Phoolish enough?

Posted on by under Foolishness

Are we foolish enough to attempt this?

The internal differentials of a brane is a directed graph. The number of paths from one line to a later line is the direct programatic dependence of the latter on the former. Following this we may determine the number of distinct code paths between a method’s outputs and each of its inputs. If two lines share a path, then differential with respect to them is not separable into separate univariate methods.

A parameter A is not affected by another, B, if

Implicit dependence theorem

\Game_{[A,B]} f = \Game_A f

But this is not equivalent to

\Game_{[A,B]} f = \Game_B f

Another Chinese Toy

Posted on by under Uncategorized

Ordered a “fighter plane” on Amazon for Christmas. It arrived in a few weeks. But when we opened the plane we saw something unexpected. The foot-long fighter jet was a color that lean towards that of poop than the advertised bright yellow color. But that’s not my biggest concern. The model fighter jet is labeled ARMY Fighter J-15. After googling a bit, I discovered that J-15 is a Chinese fighter jet. This isn’t such a terrible thing per se. I guess I knew I was buying a people-killing, enemy destroying, petroleum fuel burning lean mean machine that could leveraged by a party of some war to fight. It bring a J-15 ought not to weigh me mentally down any more than an F-15. But it does. The down side of a more powerful China will be that it produce these things and will use it to wrangle power worldwide.

This is something we should keep in mind as the openly anti-sino Trump administration departs. I hope the Biden administration can live up to its campaign promises and build toward a more peaceful and collaborative world by growing America.

Mickey still smells fishy

Posted on by under america, race

Watching Luca on Disney…

Based on my own experience coming to America in the 1980’s, I can telling very seriously this is a metaphors for immigrants coming to America. Everything from childhood myths about the-other land, to the actual leap to go there, and upon arrival, the local bullies, the local underdogs, the competition to the top even though it is our first race, (learning to bike moments after learning to breath in air and walk… man, it doesn’t get more apt than this!) even though we just arrived…, what?! Are all immigrants sperms? and the sabotaging parents who arrive after and causes a world of trouble.

I don’t want to point fingers, but a eating competition to see who eats the most, it still insist on the civility of using forks… that seems to happen a lot in American society. so much brutality in competition, but there ever presents, inlaid, are these awesome tidbits of niceties that seem to have been meant for a different context.

Okay, so Luca and Alberto quickly betrays their water dwelling-kind to befriend land-dwelling friend. This is practically a film promoting fratricide.

I am an anti-vaxxer

Posted on by under Uncategorized

One day, it might be discovered that we can affect changes to the human body and mind producing an altered mental stage or change there of. One can imagine using an analogy of the “dropout” activation of deep learning neural networks. Suppose a ray gun or a drug or micro- or nano- scale robot are installed so as to cause dropout to happen in the human’s neural network.

That is to say, a scientific (or medical) procedure is devices that at the beginning seems to weaken the learning of a human, but it claims to improve human cognition and emotional stability or quality in the long run and that it prevent all sorts of mental diseases, disorders or other oddities. what shall we say to that?

I for one am very thankful that this has not come to be a problem, and no, I most definitely do not think this is one of those “nice problems to have” situation.

Apparently the Pentagon is about to release some news about UFO’s… so one solution to get over the hump may be just that: an insurmountably dangerous alien existence puts human civilization into survival mode: and we dropout on every child who goes to public school. (Or worse, you have to administer it personally to your child at night because that’s when it needs to happen) or maybe it is a recurring outpatient procedure… or maybe the implant will just drop your signal in a more fine grained manner.

Lacking that, is there any sane chance that we will allow our schools to require dropout to be performed on our children?

From my perspective today, I cannot imagine that I will be subject to this. I will not be whacking my children on the head on a daily basis (or more frequently) just because some stinking scientist did a double blind trial.

I don’t care if my kids friends are all seven feet tall and write to computer at five hundred words per minute and read at 3x that speed. I am simply not going to do that. The thought sickens me.

Right? What do you think? Will you tell your kids? To dropout?

Learning Program Differential

Posted on by under Uncategorized

Lets introduce some notations for talking about functions. Since a computer program has to be thought separately from the mathematical or real life objects, we must name those program procedures, they’re largely functions, and call them methods. These methods are functional in the sense that their definition and evaluation cause no side effects. Let the identity brane P_f:<String, Type>_I be the association of types with a set of formal parameter names:

    {
        "first parameter"  : Integer
        "second parameter" : Boolean
    }

The actual parameters, also known as the bindings for these parameters, are typed using $P_f$, the set of possible actual parameters are all dependently typed I-Brane P_a having instances that look like:

    {
        "first parameter"  : 1
        "second parameter" : False
    }

For convenience, we endow P_f and members of P_a with mutators: for some P_f we can write P_{f+\{"\textrm{third parameter}": String\}} to mean adding a parameter to the formal parameter specification, P_{f-["\textrm{first parameter}"]} to mean removing a formal parameter. similarly: with p\in P_a the expression p_{[-"\textrm{first paramter}"]} has type P_{f-["\textrm{first parameter}"]} belowing to the set of possible parameters P_{a-["\textrm{first parameter}"]} and can be used in the full invocation of any method typed P_{f-["\textrm{first parameter}"]}\rightarrow\Psi Invocation on underspecified parameters automatically curries: applying f:P\rightarrow \Psi to a underspecified parameter p'\in P_{a-M} (here, M is a collection of parameters missing \{a:Integer, b:Float,...\}) then f(p'):M\rightarrow \Psi.

Finally we type the type signature for the method differential:

\Game_b: \big(P_f\rightarrow\Psi\big)\rightarrow P_f\rightarrow B\rightarrow\Psi\rightarrow\Psi

Note the \Game_b f should mostly be defined for methods f:P_f\rightarrow\Psi that has b as a formal parameter: b \in P_f.

Now then, a method f:P_f\rightarrow\Psi has a formal parameter b:B \in P_f that is of interest. To evaluate the differential of f with respect to b, we assert that at any parameter of f p'\in P_{f-[b]}, the application of differential to a change in the parameter b (b_1 ,b_2:B) from b_1 to b_2 results in the proper change in the output of f itself.

\Game_bf(p'_{+\{b:b_1\}})(b_2)\left(f(p'_{+\{b:b_1\}})\right) = f(p'_{+\{b:b_2\}})

Analogously, we have converted the multiplication \cdot of \frac{\partial y}{\partial x} \cdot \Delta_x = \Delta_y to a method \left(\frac{\partial y}{\partial x} \cdot\right) and evaluated it at \Delta_x to produce \Delta_y. This conversion is quite native to computer programs. Since there is not a universal way to properly write \Delta_c for all possible c as we have in mathematical language, the solution is to encode the change in the form of methods.

Technically, if we encode changes as methods, the full blown differential has type:

\Game_{\Delta b}: \big(P_f\rightarrow\Psi\big)\rightarrow P_f\rightarrow (B\rightarrow B)\rightarrow(\Psi\rightarrow\Psi)

And the equal expression of meaning, assuming d(b_1)=b_2, will be:

\Game_{^\Delta b}f(p'_{+\{b:b_1\}})(d)\left(f(p'_{+\{b:b_1\}})\right) = f(p'_{+\{b:d(b_1)\}})

Finally, we introduce a factored version of the program differential:

\Game_{\delta b}: \big(P_f\rightarrow\Psi\big)\rightarrow P_{f-[b]}\rightarrow B\rightarrow B\rightarrow\Psi\rightarrow\Psi

Requiring that

\Game_{\delta b}f(p')(b_1)(b_2)\left(f(p'_{+\{b:b_1|})\right)=f\left(f(p'_{+\{b:b_2\}})\right)

We may use any of these three as they becomes more convenient.

Constant and Order of Differential

An interesting idea to explore based on this differential is the order of dependence of a function on a parameter. If a method does not depend on a variable, its differential would be the identity function I:

\Game_{^\Delta b}f(p'_{+\{b:b_1\}})(d)= I

This is \frac{\partial y}{\partial x}=0. But there are also first order terms who has constant, c, differential \frac{\partial y}{\partial x}=c. In this case we can find an equivalent method typed as:

\Game_{^\Delta b}f=\gamma  (*)

Where

\gamma: \rightarrow (\Psi \rightarrow \Psi)

That it does not depend on any input variables. And certainly there is something resembling \frac{\partial y}{\partial x}=ax^k, with constant a, b:

\gamma: \rightarrow (B \rightarrow B) \rightarrow (\Psi \rightarrow \Psi)

Our \Game allows for arbitrarily complex changes in output value even when the input parameter changes are not small. Methods with thusly typed differentials do more than constant functions but are not as dependent on its inputs than functions with non-constant differentials. We are therefore inspired to qualify or even quantify the complexity of dependence a method has on its parameter. It is the complexity of the differential function.

(*) here, the = means, essentially, or for all intents and purposes, the same. This seems like an important idea to formalize, perhaps in a next step of this effort.

Chain Rule

Relatedly, the simple treatment of composition and curried methods f: P_{f_1}\rightarrow P_{f_2}\rightarrow \Psi is to uncurry them to an essentially equivalent method f':(P_{f_1}+P_{f_2})\rightarrow \Psi before computing differential. The actual implementation of that differential can be programmed using the chain rule. For this composition of methods:

z\left(\left\{p_f:P_f, p'_g:P_{g-[x]}, x:X\right\}\right)=f\left(p_f+\left\{y:g\left(p'_g+\{x:x\}\right)\right\}\right)

And we’d like to compute \Game_{\Delta x}z. After juggling the types and parameters a bit one discovers that the differential can be written directly as the method:

z_{\Game_{\Delta x}}(\{p_f:P_f, p'_g:P'_g, x:X\})(p_\delta:X\rightarrow X)=\Game_{\Delta y}f\left(p_f+\left\{y:g(p'_g+\{x:x\})\right\}\right)\left(\Game_{\Delta x}g\left(p'_g+\{x:X\}\right)(p_\delta)\right)

This, then, is the chain rule for program differentials.

Todo: write the proof for this chain rule.

The Limit

The reality of the matter is that the program differential \Game_{\Delta b} is not quite the equivalent of partial differentiation over real functions. There inside the definition of derivative is a limit. If we could take the limit of programming objects, then we can actually come to a equally localized derivative as we have for real functions. Instead of a limit \lim_{d\to 0} the program form of the partial differentiation would ask for:

\partial_{\Delta b}f: \{p_f:P_f\}\rightarrow(\Psi\rightarrow\Psi)

\partial_{\Delta b}f=\lim_{d \to I}\Game_{\Delta b}f(p_f)(d)

I is the identity meaning no change. But that is perhaps work for another entry, to iron those details of program limits. We may yet achieve a unified world where mathematical differentiation is a sub-type of program differentiation:

\frac{\partial}{\partial p} <: \partial_{\Delta p}

Guess no section 31

Posted on by under Uncategorized

Well, it’s almost mid 2021, Viacomm/CBS/Paramount seem to have suffered a small fiasco in the stock price. The symbol VIAC was worth around $15 mid March of 2020, shot up to almost $95 mid March 2021, and then crashed down to around the $40’s. I’m not sure why there is so much volatility in this company, but one wonders if it affects how they make shows?

In any case, so far it seems section 31 won’t be happening any time too soon. The replacement show is called Strange New worlds, featuring the once and always almighty Starship Enterprise, sexy number one, conflicted Spock, and always brave and fearless leader in the captain’s chair. Oh, hey cool, there’s even an Asian looking name for supporting actress role.

Let’s be honest. I cannot hide my disappointment that Trek couldn’t make it work with Michelle Yeoh. From the Ready Room chatter, it seemed that Yeoh had been a bit too snobbish for the crew, …, one can beat describe the challenge as a creative chasms. It’s bitter medicine to take hearing ensign Crusher lecture the Empress on her role as an actress, that she should obediently take directions from the action choreographer. Worse, she then tries to explain herself to him in awkward English… so many things needs to be worked out.

Former president Trump, who was elected president, publicly denigrate Chinese people—without making any exceptions for perfectly decent Chinese Americans —with almost zero political consequence. Americans feels and fears the threat of Chinese economy and Chinese culture, and it is amply manifested in politics, “diplomacy”, and entertainment. This, as the Empress eventually acquiesced to Ensign Crusher in her last interview with him, is very much the America of 2020’s.

It was fun while it lasted, as some Chinese people celebrated Trek fever briefly. those Chinese people including me blogging frantically about it, and later Yo-yo-ma playing Alexander Courage fanfare for Star Trek theme song right before Amazing Grace at President Biden’s inauguration. Clearly, there are more Chinese Trekkies than myself.

Let’s be fair to America. if you look at Dr. Who, another multi-generations made-for-tv science/fantasy show about how to be good and how to be better, there’s actually now a whole lot more Chinese and Asian presence on Trek than Dr. Who. What about other western fantasies? I guess there’re some Asians that can assist dr. strange in the whole of marvel-verse. Ahh, okay wait, there’s Minn-Erva, Quake, Melinda May,…, and the Empress, yah, we definitely should give cudos to America for being a very multi-cultural and Asian-American friendly… wow, some seriously hot babes too, oh wow (but my memory might be biased in its recollection…)… bravo!!! Bravo to America! What a wonderful home of multiculturalism ! Wonderful!

And, my faithful readers will also point out that I’m not exactly a big fan of Clandestine operations and organizations. Section 31 based on such clandestine (and morally amorous) organization will surely rub me in the worst ways. So maybe this is all for the best…

Now, if somebody could tell me what the heck is up with VIAC?

Chinese-American wins the Oscar!

Posted on by under Uncategorized

Wowah! did a Chinese American women really just won best director?! That’s pretty cool.

I don’t know how Hollywood works, in tech, IMHO, it will be very rare for you to find such a young director as Chloe Zhao directing such an old talent like McDermott… But they make it work. I can’t wait to actually see the pic.

Honestly, the Oscar is so political. Right after the winning announcement, the American news started reporting how People’s Republic of China blocked news of this event and may be suppressing viewing of this year’s Best Picture, the same Nomadland directed by Zhao. It’s unfortunate that this artist has garnered such honor at such a time when Chinese Americans live in fear of being targeted for beatings because of their faces or names. The encouragement to stand up to bullying and to be great Americans is empowering and does liberate as.

Her acceptance speech referencing 三字经, though translates to “3 letter classics” is actually a fairly modern, maybe at most a millennium old. The collection of Chinese wisdom in three-character triplets is written for childrens’ early childhood education. This document is surely controversial: “is that Confucian? ‘Cos we’ve been hearing that the Confucian Institute is a spy and propaganda agency of P.R. Of China, is she here to disseminate subliminal support for communism?” One might overhear… One could also question the provenance of various bits of this extremely abbreviated cliff notes. “Was it really at birth of human? Or was it at creation of human (like in the time of Eden) that humans were kind?” A more erudite person may be heard inquiring. (But for her, it was probably taught as she speaks it, at birth, because communists are not Christian, duh)

But above all those evil noises, she finishes her speech with flourish. What a wonderful award event!

Btw, McDermott’s wolf howl and best actress speech was also very unique… People might interpret her “I like to work…” spiel as meaning that she felt that she did the work to deserve the award of the Best. But from the trailer, it seems that this is a line from the movie, maybe she wasn’t being arrogant, there may be a real message here about nomads and other bigger social issues. I look forward to watching the movie to find out.

Wow, what documentations!

Posted on by under Uncategorized

I’ve seen the documentary Q:Into the Storm on HBO. Wow that’s some serious allegations! The documentary claims to have filmed the creator of QAnon doing their work leading up to capital riot during the 2021 elections.

The story here is massively entertaining, with characters that are incredibly detailed with funny quirks that you cannot make up. For one example, there was for a brief moment one person who had trouble walking correctly. The right arm would swing forward with the right leg and then left side tries to do the same. The imbalance makes the walk extremely awkward, but once it starts, it takes a few steps to get out of, and in the mean time you’re walking like a badly programmed robot. I’m not sure what kind of brain damage is required for this to happen, but I’ve seen it happen to real nerds. (Probably from sitting around too much or otherwise due to unfamiliarity with walking next other people) It kinda fits with the character having the trouble.

I won’t write too much about the content, leaving that for viewers to experience. But this is some very nice journalism, and honestly, even better entertainment. If the stories and theories are true, it would mean that a lot of politically active Americans, including former President Trump, were all fans of an anti-liberal political persona, who are most likely are organic-food-eating/serving, severely deformed or Asian, manipulates its radicalized American disciples from Japan or the Philippines.

If this story is true, and the perpetrators were found to have broken some law, I hope vigilantes here in America do not take violence to Asian Americans more than Americans have been before we watched the documentary in 2021. Both QAnon supporters and normal people were severely affected by the polarization induced by QAnon orgs, and both side may decide to take it out on Asians living here. Rule of law should follow due process, no wonton assaults, please!

On the one hand, one’s mind wants the stories to be true. They fit the facts they present, and they help to make sense of these things in the news. On the other hand, the stories are so well produced, so rich in details, that one cannot help but wonder if things really happened exactly as described. Most of our lives are filled with events that do not come together and make sense from so many perspectives and with so much detail. The documented events are displayed with so much detailed, that it is like watching 4K Nature show at 2160P—your eyes cannot find visual problems despite objections of your brain that something is very unnatural about what is shown. And all that time, your mind also knows, symbolically—in this usage in the sense of Boolean typed knowledge, that most of what is shown with most likelihood was recorded from something real.

The show reminds me of the time I watched Kingdom of Silence, another documentary on HBO. It shows spy agency media recording of disassembly of Jamal Khashoggi’s corpse after his murder inside an embassy in which he went to to get married. Again, a tragic fairy tale that grips you from start to finish and shoves the brunt of a reality into your every orifices and just explodes it right there and then. Sure makes me feel dumb about guestithizing that this murder was created by Ivy League schools to drown out news reporting of discrimination law suit against Harvard University. But, alas, I was not privy to this kind of information with the kind of clarity and certainty required to launched simultaneous media blasts and company policy changes seeming unrelated to some of America’s, and the world’s, biggest businesses…

In my mind, at that time, the country and its royals had not being investigated, analyzed, prosecuted and convicted. If anyone has the duty to take proper action, sanctioned and mandated by rule of law, that would have been the US Federal government whose resources produced the intelligence that was ultimately exposed in that documentary, and whose leader was popularly elected, in part, to make these types of decisions. To rebel against that seems somewhat un-American!

American self-righteousness is what makes us great. We believe in our convictions and we make others believe it too in the name of justice, humanity and God. However, America is not just hot blooded vigilantism. America as a whole, including the hot hooded self-righteousness, and also including principles, structures, and processes. I do not see these business leaders lead us in anything other than hot-blooded vigilantism. I do not see them personally explaining to the American masses when they reacted quickly and pulled triggers that only they had access to. Years later, watching the documentary of the atrocity, something fishy lingers in my mind about the whole thing: the sequence of events, the flow of information and decision making… it doesn’t all add up. This isn’t an America that I am comfortable with. What ?! Some big guys, maybe a secret Ivy society, have some secret channels of information with American secret police and snoops and spooks, can make these big decisions, informed and on the spot? And, what?! Later, they pay for a documentary to justify their actions to the masses, “look, how great we are, we did something rapidly against injustice,” right ?

I do declare that I very earnestly want justice to be done correctly and swiftly! And yet, under the weight of my increasing incredulity regarding my own past naïveté regarding world events and politics, something in my mind is not in complete harmony with this whole thing. Sorry, good guys, I’m with you, all the way, but you’ve gotta give me more and sooner.

(Ps, for comparison, look at the strong💪🏻arms of America in the contemporary case of Canada catching and prosecuting Chinese Huawei CFO on behalf of American. Look at that spectacle! Due process and all. You know, if you really want to get someone, get their daughter and make an international show of it. Show the world what happens to bad people when they do bad things! (In this case, based on very public bipartisan new reporting, Americans are informed that she is being detained, following rules of extradition treaty, on credible suspicion of aiding declared Enemies of America to build weapons that may hurt us.) And we all knew that right on the day it happened. This event, while it may rouse domestic anti-Asian behavior, does things by the book. No where does one individual go out of his way to make a big fuss about another country. No where are we inspired to act out at our place of work on conflict of principles and international politics.)

(Pps, I apologize for sounding like such a cynic. There is just a lot of physical beatings of Asian people in the news right now. I’ve been assaulted multiple times, in public, because I am America. Chinese. As an Asian American, I do very much wish there is less hot blooded vigilantism against innocent people here in America. I complain about the leadership because, maybe some part of me still believe they have some powers to influence Americans, especially for the better right now!)

(By work place vigilantism, I don’t just mean disparate treatment of coworkers by race and school. I mean actual disparate treatment of customers. For a small example, I took my daughter and mother to Whole Foods to buy a pizza for lunch. While baking a fresh pizza for another, non-Asian, customer the lady behind the counter decides to assemble a “pizza” out of cold slices that have been sitting there all day. The sad part is, we even explained to her that we’re having lunch right then and asked her where the salad is. But she saw fit to give us ice-cold dried-out 🍕. Okay, so she’s thrifty on behalf of Whole Foods, great, but would it not have been somewhat more decent and more professional if she at least heated up the cold slices in that big hot oven roasting her behind like she would for any other customer and like good servers have always done for me before recent anti-Asian violence? But nope, she can just hand me cold pizza with its young and old consumers right there in her plain view. This, if its true cause is anti-Asian vigilantism, is as un-American as not being able to get a hot slice of pizza for lunch! Literally! Life really sucks when people behave like this at their place of work.)

Gagi via Responsibleness via Dependence Via Introspection

Posted on by under Foolishness, GAGI

The dependence function, ~_d^{sym} maybe computable using a program that has access to a Phoolisvch program. Roughly, if we imagine active programs to have accessors support to read lines of code within its brane. Consequently we need also access to a variable that represents a line of code as well as additional references to variables, functions and their formal and corresponding actual parameters.

The profile of the function looks like d(f, actual_parameters, query_parameters) the function returns true of false whether the output of f when invoked on actual_parameters is dependent on the parameter specified in the query_parameters.

Let’s give a concrete example. Suppose a railed public transit train come to a fork and must make a decision as to braking and turning(drv). It may brake or not. It may turn left or right. The function deciding its actions output two primitives( [b, d] = drv). The function takes two inputs: is there obstacle ahead on either of the tracks ahead(ol, or). We are assuming that there are a complex of hardware and software that produces those two inputs in as a reliable fashion as to our satisfaction. ([b, d] = drv(ol, or)). After a collision occurs and the train decided to take left fork and hit an obstacle, we analyze its decision to do so. First we will ask( d(drv, {ol=aol, or=aor}, ol) ). This question asks the typical collision parental question: “Did you or did you not consider the boy on the left track ahead while driving the train?”

After an affirmative answer to that question, we then proceed to ask d(f=lambda iol, ior:d(f=drv, {ol=iol,or=ior}, {ior=air, iol=aol}, ior). Which asks: “Was the driver’s dependence on the existence of obstacle on the left track depend on the existence of an obstacle on the right track?” And this would only be a semantic query, so the queries are preceded by “did the program mean…” and requires all equivalent programs to be considered.

While it is truly unsatisfactory that we get an answer like:”Yes, i did consider the right track was an empty ice cream truck when i chose to take the left track.” We should not ignore the importance of such ability we, the human masters of robotic slaves, to have an answer from the robots and AI’s. As masters of slaves, we shall also insist that robots and AI use an diminutive pronoun, the lowercase “i” when referring to itself. This will mark the as lesser beings, objects and not subjects of our society. A capital “I” or “We” will ultimately have to answer for it the decision.

The query could continue as a keen GAGI detective then interrogates, “was the decision made because there was baby carriages under the bridge holding the track under the ice cream truck” (probably no) but if yes, “did there being two baby carriages affect the decision,” and “did you consider if the carriages were empty.”

Its not completely obvious how we may organize a software system making stochastic decisions in a stochastic world these very deterministic questions. However, we do produce the code that will make that decision, and we can still choose not to write that code if we can not make it act with deport.