Einar W. Høst

All idiots are wrong, some are useful.

“Human beings may behave like puppets, but no one is pulling the strings.” — John Gray

Team flykode. Også kalt team primærnøkkel.

Maybe. Probably. Much like an integer in my program, I treat the binary representation as a binary representation.

Apart from that I would say there is no convention, and without a convention, there is no name.

But when I count in binary on my fingers (as one does) I say "two".

If you pronounce it "two" there is no joke.

“It is only natural that believers in reason, lacking any deeper faith and too feeble to tolerate doubt, should turn to the sorcery of numbers.” — John Gray

Can't wait for winter to come.

Again with the takeaway.

What do you get when you divide individual and interactions by processes and tools?

"I DON'T NEED YOU TO FUCKING REWRITE WHAT I'VE JUST WRITTEN!"

YouTube video by Banks Productions Programmable 2025: AI is a Hype-Fuelled Dumpster Fire - Chris Simon

Finally got around to watch the "AI is a Hype-Fuelled Dumpster Fire" talk by @chrissimon.au. It is really good. www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bF_...

NTB trakk sak med falske sitater og falsk kilde: – En veldig alvorlig feil Fem av fem Telenor-sitater, og navnet på direktør, var oppdiktet. Feil bruk av KI, forklarer redaktør.

Hør her. Det er fort gjort å tro at journalistikk er en av de tingene KI passer til, men det er faktisk en av de tingene KI passer _dårligst_ til. Modellene er lagd for å generere ord helt uavhengig av hva som er sant, det er nesten det motsatte av god journalistikk. Dere må slutte med det. Nå!

YouTube video by 3jewell Black Adder Goes Forth - 1 to 1 clip.wmv

www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZT-...

This is something that I have tried to convey to people, only to be met with "all models are wrong" and suspicions that I'm a Platonist, i.e. that I believe there is a single, correct model.

It's no deeper than the observation that a linear model is not useful for non-linear systems. But an excessive faith in the relativity of models seem to get in the way of that understanding.

Of course the designation as complex adaptive system is also a model, but it's reality that exhibit feedback loops and throws the non-linear effects in our face.

For instance, if we try to apply a linear model to optimize a complex adaptive system, we shouldn't be surprised that we make the system worse (or in the best case accomplish nothing).

The wrong model is much wronger than the right model.

Simply, if we choose the wrong model, we shouldn't be surprised if the get bad results.

As Weinberg put it, "The problems arise when we try to apply a model that doesn't match the situation in front of our eyes."

This applies in particular to what I call sketch models, which aim to describe rather than prescribe.

The point that I wanted to make is that we are of course at liberty to choose our models (although everything we think and do is influenced by unexamined structures and the limits of our language) but we are not at liberty to choose our reality. :-)

(In a grand irony I abandoned the blog post because I wasn't sure I was able to convey the usefulness of that distinction, that is, of that model of models.)

I have an abandoned blog post draft that distinguishes between two kinds of models, sketches and blueprints. Sketches attempts to describe existing structures, blueprints are intended to bring new structures into the world.

There is also perhaps a certain facileness in how we talk about models which rubs me the wrong way, which has its roots in the multitude of models and their uses, and also that we seem to be naive about models in general.

It is misused or misunderstood (I think) to create a narrative of absolute relativity of models.

It's also that people seem to read weird things into it, like all models are equally wrong, or all models are equally useful, or all models are useful on the same parameters, or that models are uniformly wrong or useful irrespective of context. I could go on.

It's not that I don't agree, it's more like it's treated somewhat like a mystic text (we all nod solemnly at its profundity) and that it seems like we have little else to say about models. (The essay and talk you did with Rebecca is a rare exception.)