Variety of networks and ERE?

[7Wannabe5]

I found this article* interesting and wondered if anybody could attempt relating the ant network or the middle school popular girl network model to ERE web of goals and/or personal finance?

https://aeon.co/essays/the-most-importa ... -the-local


*Not unrelated note would be that I am finding that the Pocket function attached to my browser is doing a very good job of spitting up articles I might be interested in reading based on my other tracked behavior. It actually feels more helpful than intrusive or annoying.

[jacob]

Sure ... for example, cooking can be seen as a network (flow process) where the goal is something edible. If one ingredient (node) doesn't exist and other ingredients exist (in a pantry), a different path can be taken. Some paths work better together, that is, either some ingredients go better together, especially if the thinking in combined by functionals as well. For example, butter and steak combine well in a path but only in the process (path) of frying... not in the path of "spreading X on Y and eating it raw: (something that works for bread and jam). Compare to not having a pantry (supermarket->recipe->dish) or "indexing" the cooking ("for my stir fry, I just fried all the ingredients I had...", i.e. diversification because of not having a clue about which ingredients work better together). Experience in cooking (paying attention) reinforces the working paths and deletes the less tasty ones.

A similar process works for investing. It's like cooking a portfolio dish.

The web-of-goals is this structure translated into living arrangements.

[daylen]

I thought you were referring to Actor-Network Theory when you said "ant"; it is related to the application of network theory to humans. Mildly interesting tangent.

If you think of the ERE web of goals as a representation of a network of activities an/a agent/human is likely to do over a set period of time, then you can analyze how the activity allocations would evolve overtime based on what you learn and/or acquire (from your activities or other agents).

Each ant colony is like a business that employs worker ants to further their progression towards land domination. The ants are literally unaware of the existence of any thought that could result in actions that are likely to compromise the authoritative order of the colony. Often ants will get stuck in loops following each other until death; this is akin to a group of rich friends that want more money than each other and end up having heart attacks before 60.

[jennypenny]

I think the middle school girl example is a good one because it shows the dynamic nature of the parts as well as the system as a whole. It also shows how some parts can be unpredictable. Something like cooking uses fairly static parts. Even the ants have fairly predictable roles and functions. An ERE web of goals has to take into account the the changing parts as well as the functions.

It also shows the vulnerability of keeping those networks 'open' at all times. As Gordon says, "Highly connected networks trade resiliency for security. More connections mean easier repair, but also more vulnerability." The best ERE system might have a cohesive set of connections established, but not keep all of them open. Or maybe have enough layers built in so that there are very few direct connections open that leave us vulnerable. I guess the other option is constant monitoring in case a connection needs to be closed, and avoiding making too many connections that must remain open regardless, like family, locality, job, etc. (how's that for beating a metaphor to death? lol)

[daylen]

More connections mean easier repair, but also more vulnerability."

Perhaps a more anti-fragile approach to lifestyle design would be to practice two or more strategies (minimal connectivity and lean connectivity). The minimally connective approach could be to prepare for post-apocalyptic scavenging, and the lean connective strategy would be useful for decoupling from a large economic system and focusing on simple but effective systems (ERE). A Permaculture like approach where 80% of the caloric intake is supplied by your land is a good strategy while your local networks (humans, computers, resource transportation) are cooperating, but I imagine it is good practice to train for skills that will act as a hedge investment against situations where you become isolated from familiar systems (or existing are beyond repair).

[7Wannabe5]

@jacob:

Gotcha. I have higher level comprehension of improvisational cooking flow, so makes easier sense than ant territorial dominance. Wouldn't indexing be more like running a robot that purchased and arranged for delivery of whatever were the 30 most popular items in the inventory of a major chain grocery store that week? It would actually work fairly well up to a point, because, for instance, a turkey and a bag of stuffing mix would likely land on your doorstep just before Thanksgiving, and you would probably receive a gallon of milk and a bag of whatever produce was in peak season somewhere each week.

The web-of-goals is this structure translated into living arrangements.

With goal being something like survival towards flourishing?

@daylen:

Can you recommend any good books that would cover the topic of Actor-Network Theory?

If you think of the ERE web of goals as a representation of a network of activities an/a agent/human is likely to do over a set period of time, then you can analyze how the activity allocations would evolve overtime based on what you learn and/or acquire (from your activities or other agents).

So, you would do something like make first approximation of activity allocation that would maximize desired state, and then attempt to determine which possible initial allocation of activity would likely lead to best path to final desired state? For instance, zero allocation of activity time to money-making activities was part of first approximation of ideal, but you might not include fastest path to that state if it had high risk of fatal fail. For instance, if you were offered a high-paying job in a war zone.

Each ant colony is like a business that employs worker ants to further their progression towards land domination. The ants are literally unaware of the existence of any thought that could result in actions that are likely to compromise the authoritative order of the colony. Often ants will get stuck in loops following each other until death; this is akin to a group of rich friends that want more money than each other and end up having heart attacks before 60.

The ants did regularly, occasionally, make the "mistake" of not following the path of highest pheromone distribution. So, to go back to Jacob's example, a human with more of an ENTP scout nature, would be more inclined towards highly experimental variation of recipe ingredients due to biochemical state associated with feeling of boredom, whereas a more risk-averse human type might experience too much anxiety when contemplating moderate likelihood of failure when dandelion greens and sunflower seeds are substituted for arugula and pine-nuts, even though the first ingredients are likely 10x less expensive.

I think the middle school girl example is a good one because it shows the dynamic nature of the parts as well as the system as a whole. It also shows how some parts can be unpredictable. Something like cooking uses fairly static parts. Even the ants have fairly predictable roles and functions. An ERE web of goals has to take into account the the changing parts as well as the functions.

Right. So, J.Bozo would be like the popular mean girl at the hub of middle school society relative to my poor nerdy little rare book business. As soon as ze decided that ze no longer cared about keeping unique titles in warehouse system, I was cast off like last month's PopSugar style picks.

It also shows the vulnerability of keeping those networks 'open' at all times. As Gordon says, "Highly connected networks trade resiliency for security. More connections mean easier repair, but also more vulnerability." The best ERE system might have a cohesive set of connections established, but not keep all of them open. Or maybe have enough layers built in so that there are very few direct connections open that leave us vulnerable. I guess the other option is constant monitoring in case a connection needs to be closed, and avoiding making too many connections that must remain open regardless, like family, locality, job, etc. (how's that for beating a metaphor to death? lol)

Are we to assume that "more vulnerability" means "less robustness?" Obvious example being my semi-ongoing experiment with polyamory vs. serial vs. committed monogamy, which is not unlike my semi-ongoing experiment with 3 part-time income streams vs. one full-time job vs. career. Of course, my irrational tendency towards fear of being trapped/buried-alive/bored-to-tears-and-walking-zombie-depression if I were to commit too many of my resources for too long to any one node is at play here, so hard to evaluate objectively. Taleb uses analogy of marry the accountant/have affair with the rock star for barbell investment strategy.

Perhaps a more anti-fragile approach to lifestyle design would be to practice two or more strategies (minimal connectivity and lean connectivity). The minimally connective approach could be to prepare for post-apocalyptic scavenging, and the lean connective strategy would be useful for decoupling from a large economic system and focusing on simple but effective systems (ERE). A Permaculture like approach where 80% of the caloric intake is supplied by your land is a good strategy while your local networks (humans, computers, resource transportation) are cooperating, but I imagine it is good practice to train for skills that will act as a hedge investment against situations where you become isolated from familiar systems (or existing are beyond repair).

Are you considering the possibility of your life naturally ending before some major apocalypse in approach? I think there is good likelihood of that possibility in my case, so my design includes maximal possibility of flourishing in overall happy circumstances, as well as somehow surviving in SHTF scenario. So, some activities such as gardening can provide healthy, gourmet goodies or survival caloric needs. Fitness training can allow you to look good in a LBD while simultaneously improving odds of pulling yourself back up on to a rooftop from a dead-hang (not me ever, but maybe some of you other people )

[daylen]

@7w5

I have only read some of the Wikipedia pages on the subject, but I just recently picked up the book "Agent-Based Modeling and Network Dynamics"; it looks related, and seems to achieve a good balance of English, math, and visuals. The book appears to have a heavy game theory bent.

Yes I have considered the possibility, but I believe that I have a good strategy either way. I do think there will at least be some shocks to the global economy related to the energy crisis and over-population. For instance, I believe that is likely that within my life time (50-70 years) globalization will be limited or cut off completely. Such shocks (such as an industry collapsing due to oil prices) would give rise to less stable local environments.

An example of an activity that I am doing now that works in both stable and unstable conditions is mushroom cultivation. Fungi are efficient at recycling stuff that society uses a massive amount of (paper, grains, straw, wood, and more). Mushrooms go bad quickly so it isn't economical to transport them over long distances; this gives more economic incentive to small local growers. Mushroom cultivation also translates into a perennial forest system well. In a global economic crisis, having a way to create food out of local resources quickly is a big deal.