people – Page 26 – Maverisk / Étoiles du Nord

Accountancy: agency or is it a Repeated Sequential Life Core War Game ..?

These thing just swirled into my mind:
The accountancy industry pictures itself as some instantiation of agency theory’s model(s). Which may be right, but then, the eager beaver ideal is achieved hardly anywhere anytime. The praxis is one of a model so deeply devolved that we have much more of a farce at hand.
Alternatively, the idea(l) of the repeated game, in sequential form with some Life notes on the palate and definite tones of Core War, turned up. Yes, it takes some crafting to plug all participants into it, and to my surprise not too much definitive info could be found on the ‘net (apart from, e.g., this sort of work) or am I missing something. Maybe it’s the difficulty of the crafting that I missed by which I might also overstate.
Oh and did I mention that usually, game theory is explained from the start of a two-player simultaneous game whereas in our application, we have three to numerous players (stakeholders/-groups) and sequentialism to at least some degree. Plus the Life aspects of travel through time and the environment, within the limits and counterforces set by the Core size/format. And yes, three-plus players … an obvious Three-Body Problem, right ..?

Why all this game-name dropping ..? Because reasons.
Reason being: There might be much better understanding of the role and value of ‘the’ accountant in daily practice (though the significance may very well be much less than presented today), and a number of methodological issues in the field would be settled much easier.

But then, if only someone would pay me to investigate… [And pay my time’s worth — now there’s many less that can even afford me ;-] but oh well, there’s still:
DSCN1270
[To impress. Girona yet again]

Racing humanity against ASI

One thing still amiss in the discussions about the (near?) Future:
Whether Singularity/ASI will come before humanity leaving its biological substrate, or the other way around.

The first, leading to a dystopian future of humans initially being Machine’s pets but later (?) being discarded as inefficient nuisance. Even if only via Lanier‘s route.
The second giving some hope that humans may transform into ASI after which the age-old wars start all over again. Or, the first past the post takes all…

Yes, still ploughing through [and finding much want for evidence or less of it, and addition of great many ethics aspects] Kurzweil as here, here and here.
The first, in a great many previous posts on this blog. The second, too. I’m unsure how the future will play out. Now that Ray’s predictions, time-wise, seem to have fallen before (fallen non-behind) actuality maybe due to something with a financial crisis but Ray had demonstrated (?) that to not hurt the ‘real’ economy too much — from which either we will bounce back with a sprint to return to the (smooth..?) expo growth path, or we will prove not all that starts exponentially, will indefinitely continue that way. So we have lost already by not waking up fast enough or still have some time if only we’d wake up to join the discussion — not necessarily the Luddite revolt …

Your thoughts, please ..?

Oh and just wanted to add, for the relatively (very) short term: “If every instrument could accomplish its own work, obeying or anticipating the will of others, if the shuttle could weave, and the pick touch the lyre, without a hand to guide them, chief workmen would not need servants, nor masters slaves.” (Aristoteles) — taken to be positive. But just extend that; one could consider it short-sightedness by Ari to not have asked why there would be any chief workmen with the possibility that there would need not be any work at all leading to no income for all hence devastating poverty and starvation but for the few if any (sic) who ‘own’ the machines. Also:

[The interesting about ‘life’ in Chalons-en-Champagne is just a tucked-away corner, nothing more — same for humanity in the near future ..?]

The lion’s share of SOx

Anyone dare to guess whether ‘SOx’ and all the totalitarian-bureaucratic tendencies that still dominate the organizational world of today, over the chaotic-environment-forcing-to-retreat-into-more-sober-flexibility upstarts, is the lion that roars just one last time before being overtaken by younger more vital rivals, or is it a resurgence in greater scope than ever before of some History’s greater trends ..?

This, with of course higher-frequency but (much) smaller-amplitude cycles being layered onto it, producing an apparently random but wavelet-transformation-traceable ordered (or at least, causally correct) pattern — which may or may not have a direction other than zero, through the aeons. Staying far from pretending that humanity by any worthwhile measure is better off than in all previous times, which is very highly doubtful …!

But the first dare is what it’s about, here.
Hope and joy, humanity saved by its own creativity and the inherent dice-throwing of Nature [contra Einstein but that’s not the point here — Wovon mann nicht sprechen kann OR is beyond human comprehension] — XOR — despair and demise. Beyond short-term trends, where are we going?

Your call. In particular in Comments. Plus:

[Suddenly, different. Even when not adapted i.e. ‘shopped. Girona again]

The Body of the Mind

Quick note: Still wondering whether the brain may function as smoothly when not connected in the most natural of ways with the body that feeds (…) it and vice versa.
Yes — decoupling of functions and/or replication of interfaces may solve some problems. But remain not ex ante sure whether in a logical sense, we miss something. The ultimate mimic game may still not be the real thing.

Sorry — some points cannot be dissed quite so easily, with stop gap arguments. And:

[“It’s just a house, like a stone skin”…? Girona]

Plusquotetime

Diversity is joy and riches.

Another one in the series inspired by this here Expert, this here post continues the somewhat hopefully new series — with my own personal ramblings which I would dare to call motivational soundbites but you would consider to be as typically as this sentence to be my interpretation of brief, not necessarily positively motivational but that’s (yes I do use abbreviations to shorten the sentence even further) because that remains your interpretation but that’s not necessarily the right one being the one I intended.

The above might even require some exepelenaisijuhn. Where some approach diversity, of any kind, with fear, I consider diversity to be an asset at the mundane level, e.g., through creation of (evolution-enabling) robustness by partial pre-readiness against the chaotic changes in the (any def. of) environment. That some of the group however defined, will survive and no mass extinction is the effect of the previous perfected adaption (by definition), in itself should create calmth. All-individuals’ survival was never on the program (on the contrary, everything so certainly human life(s) will come to an end — trace the stories describing the utter horror and boredom of living forever…), and now, continuity can be guaranteed when diversity is cherished. One can even see the value to society of having some with less perfected adaptation to modern life that should be cared for as our hope for the future when we (?) ‘normals’ will be the misfits and the tough get going.
Also, uniformity is boring. Utterly boring. Think sheeple following $AAPL. Diversity, especially in society and the superset, art, has riches and value in itself. In flip image, those that oppose diversity-through-immigration often do so for an unconscious subliminal fear of being found out to be overly shallow… [Yes one can learn of other cultures from afar, certainly latter days, but meeting F2F in the others’ environment is still much preferred for its full-all-senses experience. To keep the world a better place, one of course then needs not flatten all culture to some happenstantial low(er/est) common denominator. That one doesn’t take over another one’s culture doesn’t mean one disses or dismisses it let alone one would (feel the need to) rate it lower — on the contrary, one could enjoy the diversity. And/or learn where others are in fact esthetically and ethically superioir, within losing one’s own peculiarities — again the fear of being found out to in fact be the lower life and having to give up one’s (implicitly, now exposed) inferior and/or underserved position.

I rest my case. And:

[‘My house in the ‘burbs must by law be exactly like yours’ — said no one ever. BarÇa again.]

In support of TED ..?

A certain, distinguished ( ? ;-| ) R. Kurzweil in The Singularity Is Near has some off the cuff remarks about becoming pets, Ted style. (p.32)
Which is a sligh against (later!) sages of the Musk, Gates and Hawkins class — and fully unjustified. Since the ‘Theory of Technology Evolution’ is a quasi(sic)religious circular argument paraphrasing Hegel with apparently quite carefully selected and probably redacted statistics and some ontological Technology-defeatism in the undertow.

And the rest is consumable but only when considering these initial ails as foundations hence only a particular Kuhnian discourse. Interpuncted (Eldredge/Gould style) with badly under- or misinformed remarks. E.g., regarding chaotic processes resulting in smooth exponential trends being not a coincidence but an inherent feature of evolutionary processes (p.73) — based on a misunderstanding of evolution, probably, since numerous times, the latter is made to appear like some purposeful decision making by individual instances of, or species as actors instead of happenstance sheer survival-luck. How much of the overwhelming evidence must one disregard to arrive at the smoothness!

The list goes on. But I will not. (Nevertheless…) read the darn thing and smile! Naivety is a good read, too. And:

[Yes, take your meds. No need to swallow just the blue pill that the above book might be, though. Barça, of course]

Miss Quotes: Biblical edition

The quotes, of motivational nature or other, that you meet every time again — but aren’t, since they are garbled versions of the original. And the original had much more profound wisdom, or was even true where the misquote isn’t.

This second one in a series, a rather old one:
“Money is the root of all evil“
Which of course is true.
Though it isn’t.

Because the original is:
“For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.”
(1 Timothy 6:10) KJV (The King James Bible)
Where we have: The love for. Which can be quelled by the realization that it is bad form (‘erred from the faith’ — where faith is the ‘universalist’ social philosophy aspect of humanity/humanism, not the accidental form-over-substance) to love money for its own sake, piercing the lovers through with many sorrows to get ever more of it since it will not give satisfaction due to its unproductive core nature (i.e., useful, but nothing more; it isn’t the root in itself but a branch to club others with…!).

O kayyye, short but this will suffice. I ~~hope~~ am sure. And:

Rosebud and Cain

So, … Waking up, a deeper layer of the Citizen’s movie surfaced. Unsure whether this was even in the movie, but of course there’s the battle of the same name (note the number of casualties that today would not count for much but then still did ..!), where “Indians” fought on both sides, and probably did it the best, too. And it was the lead-up to that other one. And the land issue remained open (until 1980 no less) and can still not be considered closed…
But apart, or through, all that, I figured: The above is about people of the land protesting the plunder by what was hoped to be passers-by but that turned out to be permanent though (still) roving occupiers (not of the ~[name your city] kind you superficial dumbo — on second thought, might be similar to the here-meant protesters!), in perfect analogy to the biblical story of Abel and his brother. Where in the bible, the story is skewed towards the Traveler side as that’s the side of the victors that wrote the story in the first place.

And that’s why the main movie character is named as, like he is but then his career as the settled, is opposite. Then, his sled’s name refers to his childhood lost (clearly in the plot) which was a time of roaming free, just like the white man’s settler times before the above battles — that lasted till all was conquered and stable, necessarily locked-down by lack of remaining open terrain (well, …), society developed. This of course was also the man’s life: Ever more protecting Xanadu the archetypical dwelling, and the estate at large. Through emergency vent projects, some bits of the core primal power (as here and as reflected in the abovementioned biblical story, and also in e.g., Germanic and Scandinavian lore as close-to the very beginnings of cosmo- and anthropogenesis!) had been able to escape but had been ridiculed. See the pic below; if you get that. And, that in latter-day society, too, there were tribes of the same Culture fighting each other, on both sides.

Then, the life came to an end. And then, the realization of the integrated whole came back, not only the yearning for the lost innocence, but also the ‘misfit’ness of life’s escapes and in the recluse stages the possibility of returning to a more balanced and holistic life, which latter option had now vanished and the cycle was finished. Rosebud…
After which the Order, the cleaning up of the house, of course summarily dismissed the non-Apollo’nian into the fire (back to its origins, one notes) at the hands of the minions of mind, the dull-minded follower housekeepers.
For Dutch readers, this here item may also apply, in somewhat similar, overlapping fashion.

OK, OK, I known, my insights deteriorated throughout he writing-up into the already known. But just wanted to add my by now deeper anchoring of the trope(s)… And:

[Even the model is big. You know why this pic is here. And in DC]

Electibility for dogs (quoted from the ‘US’)

Bear with me; thinking of some country but applicable to a great many others’ politicians as well; a full-length quote with some notes:

The Dogs Hold An Election. [Brule Sioux]
We don’t think much of the white man’s elections. Whoever wins, we Indians always lose. Well, we have a little story about elections. Once, a long time ago, the dogs were trying to elect a president. So one of them got up in the big dog convention and said: “I nominate the bulldog for president. He’s strong. He can fight.”
“But he can’t run,” said another dog. “What good is a fighter who can’t run? He won’t catch anybody.”
Then another dog got up and said: “I nominate the greyhound, because for sure he can run.”
But the other dogs cried: “Naw, he can run alright, but he can’t fight. When he catches up with somebody, what happens then? He gets the hell beaten out of him, that’s what! So all he’s good for is running away.”
Then an ugly little mutt got up and said: “I nominate that dog for president who smells good underneath his tail.”
And immediately and equally ugly mutt jumped up and yelled: “I second he motion.”
At once all the dogs started sniffing underneath each other’s tails. A big chorus went up:
“Phew, he doesn’t smell good under his tail.”
“No, neither does this one.”
“He no presidential timber!”
“No, he’s no good either.”
“This one sure isn’t the people’s choice.”
“Wow, this ain’t my candidate!”
When you go out for a walk, just watch the dogs. They’re still sniffing underneath each other’s tails. They’re looking for a good leader, and they still haven’t found him.
Told by Lame Deer at Winner, Rosebud Indian Reservation, South Dakota, 1969
[And blatantly copied by me from Erdoes and Ortiz: American Indian myths and legends, Pantheon NY 1984]

Now, the bulldog of course may very well be Saunders (!). The greyhound, well, think Waving Hair (of sorts). But the butt-sniffing: Everywhere around the world.

Plus:

[Justified pride. No sniffing required. DC]

Leaders don’t stand up, but sit on it.

Or even, lay awake.
As real, actual leaders will not aim to please as big a crowd as possible by focusing on the (ever diminishing, as the group size (target) grows, by mathematical rule) average, or even trying to cater for that. Such ‘leaders’ are just ring leaders for mob rule which will in the end not only eat its children but also them_selves.

Leaders who succeed, in becoming Men (F/M/other) of State, elderly statesmen, are the ones that do not follow the outcry but seek solutions and then act on them, without having to revert to words first. Not even walking the talk, as they only walk.
And, equally important, not consult-and-then-dismiss differing views but consider those as they know them already. And ponder about the best solutions, hurting as little of the sea of other-stakeholder needs that suffer from the move towards a Pareto optimum away from the political (def.: ‘choice-related’) meddling, scheming-for-its-own-purpose (much sub-)mediocre compromises that achieve nothing because they fall short of pleasing anyone and come to late to address actuality — to arrive at such lameness of ‘solutions’ (quod non), much time has passed, in which the world has already turned beyond the original problems.

So, … don’t aim for acclaim. Think…

[May be (much) better, but maybe better than usually considered…?]