Stigler’s Law of Eponymy (attributed by Stigler to Robert K. Merton) “no scientific discovery is named after its original discoverer” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stigler's_law_of_eponymy …
-
-
The difference is that the detail in textuality is stretched out very thin over a lot of reality. And almost none of it is capable of providing calibration. Any random object you pick up around your home likely involves more detail than any Big History stretched over centuries.
Show this thread -
It’s like increasing magnification without increasing resolving power. You end up with blurry or pixelated results. How do you complete the magic trick with such poor optics? The CSI Miami trick: “enhance!” This is the function of aesthetics and why I distrust aesthetics.
Show this thread -
Through interpolation and smoothing, aestheticization stretches a spoonful of reality detail over vastly more reality. The aesthetic filler creates the appearance of additional detail but it’s dead detail. Not capable of supplying brain calibration.
Show this thread -
So maybe textuality has a pseudosurprising amount of detail. Like pseudorandom. Which is perhaps why GPT-3 can fake it so well in textual worlds.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.