> Catalan polymath, Ramon Llull was the first person to conceive a device able to externalise the human mind. In his seminal opus, the Ars Magna, Llull conceived a series of figures that could replicate the mental ability to connect information in order to acquire knowledge. Thanks to these studies, he is considered a precursor of artificial intelligence research.
> The Llullian figures, a series of instruments that organise and place concepts into relationships, exploit the ability of geometry to produce interconnections on two-dimensional, paper surfaces. They employ lines, concentric shapes, ladders and frames bearing a visual quality similar to that of architectural plans ... it revealed an intrinsic potential to work as a “logic machine”, an instrument producing knowledge in different fields through multiple combinations of ideas. Llull constructed the very first demonstration that showed that human way of thinking could be imitated by a device.
I find models are great and all, but in the end to me it's just intellectual pornography, when it comes time to make choices, i don't have the mental capacity or brain bandwidth to start running through 50 different models that i once read about to try and figure out what is the best choice, that's just too exhausting.
It is just a catalog from which you pick and choose as needed; helpful to structure your thought process before making a Decision. Hence an exposure to the models is beneficial.
FTA: The rightness of a decision will vary with time, what seems wrong today may in the future seem to have been the right decision
ah ah ah. That's the easy case. Things get into problems when what sounded right yesterday now feels completely wrong.
There are so many variables and people are not completely dumb so that usually, any decision will do. The trick is to be able to convince others that you are right (and that happens mostly in an irrational space); before and after the decision is/was taken...
Like when I sold 2 BTC at the first peak in ~2013. Oops.
BUT that $1200 represented a 400% gain, paid my rent (which I was short for), and it took almost 5 years for bitcoin to come back to the same value. Would it have been better to wait until 2021? Yes. Was it a bad decision? Not at all.
I don't play poker, but it's interesting there that the right play (because sound statistically) can make you lose the game. Over time a player that makes better decisions will come out on top.
It makes me think sometimes about how the right decision can still end up exploding in your face: it was the best decision with the information at your disposal at the time.
Risk of ruin doesn't apply in poker decision-making except in the "metagame" (ie which stakes you play and how much you actually put on the table etc).
In hands themselves poker is played for "table stakes" (ie in a given hand you can only lose the chips that are in front of you at the beginning of that hand). Because of the table stakes rule, avoiding risk of ruin in poker is literally as simple as keeping some money as cash and not putting it on the table.
The thing that happens in movies where someone makes a bet their opponent can't call so they throw the deeds to their house/title to their gold mine/keys to their car into the pot literally can't happen in poker. You can only bet what you have on the table at the beginning of the hand and if you call all-in (all those chips) you get to see the hand to conclusion regardless of what the opponent bet.
I really like the ideas in Annie Duke's "Thinking in Bets". The book would suggest that the rightness of a decision shouldn't vary much with the outcome (or with time).
The book suggests that we judge the quality of the decision based on how comprehensively we evaluated possibilities before we made the decision. Our habit is to re-evaluate the quality of the decision based mostly on the outcome, even if that outcome was one of the possibilities we considered. The book suggests that a good decision can't be judged by the outcome alone, as every decision is a bet with a variety of possible outcomes. (Adjusting priors for future decisions is related to this, and one should strive to allow adjusting priors in a disciplined way while not beating oneself up or congratulating oneself too much based on outcomes which were not certain going into the decision.)
You can luck into winning the lottery, and luck into really bad outcomes while investing into index funds, but that does not make playing the lottery a good decision. In fact two decisions that lead to the same outcomes should be respected differently, depending on how much work went into them and the quality of the decision-making framework(s) applied.
> Catalan polymath, Ramon Llull was the first person to conceive a device able to externalise the human mind. In his seminal opus, the Ars Magna, Llull conceived a series of figures that could replicate the mental ability to connect information in order to acquire knowledge. Thanks to these studies, he is considered a precursor of artificial intelligence research.
> The Llullian figures, a series of instruments that organise and place concepts into relationships, exploit the ability of geometry to produce interconnections on two-dimensional, paper surfaces. They employ lines, concentric shapes, ladders and frames bearing a visual quality similar to that of architectural plans ... it revealed an intrinsic potential to work as a “logic machine”, an instrument producing knowledge in different fields through multiple combinations of ideas. Llull constructed the very first demonstration that showed that human way of thinking could be imitated by a device.