was the "spoils system" the XIX equivalent of "access money" in the US?
While the "spoils system" did incentivize access, the principal-agent problem in this case would treat a voter as the principal and a legislator as the agent, as is a common issue with patronage systems in general.
Access Money in Ang's typology hasn't been extended to patronage politics (yet).
[0]large mean time between scattering events, e.g. number and make-up of parties dont change very much since the last time the current system became barely-functional (we take on socio-technical debt before we have actual social tech??) as it is, 1789 was a bit too long ago for founder-mode, may halloween continue to console us!
[1]more tk. it seems mostly everyone is tripartite. Tripartism, has its own en.wikipage! But more research on YYA’s taxonomy is required of me.
a/ everyone is tripartite
b/ every now and then, mid and high circulate, often by appeal to the low
c/ as soon as the old mid becomes the new high, they forget their promises
which is completely in keeping with what he said in Animal Farm. (did he have a third book on the topic?)
{a: PIE, b: Veblen, c: Machiavelli}?
(I recently learned the chinese latin TLA "SPA" from a Zhihu question about the PRC equivalent of the low)
* not completely fast forward: one sentence of the last narrative explains why the Man even bothers to keep the low down: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40023059
EDIT: on Tripartism, yeah, a large part of our current "The Middle" party was previously known as Christian Democrats.
Not sure if the sage is allowed cruelty(=irreversibilty?<= deluging), more sure that the sage is forbidden from enjoying it (or even signalling its enjoyment, cf Not-Hillel)
The chinese note a tension between 霸 and 王 , do they also note one between 正 and 仁?
Lagniappe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92WwPFDn_xM#t=90s
*Check out DP-G and TSC’s 2020 update, where their Ham doesnt seem so contrived, and in fact, closer to, let’s say, the-country-that-shall-not-be-renamed. Are the chinese paying attention??!! https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42039941
Citation on the tension? I suspect the tension isn’t between elite-driven and anarchism*. No time to hunt for a item i saw a while back here (its “everywhere”) observing that you cant see any of the supposedly cataclysmic events of the XX (& XIX?) on the emissions chart.. perhaps we should explore (cue tony blair’s victory song) the tension between inflation and deflation instead?
*https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42031606
[maybe Einstein saw Goedel as Spinoza reincarnate, pity he hadnt heard about MPB (or even RPF/AG]
PS hadnt seen the PC article, thanks! The content is very familiar.. however.
How long before we have Gravitational Engineers?
EDIT: as to pro-logician (in the proset sense) JYG is the closest I know of, and for him physics is more than one applicational layer away. (I find presenting boolean truth tables makes the foundational q's that bother him disappear for me. A gramme is better than a damn!)
EDIT2: [multivariate, wlog] calculus works because things have interiors and exteriors, so in the sense of highly leveraging containment/implication, that'd be an advanced application of logic? (compare CSP's existential graphs)
EDIT3: wow, looking at china vs india (esp. the crossing!), we can really see the power of:
if your time horizon is...
1 year plant rice
10 years plant trees
100 years educate people
Will have to think of a good citation; I'd thought it a truth universally acknowledged that bureaucracy, customer interfaces, and other formal systems (正; 正名) cover all bases in theory but in practice the lasting ones tend to leave pragmatic, if implicit, escape hatches (仁; fac et excusa)?
Does <<the galois theory of algorithms>> throw any light on vNuC? (von Neumann universal constructors, aka(?) the orthographically suggestive “geon”)
P4: >…we have to construct a Hamiltonian whose ground-state energy is dependent on the outcome of a (quantum) computation. This is possible thanks to Feynman and Kitaev’s history state construction used ubiquitously throughout quantum complexity proofs
[Escape hatches of substance, steadfast in starstorms, abstracting into infinity…]
To make a uC you need a quine and some generators; the galois connexion above ought to pick out the fixpoints/closed sets. (in particular, we're usually interested in cases where the latter are infinite but the former are finite — the XX continuation of angels* dancing on medieval pinheads)
Lagniappe: https://www.xkcd.com/974/
* I guess now we would say they expended a great deal of intellectual energy on attempting to discern if angels had 0, finite, or infinite measure?
EDIT: if you haven't already, consider that quinoids don't have to exactly self-reproduce, don't have to be quines: one can program "objects" that, upon receiving a message, reproduce themselves and all their response methods (essence) — but with a new state (accident).
Having missed its 64th anniversary, I guess I should plan to get a working implementation of my kleene algebra (quantale) in shape for its 75th?