When the author was a boy, he wrote a universal theorem prover. Given enough time and memory, it would prove every theorem in large parts of mathematics. Strangely, this did not put all mathematicians out of business.
Pretty much the most interesting blog on the Internet.
— Prof. Steven Landsburg
Once you get past the title, and the subtitle, and the equations, and the foreign quotes, and the computer code, and the various hapax legomena, a solid 50% English content!
—The Proprietor
When the author was a boy, he wrote a universal theorem prover. Given enough time and memory, it would prove every theorem in large parts of mathematics. Strangely, this did not put all mathematicians out of business.
While one is rather pleased with the quality of the readers of these pages, one feels—perhaps incorrectly—that the quantity is not quite as large as the number of those who might enjoy occasionally perusing them. So if any gentle reader is pleased, entertained, or amused by anything here and perhaps feels somewhat positively inclined toward the author, he would consider a personal favor if the reader pressed on the various Facebook, Twitter, or Google Plus buttons at the bottom of every post. Or if the reader has a blog or similar forum of his or her own, a link—complimentary, critical, or non-committal—would also be much appreciated. Needless to say any such connection could not be deemed the reader’s blanket endorsement of everything written here for not even the author would go that far.
Moreover it is conceivable that given the wide range of subjects covered in these pages some readers might only be interested in some of them, while being bored or worse by others. To the attention of such readers the labels on the right-hand side of this page are commended. Using them it is easy to read only the posts on subjects of interest, while filtering out all others.
Note: This post expands on the concluding paragraphs of another recent post. Please see there for context.
When the author was young—in the Internet’s teenage years and the early years of the web—he was semi-prominent in a number of technological and other endeavors in which by some sociological fluke the author and those of similar views were either outright in the majority or at least the dominant political faction. We too had our dissenters and would frequently engage in ferocious political debate with them, the author not being among the least ferocious. But we always tried to argue facts and reason without ill-feeling against our opponents. If anybody had ever suggested that we should use our numerical strength to shun and shame the dissenters into silence or exit, this suggestion would have been universally deemed unworthy of philosophers or gentlemen (as almost all of us were).
We were confident our words would suffice. Some of the more psychologically astute among usIt is a relative term, given that so many of us were somewhere on the autism disorder spectrum. would even go out of their way to be solicitous and technically helpful to the dissenters in the hope that if arguments alone were not enough, the resultant good feeling might inspire some of them to emulate us. But all agreed that it would be shameful to permit politics to contaminate our technical collaboration with the dissenters. We had (or so we thought) on our side the truth, and in many cases telephone-number IQs and encyclopedic knowledge of not only technical facts, but also those of history, law, and politics. Surely, we ought to prevail even without descending to ad hominem and dirty, alienating tricks. Perhaps that is why, all our advantages notwithstanding, we always lost the political battles in the end.This is why among the very small group of people and entities to whom the author does not try extend his general benign indifference slightly tinged by benevolence and empathy is the Gawker empire. Most of its many outlets produce occasionally worthwhile content but invariably leaven it with occasional political rants, invariably delivered at the level of the over-excited freshman. For the frequent unpleasant shocks this has administered, the author bears Gawker and co. genuine, if passive, malevolence and he takes genuine psychic pleasure at their failures and the prospect of their collapse. That is unworthy, but the author is only human with all human failings. Homo sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto.
Publius Terentius Afer.
One of the more entertaining of these endeavors was the game Olympia.Previously mentioned here. The author was one of the first to sign up for it and immediately proceeded to recruit an alliance of skilled and like-minded players. Among them was D, a clever young man and—as a fellow at a think tank near the university where the author was then a graduate student—one of the few allies he ever met in person. D and the author would exchange countless e-mails and share more than a few meals, plotting strategies, exchanging snippets of code, and sometimes debating politics for D was of Progressive views, then a minority view among our peers, but now the received opinion in many circles.
Recently a semi-prominent Haskeller, some of whose work the author has in the past enjoyed, has unfurled his personal flag. It consists out of \(\lambda\), the traditional ensign of theoretical computer science (of the practitioners of which Haskell has in recent years been a favorite plaything) and the flag of one of the twentieth century’s great genocidal totalitarianisms, similar to the title image here.No, of course not that one. The other one.
A lot of talk has grown in the programming scene about 'keeping politics out of code' so I decided instead to create a banner for those who feel rather more otherwise.
I believe in a programming community that is aware and conscious of its place within the greater society, and acts with conscience and considerations of the consequences of its actions, rather than one that hides in an imaginary
apoliticalspace oblivious to the effects its creations wreak upon civilization.I also believe in the ideals of equality of opportunity, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, or economic class, and that the needs of all members of society should be met, rather than only those of a wealthy and privileged elite and those who can claw their way into its good graces.
This saddened the author on several levels. For one it means that the author and that Haskeller will likely never be able to collaborate on anything Haskell related. Even if the author could, as he hopes he can, banish his revulsion at the Haskeller’s political views long enough, this Haskeller must consider this author’s views equally contemptible and makes it clear that such suppression of politics is not only not desirable, but would constitute an unacceptable act of ideological treason.
More importantly it means that an effort at ideological Gleichschaltung is underway in yet another field of thought. Even if this Haskeller does not succeed, another one very well might. And when they do, people like the author (or any other views different from that of this Haskeller) will no longer be welcome there.
The title of this post is the license plate the author is sorely tempted to acquire for the Tesla Model S he has been driving for the last few years.The author of course realizes that in so posting, he’ll cause the hordes of Tesla-driving readers to snap up this plate in all states, thereby frustrating his plan. For that is indeed what his car runs on: coal delivered via high-voltage wires. So the environmental benefits of Teslas are probably non-existent or at least greatly exaggerated.
Moreover, Tesla and its founder Elon Musk have with some justice been criticized for pocketing large subsidies offered by the federal and state governments for electric vehicles. That criticism, while valid, is more properly directed at the politicians for instituting these subsidies, than at Musk for pocketing them.In so far as Musk lobbies for maintenance or extension of these subsidies, he of course bears some contributory guilt. If the government offered large amounts of free cash to the author, he would take it too; as he did, when taking the $7,500 tax credit for Tesla buyers.Some concern has been raised regarding the high cost of fixing dents and scratches on the Model S. That is true because the Model S is mostly made of aluminum, which while stronger and lighter than steel, is also more expensive and harder to repair. But that is a downside that the Model S shares with virtually all cars in its price range.
These points notwithstanding, the Tesla Model S is a very, very good car:More objection can be made to the noun than the adjective. Arguably a Tesla Model S is not so much a car, as a giant iPad that can take you places. This, some discussion elsewhere notwithstanding, is high praise.
H was a non-Communist German Jew born in Eastern Europe in the early part of the twentieth century. As such, he had the honor that two of history’s great totalitarianisms made strong efforts to murder him and his family. Happily, they were not successful and after the war H was able to escape and become a professor of mathematical physics in the United States.
It was in that capacity that the author, then a newly enrolled student at H’s institution, first met H. H had at least two understandable reasons to take a dislike to the author. One is that the author always has been the most obnoxious of students; uncontrollably blurting out objections and questions on any subject which captured his interest and disturbing carefully constructed lesson plans. The other is that the author—a tall, blond, blue-eyed gentile and with an accent easily mistaken for German—must have born a superficial resemblance to one of the groups of people who had tried to murder him.
Comments on the blog were shifted from Blogger to the more capable Disqus some months ago. After an apparently brief and unintentional regression, they seem to have stuck with Disqus for the desktop site. However, some viewers of the mobile site apparently still got Blogger comments, which is a pity as those comments became essentially invisible to other readers. This appears to have been fixed now, but not before another batch of comments went invisible. As the Blogger to Disqus comment export mechanism is currently broken, transferring all the Blogger comments requires some doing and the author promises to accomplish it as soon as he finds time.
Speaking of comments, they are very much welcomed and preferred even over e-mails (unless they concern a non-public matter of course). The author reads all comments diligently and, at least until such time as there are enough commenters to sustain a conversation without him will at least try to respond to most of them.
Finally, the author is sometimes asked along these lines: Why does the author refer to himself in the third person? Who does he think he is? Bob Dole?
The author—as was perhaps Mr. Dole—was at an impressionable age firmly instructed that the use of the first person pronoun is the hallmark of teenage girl (or perhaps the President giving the eulogy of a person barely known or remembered). Serious people do not use them, except perhaps sparingly in unrecorded, personal conversation with intimates. This discomfort with the first-person pronouns has become too deeply ingrained to be readily discarded. Sadly, there is too much of the teenage girl (or perhaps the Presidential) in the author. So as an expedient designed to maintain at least the façade of dignity, the author has adopted the transparent fig leaf of speaking merely of the author and never himself.
Thinking Like a Lawyer
One of the promises made to students as they enter law school is that one day during their sojourn there, they will have an epiphany and grasp what it means to think like a lawyer.
It is on that day, and no earlier, that they will cease to be mere law students, but become novice lawyers.
The titular proposition, not endorsed by any politician or commentator the author is aware of,The closest parallel are some remarks unsurprisingly by Milton Friedman: Now, that Mexican immigration, over the border, is a good thing. It’s a good thing for the illegal immigrants. It’s a good thing for the United States. It’s a good thing for the citizens of the country. But, it’s only good so long as its illegal.
is a peculiar one to be advanced here for reasons both personal and principled.
Just Write!
Common-place, yet one thought sound, advice frequently given to aspiring authors:
Just write! Put words on paper or screen and share them with whoever may be willing to read them.
Do not allow yourself to be worried about imperfection. For that will only ensure that you never write.
Perfection, should that ever become a necessity, can wait until such time.
Such advice is more readily dispensed than followed. But the volume and imperfection of these pages in recent weeks should attest that the author at least made a valiant attempt to do so.
Robin Hanson teaches economics at GMU. The author considers him to be something like a far more accomplished doppelgänger, for:
The titular question is one sometimes asked of this author. For it was through his interest in economics, including the reading of the works of the economist depicted on the left, that he first had an inkling that law might be a suitable profession.The works of the other person depicted also admittedly had an influence. While the author many years later had the good fortune to meet and work with the person on the left, he has not been so fortunate with respect to the person on the right.
The author has found that the secret
of having a well-stocked memory is to read and experience widely but, preferably, not to take notice of anything unimportant or, if that is unavoidable, to forget the unimportant as quickly and completely as possible.
This method is effective, but poses a substantial risk. For when and where one has read or seen a thing is surely unimportant and to be forgotten. But later, a vaguely remembered idea or concept may arise in one’s thoughts in a manner subjectively indistinguishable from discovering it oneself.
This has, on more than one occasion, led the author to embarrassment.
Over the last year, in his spare moments between work and posting here, the author has been working on a game called Ascendancy of which he has been thinking off and on for the more than twenty years since he played Rich Skrenta's Olympia. It surely has no mass-market appeal, for it is no Farmville or even Dark Souls. Rather it appeals to a specialized taste for something like a grander scale Minecraft plus a bit of RobotWar minus the graphics.
But it occurs to the author that this is a specialized taste quite possibly shared by some of the readers of this blog. So he directs such gentle readers to the complete manual. The prototype code is nearly complete, but there is still much of work to be done with filling out the database; a task that could continue indefinitely. The comments and suggestions (including whether they would consider playing Ascendancy) of any reader are eagerly solicited in the comments section to this post.
Whose Side Are You On, Anyway?
Recent comments on abortion have provoked friends, acquaintances, and strangers alike to make the above inquiry and—in some of the less friendly instances—to imply that one is a renegade from a cause previously believed to have been shared. In the past, comments on climate change, immigration, homosexuality, crime, religion, and others, have caused similar responses.
One could, perhaps, just state one's ultimate conclusions—of which the author is in ample supply—add some venomous barbs for all who do not share them, and consider the job well done. Indeed, most commentary seems to fall squarely within that category.1
In order to indulge my vanitysatisfy the insatiable curiosity of the clamoring masses, let me briefly explain why I chose this particular pseudonym. (The reason this blog is weakly pseudonymous was given below.) The author would like to say that it was his profound engagement with the thought of Aquinas, Spinoza, and Wittgenstein which inspired him to pick this particular nom de cyber. Sadly that would be a lie.
I live in a pleasant 9,000 sq ft, 8 bedroom house in Northern Virginia, about 10 miles from the White House and my work. Recently I refinanced the mortgage on this house. Let's look at the economic implications.
This blog is blatantly and openly pseudonymous. Blatant because it is published and written under a name obviously different than the author's legal name. Open because anybody with even a smidgen of Internet know-how (and many without) can figure out the legal name of the author with a few minutes snooping at most.
So why bother with this semi-anonymity?
Hence, Sub Specie Æternitatis lives.