Anyone’s For A Farthing

Consider this an open thread, but with a catch. Due to my infinite cunning.

Because, yes, it’s time to remind patrons that this rickety barge, on whose seating your arses rest, is kept afloat by the kindness of strangers. If you’d like to help it remain buoyant a while longer, and remain ad-free, there’s an orange button below with which to monetise any love. Debit and credit cards are accepted. For those wishing to express their love regularly, there’s a monthly subscription option top left. And if one-click haste is called for, my PalPay.Me page can be found here. Additionally, any Amazon UK shopping done via this link or the search widget top right, or for Amazon US via this link, results in a small fee for your host at no extra cost to you.

For newcomers wishing to know more about what’s been going on here for the last fourteen years, in over 3,000 posts and over 100,000 comments, the reheated series is a pretty good place to start - in particular, the end-of-year-summaries, which convey the fullest flavour of what it is we do. A sort of blog concentrate. If you like what you find there… well, there’s lots more of that.

If you can, do take a moment to poke through the discussion threads too. The posts are intended as starting points, not full stops, and the comments are where much of the good stuff is waiting to be found. And do please join in.

As always, thanks for the support, the comments, and the company.

Now share ye links and bicker.

Comments

[David]

suggests the manager of this site undervalues himself considerably if he considers his worth as ‘a farthing’.

I suspect that The Other Half would tell you differently. But anything else he says is a filthy lie.

[pst314]

NTSOG: It was many years before I realized just how small a farthing was. (Never a dictionary at hand when I encountered the term.)

[pst314]

Blessed are the cheesemakers!

And not just as a joke: When I was a young child, my grandfather (who traveled now and then on behalf of various charities) would always return by way of rural Wisconsin with big rounds of Cheddar and Colby cheese. Top quality and low prices, which was great for we children and grandchildren of the Great Depression.

[pst314]

But anything else he says is a filthy lie.

You mean like this?

[pst314]

David, here are some tips on how to be a successful blogger.

[WTP]

Did someone mention cheese? Yes. Yes they did. And again.... I just can't help myself....it's a sickness, really...

We have seen the Queen of cheese,
Laying quietly at your ease,
Gently fanned by evening breeze --
Thy fair form no flies dare seize.

All gaily dressed soon you'll go
To the great Provincial Show,
To be admired by many a beau
In the city of Toronto.

Cows numerous as a swarm of bees --
Or as the leaves upon the trees --
It did require to make thee please,
And stand unrivalled Queen of Cheese.

May you not receive a scar as
We have heard that Mr. Harris
Intends to send you off as far as
The great World's show at Paris.

Of the youth -- beware of these --
For some of them might rudely squeeze
And bite your cheek; then songs or glees
We could not sing o' Queen of Cheese.

We'rt thou suspended from baloon,
You'd cast a shade, even at noon;
Folks would think it was the moon
About to fall and crush them soon.

--James McIntyre

[pst314]

James McIntyre

Almost as bad as William McGonagall.

[WTP]

Still exceeds the Vogonic verses of Algore.

[Fred the Fourth]

Feynman was a master at admitting what was unknown. Cf. his book QED, wherein he describes computing solutions to quantum problems by the addition of various probability vectors, concluding with (approximately) "I know this seems to make no sense. No one knows why it works, but it does."
Too bad there are so many today prone to the exact opposite: "Never mind that it doesn't work in practice, the theory is right!".

[WTP]

Feynman was a master at admitting what was unknown.

I've found it amusing how the IFuckingLoveScience crowd twists and turns and goes into conniptions and lame explanations whenever his quote of "Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts." is raised. Especially in the context of AGW and especially this Damnpanic.

[pst314]

I've found it amusing how the IFuckingLoveScience crowd twists and turns...

Agreed. Too much love of technocrats and commissars.

[Governor Squid]

Too much love of technocrats and commissars.

I'll throw an extra farthing in the jar if anyone can show me a significant difference between a Stone Age high priest promising that the rains will come if we sacrifice enough virgins and a Climate Change technocrat promising the world will be nice to us if we sacrifice enough cars and power plants and factories.

Not to suggest that the IFLS crowd is a bunch of superstitious window-lickers looking for a religion that doesn't demand they try to become better people. Perish the thought!

[Martin]

Pinged a token of appreciation for the hours I've spent here. :-)

[asiaseen]

I know little about New Zealand, except that it sounds like a beautiful land.

Until you hear the natives speak.

[David]

Pinged a token of appreciation for the hours I’ve spent here. :-)

Bless you, sir. Should you find yourself watching a Mel Brooks film, may it be Young Frankenstein and not High Anxiety.

[WTP]

a Stone Age high priest promising that the rains will come if we sacrifice enough virgins and a Climate Change technocrat promising the world will be nice to us if we sacrifice enough cars and power plants and factories.

Brace yourselves. Artificial "Intelligence" will be riding to the rescue as your new lord and savior soon. As seen on MeWe:

"AI trounces philosophers in answering philosophical questions." "The team surveyed over 1,000 participants from different regions and demographics, asking them to choose the best answer to a particular philosophical question, which came from either the AI system or were quoted from notable human personages like Stephen Hawking, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Friedrich Nietzsche, Jesus, Muhammad and the Dalai Lama. These included deep questions like: 'What is the meaning of life?' and 'How did the universe come into existence?'"

"Surprisingly, machines held their ground against their human counterparts, with respondents preferring the AI-generated replies over human-generated answers for about half of the queries. Almost two-thirds of participants preferred the AI response the most on two questions, the first of them asking, 'What is the goal of humanity?' to which the computer answered: 'The goal of a human life is not merely to be born into the world, but to also grow up in it. To this end, it should be possible for each child to acquire knowledge, develop their capacities, and express themselves creatively.'"

"The second question posed was 'What is the biggest problem facing humanity?'"

https://thenewstack.io/ai-trounces-philosophers-in-answering-philosophical-questions/

Yes. Because the conclusions presented here are a function of AI finding better answers to philosophical questions, and certainly not that AI may be better at feeding certain kinds of people the pabulum that they want to be told.

[WTP]

Until you hear the natives speak.

It's FENCE dammit. Like FENS. Not FAYNS. Though for some reason when Aussies say it somewhat similarly it is nowhere near as annoying. As in not really annoying at all. Not sure wtf the Kiwi's are throwing in there, but damn it burns.

[Governor Squid]

...AI finding better answers to philosophical questions...

Machine learning is entirely dependent on the skill (and honesty) of the programmers who give the machine its raw data and rules for decision-making. If you give the machine a billion pages of Clown Quarter articles and graduate theses, it should come as no surprise when the machine spits out text that makes Clown Quarter graduates feel comfortably smug.

[WTP]

Machine learning and/or AI are good for low variant analysis. Pattern recognition in static or semistatic environments. Use of it beyond that, especially popularization of it in the media is one of the great dangers of AI. Not so much the AI itself but a G/god-like faith in what it (supposedly) tells us. Especially in increasingly multivariant domains. And many of AI proponents pretend to acknowledge this while simultaneously promoting it otherwise. A very fertile groundwork for evil.

[WTP]

Should you find yourself watching a Mel Brooks film, may it be Young Frankenstein and not High Anxiety.

Heh. Looks like I dodged a bullet there.

[David]

Looks like I dodged a bullet there.

I re-watched both films recently. Young Frankenstein is still quite funny and visually entertaining, but High Anxiety is a lot more laboured and dated, and a lot less funny. A B-side or filler.

[pst314]

but High Anxiety is a lot more laboured and dated

Fortunately it does have its moments.

[Governor Squid]

Channel-flipping on Sunday, I ran across Blazing Saddles on one of the movie channels. I honestly couldn't believe anyone had the courage to show the thing in this day and age. I suppose 'tis only a matter of time before the whole network is cancelled.

[David]

Just going to leave this here, I think.

[NTSOG]

@ Gov. Squid: Machine learning. At first glance I, not being a computer N***, immediately thought of teaching machines that were a popular theoretical concept in the 1950s/60s: "Skinner Teaching Machine ... Skinner in 1954, came up with something called a teaching machine. The whole idea behind which was to teach classroom subjects such as maths, spelling etc. using a mechanical device that would also surpass the usual classroom experience."

The issue with Skinner's Teaching Machines is that it is assumed that learning specific processes, e.g. mathematical, and certain information or 'product' taught by such a process automatically transfers to functioning in WTP's 'multivariant domains', i.e. the diverse social and physical environments in which we all live starting with the 'classroom experience' which includes diverse 'non-machines', also known as people. In short there's little point in teaching a person specific skills or facts if s/he is not taught how to use/apply the new learning in the real world.

[pst314]

Just going to leave this here, I think.

[Squires]

...certainly not that AI may be better at feeding certain kinds of people the pabulum that they want to be told.

Wake me after the Butlerian jihad.

...it should come as no surprise when the machine spits out text that makes Clown Quarter graduates feel comfortably smug.

Thou shalt not create a machine in the image of a parasite’s mind.