Notes by Retraice

For proper formatting (bold, italics, etc.) and graphics (where applicable) see the PDF version. Copyright: 2020 Retraice, Inc.

Ma14: Dilemmas of Automation

Margin by Retraice1

On what, when and how to automate work.

Air date: Friday, 13th Nov. 2020, 3 : 05 PM Pacific/US.

A tough decision

Deciding whether to automate depends on circumstances and estimating costs and benefits in time and money.

"The only way to go fast, is to go well."2

It's usually true, these days, that mindless tasks can be automated—if you can afford the time and money necessary to make it happen.

The dilemma

Automation is not just a switch you can flip—even if the sales guy says it is.

Our needs

In order to produce the chapters (time codes) for our show notes, we have to do a lot of slicing and dicing of text. Converting this process into a find/replace procedure using regular expressions made it clear that we were very close to using a computer program to do this.

Side note: for now, let's use the word 'process' to refer to a mental or physical set of steps, and a 'procedure' as an imperfect model or description of a process (in the form of a machine, or writing or code, etc.) that is constructed for purposes of automation. We can almost justify these technical definitions by citing Abelson, Sussman and Sussman.3

Below is a working series of find-replace steps. The input is a text file generated by our audio mastering (with chapters) process, and the output is the 'Chapters' and 'DETAILS' sections of our show notes. The [\s] stands for a single space, and 'null' stands for no character. All the other special characters are manually entered directly into Sublime's find-replace tool, which accepts 'regular expression' code. This is less efficient than using our custom-built spreadsheet that produces the same output in fewer steps, but unlike the spreadsheet, this procedure lends itself to programming. The output of this procedure has been checked on this segment (Ma14), character for character, against our manual spreadsheet process output. However, it's likely that bugs will be discovered over time, as future segments produce different input for the procedure.

Figure 1: * A manual find-replace procedure using 'regular expressions' code. Our programming experience

We've written a few programs in C, and one or two other languages. But most of the work of learning to code, we think, is in clearing out the garbage thoughts that we absorb from bad explanations and popular culture, and then avoiding those who would put in more garbage.

Kinds of automation

Hardware: a microphone boom automates the holding-in-place of the microphone.

Software: a light-switch (more controversially) automates the transmission of power through, or not-through, a circuit. This transmission (or not) of power can also be used to send and receive information (think Morse code). Perhaps a light-switch is not quite software, but see Petzold4, Nisan and Schocken5, and Scott6 for how gray this area is.

Wetware: A brain, when it is slavishly following a procedure such as a checklist, is wetware automated.

The cost and the benefit

In our case, the setup is the cost. We can pay someone who has the automation already (or has the means to build it), or roll our own. The benefit is the time we would yield and then put to better use.

Relief and reliability

The primary appeals of automation, in our case, are: relief from drudgery, and the peace of mind of knowing that computers don't make mistakes.

Friday

We have no sage advice for you at this time.

References

Abelson, H., Sussman, G. J., & Sussman, J. (1996). Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs. MIT, 2nd ed. ISBN: 978-0262510875. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0262510875 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0262510875 https://lccn.loc.gov/96017756

Martin, R. (2018). Clean Architecture: A Craftsman's Guide to Software Structure and Design. Prentice Hall. ISBN: 978-0134494166. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0134494166 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0134494166 https://lccn.loc.gov/2017945537

Nisan, N., & Schocken, S. (2005). The Elements of Computing Systems: Building a Modern Computer from First Principles. MIT. ISBN: 978-0262640688. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0262640688 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0262640688 https://lccn.loc.gov/2005042807

Petzold, C. (2000). Code: The Hidden Language of Computer Hardware and Software. Microsoft Press. ISBN: 978-0735611313. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0735611313 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0735611313 https://lccn.loc.gov/99040198

Scott, J. C. (2009). But How Do It Know? The Basic Principles of Computers for Everyone. John C. Scott. ISBN: 978-0615303765. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0615303765 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0615303765

1https://www.retraice.com/margin

2Martin (2018) p. xviii.

3Abelson et al. (1996) pp. xi and 4.

4Petzold (2000) p. 32 ff.

5Nisan & Schocken (2005) p. 11.

6Scott (2009) pp. 19-20.

For proper formatting (bold, italics, etc.) and graphics (where applicable) see the PDF version. Copyright: 2020 Retraice, Inc.

Re13: The Care Factor

Retraice1

A constraint on intelligences.

Air date: Tuesday, 10th Nov. 2020, 1 : 25 PM Pacific/US.

What intelligence can't do

While it's impossible to know all the things an intelligence might do, what it cares about might reveal a boundary, a region of things that the intelligence just can't or won't do.

Taking care seriously

If intelligence has a bright (or at least interesting2) future, the role of what we call 'care' will be central to that future.

Two philosophers, Haugeland and Frankfurt, writing at about the same time, pointed out 'the importance of what we care about'.3 Haugeland was talking about AI; Frankfurt was calling out 'care' as a philosophical domain distinct from epistemology and ethics.

Two beings, one doesn't care

Haugeland argued that, in understanding simple textual (or spoken) stories, the burden of knowledge is profoundly on the reader.

He tells the story of two beings, only one of which understands the difference between losing a part of one's body and losing a child.

'Computers don't give a damn'

Haugeland also captures some of the implications with his opening (and closing) line:

"The trouble with artificial intelligence is that computers don't give a damn."4

How could computers understand, without having and living a life, without a chronology, and feelings?

To understand each other, we must have knowledge about how the world works (intentions, situations, common-sense), and, crucially, what it's like to have a life and care about the things in it. He called it existential holism, and said it was fundamental to understanding natural language.

Common-sense

On the challenge of common-sense in artificial intelligence, see, for example, Gary Marcus and Oren Etzioni in Ford.5

Existence

You have to be a whole person even to understand the simplest human conversations.

A tar pit of creatures and language

If we ask which living creatures 'care', we're quickly faced with the problem of definition.

Other words compete with 'care' in their meanings: motivation, desire, want, need, will or willpower. If they're all different, exactly how? If they're all the same, why so many words?

Logical, causal and 'volitional' necessity

Frankfurt6 says philosophy has systematically analyzed epistemology (questions of 'is', knowledge, belief) and ethics (questions of 'ought', morals, action), but failed to notice 'the importance of what we care about'.

He also coins a term, 'volitional necessity', to describe the sense a person has when they can or cannot do something for reasons that are neither logical nor causal, and in a way that does not tend to entail feeling helpless. What is affecting such a person, he says, is care.7

Things you're not going to do

If it is possible to know what an intelligence cares about, it seems very likely that it is possible to know what is unthinkable to that intelligence.8

References

Adams, Z., & Browning, J. (Eds.) (2017). Giving a Damn: Essays in Dialogue with John Haugeland. MIT. ISBN: 978-0262035248. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0262035248 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0262035248 https://lccn.loc.gov/2016016598

Churchland, P., & Churchland, P. (2000). Foreward to the second edition of Von Neumann's The Computer and the Brain. In von Neumann (1958).

Ford, M. (2018). Architects of Intelligence: The truth about AI from the people building it. Packt. ISBN: 978-1789131512. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-1789131512 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-1789131512

Frankfurt, H. G. (1988). The Importance of What We Care About. Cambridge. ISBN: 978-0521336116. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0521336116 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0521336116 https://lccn.loc.gov/87026941

Haugeland, J. (1998). Having Thought: Essays in the Metaphysics of Mind. Harvard. ISBN: 0674382331. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=0674382331 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+0674382331 https://lccn.loc.gov/97044542

Retraice (2020/09/07). Re1: Three Kinds of Intelligence. retraice.com. https://www.retraice.com/segments/re1 Retrieved 22nd Sep. 2020.

von Neumann, J. (1958). The Computer and the Brain. Yale, 3rd ed. First published 1958. Third edition 2012. ISBN: 978-0300181111. Searches for this edition: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0300181111 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0300181111 https://lccn.loc.gov/2011943281 Different editions available at: https://archive.org/search.php?query=The%20Computer%20and%20the%20Brain

Index Etzioni, Oren, 1

Marcus, Gary, 1

1https://www.retraice.com/retraice

2Churchland & Churchland (2000) p. xliii. See also Retraice (2020/09/07).

3Haugeland (1998) pp. 58-59. Frankfurt (1988) p. 80 ff.

4Haugeland (1998) pp. 47, 60. Cf. Adams & Browning (2017).

5Ford (2018) p. 319, pp. 494-496.

6Frankfurt (1988) p. 80 ff.

7Frankfurt (1988) pp. 85-88.

8Cf. Frankfurt (1988) pp. 177 ff. on 'Rationality and the Unthinkable'.

For proper formatting (bold, italics, etc.) and graphics (where applicable) see the PDF version. Copyright: 2020 Retraice, Inc.

Ma13: Architecture Is a Hypothesis

Margin by Retraice1

On passing and failing tests.

Air date: Tuesday, 10th Nov. 2020, 12 : 50 PM Pacific/US.

The Screenslaver

If you can't test it you can't know it. So build, or rebuild, to be testable.

If you don't, you'll get gotten by a problem like the one we had: for over a week, our live audio sounded like Screenslaver (movie: The Incredibles 2). And worse, our setup was such that, given the intermittent nature of the problem, it was virtually impossible to reproduce or isolate the cause. We had to rebuild simpler, and more testable.

Our live audio architecture hypothesis

We built our setup to do a few sophisticated things, but we didn't build it to be sufficiently comprehensible and testable.

Failure

We should've been reviewing the live recordings, but we weren't. And when something went wrong, the architecture was too complicated to test and isolate an intermittent problem.

Architectural hypotheses

"Architecture is a hypothesis…."2 Our hypothesis was false, but we didn't discover that until it failed a reality test.

Our response

Despair, a little bit, because it was not going to be easy to fix. But we've gotten used to solving problems that initially seem daunting—a familiar feeling for entrepreneurs?

We now have a more simple, testable architecture (see figure).

Side note—make testing fun

If it's not fun, you won't do (enough of) it.

Amendment—business wife

You business partner does not have to be your real-life spouse, but ours are.

Figure 1: * Our old signal path diagram (never fully updated). The two things we eliminated were 'Yamaha' and 'iShowU'. We did not sacrifice any features or functionality—very proud of that. The cause of the Screenslaver problem is not represented.

Figure 2: * Our new signal path diagram. The solution to the Screenslaver problem is in the MacOS settings. One mystery remains: the absence of echo in call-in audio for the caller. Is it being eliminated by AI (machine learning, ML)? This is testable but we have not tested it yet. References

Martin, R. (2018). Clean Architecture: A Craftsman's Guide to Software Structure and Design. Prentice Hall. ISBN: 978-0134494166. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0134494166 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0134494166 https://lccn.loc.gov/2017945537

1https://www.retraice.com/margin

2Martin (2018) p. xviii.

For proper formatting (bold, italics, etc.) and graphics (where applicable) see the PDF version. Copyright: 2020 Retraice, Inc.

Re12: Aliens and Trouble

Retraice1

On thinking about alien intelligences—real or not, perceived or not.

Air date: Thursday, 5th Nov. 2020, 12 : 50 PM Pacific/US.

What you think and how you think

How is more important what. See Hitchens.2

Getting in trouble

This is the concern when talking about aliens—reputations, jobs, etc. are sometimes at risk.

The crazies

It's not just the 'attendees' (of conferences, for example), but also the working and writing authorities on the subject who tend to go off the deep end.

Taking the subject seriously

Witnesses are almost certainly genuine, most of the time, but not necessarily right about the reality behind their experiences.

What does a witness have? Usually just a story. There is sometimes physical evidence, but it tends to be weak. On cases, see Vallee.3

A critical point is that, when dealing with any advanced intelligence, science is inadequate compared to counterespionage.4 Something that doesn't want to be studied can evade scientists.5

Thinking about 'them'

First, if there is something other than human brain problems happening, 'they' might not be from far away. And 'they' might actually be one unitary thing.

Second, the brain is not a reliable detector. There could be some, lots, or no overlap between real phenomena and reports.

The phenomena could be real or not, perceived or not. Definitive statements—either way—seem dubious.

Documents, manipulation, evidence

It's easy to produce documents. And strategic intelligence organizations often have strong incentives to manipulate the beliefs of those who already think they're onto something big.

Trying to imagine, from the outside, how things work inside complex organizations, or in complex situations, is hard. But work has been done on this.6

Evidence is a matter of degree, and one piece of evidence can support two mutually exclusive facts.

More difficulties

Those in positions to speak with authority have little incentive; compelling evidence such as darting lights is yet ambiguous; and yet we must think about the possibilities or else accept a huge attentional blind spot.

References

Cohen, J., & Stewart, I. (2002). Evolving the Alien: The Science of Extraterrestrial Life. Ebury. ISBN: 978-0091879272. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=evolving+the+alien https://www.google.com/search?q=evolving+the+alien https://lccn.loc.gov/2003427167

Dolan, R. M. (2002). UFOs and the National Security State: Chronology of a Coverup, 1941-1973. Keyhole, 2nd revised ed. ISBN: 978-1571743176. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-1571743176 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-1571743176 https://lccn.loc.gov/2001099307

Dolan, R. M. (2009). UFOs and the National Security State: The Cover-Up Exposed, 1973-1991. Keyhole. ISBN: 978-0967799513. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0967799513 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0967799513

Hitchens, C. (2001). Letters to a Young Contrarian. Basic / Perseus. ISBN: 0465030327. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=0465030327 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+0465030327 https://lccn.loc.gov/2001035273

Kelleher, C. A., & Knapp, G. (2005). Hunt for the Skinwalker: Science Confronts the Unexplained at a Remote Ranch in Utah. Paraview Pocket Books. ISBN: 978-1416505211. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-1416505211 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-1416505211 https://lccn.loc.gov/2005053457

Margin (2020/11/05). Ma12: Quitting Your Day Job. retraice.com. https://www.retraice.com/segments/ma12 Retrieved 5th Nov. 2020.

Retraice (2020/09/07). Re1: Three Kinds of Intelligence. retraice.com. https://www.retraice.com/segments/re1 Retrieved 22nd Sep. 2020.

Vallee, J. (1969). Passport to Magonia: On UFOs, Folklore, and Parallel Worlds. Contemporary Books. Original edition 1969; this edition 1993. ISBN: 0809237962. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=0809237962 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+0809237962 https://lccn.loc.gov/93003427

Vallee, J. (1975). The Invisible College: What a Group of Scientists Has Discovered about UFO Influence on the Human Race. E. P. Dutton. ISBN: 0525474501. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=0525474501 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+0525474501 https://lccn.loc.gov/75012843

Vallee, J. (1979). Messengers of Deception: UFO Contacts and Cults. And/Or Press. ISBN: 0915904381. A different edition available at: https://archive.org/details/MessengersOfDeceptionUFOContactsAndCultsJacquesValle1979/mode/2up

1https://www.retraice.com/retraice

2Hitchens (2001) pp. 3, 28, 63.

3Vallee (1969).

4See Vallee (1979) pp. 67-68, and Retraice (2020/09/07).

5Side note: see Margin (2020/11/05) on chasing and escape.

6See, for example, Cohen & Stewart (2002), Dolan (2002), Dolan (2009), Vallee (1975), and Kelleher & Knapp (2005).

For proper formatting (bold, italics, etc.) and graphics (where applicable) see the PDF version. Copyright: 2020 Retraice, Inc.

Ma12: Quitting Your Day Job

Margin by Retraice1

On desire, fear and resources.

Air date: Thursday, 5th Nov. 2020, 11 : 25 AM Pacific/US.

Video experiment

We're doing live video today.

Quitting your job

It's different for everybody.

Our story

For years, one of us felt like we needed to do something drastic, i.e. actually quit to start the business.

The essential problem

Are you ready and willing? It comes down to desire and fear.

Acid and fire

There's something burning inside entrepreneurs. It's acidic if it sits untended; it's combustible if something is done.

What it comes down to

Perhaps it should be a matter of resources, calculations and planning. But in practice, it's about the burning.

Luck and escape

If you're fleeing or chasing something, instead of rationally considering things, you'll need some luck after you quit, because things will go wrong. On escape, see Benson.2

More of our story

It has taken much longer to get to this point than we predicted, and it's been an excruciating wait.

Getting out there

To figure out how to do something worth doing, you have to go out and work. Too early, or too late, and you'll fail.

You're never ready

How 'ready' do you have to be? It depends. Experiment if you can.

Your estimations of time, money, people, energy, etc. is crucial. You should keep a huge margin of safety if you can.3 But most of us can't.

Entrepreneurs are risk-takers

You're probably not the ultra-prudent type. That's not how entrepreneurs are. The ultimate risk is the lost years of your life.

References

Benson, A. C. (1916). Escape, and Other Essays. Echo Library. ISBN: 978-1847029010. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-1847029010 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-1847029010 https://lccn.loc.gov/15019279

Graham, B. (1973). The Intelligent Investor: A Book of Practical Counsel. Harper Business, 4th revised ed. Fourth edition 1973; this edition, with material from Jason Zweig, 2006. ISBN: 978-0060555665. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0060555665 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0060555665 https://lccn.loc.gov/2003047894

1https://www.retraice.com/margin

2Benson (1916).

3Graham (1973) chpt. 20.

For proper formatting (bold, italics, etc.) and graphics (where applicable) see the PDF version. Copyright: 2020 Retraice, Inc.

Ma11: Month-End for October 2020 (Part 2)

Margin by Retraice1

On data, questions, knowables and knowns.

Air date: Wednesday, 4th Nov. 2020, 1 : 55 PM Pacific/US.

Data is deceptive

You can't have a lot, but not perceive anything. You can know things that aren't in your data. And you can want to know more, and want to have more. But the data by itself is screaming at you—deceptively.

Our data

The more independent sources, the better. But bringing them together is work.

What's clear to us about our business 1. Attention is finite. 2. Minutes go down, show count goes up 3. Count goes up, production time goes up 4. All shows → downloads 5. Some shows → organic search and/or shares 6. Downloads ≠ listens 7. Listeners ≠ customers 8. Retraice average: 250/10 = 25 (probably lower because of initial tests) 9. Margin average: 189/10 ≈ 19 10. Notes average: 204/20 ≈ 10 Our key questions

1. What data should we want?
2. What data do we have?
3. Over time, will the show-download rate be the best measure?
4. More shows better podcast

   - Shorter shows same quality (more researched?, less time consuming for listener)

   - Quality can't dip.

   - Do customers want daily?

5. Does country matter, or is it just interesting?

   - Well, international payments are on via Stripe, so intl is the same as US(?)

   - Country only matters if subscription rates vary by country, or some other thing related to revenue varies.

6. Does platform matter?

   - What would we change if one platform were performing better? They're all free.

   - If we could measure platform conversion, platform might matter.

You can adapt our specifics

We expect you'll be able to adapt these specifics to your own, different business. Write to us if you have details or questions.

References

1https://www.retraice.com/margin

For proper formatting (bold, italics, etc.) and graphics (where applicable) see the PDF version. Copyright: 2020 Retraice, Inc.

Re11: Travel

Retraice1

On where intelligent things can go, and when, and how.

Air date: Wednesday, 4th Nov. 2020, 1 : 05 PM Pacific/US.

1 Travel is smart, motion is dumb

Smart things (e.g. people, animals) are traveling. Dumb things (e.g. rocks, clouds) are just moving.

What's the difference?

'Travel' implies internal things—thoughts, intentions, beliefs, etc.

Mental time travel

There's an open question in comparative psychology (or comparative cognitive science) about whether some non-human creatures, such as birds, do "mental time travel", i.e. thinking about the future and taking actions in the present according to such thoughts.2

Obviously humans can do it, right?

The marshmallow test—and trust

Consider the marshmallow test: resist temptation and you'll get something more in the future—unless you don't trust me.3

Time travel is space travel

It's hard to conceive of traveling in one but not the other.

Space and time are bizarre

Because quantum theory and relativity.

Drawing the intelligence line

Even the dumbest amongst us is smart enough to do mental, in addition to physical, travel.

Where we draw the line is a choice. There is no wide gap between the creatures on Earth, humble to human.4

Hinton's five-year-old experiment

To appreciate how impressive natural intelligence is, consider a child trained to perform on a simple test. While he is supposed to be doing as we expect, he's also wrapping his mind around the entire situation, including the people and things at different places and times, that are trying to figure him out.5 He's mentally traveling.

Other creatures

We can say, perhaps, that lesser creatures, when they do impressive things like nesting or food storage, are being reflexive, not doing 'mental time travel'. But is that justified?

What is natural intelligence really about?

Travel, guessing, checking, learning. Which ones are essential? It's not obvious.

Amendments and corrections

Re10: We forgot to say Feynman's 3 rules; and Darwin's Delay might have been about workload and illness, not fear of repercussions. See the PDF notes for details.6

References

Ford, M. (2018). Architects of Intelligence: The truth about AI from the people building it. Packt. ISBN: 978-1789131512. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-1789131512 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-1789131512

Kidd, C., Palmeri, H., & Aslin, R. N. (2013). Rational snacking: Young children's decision-making on the marshmallow task is moderated by beliefs about environmental reliability. Cognition, 126(1), 109–114. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0010027712001849 Retrieved 4th Nov. 2020.

Mischel, W. (2014). The Marshmallow Test: Mastering Self-Control. Little, Brown and Company, Kindle ed. ISBN: 978-0316230858. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0316230858 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0316230858 https://lccn.loc.gov/2014018058

O'Shea, M. (2005). The Brain: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford. ISBN: 978-0192853929. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0192853929 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0192853929 https://lccn.loc.gov/2005027741

Retraice (2020/09/07). Re1: Three Kinds of Intelligence. retraice.com. https://www.retraice.com/segments/re1 Retrieved 22nd Sep. 2020.

Retraice (2020/11/02). Re10: Living to Guess Another Day. retraice.com. https://www.retraice.com/segments/re10 Retrieved 2nd Nov. 2020.

Russell, B. (1921). The Analysis of Mind. Macmillan. No ISBN. https://books.google.com/books?id=4dYLAAAAIAAJ Retrieved 6th May. 2019.

Shettleworth, S. J. (2013). Fundamentals of Comparative Cognition. Oxford. ISBN: 978-0195343106. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0195343106 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0195343106 https://lccn.loc.gov/2012000398

Watts, T. W., Duncan, G. J., & Quan, H. (2018). Revisiting the marshmallow test: A conceptual replication investigating links between early delay of gratification and later outcomes. Psychological Science, 29(7), 1159–1177. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0956797618761661 Retrieved 4th Nov. 2020.

1https://www.retraice.com/retraice

2Shettleworth (2013) pp. 69-72.

3Mischel (2014). See also Kidd et al. (2013) and Watts et al. (2018) on the more nuanced, less sensational conclusions, including the importance of trust.

4O'Shea (2005) pp. 21-22; Russell (1921) p. 41. Cf. Retraice (2020/09/07).

5Ford (2018) p. 81.

6Retraice (2020/11/02).

For proper formatting (bold, italics, etc.) and graphics (where applicable) see the PDF version. Copyright: 2020 Retraice, Inc.

Ma10: Month-End for October 2020 (Part 1)

Margin by Retraice1

On financial reports, budgeting and miscellanea.

Air date: Monday, 2nd Nov. 2020, 2 : 15 PM Pacific/US.

Monthly reflection

Today, reflecting on financials. In Part 2, other business data.

Money and stupid cash

While there is stupid cash out there2, there isn't so much that you're likely to have some in the beginning.

Someone once said that 'money follows good ideas'. But that can't be true.3

The first rule of intelligent investing is: Don't lose money.4

Our investment

We incorporated in December, 2019, but did a lot of work and spending before that—and since, before going live in September 2020.

Three accounting reports plus one

We use the standard balance sheet, income statement (aka profit-and-loss), and cash flow statement. We also built a 'cash projections' report, which captures essentially the entire financial picture on one page, in two tables and two charts (see figure below).

We use Quickbooks, which tracks all transactions and generates the accounting reports (except our cash projections report).

Balance sheet

Here's an oversimplification:

Outside investors

Based on estimates, we put in a year's worth of cash, as an initial investment. We were able to do this without outside investors because our business overhead is small. On fundraising, see Sutton and Detweiler.5

Securities laws

On the special-ness of the "founders' round" of investing, see Sutton and Detweiler.6

The purpose of the SEC and U.S. state securities regulators, or your local equivalents, is to protect people from being swindled. It is not to protect investors from losing money; if you are uninformed and want to take stupid risks, that is perfectly legal. What's not legal is for someone to misinform you.7

Our strategic decisions

We don't have customers yet because we can't: our strategy requires a lot more promotion before trying to close sales, and that requires free content, so our paywall is not currently passable because there's nothing on the other side yet.

Zero day and other days

We have a zero-cash day projected, assuming no customers and no new expenses. But before zero day, minimum-balance fees kick in. The slope toward doom gets more steep the closer you get.

Our 'cash projections' report

It has one table that shows transactions past and future, one table that shows annual totals by payee, and two charts that show totals (spending, balances, break-even and zero-day) past and future. This is the report that most clearly represents our financial position and trajectory, including how long we have to live and what our next goals should be.

Figure 1: * Our 'cash projections' report (blurred). The gray areas are past-confirmed transactions and totals; red numbers are negative, green positive; the left-side chart is past totals, the right-side chart is projected totals; the red line is our cash balance; the blue line is our month-to-month expenses; the green bar is the nominal break-even point (without employees). The lower-right table is annual expense totals by payee, and how many monthly customers are needed to cover each payee, at different price-points and assuming taxes and other fees. Thoughts on incorporating

The following applies to U.S. businesses. The cost is around $1,000, depending on how you do it, and your state of incorporation. This is without legal counsel, which can be done but is risky for most businesses. It is the way we did it.

That figure includes filing fees and state licensure. It does not include other necessary licenses (city, county, industry-specific), research costs (books, in our case), the cost of 'qualifying' in your state of operation (if you incorporate in a state other than your business's base of operations, you'll pay a similar sum to qualify to do business in that other state), etc.

The benefits of incorporating are many: it's easier to raise money, easier to attract employees, and the processes and corporate formalities are rich with business guidance and best practices. The opposing view is that it's too much overhead and hassle for most small businesses.

Corporations and LLCs have an interesting history.8

More on the balance sheet

We've spent about a third of our initial investment so far.

Thoughts on annual pricing

In the beginning, you're trying a lot of things, so taking the annual discount on a service is risky. In fact, it might be that the services that are worth having don't offer an annual discount, but this is just our impression.

Income statement (profit-and-loss)

This breaks down the detail of expenses and revenue by category. For example, we have many transactions categorized as 'marketing and advertising', because so much of what we're currently doing (free podcast, free website, free livestream) is leading to 'free' product, i.e. not product, but marketing material. We've spent $0 on advertising and marketing in the traditional sense.

If you run a single-month report, you'll see how you did this month, but some months are more expensive than others. Our pricey months are December and February.

Contents and packaging

On the subject of ads and marketing, Jack Conte (founder of Patreon) once argued that artists should be passionate about what's inside the box, but be very flexible about the exterior packaging that helps get the box to its audience.9

More P&L

We also had bank fees (sigh), hosting fees (for mp3 and PDF files and distribution), a PO Box, etc.

More 'cash projections' report

It helps us see more clearly, and answer questions more quickly, especially regarding when big financial hits are coming.

Cash flow statement

Again, how expensive the given month is will make a big difference in how this report looks on its face.

Routine, reports, clarity

Running the reports monthly gives a clean, multi-angle look at your business, which is essential. For us, the cash projections report is most useful right now.

References

Conte, J. (2016). PatreCon: Adjust your packaging. Youtube.com. 15th Nov. 2016 https://youtu.be/R5tkpqW-1BY Retrieved 3rd Nov. 2020.

Gevurtz, F. A. (2004). The historical and political origins of the corporate board of directors. Hofstra Law Review, 33(1). http://scholarlycommons.law.hofstra.edu/hlr/vol33/iss1/3 Retrieved 13th Sep. 2019.

Graham, B. (1973). The Intelligent Investor: A Book of Practical Counsel. Harper Business, 4th revised ed. Fourth edition 1973; this edition, with material from Jason Zweig, 2006. ISBN: 978-0060555665. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0060555665 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0060555665 https://lccn.loc.gov/2003047894

Graham, B., & Dodd, D. (1940). Security Analysis: Principles and Technique. McGraw-Hill, 2nd revised ed. Second edition 1940; this edition, with commentary from multiple authors, 2009. ISBN: 978-0071592536. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0071592536 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0071592536 https://lccn.loc.gov/2008023115

Retraice (2020/11/02). Re10: Living to Guess Another Day. retraice.com. https://www.retraice.com/segments/re10 Retrieved 2nd Nov. 2020.

Ribstein, L. E. (2003). LLCs: Is the future here? A history and prognosis. ABA Business Law Section, 13(2). https://studyres.com/doc/16603361/is-the-future-here%3F---american-bar-association Retrieved 1st Sep. 2019.

Sutton, G. (2016). Start Your Own Corporation. RDA Press, 2nd ed. ISBN: 978-1937832001. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-1937832001 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-1937832001 https://lccn.loc.gov/2011279504

Sutton, G., & Detweiler, G. (2015). Finance Your Own Business: Get on the Financing Fast Track. Success DNA / Brisance. ISBN: 978-1944194017. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-1944194017 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-1944194017 https://lccn.loc.gov/2017304946

1https://www.retraice.com/margin

2Cf. Retraice (2020/11/02) on stupid bodies and brains.

3Graham & Dodd (1940) p. 669 ff., Graham (1973) pp. 204-205.

4Graham (1973) p. 18.

5Sutton & Detweiler (2015).

6Sutton & Detweiler (2015) pp. 182-184.

7Sutton (2016) p. 176.

8See for example Ribstein (2003) and Gevurtz (2004).

9Conte (2016).

For proper formatting (bold, italics, etc.) and graphics (where applicable) see the PDF version. Copyright: 2020 Retraice, Inc.

Re10: Living to Guess Another Day

Retraice1

On guessing, checking and fighting.

Air date: Monday, 2nd Nov. 2020, 12 : 00 PM Pacific/US.

1 Natural intelligence

We've already talked about strategic and artificial intelligence.

Side note: by listening to a podcast, or to anything, you are almost by definition 'smartish', to borrow Yudkowsky's term.2 Listening and hearing might be different, but a rock can do neither, which is not smartish.

You've realized you're dumb

Right? If you're not still an overconfident whipper-snapper, we safely assuming that your own dumb mistakes have humbled you about your own smartishness.

There's genius there, in all of us, to be sure. And the same is true of stupidity.

Stubbing your toe is 'body stupidity', not brain stupidity, if there's a difference.

What (natural) intelligence might be

Maybe it's guessing correctly, maybe its checking and hunting down answers.

Historical candidates for smartish and dumb

Ptolemy vs Copernicus: Was it really easier to construct a complex system of patterns than to gather lots of data and look for the simplest model of it?

Germ theory vs humours, spirits, etc: We knew that invisible things, such as wind, were real; why didn't we guess that there might be others?

Bowling balls, feathers and classical mechanics: While this is arguably a more surprising result, still we can ask why it took us so long for us to make this guess that was checkable.3

But we don't all check the work done by the smart people who pioneered these ideas. This is a crucial point (see below).

The truth comes out

True things tend to stay true, whether or not we're right about them. For this reason, they force their way to our attention over time.4

2 Guessing

The unity behind all intelligence is "the goal of improving the reliability of predictions by exploiting the redundancy of sensory massages—in other words, intelligence helps us to guess right", according to Barlow. 5

He says intelligence is about detecting new, non-chance associations (patterns) in an environment6, and that there are three distinct tasks that make up guessing correctly: formulating the guess, testing (checking) it, and working out (elaborating) the implications.7

Intelligence and learning might be unconnected

On Macphail's claim8 that there is no apparent correlation between learning and intelligence in many species, see Barlow9 and Shettleworth.10

Intelligence might be about perception

Barlow says intelligence is about perception, not learning.11

An absolute measure of intelligence

Barlow also says that information theory, combined with statistics, can be used to define an absolute scale of intelligence:

"The idea that there is an absolute zero of intelligence, where none of the available information about a new association is used, or 100 per cent intelligence, where all of it is used, may be new to some people, as will be the idea that one aspect of intelligence is in principle measurable on an absolute scale, free of reference to population norms."12

Other work has been done on absolute measures of intelligence.13

IQ

An absolute measure of intelligence would be an impressive improvement over current tests like IQ, which can feel unsatisfying.14

3 Checking

Nothing to do with learning ability or perceptual ability, per se, is the prudent, effective armory of right-answer-finding tools called science and logic. Checking one's work methodically, notwithstanding the apparent wiz kids who don't do it in elementary school, seems smart, i.e. intelligent.

Both a natural sprinter, and the author, might improve in their abilities if they were to learn techniques of sprinting that have been checked by the scientific method.15

Feynman's Cargo Cult Science

There are always crazy ideas out there. We should check them. To do so:

1. bend over backwards to report everything you find, to help others see the value of your idea-checking work;
2. don't fool yourself (and you're the easiest one to fool), and then it will be easy to not fool your fellow checkers—by just being honest;
3. don't fool outsiders, as a matter of integrity.16

Side note—for machines, easy is hard and hard is easy

The gist of the last seventy years of artificial intelligence is: The things we think are difficult turn out to be easy for machines (formal logic, mathematics, working without rest), and the things we think are easy turn out to be difficult for machines (image and speech recognition, common sense).17

Pseudoscience

Consider cargo cults, witch doctors, UFOlogy, ESP-ology, reflexology.18

A shining example of a science—and disappointment

Feynman describes a scientist named 'Young' going to great rational lengths to make sure he knew how his rats were finding food.19 Then, Feynman says, no one in his field followed his lead; instead, they made dumb mistakes.

He took away the information

Taking away all the clues from the rats' environment rendered them unable to find the food. This jibes with what Barlow says, that intelligence is about perception, not memory.

Reasons to reproduce checks

Reason 1: to make sure the person who says they had the right answer actually did.

Reason 2: to make sure there's nothing funny about your setup that will lead you to misinterpret your results.

4 Fighting

Fight or flight are the two options. Fighting all the time, and flight-ing all the time, are bad strategies. The choice should depend on the challenge, the given environmental circumstances.

A lion, a crocodile, a spreadsheet. All are matters of fight or flight.

Fighting for guesses

If one person fights to defend a guess because it feels good, and another person works on checking the guess prior to fighting for it, which one is more intelligent? It's not obvious. It depends on the environment.

Darwin's belated fight

[During the livestream, it was said that:] Darwin was reluctant to publish because he didn't want to take on the fight against religious authorities. He was pushed to do so by a letter from Alfred Wallace, who had independently developed the same ideas.20

[Update! Upon checking the above claim, we found that recent scholarship has belied the idea: Darwin, it is now thought, was not afraid, he was just busy being thorough with the evolution work, and working on other things, and occasionally in bad health.21]

Science is so recent, but babies aren't

On the idea that scientists are like babies, see Gopnik et. al.22

5 Recap

Is there intelligence without an environment? Is checking 'smart', or 'intelligent'? Which is intelligent: fight, flight, both, neither? We don't know.

References

Barlow, H. B. (2004). Guessing and intelligence. (pp. 382–384). In Gregory (2004).

BBC Two (2014). Brian Cox visits the world's biggest vacuum — Human Universe - BBC. Uploaded 24th Oct. 2014. https://youtu.be/E43-CfukEgs Retrieved 2nd Nov. 2020.

Copi, I. M. (1972). Introduction to Logic. Macmillan, 4th ed. No ISBN. Webpages: https://www.amazon.com/Introduction-Logic-Irving-M-Copi/dp/B000J54UWU https://books.google.com/books/about/Introduction_to_Logic.html?id=sxbszAEACAAJ https://lccn.loc.gov/70171565

Deary, I. J. (2001). Intelligence: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford. ISBN: 978-0192893215. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0192893215 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0192893215 https://lccn.loc.gov/2001269139

Feynman, R. (1974). Cargo cult science. Engineering and Science, 7(37), 10–13. http://calteches.library.caltech.edu/3043/1/CargoCult.pdf Retrieved 20th Mar. 2019.

Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y., & Courville, A. (2016). Deep Learning. MIT Press. ISBN 978-0262035613. Ebook available at: https://www.deeplearningbook.org/ Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0262035613 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0262035613 https://lccn.loc.gov/2016022992

Gopnik, A., Meltzoff, A. N., & Kuhl, P. K. (1999). The Scientist in the Crib: What Early Learning Tells Us About the Mind. Perennial / HarperCollins. ISBN: 0688159885. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=0688159885 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+0688159885 https://lccn.loc.gov/99024247

Gregory, R. L. (Ed.) (2004). The Oxford Companion to the Mind. Oxford University Press, 2nd ed. ISBN: 0198662246. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=0198662246 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+0198662246 https://lccn.loc.gov/2004275127

Hart-Davis, A. (Ed.) (2009). Science: The Definitive Visual Guide. DK. ISBN 978-0756689018. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0756689018 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0756689018

Legg, S., & Hutter, M. (2007). Universal intelligence: A definition of machine intelligence. Minds & Machines, 17(4), 391–444. December 2007. https://arxiv.org/abs/0712.3329 Retrieved ca. 10 Mar. 2019.

Macphail, E. M. (1982). Brain and Intelligence in Vertebrates. Oxford. Book pending receipt by Retraice. ISBN 978-0198545514. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0198545514 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0198545514 https://lccn.loc.gov/82166301

Margin (2020/10/26). Ma7: Reading and Writing. retraice.com. https://www.retraice.com/segments/ma7 Retrieved 27th Oct. 2020.

Retraice (2020/09/07). Re1: Three Kinds of Intelligence. retraice.com. https://www.retraice.com/segments/re1 Retrieved 22nd Sep. 2020.

Retraice (2020/10/28). Re8: Strange Machines. retraice.com. https://www.retraice.com/segments/re8 Retrieved 29th Oct. 2020.

Shettleworth, S. J. (2010). Cognition, Evolution, and Behavior. Oxford, 2nd ed. ISBN: 978-0195319842. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0195319842 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0195319842 https://lccn.loc.gov/2009017840

van Wyhe, J. (2007). Mind the gap: did Darwin avoid publishing his theory for many years? Notes Rec. R. Soc., 61, 177–205. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsnr.2006.0171 Retrieved 2nd Nov. 2020.

Yudkowsky, E. (2013). Intelligence explosion microeconomics. Machine Intelligence Research Institute. Technical report 2013-1. https://intelligence.org/files/IEM.pdf Retrieved ca. 9th Dec. 2018.

1https://www.retraice.com/retraice

2Yudkowsky (2013) p. 9. See also Retraice (2020/10/28).

3For a video of the phenomenon in question, see BBC Two (2014).

4Feynman (1974) p. 11.

5Barlow (2004) p. 384.

6Barlow (2004) p. 382. Cf. Margin (2020/10/26) on detecting.

7Barlow (2004) p. 383.

8Macphail (1982).

9Barlow (2004) p. 383.

10Shettleworth (2010) p. 38, pp. 188-189, pp. 231-232.

11Barlow (2004) p. 384.

12Barlow (2004) p. 383.

13See Legg & Hutter (2007), for example.

14Deary (2001) p. 102 ff.

15The analogy is borrowed from Copi (1972) pp. 3-4.

16Feynman (1974) pp. 11-12. These key points were mistakenly not mentioned during the livestream, but will be amended during segment Re11.

17Goodfellow et al. (2016) p. 1.

18Cf. Retraice (2020/09/07) on UFOs, where we take the subject more seriously than does Feynman, though still with caution.

19Others have not been able to track down the scientist 'Young' based on Feynman's description. For example: https://www.realclearscience.com/blog/2014/02/the_rat_experiment_you_dont_know_about_but_should.html and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Cargo_cult_science

20Hart-Davis (2009) p. 198.

21van Wyhe (2007).

22Gopnik et al. (1999) p. 155 ff.

For proper formatting (bold, italics, etc.) and graphics (where applicable) see the PDF version. Copyright: 2020 Retraice, Inc.

Ma9: A Tale of Two Banks

Margin by Retraice1

On good and bad, nice and mean.

Air date: Saturday, 31st Oct. 2020, 1 : 05 PM Pacific/US.

The difference between good guys and bad guys is not the same as the difference between nice guys and mean guys. "Niceness is a decision…."2

1 The two banks

Good Bank seemed good, Bad Bank seemed bad.

Bad Bank

The Bad Bank relationship lasted for years, and did not overlap with the Good Bank relationship, which came later.

When outrageous things would happen, different people would respond differently.

Bad Bank was not the only client we had that seemed 'bad', but it was always at least tied for 'worst'.

By 'worst' we mean: most difficult, most demanding, most merciless, but below we will discuss different ways of thinking about how Bad Bank was or was not 'bad'.

Good Bank

Good Bank was just as profitable as Bad Bank, if not more so, and enjoyed a much better reputation in the marketplace, from the top down.

Bad Bank was not nice

But they weren't mean, or cruel or demeaning. This is a crucial point.

Demanding, but incomprehensible

There's nothing wrong with being demanding, in principle—businesses have to be demanding of their partners. But it's what they were demanding about that was bad, because it was, generally speaking, incomprehensible. It was as if the demands were ostensibly about one thing, but really about something else.

We spent our time doing things that were almost certainly not relevant to their business (and therefore ours).

A year of water torture

We spent the better part of year, bit by bit, correcting for a vanishingly small dollar amount, that could not possibly have been above any relevant threshold of importance to Bad Bank. Dollar-figure corrections are common, but spending so much time correcting them is not.

Good Bank prioritized differently

They were more realistic, and saw finite resources—and therefore priorities—more clearly. We were among their finite resources.

Care and outsourcing

'You outsource what you don't care about, and you don't care about what you outsource.'3 This seemed true of both banks, but lead to very different results.

Were they nicer?

At the time, Good Bank seemed nicer. But in retrospect, it doesn't seem like Bad Bank's 'niceness', or lack thereof, was what made them bad.

2 Differences

Good Bank: flexible, apparently effective,

Bad Bank: inflexible, apparently ineffective.

Effectiveness

In terms of the goals of the business relationship, neither bank seemed clearly more effective than the other. Though, this is hard to judge without running the numbers to get dollar figures over time.

Styles

If your goal is to have pleasant days and relationships, Good Bank wins. But that is not a business goal.

Environments

What seems to be true is: The effectiveness of Good Bank and Bad Bank would depend on the given environment.

3 Similarities Processes guarded by people

Processes that were as well-designed as they could be by their designers then had to be protected and developed and advocated by people.

Frustration on the ground

Processes, resources, and other things led to frustration at the middle and lower levels, as per normal at businesses that are not obviously leveling up.

Leveling up and falling down stairs

There are different kinds of frustration, depending on whether or not things are going well.

Indifference at the top

Even levels down from the top didn't seem to care. The relationships were not strategic.

4 Questions, but the experiments can't be run

Is more pleasant better? We can't test it because we can't control the variables.

Survival fitness

While no two things are ever in exactly the same environment, the two banks were pretty close.

Neither bank had, or has, any existential problems.

Businesses are documents that don't care

As an idea, and activity, business is indifferent to what we care about. Like lions and crocodiles, businesses, apart from the people who populate them, don't care, because they are ultimately documents.

Constraints in key documents

Most corporations put very vague purpose statements in their articles, because otherwise they're imposing unnecessary constraints on themselves. Recent exceptions to this rule are things like B corporations and 'certification'.

We have to judge, but how?

Survival is a funny thing. The jury is still out on Good Bank and Bad Bank.

5 Corrections to Ma7 and Ma8

Ma7: In 'affecting is not detecting', we slid back and forth between 'affect' and 'effect', which is understandable, but an English language no-no.

Ma8: We said 'kanban' cord, but we should've said 'andon' button.4

Pushing up the numbers at Retraice, Inc.

We produced almost eight segments this week, up from five in two previous weeks in September and in October. Seven were fully produced, and one was live and recorded on Saturday, but not produced and pushed to the podcast until Sunday (this segment, Ma9). This is an increase of 50%, but short of our goal of 100%.5 Happy? More yes than no.

References

de Becker, G. (1997). The Gift of Fear: And Other Survival Signals That Protect Us from Violence. Dell / Random House. ISBN: 0440508835. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=0440508835 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+0440508835 https://lccn.loc.gov/96051051

Liker, J. (2004). The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles from the World's Greatest Manufacturer. McGraw-Hill. ISBN: 0071392319. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=0071392319 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+0071392319 https://lccn.loc.gov/2004300007

Salter, A. (2003). Predators. Basic Books. ISBN: 978-0465071732. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0465071739 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0465071739 https://lccn.loc.gov/2002015846

1https://www.retraice.com/margin

2de Becker (1997) p. 58. Cf. Salter (2003) p. 38.

3Did Sey Hersh say this? Write to us if you have a source.

4Liker (2004) p. 23, pp. 130-131

5Let us make a habit of checking our math publicly, to disinfect with the same sunlight used on laws and open-source software. And 'showing your work' is more fun because getting the right answer is more fun. We produced 7.5 total segments in a week, which is 2.5 more than our previous record, 5. So the percentage increase from 5 to 7.5 is the percentage of 2.5 with respect to 5. So: 2.5/5 = 0.5, converted to a percentage (multiplied by a Latin 'cent' or 100) is 50%.