Free Recommendation On How To Play Billiards > 자유게시판

I started out, first, in two directions in parallel. Well, let’s start chronologically from where I started. So you’ve got Apple and Google stocks and you start out with a market that’s holding 100 shares of each. So you’ve got this market of traders and in aggregate they’re holding 100 shares each of Apple and Google. John Wentworth: It turns out that what happens depends on the path by which this market went from 100 shares of Apple and 100 shares of Google to 150 shares of Apple and 150 shares of Google. Daniel Filan: Can you tell us what’s an example of one path where they trade at one-to-one and one path where they trade at two-to-one? We tell you how it can help you to stay in top shape. Can you tell us a little bit about that and how it relates? The specifics in this case, what you have is there’s this little sensor for sugar and there’s a few other things it also keeps track of. John Wentworth: So it can keep track of whether concentrations are increasing or decreasing as it’s slipping.

Biologists always describe E. coli as collecting information from their environment and using that to keep an internal model of what’s going on with the world, and then making decisions based on that in order to achieve good things. Presumably, what you want to do with this material is, go do things in the world, build new systems in the world that do cool things. Intuitively, it seems like it’s doing agenty stuff, but we don’t have a good way to go from the low-level dynamical systems representation to it’s trying to do this, it’s modeling the world like that. They sure do intuitively seem to be doing something agenty. You said there was something to do with biology as well? John Wentworth: No, it does not mean that everything is measuring everything else very, very well. John Wentworth: I was also, around the same time, looking at markets through a similar lens, like financial markets. But we know from the aforementioned definition of the ellipse that any such path must have exactly the same length! One path might end up with them willing to accept a two-to-one trade. The other path might end up with them willing to accept a one-to-one trade.

So which path the market followed to get to that new state determines which trade-offs they’re willing to take in that new state. John Wentworth: So the coherence theorems implicitly assume that there’s no path dependence in your preferences. John Wentworth: So there’s a few parts to it. John Wentworth: Probably a bit more than that. All these questions and more will be answered in this interview with John Wentworth, where we talk about his research plan of understanding agency via natural abstractions. John Wentworth: Then the question is at what prices are they willing to continue trading? John Wentworth: But, anyway, how to play billiards you’ve got everyone that’s in the market and keeping in equilibrium with each other and trading with each other regularly. John Wentworth: So you end up with the equilibrium number of phosphate molecules on there tracking what’s going on with the sugar outside. So they’re out of equilibrium with the market most of the time. John Wentworth: Yes. Basically it tracks the sugar concentration over time. Then there’s an adaptation mechanism, so that if the sugar concentration is just staying high, the number of phosphates on each of these molecules will drop back to baseline.

But if the sugar concentration is increasing over time, the number of phosphates will stay at a high level. Gray played with a stance that involved sighting with both eyes centrally over the cue, and with the cue running down the middle of his chin. Billiard cloth (sometimes erroneously called felt) is a specific type of cloth that covers the top of the table's "playing area". John Wentworth: I can’t give you a numerical example off the top of my head because it’s messy as all hell. All right. So we’ve mentioned that in biology, we have these E. coli cells that are somehow pursuing goals and making inferences or something like that, but the dynamic models of them seem very simple and it’s not clear what’s going on there. Daniel Filan: So going there, if an agent is an abstraction, it doesn’t seem like it has to follow that we need to care a lot about abstractions, just because - the word agent is a word, but we don’t have to worry too much about the philosophy of language to understand agents just because of that, right?