Computational mechanics & ε- (epsilon) machines
I found a few new concepts for tracking.
Computational mechanics
There is computational mechanics, which deals with numerical modeling of mechanical processes and there is an article about it on the wiki. This post is not about it.
This post is about computational mechanics, which studies abstractions of complex processes: how emergent behavior arises from the sum of the behavior / statistics of low-level processes. For example, why the Big Red Spot on Jupiter is stable, or why the result of a processor calculations does not depend on the properties of each electron in it.
ε- (epsilon) machine
The concept of a device that can exist in a finite set of states and can predict its future state (or state distribution?) based on the current one.
Computational mechanics allows (or should allow) to represent complex systems as a hierarchy of ε-machines. This creates a formal language for describing complex systems and emergent behavior.
For example, our brain can be represented as an ε-machine. Formally, the state of the brain never repeats (voltages on neurons, positions of neurotransmitter molecules, etc), but there are a huge number of situations when we do the same thing in the same conditions.
Here is a popular science explanation: https://www.quantamagazine.org/the-new-math-of-how-large-scale-order-emerges-20240610/
P.S. I will try to dig into scientific articles. I will tell you if I find something interesting and practical. P.P.S. I have long been thinking in the direction of a similar thing. Unfortunately, the twists of life do not allow me to seriously dig into science and mathematics. I am always happy when I encounter the results of other people's digging.
My GPTs and prompt engineering
Ponies are doing prompt engineering (c) DALL-E
I've been using ChatGPT almost since the release of the fourth version (so for over a year now). Over this time, I've gotten pretty good at writing queries to this thing.
At some point, OpenAI allowed customizing chats with your text instructions (look for Customize ChatGPT in the menu). With time, I added more and more commands there, and recently, the size of the instructions exceeded the allowed maximum :-)
Also, it turned out that a universal instruction set is not such a good idea — you need to adjust instructions for different kinds of tasks, otherwise, they won't be as useful as they could be.
Therefore, I moved the instructions to GPT bots instead of customizing my chat. OpenAI calls them GPTs. They are the same chats but with a higher limit on the size of the customized instructions and the ability to upload additional texts as a knowledge base.
Someday, I'll make a GPT for this blog, but for now, I'll tell you about two GPTs I use daily:
- Expert — answers to questions.
- Abstractor — makes abstracts of texts.
For each, I'll provide the basic prompt with my comments.
By the way, OpenAI recently opened a GPT store, I'd be grateful if you liked mine GPTs. Of course, only if they are useful to you.
About the book "The Net And The Butterfly"
I bought "The Net And The Butterfly" by mistake when I was in St. Petersburg about 5 years ago and organized a book-shopping day. I bought about 10 kilograms of books :-D, grabbed this one on autopilot without reading the contents. I thought the book would be about the network effect and the spreading of ideas, but it turned out to be about how to "manage" a brain relying on one of the neural networks in it. Which network? For the book and its content it does not matter at all.
My opinion of "The Net And The Butterfly" is twofold. On the one hand, I cannot deny its usefulness, on the other… the material could have been presented 100 times better and 3 times shorter. Sometimes, the authors walk on thin ice and risk falling into information peddling/marketing fraud.
Two years of writing RFCs — statistics
Slightly more than two years ago, I became a Lead/Engineering Manager for Palta's payment team. I left the company at the end of 2023 for another sabbatical [ru].
It is time to sum up. I will start with my favorite initiative.
From the first month, I promoted the idea of preceding major changes with text documents — RFC — Request for Comments.
In this post, I will analyze two years of applying this practice to share the experience, summarize the results, and have convincing arguments for my next job.
About the book "Economics: The User's Guide"
Cover of the book "Economics: The User's Guide"
This is the second book by Ha-Joon Chang that I've read. The first one, Bad Samaritans [ru], left a good impression, and it was also positively reviewed by Tim O'Reilly in his book WTF? [ru]. So, "Economics: The User's Guide" took its place on my reading list, and finally, I have read it.
Here and further, all quotes point to the Russian edition of the book and are translated into English by me (I have only the Russian edition) => inconsistencies are possible because of double translation English->Russian->English.
According to Chang, the book was conceived as an "introduction to economic theory for the widest possible audience" (page 299), and this reflects its essence well. I would only add, from the perspective of my post-Soviet education, that the book looks more like an "overview of the diversity and complexity of economics, supplemented with an introduction to the theory" rather than an "introduction to the theory".
The book contains no mathematical formulas or jaw-dropping statistics, just concrete facts. What makes it valuable, however, is a set of prisms through which you can — and should — view the economy to gain a basic understanding of what's happening around you.
Chan provides a set of points of view through which you can examine economic processes; describes their advantages and disadvantages; accompanies all this with examples, historical references, and facts.
Since the book serves as a sort of textbook, I won't attempt to retell it in full — this would lead to an attempt to repeat the book in a couple of pages, and I definitely can't do that. I will limit myself to describing the author's view of the economy as a whole as I understood it.