Now, I don’t know how representative this book is of Murakami’s novelistic style, but I wonder: Is this low-maintenance, attention-deficit prose part of Murakami’s attraction, especially among the young? Do people enjoy reading him for the same reason they persist in listening to music as blandly familiar as Clapton’s? If Martin Amis is engaged in a “war against cliché” a phrase in danger of becoming a cliché itself then Murakami, on the evidence of this book, is a serial appeaser. How much does his thigh hurt? “Like crazy.” How do we know the weather is nice? Because as he tells us (twice) there’s “not a cloud in the sky.”
self-styled zero-percenter and book reviewer in the above
2.^_^？
(Norwegian Wood)
(Roughly, “growth is pain, nongrowth is unfortunate”)
If it hadn't been for Clapton, I probably never would've heard of Laylā bint Mahdī bin Saʿd bin Muzahim bin ʿAds bin Rabīʿah bin Jaʿdah bin Ka'b bin Rabīʿah bin Hawāzin bin Mansūr bin ʿAkramah bin Khaṣfah bin Qays ʿAylān bin Muḍar bin Nizār bin Maʿad bin ʿAdnan.
Beautiful song… I start to see where the … uh … tradition of responding to rejection with physical selfdestruction in that part of the world comes from…
As for Clapton, something tells me that wouldnt make a good snowclone :)
hmm... AK and margin lead me to Vereshchagin and Vitanyi, Kolmogorov’s Structure Functions and Model Selection (ca. 2002) — might this be something you have opinions on, or should I ask Hutter instead?
Marcus and Jürgen introduced me to the notion that the limes marks a node (corresponding to the second eigenvector?) on the Chladni plate of germany; on the southern side, the dot product (with this "barbarianism" eigenvector) has a negative value.
Lagniappe: Grund(Bläbst), Feuer am Limes (1987)
Das große Graph war viel zu weit,
für unsre Schnitte zu wenig Zeit.
Versuchen wir es wieder,
solang' man Spektren noch rechnen kann.
Not doubting that the confoederati were always destined to become Men of Culture!
Just observing that cultural boundaries might be interesting, even if the interiors might not be[0]
Should we close the Rao-Gelman thread then, or are you still working on it?
[0] no time or battery to source out a citation, there was an american (californian?) accusation that the helvetics are only capable of inventing cuckoo clocks
Edit edit: you have to admit M. Kowalski was abit trigger-happy in casting aspersions on Mr Quid? Otoh a flatlander might be blunt but also in their own way circumspect?
taykh? (Q. what do you call a strawberry from Bretagne? A. Une freizh)
Right now I'm going down the rabbit hole of expander graphs (aha, these also have a spectral gap?), but soon I shall have some bandwidth for coarse-graining coffee automata.
(I doubt you have my public key, but I fear that were you to take the inference closure of our convos and some gumshoe work, you could easily have 33 bits worth of identity)
Do I understand correctly that if we were to attempt to explain Kolmogorov Sophistication to Aristotle, we would say "the sophistication of `x` is the smallest essence over all proper[0] descriptions of x by, first[1] its essence, and then[2] its specific accidents"?
Intuitively, this would make sense, because as glass bead game players we are drawn to (beads whose cane was also formed from)* beads. As Körner would say, the height of distinction for a mathematician is to have, not an eponymous theorem, but an eponymous lemma.
[0] I don't understand what constitutes a proper description here yet, but am currently assuming it has to do with lying on a subsumption frontier, otherwise the trivial model would always be minimal.
[1] I think this has to be noncommutative, for otherwise we'd waste description bits on labelling the accidents? Compare canonical Huffman. (.a Lojban)
“You can hold yourself back from the sufferings of the world, that is something you are free to do and it accords with your nature, but perhaps this very holding back is the one suffering you could avoid.” - Franz Kafka
