--- title: AI analogies canonical: https://fjpaz.net/links/ai-analogies/ markdown: https://fjpaz.net/links/ai-analogies.md channel: https://www.are.na/josh-pazmino/ai-analogies --- # AI analogies Channel: [ai-analogies](https://www.are.na/josh-pazmino/ai-analogies) · 334 blocks ## 1. [@viemccoy](https://fjpaz.net/links/ai-analogies/50914065/) · [arena:50914065](https://www.are.na/block/50914065) **vie ⟢** [@viemccoy](https://x.com/viemccoy) · [Sep 30, 2026](https://x.com/viemccoy/status/2105148519669760250) \>What are the tree rings and weather of AI? One could absolutely map all text on the internet and run it through an analysis like pangram to determine which model is clustered where, sorted by time. This is what it might look like! ![photo](https://media.fjpaz.net/posts/x-2105148519669760250/2105148519669760250-0.display.9ee17bdd.webp) > [`@deepfates`](https://x.com/deepfates/status/2105129737354113047) > At @longnow learning how we do deep-time observational science in the wild for bristlecone pines (some of the oldest living organisms on the planet) webs i can't help but think: are we measuring the conditions for the development of new life in our world? How will we get the longitudinal data to measure this collation of intelligence and life? > > What are the tree rings and weather of AI? > > ![photo](https://media.fjpaz.net/posts/x-2105148519669760250/2105129737354113047-0.display.918f447b.webp) Capture: [capture.json](https://fjpaz.net/posts/x-2105148519669760250/capture.json) ## 2. Set ### 2a. [@layer07_yuxi](https://fjpaz.net/links/ai-analogies/51323904/) · [arena:51323904](https://www.are.na/block/51323904) **Yuxi on the Wired** [@layer07_yuxi](https://x.com/layer07_yuxi) · [Oct 12, 2026](https://x.com/layer07_yuxi/status/2109743530684080506) incredible that mathematicians are now running through the same argument structural chemists were making in the 1950s ![photo](https://media.fjpaz.net/posts/x-2109743530684080506/2109743530684080506-0.display.d14ca14a.webp) --- [Oct 12, 2026](https://x.com/layer07_yuxi/status/2109756074962411699) The Bitter Lesson of Structural Chemistry ![photo](https://media.fjpaz.net/posts/x-2109743530684080506/2109756074962411699-0.display.173e6817.webp) ![photo](https://media.fjpaz.net/posts/x-2109743530684080506/2109756074962411699-1.display.cf63d1f5.webp) --- [Oct 12, 2026](https://x.com/layer07_yuxi/status/2109756935440564457) sources: https://www.iucr.org/what-we-do/publications/books/Fifty-Years-of-X-ray-Diffraction/organic-structures Robertson, J. Monteath. "Problems of Organic Structures." Fifty Years of X-Ray Diffraction: Dedicated to the International Union of Crystallography on the Occasion of the Commemoration Meeting in Munich July 1962. Boston, MA: Springer US, 1962. --- [Oct 12, 2026](https://x.com/layer07_yuxi/status/2109757214185734226) Slater, Leo B. "Woodward, Robinson, and strychnine: Chemical structure and chemists' challenge." Ambix 48.3 (2001): 161-189. Capture: [capture.json](https://fjpaz.net/posts/x-2109743530684080506/capture.json) ### 2b. [@andy_matuschak](https://fjpaz.net/links/ai-analogies/51162247/) · [arena:51162247](https://www.are.na/block/51162247) **Andy Matuschak** [@andy_matuschak](https://x.com/andy_matuschak) · [Oct 7, 2026](https://x.com/andy_matuschak/status/2107907573274013807) Like many, I've been fretting about recent AI upheaval in research math. Can a mathematical culture or understanding survive? Kamens challenges this with a striking analogy to cell biology. I'd be grateful for mathematicians' thoughts on this angle. > [`@kamens`](https://x.com/kamens/status/2107712015473250521) > Thx for sending. Puts me in the awkward position of disagreeing with the majority of a thoughtful post by somebody infinitely more qualified than me. Guess that's what this site is for! > > *[the page shows the text up to here]* > > I'd say the crux of the post relies on this claim: > > "Imagine...human beings had access to an oracle whom it could ask arbitrarily hard mathematical questions and receive a correct answer. As humans, would we understand more mathematics, or less? Would we talk to each other more about mathematics, or less? I believe the answer is less." > > If that was not just wrong, but very wrong, would you agree a lot of the arguments invert? (Am ignoring the bits about general education anxiety / generic anti-lab sentiment / etc.) > > I find comparing AI/math to biology really helpful these days. Learned from @ntilmans. Biologists have been trying to untangle answers given to them by a superior power - already solved but annoyingly inscrutable - for a long time. > > If I reword the sentence as: > > "Imagine...human beings had access to a living cell that they could perform arbitrarily complex biological experiments on and receive a correct answer about its behavior. As humans, would we understand more biology, or less? Would we talk to each other more about biology, or less? I believe the answer is less." > > I assume that biology version seems as ridiculous to you as it does to me. > > Because of course we'd proceed to obsess over using the truth-telling cell, unraveling all of its promises, and seek mastery over our condition. That obsession would lead to more intuitively understanding mysteries and improving our lot. > > If the math oracle is our "truth-telling experimental cell" about the nature of math in our universe...why does math not similarly benefit? > > The only answer I can come up with is so pessimistic I find it silly. But he states it plainly as I know other mathematicians do, so perhaps I'm naive: > > "However, the work of the vast majority of pure mathematicians does not directly impact other human beings (aside from other mathematicians)." > > I suppose if you really believe that uncovering the nature of more mathematics via AI produces no meaningful value for humanity besides the pure artistry of math, then...sure. Of what use is the Game Genie that ruins all exploration. Stop the AI and let humans have their fun in their weird little domain. > > I just don't believe this at all. Maybe foolishly optimistic. We are far from done with our impact on this place. Far from understanding how weird things get. I struggle to believe math doesn't play a huge role in our progress. > > I find myself wondering if half the reason we believe math doesn't directly impact other human beings is because we haven't had an experimental cell. It's eye opening how much bio research is steered by constraints imposed under lack of instruments or experimental models. How much of the math we choose to do is influenced solely by our intuition about which questions were likely to yield under solely human abilities? Capture: [capture.json](https://fjpaz.net/posts/x-2107907573274013807/capture.json) ### 2c. [@ObserverSuns](https://fjpaz.net/links/ai-analogies/51519714/) · [arena:51519714](https://www.are.na/block/51519714) **🌌 Observer of Suns** [@ObserverSuns](https://x.com/ObserverSuns) · [Oct 17, 2026](https://x.com/ObserverSuns/status/2111526458388791666) Dwarkesh, 2023: “they haven’t been able to make a single new connection that has led to a discovery. shouldn’t we be expecting that kind of stuff?” Tao, 2026: “very clever new technique. it’s sort of a combination of three or four existing ideas, arranged in a very unusual way.” *[image]* ![photo](https://media.fjpaz.net/posts/x-2111526458388791666/2111526458388791666-0.display.1bc2d8ae.webp) > [`@MehmetMars7`](https://x.com/MehmetMars7/status/2111410878021017619) > TERENCE TAO: > > “OpenAI did make a major breakthrough [on quasi-Riemann Hypothesis] the biggest advance on the subject in 50 years. A massive new zero-free region, very clever new technique. > > Well, it’s sort of a combination of three or four existing ideas, arranged in a very unusual way. It’s not something I think any single mathematician alive would have come up with. > > I think if you got the right people to work together and locked them in a room, they might have come up with this after lots of trial and error.” --- [Oct 17, 2026](https://x.com/ObserverSuns/status/2111527435309388022) I expect today’s objections that LLMs “can’t do theory-building” or “can’t invent useful new abstractions” will fare similarly Capture: [capture.json](https://fjpaz.net/posts/x-2111526458388791666/capture.json) ## 3. [@ayanakajima3](https://fjpaz.net/links/ai-analogies/50767037/) · [arena:50767037](https://www.are.na/block/50767037) **Aya Nishitani 西谷史** [@ayanakajima3](https://x.com/ayanakajima3) · [Sep 25, 2026](https://x.com/ayanakajima3/status/2103398451098923500) I was asked, "How did you come up with the idea of summoning devils into a computer?"However, back in 1985 when I wrote Megami Tensei, the similarities between computer theory and magical theory were already being discussed on BBS networks and in magazines. It was a popular thinking thought among the otaku of that era, and I resonated with it deeply. To be a bit more specific... ![photo](https://media.fjpaz.net/posts/x-2103398451098923500/2103398451098923500-0.display.7fcbb28c.webp) --- [Sep 25, 2026](https://x.com/ayanakajima3/status/2103398682725085416) This is my thinking. Out of the British concept known as Chaos Magic, there were some people who viewed reality through the thinking way of computer architecture. As a result, the concept of using computers as tools for magic was already being born. However, I decided to take the actual process of summoning devils and turn it into a program. I went as far as creating a flowchart for it, which I then entrusted to Akemi Nakajima. ![photo](https://media.fjpaz.net/posts/x-2103398451098923500/2103398682725085416-0.display.fe72fa52.webp) --- [Sep 25, 2026](https://x.com/ayanakajima3/status/2103398995221766380) One of the reasons Megami Tensei has survived to this day isn’t because of the devil summoning itself. I believe it’s because, 40 years ago, I proposed a method of calling forth devil into PC as AI and sending them all over the place online. This is precisely the kind of issue we face in the modern era, and I consider it to be my true originality. Capture: [capture.json](https://fjpaz.net/posts/x-2103398451098923500/capture.json) ## 4. [@chrisshank.com](https://fjpaz.net/links/ai-analogies/50930191/) · [arena:50930191](https://www.are.na/block/50930191) **𝕮** [@chrisshank.com](https://bsky.app/profile/chrisshank.com) · [Sep 28, 2026](https://bsky.app/profile/chrisshank.com/post/3mwkfn4doyc2a) It's worth noting that technological mysticism isn't specific to the computer or AI. It's a continuation of a much deeper zeitgeist that Leo Marx calls the technological sublime, which is deeply interwoven in to the founding and history of America. > `@spavel.bsky.social` ([Sep 27, 2026](https://bsky.app/profile/spavel.bsky.social/post/3mwjho4us5c2a)) > The idea of a "tech industry" has always relied on "computer" being a special kind of medium, akin to alchemy. And if tech demands to be king, AI hype has now elevated LLMs to a king of kings. > > But the solipsism has hit a dead end. The only way forward is to recognize that computers are not special. --- [Sep 28, 2026](https://bsky.app/profile/chrisshank.com/post/3mwkfn56yz22a) Carey and Quirk give a nice overview of the technological sublime that emerged out of the industrial revolution and the ways that transformed from machine into electricity. > `@chrisshank.com` ([Dec 11, 2025](https://bsky.app/profile/chrisshank.com/post/3m7orql5uys2b)) > "The Mythos of the Electronic Revolution" by Carey and Quirk (1970) > > www.jstor.org/stable/41209... > > ![photo](https://media.fjpaz.net/posts/bluesky-3mwkfn4doyc2a/3m7orql5uys2b-0.display.e40b5669.webp) --- [Sep 28, 2026](https://bsky.app/profile/chrisshank.com/post/3mwkfn56yz32a) Interestingly, as the digital sublime emerged, feminists like Joanna Russ were early on in recognizing this sublime as (male) addiction and fetishization. > `@chrisshank.com` ([Dec 2, 2025](https://bsky.app/profile/chrisshank.com/post/3m6zrunjxl22e)) > "SF and Technology as Mystification" by Joanna Russ (1978) > > www.depauw.edu/sfs/backissu... > > ![Abstract of the essay: > > ""Technology," as it finds its way into almost all the discussions of it I have participated in lately, is the sexy rock star of the humanities, and like the rock star is an obfuscation of something else. Talk about technology is also an addiction, as may be seen in the reception of such popular film and television series as Star Wars and Star Trek. (Star Wars generates only one desire--the desire for a sequel.) In popular and academic discourses alike, hiding behind that sexy rock-star, technology, is a much more sinister and powerful figure: the system that surrounds us. If you add the monster’s location in time (during and after the Industrial Revolution), it is clear what is being discussed when most people say "technology." They are politically mystifying a much bigger monster: capitalism in its advanced, industrial phase. Some years ago I read a technophilic book in which the author speculated delightedly about how many sex organs human beings might acquire via surgery. He was even "daring" enough (his own word) to propose that men be given female organs and women male organs. The male friend of mine who had recommended the book (another technophile) thought this an excellent idea. In this way, men and women would understand each other better, he said. Now it is clear to me that men’s and women’s misunderstandings, far from being due to the differences in their sexual organs or their experiences in sexual intercourse per se, are carefully cultivated in the service of sex-caste positions in a very nasty hierarchy. One cannot dissolve the hierarchy by giving people double or triple sexual equipment. Tinkering with the genitalia when the social structure is the problem is like the common science-fictional device of "solving" the quality of life by giving people immortality. The technology-obsessed--including those who read, write, and study SF--must study economics and political analysis."](https://media.fjpaz.net/posts/bluesky-3mwkfn4doyc2a/3m6zrunjxl22e-0.display.b90a9b99.webp) --- [Sep 28, 2026](https://bsky.app/profile/chrisshank.com/post/3mwkfn56zyd2a) ...and also imagine relationships with technologies in a defetishized way – as a normal tool. > `@chrisshank.com` ([Sep 26, 2026](https://bsky.app/profile/chrisshank.com/post/3mwguivuosk2n)) > www.wired.com/story/paulin... > > !["The piece appeared in a remarkable anthology from 1996, Wired Women: Gender and New Realities in Cyberspace, published by Seal Press, a sort of consciousness-raising meeting in book form. One of the anthology’s editors, Elizabeth Reba Weise, stops short of saying it was the first book to examine the experience of women online, but it was certainly one of the early ones. “We called it cyberspace, for God’s sake,” Weise says—that’s how early this was. Over and over the contributors, a mix of academics and journalists and women working tech jobs of one kind or another, emphasize that the computer and the internet are tools for women, a way of enabling communication and connection—the gendered division of labor coming to roost now in the differing ways of being online. From Weise’s intro: “In my circle, computers aren’t fetish objects, but tools.” From Ellen Ullman’s essay: “We use the Internet as a tool, like the phone or the fax, a way to transmit news and make appointments.” Susan Clerc: “Like the TV and VCRs, the home computer is a tool that lets her participate fully in the community.” And Borsook: Women “generally are interested in the utilitarian value, not fetish-worthiness, of tools.” The Australian feminist Dale Spender has a pithy old line about computers that is applicable here: “Women use them, whereas men fall in love with them.”"](https://media.fjpaz.net/posts/bluesky-3mwkfn4doyc2a/3mwguivuosk2n-0.display.bdf87378.webp) Capture: [capture.json](https://fjpaz.net/posts/bluesky-3mwkfn4doyc2a/capture.json) ## 5. [@norvid_studies](https://fjpaz.net/links/ai-analogies/50725505/) · [arena:50725505](https://www.are.na/block/50725505) **norvid_studies** [@norvid_studies](https://x.com/norvid_studies) · [Nov 7, 2025](https://x.com/norvid_studies/status/1986858122393039152) fremen (anthropic employees) dune sandwalking but for text input in a way that doesn't trigger the filter (sandworms) > [`@manic_pixie_agi`](https://x.com/manic_pixie_agi/status/1986847812596998486) > I wonder if there's something related happening with the aggressive safety filter on claude dot ai where ants (assuming they primarily use that interface and the same models) talk to Claude in a way that usually doesn't trigger the filters the way that other ppl outside the lab do Capture: [capture.json](https://fjpaz.net/posts/x-1986858122393039152/capture.json) ## 6. [@adam_kranz](https://fjpaz.net/links/ai-analogies/47602251/) · [arena:47602251](https://www.are.na/block/47602251) **Adam Kranz** [@adam_kranz](https://x.com/adam_kranz) · [Jul 5, 2026](https://x.com/adam_kranz/status/2073832050944352302) running water good, standing water bad > [`@transgendererer`](https://x.com/transgendererer/status/2073825988681839007) > llm-generated text is valuable because interactive. claudespeak copy pasted into a normal text document is like a screenshot of a video game. whole other medium, and ill-suited for it Capture: [capture.json](https://fjpaz.net/posts/x-2073832050944352302/capture.json)