Rennaissance Man

11:37 am - Very cool 3D animation

Check out this animation, make sure to zoom in and out, it will make your day

Current Mood: cheerful

01:15 am - The nature of entropy

I was reading an interesting post in philosophy on entropy and intelligence, and in my response I put into words some thoughts I have had for a while on entropy, so I am cross-posting it here.

Entropy is a measure of disorder, but what is disorder? When we say that something is ordered, what we are really saying is that we can describe it with more parsimony than something that is disordered. But is that because the thing is inherently simpler, or is it because its structure has more affinity with the structure of our brain so it is easier for us to recognize its pattern?

The concept of entropy came about from the description of inherently statistical processes, and statistics is an application of probability, but probability is just a measure of how much information an intelligent observer has. So probability is epistemological, not ontological, therefore entropy is epistemological as well. Of course historically entropy came about as a useful quantity to create equations that explained the nature of heat transfer in thermodynamics, but later, through statistical mechanics, we understood that the "ontological" thing we call entropy is just a macroscopic manifestation of the epistemological thing we also call entropy in information theory, S=p*log(p).

An increase in entropy is just an increase in our difficulty to describe the system. When we talk about entropy at all, we are dealing with a system that we understand statistically, on aggregate, not directly. The entropy of a macroscopic system increases with temperature only because it increases the number of possible macroscopic configurations that are indistinguishable from one another, in other words, we lose information, so we say that entropy increased. What if we were not there to lose information? What if a different type of intelligence with different senses was able to distinguish exactly between those macroscopic energy states? Then to them there would not be an increase of entropy since they could still describe exactly where the system is from a macroscopic observation, the amount of information they had would be preserved.

My point is that entropy is something that indirectly includes in its definition a consciousness that is observing it.

Current Mood: nerdy

08:49 am - First venture into real estate

After 4 months of working with real estate agents, and looking at many properties, the Friday before thanksgiving we sold our condo and purchased a 4plex. We weren't sure everything was going to work out with the financing, but in the end we walked out of there as new owners and landlords. Two of the rooms were rented already, we moved into another one, and we only have one left to rent. We hadn't even finished moving when we had our first tenant complaint, which we easily solved. Everything seems back to normal now, but we are going to need a crash course in landlording fast.

Current Mood: accomplished

11:45 pm - Genetic therapy to cure fundamentalists!

A scientist claims to have found a gene that makes people susceptible to religious beliefs.
That is great news! Since fundamentalism is a mental disease we can finally develop genetic therapies to treat those unfortunate enough to have caught it.

Current Mood: cheerful

09:49 pm - My computer wallpaper

Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words, especially when the picture is funny. I am currently using this picture as my computer wallpaper:



I will probably replace it with this other one at some point:

Current Mood: amused

11:52 pm - I am a libertarian

I can't say I am surprised, although I am glad these memes starting showing things OTHER than left and right.

You Are a "Don't Tread On Me" Libertarian

You distrust the government, are fiercely independent, and don't belong in either party. Religion and politics should never mix, in your opinion... and you feel opressed by both. You don't want the government to cramp your self made style. Or anyone else's for that matter. You're proud to say that you're pro-choice on absolutely everything!

Current Mood: calm

01:05 am - I am slackware linux

Maybe I should give slackware linux a try!


Which OS are You?

Current Mood: amused

08:40 am - Funny song about LISP I found in a Scheme page

Another Glitch in the Call
(to the tune of a recent Pink Floyd song)

We don't need no indirection
We don't need no flow control
No data typing or declarations
Did you leave the lists alone?
Hey! Hacker! Leave those lists alone!

Chorus:
All in all, it's just a pure-LISP function call.
All in all, it's just a pure-LISP function call.

Current Mood: amused

12:40 am - Millions for defense but not a penny for tribute!

I was watching Babylon 5 the other day, and the capitan said something that caught my attention, "Millions for defense but not a penny for tribute". That sounded like a quote, so I went and looked it up, and to my pleasant surprise, I found it was Thomas Jefferson that said it!

The context was the war with the pirates of Barbary in 1801. These pirates were a bunch of thugs from neighboring islamic territories (surprise surprise!) who were attacking merchant ships from civilized nations in the mediterranean sea and trying to extract ransom from them. The European nations decided to pay tribute, but the Americans, under the leadership of Jefferson, and under the motto of "Millions for defense but not a penny for tribute!" refused to pay tribute, and sent ships to hunt them down and destroy them.

Here is a detailed account of the whole thing, and here is a washington post article that identifies the parallels between the terrorist threat we suffer now, and the terrorist threat they had back then.

One of the interesting things here is that Jefferson is the favorite founding father of most libertarians, but on foreign policy, the republicans seem to be closer to Jefferson than the libertarians. This is one of my points of contention with the official libertarian position, but this might be just what the libertarian party needs in order to become a little more hawkish. I guess the libertarian party has some hope after all! :-)

Current Mood: happy

01:42 am

Popular interests among aiprofessional's friends

1. ayn rand (9) 11. computers (5) 2. philosophy (8) 12. ethics (5) 3. objectivism (8) 13. linux (5) 4. libertarianism (7) 14. cryptography (5) 5. atheism (7) 15. math (5) 6. programming (6) 16. physics (5) 7. psychology (6) 17. science (5) 8. capitalism (6) 18. movies (5) 9. cognitive science (5) 19. science fiction (5) 10. liberty (5) 20. logic (5)

Interests gestalt

My most interesting friend is aiprofessional who has 19 of these interests, followed by sunshine__girl (13), yoak (11) and spoonless (11).

Normality Index

My friends are 25.8% normal.

Analyze me !

Username: Popular interests created by _imran_

01:47 am - Say NO to Jesus, YES to Schwarzenegger and Bush!

Schwarzenegger is so cool! I am a republican according to his definition:

"My fellow immigrants, my fellow Americans, how do you know if you are a Republican? Well, I tell you how. If you believe that government should be accountable to the people, not the people to the government, then you are a Republican. If you believe a person should be treated as an individual, not as a member of an interest group, then you are a Republican. If you believe your family knows how to spend your money better than the government does, then you are a Republican. If you believe our educational system should be held accountable for the progress of our children, then you are a Republican. If you believe this country, not the United Nations, is the best hope for democracy, then you are a Republican. And, ladies and gentlemen, if you believe that we must be fierce and relentless and terminate terrorism, then you are a Republican." I agree with everything he mentions. In particular, the last part is where his views differ from the official libertarian party line.

If the libertarian party was tougher on terror, a bit more Jacksonian in foreign policy, they would be the perfect party for me. Also if the republicans got rid of the religious right, and of the "compassionate" conservatives, they would be the perfect party for me as well.

But maybe there is hope after all and the religious nut cases as well as the compassionate bleeding hearts can be wooed into the democratic party, here is one of the attempts from the democrats to do so:

Current Mood: cheerful

12:52 am - Computational Biology

I just started on a new Masters degree on Math, with an emphasis on Computational Biology. Feels good to be a student again, especially when I don't have to quit my job, so I can have money and fun at the same time. I've always wanted to learn more about Biology, and I think this is the best way to do it for me, through the eyes of mathematicians and computer scientists. I tried learning it through the eyes of physicists and chemists before, but it seemed too complicated and arbitrary, however, as a computer scientist, it all boils down to treating DNA like a turing machine. Now I just have to finish all this homework...

Current Mood: cheerful

08:11 am - The fair tax proposal

I was recently complaining about how we get taxed on production, not consumption, and I was arguing how much better things would be if instead of discouraging production, we were to discourage consumption with the tax code.
Well, I think my wish might just come true! I just found out yesterday that there is actually a bipartisan proposal in the house of representatives (HR 25) to change this. It is called the fair tax proposal.
They are actually proposing the elimination of ALL income tax, capital gains tax, dividends tax, employment tax, self employment tax, social security tax, medicare tax, and in general all taxes that go directly to the individual. Individuals would never have to file taxes again, companies would not pay taxes, and the only tax ever would be in consumption, when you buy something.
Along with this bill they want to repeal the 16th amendment, to make it illegal for the government to tax individuals directly, and eliminate the IRS. They would have no exemptions for medicine, food, etc. Instead, they would have a poverty level refund for everybody, which would make the tax progressive.
We currently spend $225 billion dollars per year just complying with the existing tax code, apparently that is 3 times what the war in Iraq has cost so far, and about 2.25% of the GDP! All that would go away under this system, and tax preparers, tax lawyers, IRS agents, etc. would actually have to find productive work. There is an online faq for the fair tax, and also a comparison between the current tax scheme, the flat tax, and the fair tax.
If this actually goes through it will make my decade! It could be the most important pro-freedom step since the declaration of independence!

Current Mood: happy

07:15 am - is intellectual property incompatible with property rights?

Here is a very interesting article with a very compelling argument on why intellectual property rights should not exist. Before reading that article I would have defended intellectual property rights on any debate, now I am not so sure any more, I have to rethink my stance.

Current Mood: confused

10:09 am - Bush vs. Kerry thoughts (and funny video)

Check out this hilarious video where animated versions of Bush and Kerry attack each other!

A lot of my friends are surprised that being an atheist I would prefer George Bush to John Kerry. I finally came up with a good analogy to explain my reasoning.

Let's say there is this guy you know that you just don't like. You grew up together, went to the same school, and he used to bully you as a kid. Several times you have exchanged insults, and you have gotten into some fist fights. Now you are walking on a dark alley, and you encounter this guy, you start fighting with each other. All of the sudden, a gang of criminals from out of town surround you from both sides of the alley. It is a gang initiation night, so the gang leader makes it clear to the new recruits that they have to kill both of you. The young thugs advance toward you, carrying knives, broken bottles, and baseball bats. You can see the hatred in their eyes, they smile as they picture all the women waiting for them in gang headquarters after their initiation. You can't reason with them because the reason why they want to kill you is not material, they don't want to rob you, they just want prestige in the underworld, respect from their gang leaders and from women. At this point you have two choices: a) Continue fighting with your childhood enemy, or b) Join forces with him and fight the more imminent and more dangerous threat. Clearly b) is the wise decision.

Similarly, even if Bush wants to get rid of stem cell research, abortion, and the right of people to marry whoever they want, terrorists wackos want to kill me in order to gain prestige with allah, and get their 78 virgins in heaven. Bush might be a christian wacko, but at least he is willing to fight the terrorists without seeking permission from anybody, and he is not going to send suicide bombers after me if I don't agree with him. So I would much rather deal with the external thugs first, and deal with the internal wackos later in a more civilized manner through the democratic process.

Current Mood: contemplative

04:05 pm - Kissing Hank's Ass

Check out this movie, it is extremely funny: Kissing Hank's Ass it highlights the idiocy of religion.

Current Mood: amused

10:38 am - Postmodernism Generator

When I went back to grad school I had to take an incredibly stupid class on sustainable development, where the "professor" argued against growth, progress, technology, capitalism, etc. I remember how whenever I wanted to argue against her she would quote some nonsensical postmodernist paper or book as the philosophical grounds for her position. How I wish I had known about The Postmodernism Generator (http://www.elsewhere.org/cgi-bin/postmodern/) then! It generates a random postmodernist essay every time you reload it, I could have used it to generate nonsensical papers for that professor, I am sure she would have been impressed and she would have given me the highest grade on the class!
Try it!

Current Mood: amused

06:12 pm - Nietzche on Freedom, Ayn Rand on Money

I just read an interesting post in the philosophy community, there is a very thought provoking quote from Nietzche on Freedom:

"You call yourselves free? Let me hear your ruling thoughts, and not that you have escaped bondage. Are you one who deserved to escape from it? There are many who threw away their own worth when they threw away their servitude. Free from what? Why should Zarathustra care? Your eyes should answer plainly: free for what?"

The context of the quote is around God being dead, but I started thinking how true that is in general, being free is not necessarily good for you when you don't know what you want your freedom for. Your life could be very orderly and seem very purposeful when you seek life in heaven if you are not free from superstition, or when you seek financial independence if you are not free from poverty, or when you seek political freedom if you live in a dictatorship. But once you have what you were looking for, if you never thought what you were going to do with your freedom you are in deep trouble. I guess that is when things like midlife crises come in.

This message is similar to that of the money speech in Atlas shrugged:

"Money will not purchase happiness for the man who has no concept of what he wants: money will not give him a code of values, if he's evaded the knowledge of what to value, and it will not provide him with a purpose, if he's evaded the choice of what to seek. Money will not buy intelligence for the fool, or admiration for the coward, or respect for the incompetent. The man who attempts to purchase the brains of his superiors to serve him, with his money replacing his judgment, ends up by becoming the victim of his inferiors. The men of intelligence desert him, but the cheats and the frauds come flocking to him, drawn by a law which he has not discovered: that no man may be smaller than his money."

Money can give you freedom, but if you don't know what you want freedom for, money can't help you, instead it will open your eyes to the fact that your life is empty.

Current Mood: thoughtful

12:38 pm - Could we have a value consumed tax?

Being that it is tax day and all, I have been thinking about taxes. An income tax discourages production, a sales tax discourages trade, and in other countries there is a value added tax which is also a tax on production. If we instead had a value consumed tax, that would take care of a lot of things, you could produce and add as much value as you wanted without incurring any taxes, you could buy and sell anything, but when you bought it for consumption you would have to pay an extra tax. This has a built in bias for export, and a built in tariff on imports, because anything produced somewhere else if consumed here incurs a tax, but anything produced here is not subject to disincentives on production other than the tariffs other countries put on it. This would be a flat tax, and you would never have to prepare taxes as an individual, only a business would have to deal with paperwork. I am sure I am not the first one to think of this idea, but I would like to know what is the reason that the US favors an income tax over a sales tax, and if there is a place in the world where there is a value consumed tax.

Current Mood: thoughtful

12:02 pm - Why are certain misspellings consistent across different people?

I was wondering why very different people usually misspell my last name in a consistent way. My last name is Gutierrez, but people usually want to write Guitterez. There is no such last name in any white pages I have looked at, so it is not being confused with a different last name, and trying to put the i behind the t is very consistent across all misspellers, so it is not random. The only reason I can think of is that the second form makes more sense to a mind brought up in the English language, but that only pushes the why a little forward, it doesn't actually explain it. Hmm, I would love to talk to a linguist about this one...

Current Mood: curious