BC FOR LATER READ
Saved by @Alex1Powell

Alright, 1 hour worth of thoughts on:

Spatial metaphors for human systems

for @threadapalooza

 1/ Okay, let's start with BRIDGES!

(first that came to mind)

This is a common human system metaphor, people talking about bridging between cultures or perspectives, or communities/individuals.
2/ In fact it's the metaphor @vgr used in the prompt he gave me for @threadapalooza last year, in a thread I never finished:

https://t.co/3hjZmfEz5c
3/ The bridge metaphor is kind of an obvious one: forging some kind of translation connection between two different perspectives.

It's a kinda limited connection though. In fact, the word "translation", in the context of mathematics, means "to move across" which matches bridge
4/ So a bridge, as a metaphor, is a way to move one perspective across to another. But let's contrast that with the metaphor of "depth perception", where the two perspectives are integrated into a larger whole.

Way harder than bridging, & more potent.

https://t.co/bM2qWCrona
5/ Bridging between two perspectives seems to me like a bit of a kind of "peace" opposite of war. You've got civility, and not total difference. And it's a necessary first step. But it's only barely creating something new.

https://t.co/ibaYBxz47w
6/ The depth perception metaphor continues to blow my mind and feels really important to understanding the value of difference.
7/ I recall a convo with @rjgoodin a few years ago where we were talking about people valuing "diversity", and the sense in which it has intrinsic value, not just market value (another metaphor btw)

ie it's valuable not just because people want it

https://t.co/kZ25LvaGvY
8/ However, the same valuable potential energy that's available in diversity can be destructive if there's more of it than can be effectively integrated.

If you plugged a thousand cameras into your brain, you'd go crazy before you could integrate all those perspectives.
9/ A natural metaphor for this is that difference in perspective is like nuclear fission energy:

you need a minimum critical mass to get anything interesting to happen at all, but then if you have more than that... you get an explosive bomb that's hard to control
10/ More diversity, in this sense, isn't simply better. So there needs to be some equivalent of the nuclear control rods that govern the critical mass and maintain the capacity for safe dialogue, to avoid explosions.

This can take many forms. But what even is governance?
11/ Hmmm... "govern". Do ppl know about flyball governors? Super cool device that automatically regulates the speed of engines by turning increased speed into grav potential energy + centrifugal force that in turn slows the spinning. Great metaphor for self-governing systems.
12/ By contrast, a lot human groups have positive feedback loops around regulating group conflict and tension. As the thing speeds up, you get pulled to the outside where it's harder to hold on!
13/ And of course when people go flying they then end up traumatized and guarded in future interactions.

The other thing that's cool about the flyball governor is that the potential energy that's stored automatically gets used to restore speed if the engine power drops 😮
14/ Anyway, the point of talking about the flyball governor, aside from "it's super cool!" is to point at how governance can be something that's built into the system rather than tacked on top, and it NEEDS to be something that can regulate in both directions, otherwise WHOOPS
15/ One metaphor I've heard people use for regulating group dynamics is of a cell membrane

(what's my prompt again? "Spatial metaphors for human systems" ...idk what counts as spatial - everything's pretty spatial to me. I guess I'll avoid computer stuff tho—doing great so far)
15.....? welp this is its own thread now:

(about 10 tweets - it'll link back here at the bottom so you can navigate)

https://t.co/kxZuyBENg6
16/ ...six minutes left, what else is important?

I better say something about hierarchy. Hierarchy, as the assymetric organization of things into different functional levels, is a vital part of this beautiful fractal universe.

It can breed power abuses, but so can any context.
17/ Trees are hierarchical in organizing how the roots connect to the branches and out to the leaves. There are also of course rhizomes or weird wandery cacti that don't have a clear hierarchy, but even these have cellular hierarchy.

This is called a functional hierarchy.
18/ The "can't see the forest for the trees" metaphor is another example of hierarchy, in this case more in terms of abstraction. Trees are one level of abstraction, one level of analysis, forest is another. Up higher is maybe a whole biome or climate.
19/ Anyway, hierarchy is basically necessary for organizing large structures, but it doesn't have to be command hierarchy, and it doesn't even have to be *centralized* hierarchy!

Your brain has parallel hierarchies where each level has many connections both up and down.
20/ Of course the default result if you try to apply that to a human system is a shitshow—matrix organizations are kind of an example of such an attempt, as is this message that happened at Spotify.

https://t.co/oi3zr0U65s
21/ I think we can do it though, and that's part of my vision outlined in this thread 👇

But it'll require a totally different capacity for each node to do self-authored prioritization, as well as way better communication than most companies have.

https://t.co/Z7djNRxgOx
....fin?

It's been a little over an hour but I wanted to finish my initial thoughts. I think I can keep going, but I don't want to make that into homework for myself.

This has been a ton of fun and I want to find ways to do it more.

More from For later read

\U0001f60a MKM \U0001f60a
😊 MKM 😊...
@mamasaurusMeg
@RyanKemper10 @ScottAdamsSays @TherealzCRS Meaning to do this anyway. Strap in.

My main concern with masks is their ability to force filter droplet (with a predictable 6 foot arc) into aerosol, which has an 18-20 foot trajectory, remains aloft for gravity. It remains aloft for hours, and doesn’t respond predictably 1/🧵
FOR LATER READ
David Boxenhorn
David Boxenhorn
@davidboxenhorn
1. The death of Silicon Valley, a thread

How did Silicon Valley die? It was killed by the internet. I will explain.

Yesterday, my friend IRL asked me "Where are good old days when techies were


2. In the "good old days" Silicon Valley was about understanding technology. Silicon, to be precise. These were people who had to understand quantum mechanics, who had to build the near-miraculous devices that we now take for granted, and they had to work

3. Now, I love libertarians, and I share much of their political philosophy. But you have to be socially naive to believe that it has a chance in a real society. In those days, Silicon Valley was not a real society. It was populated by people who understood quantum mechanics

4. Then came the microcomputer revolution. It was created by people who understood how to build computers. One borderline case was Steve Jobs. People claimed that Jobs was surrounded by a "reality distortion field" - that's how good he was at understanding people, not things

5. Still, the heroes of Silicon Valley were the engineers. The people who knew how to build things. Steve Jobs, for all his understanding of people, also had quite a good understanding of technology. He had a libertarian vibe, and so did Silicon Valley
FOR LATER READ
Advertisement
Evil Saint
Evil Saint
@sanctemalum
8 rules the top play by that those at the bottom should adopt.

— Thread
(requested by followers)

1. Leverage

Most poor people don't leverage. Trying to get everything done yourself will limit you to only how much you can do.

Get more hands working for you, and find a way to pay or show them what's in it for them.

2. Trust

When doing business, poor people would require collateral from strangers, but excuse those close to them because they *trust* them.

That's how you get scammed.

The unspoken rule is to know your safety net whenever you're not taking collateral.

Never need to trust.

3. Morality

Never seen a very successful businessman say "This is not a good thing, it's evil."

It's either good for business or bad for business. Its either effective or ineffective.

Morality will only limit you.

4. Reciprocity

Expecting someone to help you because you helped them in the past is ludicrous.

If you're no longer useful to them, people have no reason to help you.

"Whenever you see water flowing upstream it means someone it repaying a kindness."

— 48 Laws Of Power
LIFE , FOR LATER READ , SELF DEVELOPMENT
Scott Hechinger
Scott Hechinger
@ScottHech
Every single public defender. Every single day.


Bail arguments, motions, oral arguments, hearings. Judges don’t know, follow, or care about the law. Prosecutors are willing to take advantage of it. And mandatory minimums, withheld evidence, & pretrial detention coerces people to plead before trial. When theres a jury. A shot.

But defenders still fight. And still win. Most times wins aren’t “Justice.” It’s power of repetition of argument in front of same judges. Introducing those in power to the people they oppress. Not just a RAP sheet or words on a page. Defenders make it harder to be brutal & cruel.

I worked as a public defender at an office as well resourced as any in the country. Social workers, team of investigators, a reentry team, support staff, specialist attorneys in immigration, housing, education, family. Relatively low caseloads (80-100). And yet still injustice.

Most think that balancing the scales of justice means more funding for defenders. Thats part of it. Enough a attorneys to actually be at bail hearings. Wrap around services to be able to help people trapped in the system end up better off in their communities. Lower caseloads.
FOR LATER READ
Jared Rubin
Jared Rubin
@jaredcrubin
Excited we finally have a draft of this paper, which attempts to provide a 'unifying theory' of the long economic divergence between the Middle East & Western Europe

As we see it, there are 3 recent theories that hit on important aspects of the divergence...

1/


One set of theories focus on the legitimating power of Islam (Rubin, @prof_ahmetkuru, Platteau). This gave religious clerics greater power, which pulled political resources away form those encouraging economic development

But these theories leave some questions unanswered...
2/

Religious legitimacy is only effective if people
care what religious authorities dictate. Given the economic consequences, why do people remain religious, and thereby render religious legitimacy effective? Is religiosity a cause or a consequence of institutional arrangements?

3/

Another set of theories focus on the religious proscriptions of Islam, particular those associated with Islamic law (@timurkuran). These laws were appropriate for the setting they formed but had unforeseeable consequences and failed to change as economic circumstances changed

4/

There are unaddressed questions here, too

Muslim rulers must have understood that Islamic law carried proscriptions that hampered economic development. Why, then, did they continue to use Islamic institutions (like courts) that promoted inefficiencies?

5/
FOR LATER READ

You May Also Like

Simon DeDeo
Simon DeDeo
@SimonDeDeo
This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?
ALL
JayneshKasliwal
JayneshKasliwal
@JayneshKasliwal
ULTIMATE GUIDE TO 21 and 200 Moving Average
SUNDAY THREAD 🔖
A trend Following System That will Help You Improve Trading immensely.

RETWEET AND SHARE 🔄
@kuttrapali26 @AmitabhJha3
#stocks #StockMarket
1/n

Moving averages
EMA and SMA
1. Exponential Moving Average (EMA) is similar to Simple Moving Average (SMA), measuring trend direction over a period of time.
2. However, whereas SMA simply calculates an average of price data, EMA applies more weight to data that is more current
2/


21 EMA : SHORT TERM TREND
1. Calculates the Average Price of past 21 days
2. A stock above 21 ema is in strong momentum , which will give pullbacks to 21 ema again and again.
3. Stock above 21 ema should never be shorted so as to stay with the trend
3/n

3. A stock which moves 10-15% above 21 ema will be too extended and hence will generally pullback
Stocks take dynamic support on 21 ema
4. You can Short only if its too extended like 15 to 20% from 21 ema ( Not advised )
#ADANIPOWER:
#pnbhousing
4/n


1. Whenever 21 ema is sloping upwards its called uptrend
2. Whenever 21 ema is sloping downwards its called dowtrend
3. Whenever 21 ema is sideways its called consolidation
⏫Buy in uptrend
⏬Sell in downtrend
Examples:
5/n
MOVINGAVERAGES , MOVING AVERAGE 20021 , ALL
Advertisement
Roger Grosse
Roger Grosse
@RogerGrosse
Important paper from Google on large batch optimization. They do impressively careful experiments measuring # iterations needed to achieve target validation error at various batch sizes. The main "surprise" is the lack of surprises. [thread]

https://t.co/7QIx5CFdfJ


The paper is a good example of lots of elements of good experimental design. They validate their metric by showing lots of variants give consistent results. They tune hyperparamters separately for each condition, check that optimum isn't at the endpoints, and measure sensitivity.

They have separate experiments where the hold fixed # iterations and # epochs, which (as they explain) measure very different things. They avoid confounds, such as batch norm's artificial dependence between batch size and regularization strength.

When the experiments are done carefully enough, the results are remarkably consistent between different datasets and architectures. Qualitatively, MNIST behaves just like ImageNet.

Importantly, they don't find any evidence for a "sharp/flat optima" effect whereby better optimization leads to worse final results. They have a good discussion of experimental artifacts/confounds in past papers where such effects were reported.
MACHINE LEARNING
John Myles White
John Myles White
@johnmyleswhite
This post is pretty bizarre, but it manages to hit on so many false beliefs that I've seen hurt junior data scientists that it deserves some explicit

(1) The notion that R is well-suited to "building web applications" seems totally out of left field. I don't feel like most R loyalists think this is a good idea, but it's worth calling out that no normal company will be glad you wrote your entire web app in R.

(2) It is true that Python had some issues historically with the 2-to-3 transition, but it's not such a big deal these days. On the flip side, I have found interesting R code that doesn't run in modern R interpreters because of changes in core operations (e.g. assignment syntax).

(3) "Most of the time we only need a latest, working interpreter with the latest packages to run the code" -- this is where things get real and reveal some things that hurt data scientists. If this sentence is true, it's likely because you don't share code with coworkers.

(3) Really is a broader issue in data science: people only think of what they need to do their work if no one else existed and code was never maintained. Junior data scientists almost always operate on projects they start from scratch and don't have to maintain for long.
DATA SCIENCE
Erik Torenberg
Erik Torenberg
@eriktorenberg
1/ Here’s a list of conversational frameworks I’ve picked up that have been helpful.

Please add your own.

2/ The Magic Question: "What would need to be true for you


3/ On evaluating where someone’s head is at regarding a topic they are being wishy-washy about or delaying.

“Gun to the head—what would you decide now?”

“Fast forward 6 months after your sabbatical--how would you decide: what criteria is most important to you?”

4/ Other Q’s re: decisions:

“Putting aside a list of pros/cons, what’s the *one* reason you’re doing this?” “Why is that the most important reason?”

“What’s end-game here?”

“What does success look like in a world where you pick that path?”

5/ When listening, after empathizing, and wanting to help them make their own decisions without imposing your world view:

“What would the best version of yourself do”?
LIFE