pasttime

Fooled by randomness, finding intelligent patterns in a string of random numbers, has come to attention as a long-standing human activity. On a spectrum of completely constant and predictable at one end to completely random and unpredictable on the other, what lies in between? I suggest, moving from constant on the left to random on the right, lie occasionally random and, further to the right, occasionally constant. As either constancy or randomness is put into or taken out of a system, its exact state fluctuates across the spectrum. Of interest is the speed at which the “needle” moves on the line, and the frequency with which the measurement of where the needle is, is made.

I have only recently come to understand the full importance of Newton's balance of forces through both apparently static objects and constantly moving ones. The massive stone columns supporting medieval churches appear to be still, but that does not mean that there are not massive forces being transmitted through them. The forces, though massive, are in perfect balance. If they are not zero, then by F=ma there is some acceleration which will ultimately cause visible movement, even if only by inches over centuries. Today we see the columns curving that looked straight and non-moving for a very long time. If there is a net F, there is a net “a”.

The same holds true for constant motion objects. A constant velocity car has forces of propulsion and resistance in perfect balance. A frictionless ball in motion would stay in motion forever. That does not mean there is no energy in the car or the system. If the car hits you, the destructive energy imparted to your body is fatal. Again, if there is a net F, there is a net “a” in this moving system.

Is there a net force on the needle on the constant-random measurement line? A person or firm can have investments rules of thumb that work well for periods time? There is constancy to the work that slips away over time? Conversely, are there a series of apparently random numbers that after a billion of them, start to, almost magically, exactly repeat themselves for the next billion in the string and so on thereafter? How quickly the numbers come spitting out and whether or not every instance is recorded or captured, over one day or over several centuries, helps a human in a several decade time frame see patterns earlier or later.

There are phrases in the language for these concept of constancy. You can set your watch by him, her or it. What goes around comes around. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

There are phrases for the opposite ideas of randomness. A stitch in time saves nine. You can pay me now or pay me later, referring to preventive maintenance. If something can go wrong, it will go wrong sooner or later.

Probability tries to put a number to the words. Increased precision comes at a cost of increased complexity. Increased complexity produces more slowly calculated solutions when time may be of the essence. On this line, random is could go either way, fifty percent, in the middle and so on. Certainty is 0% at one end and 100% at the other end, of two different, mutually exclusive outcomes.

Trust and insight

Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and do not rely on your own insight. Proverbs 3.5

Is this really the correct translation? People search the internet, libraries and travel in search of experiences to have insights. Trust in the Lord even if you sense danger? Or trust with all your heart that your sense of danger is the Lord talking to you.

Sanctify yourself and you will sanctify society. – St. Francis of Assisi

Set a good example so others will follow? Be a good example as actions are truer examples than words? Being holy yourself turns at least one light on in the sea of lights that can be humanity.

A long time ago in a future we have yet to see, our fresh and new insights were dawning yet again in the minds of humanity. And thus another book begins. Or perhaps another chapter in the larger book of humanity.

Am I giving up too many dopamine hits all at once?

For example:

• computer gaming
• sexually gratifying habits filled with novelty bias
• eating and drinking too many calories
• reading and talking about money, investing and real estate
• watching video and audio content on various platforms and media
• buying lottery tickets and gambling
• day dreaming of being rich, powerful and sought after

Seven things being given-up at once is a lot. In fact, why not ask “Wanna bet?” The list is actually seven independent variables. If the odds of failing at giving up any one activity can be estimated at between 20 and 80% (guess an average of 50% across the eight activities) then there are two to the power of eight different combinations of success or failure across a period of time. There is only one combination that has success at each of the eight positions. All the rest of the 2 to the eight power combinations has at least one failure. You have a one in 256 chance of success which is 0.391%.

If, further, your mental attitude is to viciously attack yourself for failure at even one “give-up”, and failure at even one indicates that “better to be lucky than good” isn’t working for you today, then you are very likely to give up trying at all of the seven when you have failed at one. In short, you have set up a game and mindset where you are almost certain to fail. Wouldn’t it be nice if you set up a game and mindset where success was more than 90% probable? If success is achieving any one of the seven goals (where each averages 50% chance of success) then the only possible combination of non-success is failure at all of them, which itself is also only 0.391%. Achieving one makes you more likely to keep going to achieve more because you are just that good and have powered through some stretches of bad luck.

A thought I wrote down on February 8, 2016 at 12:53 pm and just came across again now.

The balance is between having a relationship and having principles. If you must always be right, you will not have many successful, peaceful, happy relationships. No one likes a know it all. To keep a relationship going may require one to sacrifice principles. However, sacrificing all principles to keep a relationship means standing for nothing so you are liable to fall for anything. People with principles they feel must be upheld at all costs can resort to violence, fear and intimidation to control relationships within boundaries they can tolerate.

Observing the participants

In this world, there are people fortunate enough to be able to live as observers, perhaps occasionally commenting publicly. Others, also fortunate, are people who work hard enough with sufficient skill and luck to be able to live well. Then there are the rest, who get by, sometimes not well enough to get by for long.

This observation is not new. Generations of people through thousands of years have known and will learn this. Yet people still write it down and communicate it. Some part of them must hope to live, even if only so briefly, as observers in a sea of participants.

A solid beginning to a book.

How to behave individually? Think of a compass rose. The north is transparent; the south is secret. The east is cooperative and the west is ready and able to fight. These points of the compass can be given other names.

North can be Steve Jobs. South John D. Rockefeller. East is Mahatma Gandhi, while west is Winston Churchill.

Alternatively, there are actions for each compass point. North is a firm handshake. South is ears open, mouth shut. East is smiling. West looks you in the eye.

North confidently sets expectations for others. South is still waters running deep. East is charismatic. West is a tower of strength.

Groups can be analyzed by a similar compass rose and how good, or bad, they are at steering in any one particular direction. Northward is a group that does good work. Southward the group interacts well with others. East is a group that is fun to belong to, Westward is a group that has each others backs.

If one thinks of the book “Rapport” by the Alisons, their animal circle of the north lion, east monkey, south mouse and west T-rex drives at similar ideas. The lion is transparent and leads the group in doing good work. The mouse is quiet and listens well. The monkey is cooperative, fun, smiling and charismatic. The t-rex stands his ground for his own beliefs and has your back.

The Carl Jung compass rose model has introspection to the north; feeling to the south; extroversion to the east and introversion (recharges his batteries in private) to the west. This, if rotated ninety degrees counter clockwise, fits the animal model reasonably well.

In each of the compass roses, people can be good or bad. That sentence probably contains a fundamental attribution error. They are not inherently good or bad people. They are having good or bad days.

Good people have bad days by forgetting the gold and silver rules. Silver: don’t do unto others that which you don’t want done unto yourself. Gold: do unto others that which you want done to yourself.

The cooperative person becomes overly familiar and desperate to please at any price. The leader becomes dictator. The autonomous fighter becomes an assassin. The empathic, quiet listener becomes a spy or saboteur, hiding in the shadows.

The adaptable person knows where on the compass he is at the moment, but can deliberately steer a course in any direction. He can also accurately see where other people are on the compass. With skill, he can move them, or manipulate them, to other points.

Is it ethical or is it human hacking?

Follow your bliss

Follow your bliss isn't as much in fashion as once it was. If your bliss constantly changes because of novelty bias, it is only fear of missing out. Rather than Nietzsche's long obedience in a single direction; rather than consistency, habit and even less than perfect discipline, which outweighs bliss and will; you just go in circles, right back to where you began. God's grace to persevere does not require a person to like what they are doing or think their way to triumph. It requires successful action.

Misaligned incentives combined with bliss can cause harm. People can love to teach, or love to honour their family or their history. People can love to honour their country or people they admire. But if the surgeon teaches a procedure that is out-of-date or actually causes more harm than good, bliss causes harm. The surgeon can love to earn a good living or be a pillar of his community or have people look up to him. All of these ideals cause bliss but still don't help patients as much as they might, while blinding the surgeon to the need for change. Or his critics can be wrong in their data, or their opinions and their bliss of loving to criticize authority or wealth or western medicine. Ultimately, people can vote with their feet, but the herd can be wrong too.