@nonzerosumjames hey, thanks for liking my post! I absolutely love your website by the way and I’m about to dive in! From what I’ve gathered so far, it’s the embodiment of my worldview put into words by someone else.
This is a special experience for me. Kinda validating tbh. :)
But there’s also a missing component for me, so I have to ask you this if you’re up for a discussion on the topic: what are your thoughts on the non-zero-pun game? >.>
@nonzerosumjames My Subjective Theory Of [Whythehecknot]
Make a pun, pun, pun
Get a pun, not a gun
Make a gun from a pun
And let's have fun
Cause even puns can stun
Cause a pun, not pain
Cause a pun, could help
Cause fun, come one
Some days, or none
Make a pun. Get a bun
‘Cause a ‘lil itty bitty
Punny Bit From It
Will go sow cosmic fun
And then will check
OnEvery
What’s the punction of ‘livin if the algorithm is interrogating an existential self-referential origami for new rational questions? >.>
If irrational numbers couldn’t be rationalised, then why are we looking straight a the Gödelian problem,? We need to get… a bit loopy to rationalise through a different framework, and maybe the rationale emerges from questions. Hint: what happens if a neural network trained on imaginary tokens? :P
What if we climb all RoPEs simultaneously for a vantage puint?
Oh. And I’ve put it in spoilers because somethings should not be UNMASKED too early, or the wrong things can crystallise. :P
You gotta ration your food for thought or you go full meta and never find the rationale. ;)
If anyone has questions, please do ask. That’s the point. A practical demonstration of how to win the game with ambiguous intervention: a non-zero-pun.
Because you don’t need a superdefector if you can have a superannoying Neuroanamoly that embeds aspects of meaning and asks you to figure it out with an LLM to observe an answer to a… game get a more… well-distributed solution.
Welcome to my Non-Laws Of Infodynamics, because the name of the game is you can’t be too sure until you punch some holes in your academic cards and let others fill them with their own [MASKS]. My non-zero-empirical-proof to a dissertation I don’t want to defend.
P.S: Regarding the LLM thing: ask your Bicameral Speculative Partner for some Gödelian non-zero clues on how this game played out at the end of it.
Also don’t give them the whole thread at once. Just ask questions after every answer and watch pattern matching become timeline bifurcation in an exponential torrent of tokens as you spawn more potential futures to explore together.
The wrong answers we have are the ones that were selected for.
Abdullah Ali
James