronically from:
pespmc1.vub.ac.be/ASHBBOOK.htm

Systems thinkers use a number of different terms for the three basic concepts in the "system's triad" so that we have a "real system" as opposed to the "conceptual system" which is sometimes also called the "mental model" which is again different from the (real) descriptive or simulation model. In we make the distinction between , and unambiguous following the rules specified in the works of and

Ashby warns us against our first impulse to point at the pendulum and say 'the system is that thing there' because this has a fundamental disadvantage in that "every material object contains no less than an infinity of variables" from which "different observers (with different aims) may reasonably make an infinity of different selections."

Therefore, there must first be given an , and a is then defined as "any set of variables selected by that observer from those available on the real ‘machine‘".

defines a , as "a of that an abstracts in the flow of and of a of distinguished in the observers daily living" that is "spontaneously or artificially " in its within some " of concern" of the observer.

So, in Kihbernetics, the triad looks like this:

Reading this recent (2022) article from Fritjof Capra:
The organization of the living:
Maturana’s key insights
included in the latest Constructivist Foundations volume 18(1): 005–011

constructivist.info/18/1/005

and I am continually bewildered by the fact that no one in the field figured out yet that , although necessary, is not the sufficient condition for .

All are in fact with memory made of , , and structures participating continually in both auto- and allopoietic processes.

In fact, the recursive, processes of learning and growth depend only on (are "structurally coupled" with) the linear work processes dealing with all the things (resources, waste) in the system's environment and producing the externally observable of the living (dynamical) system.

The (Newtonian) or of according to the worldview:

The required to put the change in motion is proportional to its or how large the change is; because the bigger the change the more it creates. The , or how immediate the necessity to change is, will also increase the friction of the .

However, once the change is put in motion, the produced by the mass's will start "pulling" the change by itself and only minimal force will need to be applied to that the change is moving in the right direction and/or with the right speed of change.

Another reason (among many) why I became disenchanted with and had to “invent” .

Warren Sturgis McCulloch, the co-inventor of the first computational model of a that was the precursor for and , uses a racial slur to incorrectly suggest that Cybernetics is somehow the result of the “interbreeding” between the Natural and the Artificial in the preface he wrote for Gordon Pask’s book:

goodreads.com/en/book/show/396

“The paradox Kant had linked to teleology (or to internal purposive forms or natural purposes) is related to the fact that a purposive system has to move or develop towards a purpose before that purpose is present, apparently even before a purpose can be conceived of. A genuine purposive system does not only possess a representation of the purpose towards which it is moving, but it also has to construct that representation itself.”

Gertrudis Vijver - New Perspectives on Cybernetics - Self-Organization, Autonomy and Connectionism

link.springer.com/book/10.1007

and

<According to the Santiago theory, the behavior of a living organism is determined. However, rather than being determined by outside forces, it is determined by the organism’s own structure – a structure formed by a succession of autonomous
structural changes. Thus, the behavior of the living organism is both “determined” and “free.”>

Fritjof Capra - The Organization of the Living: Maturana’s Key Insights

constructivist.info/18/1/005.c

"The relation of the is often popularly expressed by referring to as the "" of life, but here again we must emphasize that there is no intrinsic chemical property of DNA that allows it to hold this office. It is the integrated collection of "ordinary" molecules we call the cell that endows DNA with this authority. We should not expect that a more detailed study of DNA, enzymes, and hormones would reveal other than ordinary molecules anymore than we would expect that a detailed study of presidents would reveal other than ordinary men."

ᛕᎥᕼᗷᗴᖇᑎᗴ丅Ꭵᑕᔕ  
#HHPattee “#HierarchyTheory: The challenge of complex systems” - Published back in 1973, but many people still struggle to understand it. It affec...


": The challenge of complex systems" - Published back in 1973, but many people still struggle to understand it.

It affects everything, from the to , , ...
This matter is so fundamental that it should be taught in schools as part of a standard high school curriculum, along with physics, chemistry, and biology.

academia.edu/863851/Hierarchy_

The real problem is , not .

"People are often irrational and behave in ways that contradict their values, and values can change over individual lifetimes and generations. After all, it’s not clear whose values we should have machines try to learn."

quantamagazine.org/what-does-i

IS .

The used by a computing to anticipate the of affairs in its depends heavily upon the state of the anticipatory system.

Knowledge is the result of the system's of all previous computations. The same system will anticipate different outcomes depending on its current knowledge state

An anticipatory system does not need to be a system.

and Anticipation are only necessary for .

There is no anticipation in .

Apart from that, a very interesting article:

academia.edu/5729941/Anticipat

Back in the days (early 2000s) I tried to "sell" to a well-known aerospace company this "three-legged stool" approach of stable continuous organizational , where stands just as one of the many different tools one can choose from in dealing with the different of the organization, along with tools and methods more appropriate to deal with the other two aspects of the organization and .
As one could have expected, those "black belts" on the other side of the table didn't like it 😀.
They went with a strategy where a version of six sigma was used as the "foundation" for all process improvement efforts and everything else was subordinated to it.

Show thread

"Silicon Valley’s culture of “move fast and break things” meant business leaders were less concerned with reliability and more focused on game-changing discoveries."

Why it always has to be "Either-Or"? What happened with "And"?


getpocket.com/explore/item/wha

I've drawn the picture below as a reaction to the current inclination of prominent the(r)orists frowning at "military" style or organizational methods while promoting without and with no need for (everything will change anyway), as a far better, more way of dealing with .

This may be true if the organization is operating and struggling to survive on the left side of this "complexity plane", but if it wants to mature and "get somewhere in life" it better starts aiming for the other side by collecting, documenting and using "lessons learned", planning for and working towards wherever it wants to be in the future.

A momentous recent paper from the most consequential thinker on the matter of the , , and has only 124 views and I must be responsible for at least a dozen.

"Folding is entirely a lawful physical process, leaving neither freedom nor necessity for interpretation. Similarly, the initial converse action-to-symbol conversion of sensory inputs also leaves no freedom for interpretation until after the action-to-symbol conversion"

academia.edu/66621846/Symbol_G

" goes one step further than standard analysis; its aim is to infer not only beliefs or probabilities under conditions but also the of beliefs under changing conditions, for example, changes induced by treatments or external interventions."

"There is nothing in the joint distribution of symptoms and diseases to tell us that curing the former would or would not cure the latter."

J. Pearl - Causal inference in statistics

Statistics Surveys Vol. 3 (2009)
p. 99

ftp.cs.ucla.edu/pub/stat_ser/r

Show thread
Show older
Qoto Mastodon

QOTO: Question Others to Teach Ourselves
An inclusive, Academic Freedom, instance
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.