I read Shalizi’s essays even when I don’t understand them (e.g. statistics, machine learning, etc) because what little I do understand makes me feel suddenly enlightened. A door to a strange world which no one could previously open suddenly flashes wide for an instant.
And his work which lies closer to my wheelhouse (history, book reviews, etc) make me feel like a privileged cognoscenti.
Regarding ergodic theory, my own quest is to shape personal history so that it no longer haunts nor controls, but merely informs. I noticed a quote from the Wikipedia post which says “…statistically speaking, the system that evolves for a long time “forgets” its initial state…” and I thought, “Gee, I wish…”
I hate to be pessimistic on the humans’ capacity to evolve. A. Koestler is my paragon for such; I am sure there are many others as well. Not adapting just seems so BORING.
I read Shalizi’s essays even when I don’t understand them (e.g. statistics, machine learning, etc) because what little I do understand makes me feel suddenly enlightened. A door to a strange world which no one could previously open suddenly flashes wide for an instant.
And his work which lies closer to my wheelhouse (history, book reviews, etc) make me feel like a privileged cognoscenti.
Regarding ergodic theory, my own quest is to shape personal history so that it no longer haunts nor controls, but merely informs. I noticed a quote from the Wikipedia post which says “…statistically speaking, the system that evolves for a long time “forgets” its initial state…” and I thought, “Gee, I wish…”
I hate to be pessimistic on the humans’ capacity to evolve. A. Koestler is my paragon for such; I am sure there are many others as well. Not adapting just seems so BORING.
Thanks for allowing me to comment.