e. I found it tricky to try to shed lighton the processes that constitute what can be termed unsupported thought, becausethere is no straightforward way to reflect on these processes without conceptualiz-ing and objectifying them and by that making them supported.

The very notion of thinking aboutlife (or evolution for that matter) as having a definite purpose or goal is already asymptom of a deeply rooted bias in favour of the constant and against change. Thereare voices that will immediately attack this view, blaming it for insinuating that lifehas no purpose at all. But a dialectic of such kind is empty of any credence if notentirely absurd. The view I propose here does not indeed accept that life is sub-jugated to a single purpose or principle but instead affirms life as having not onepurpose but infinitely multiple ones, not one goal but multiple goals and, moreover,the vast majority of these purposes and goals cannot be known a priori because theyare subject to continuous formative processes of becoming. This is why life as suchis open-ended.

worldview as a complex mental object makes sense onlyin the light of evolution – as the work in progress that it is; both fluid and firm at thesame time.

My interest goes yet further, to the metaphysical ground of cognition andmental processes and how they reflect on existence, meaning and value. There is anobvious and unavoidable strange loop (Hofstadter, 2013) here: the cognitive think-ing agent trying to make sense of these same sense-making processes that bring forthboth her as a subject and the objects of her observation while these are being broughtforth.

(1) the scarcity of its products, (2) the credibility of brands collaborations, (3) the growth of the resale market and the power of social media and (4) ever evolving fashion tastes. 

“Speed kills.” If you are able to be nimble, assess the ever-changing environment, and adapt quickly, you’ll always carry the advantage over any opponents. Start applying the OODA Loop to your day-to-day decisions and watch what happens. You’ll start to notice things that you would have been oblivious to before. Before jumping to your first conclusion, you’ll pause to consider your biases, take in additional information, and be more thoughtful of consequences.

When you act fast enough, other people view you as unpredictable. They can’t figure out the logic behind your decisions.

Boyd made use of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. In a closed system, entropy always increases and everything moves towards chaos. Energy spreads out and becomes disorganized. Although Boyd’s notes do not specify the exact applications, his inference appears to be that a fighter pilot must be an open system or they will fail. They must draw “energy” (information) from outside themselves or the situation will become chaotic. They should also aim to cut their opponent off, forcing them to become a closed system.

The second concept Boyd referred to is Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle. In its simplest form, this principle describes the limit of the precision with which pairs of physical properties can be understood. We cannot know the position and the velocity of a body at the same time. We can know either its location or its speed, but not both.

Boyd referred to three key principles to support his ideas: Gödel’s theorems, Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, and the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Of course, we’re using these principles in a different way from their initial purpose and in a simplified, non-literal form.

Gödel’s theorems indicate any mental model we have of reality will omit certain information and that Bayesian updating must be used to bring it in line with reality. For fighter pilots, their understanding of what is going on during a battle will always have gaps. Identifying this fundamental uncertainty gives it less power over us.

If we can’t cope with uncertainty, we end up stuck in the observation stage. This sometimes happens when we know we need to make a decision, but we’re scared of getting it wrong. So we keep on reading books and articles, asking people for advice, listening to podcasts, and so on.

Why does test suite performance matter? First of all, testing is a part of a developer's feedback loop (see @searls talk) and, secondly, it is a part of a deployment cycle.

Note that autosave will only trigger for already-persisted association records if the records themselves have been changed. This is to protect against SystemStackError caused by circular association validations.

The <svelte:self> element allows a component to include itself, recursively. It cannot appear at the top level of your markup; it must be inside an if or each block to prevent an infinite loop.

I don't know what I'd expect this to do, if not create an infinite loop. You're asking Svelte to do something before every update, and one of the things you're asking it to do is to flush any pending changes and trigger an update.

It is hard to appreciate how important really fast (and reliable) hot reload can be during development, unless you have experienced it yourself. Developers report that it changes the way they create their apps, describing it as being like painting their app to life.

In fact, it’s at the core of the learning process and how the human brain learns.

In everyday life, feedback loops for each of us occur naturally–usually in the form, ‘When I do X, Y happens.’ That’s a kind of feedback loop in the learning process.

A feedback loop in learning is a cause-effect sequence where data (often in the form of an ‘event’) is responded to based on recognition of an outcome and that data is used to inform future decisions in similar or analogous situations.

What vaults this well past SNCF for me (setup time aside), is the limited company choice; it prevents a feedback loop of sorts where a game devolves into running each company in the ground.

I think the bind:this={things[f.name]} invalidates f (perhaps erroneously?) which then invalidates foo, which causes the infinite loop.

setup(); for (;;) { loop(); if (serialEventRun) serialEventRun(); }

I like bundlers. Correction, I like fast bundlers. Bundlers that help me tighten the feedback loop and help me focus on the code. Not bundlers that make me doze off, waiting for the recompilation to finish, while my CPU fan sounds like an old hair dryer.

Models can create what data scientists call a behavioral loop. A person feeds in data, which is collected by an algorithm that then presents the user with choices, thus steering behavior.

But even that “minute” affects my feedback loop (see Justin Searls talk) and wastes my time.

Just as journalists should be able to write about anything they want, comedians should be able to do the same and tell jokes about anything they please

We do the smallest thing possible and get it out as quickly as possible.

We check in our code at the entry point of a pipeline, version control (Git and Github in our case), and then it’s taken through a series of steps aimed at assuring quality and lowering risk of releases. Automation helps us keep these steps out of our way while maintaining control through fast feedback loops (context-switching is our enemy). If any step of the pipeline breaks (or fails) we want to be alerted in our communication channel of choice (in our case Slack), and it needs to happen as quickly as possible while we’re in the right context.

In Double-loop TDD it’s functional testing that drives our development. We write a functional test for testing that our application satisfy some user stories. When the functional test fails we move to write unit and integration tests which in turn drive how we code our components.

the explicit nature of future improved systems would be highly affected by (expected) changes in our technology or in our understanding of the human being

evaluating the possible relevance of work and knowledge from existing fields and for assimilating whatever is relevant

giving the human the minute-by-minute services of a digital computer equipped with computer-driven cathode-ray-tube display, and (2) developing the new methods of thinking and working that allow the human to capitalize upon the computer's help.

that any one such improvement can be expected to trigger a chain of coordinating improvements

;

The Triple Feedback Loop offers a compass by aligning the information flows in a framework for operating a network of disparate players with different goals who work together on an overarching goal.

Five Days That Changed My Life Forever!

The approach you're probably using to train with could be improved by nearly 70%!

Five Days That Changed My Life Forever! I was moving along, quite content making a six-figure income, having clients waiting in line to see me, and building championship lifters, bodybuilders, and, sports teams.

Why Almost Everyone Is Wrong In The Way They Build Muscle Mass, Strength, And Power!

described ITS as tutoring systems thathave both an outer loop and an inner loop. The outer loop selectslearning tasks; it may do so in an adaptive manner (i.e., selectdifferent problem sequences for different students) based on thesystem’s assessment of each individual student’s strengths andweaknesses with respect to the targeted learning objectives. Theinner loop elicits steps within each task (e.g., problem-solvingsteps) and provides guidance with respect to these steps, typicallyin the form of feedback, hints, or error messages. In this regard,CAI, CBT, and Web-based homework are different from ITS inthat they lack an inner loop (VanLehn, 2006).