Let Traits Accrete

How can it be that complex, dynamic objects can be described by short and simple strings and words? We often seek:1

We need to be able to trust our own data, logic, and presentation resources. One way to accomplish this is to think of these resources in terms of traits, and then proceed to train those dynamic resources to behave according to those immediate images.

Still, like a personality is merely the surface of a person, a schema is merely the surface of a dynamic digital object. What we call traits, properties, etc. are only the regularities we manage to perceive and deem worthy of systematizing at present.

We may not be able to “pin down” the traits of our digital resources because there are many processes and policies that don’t yet show themselves directly in elicited behavior but that work behind the scenes and that may only become important to name and systematize later.

This post was adapted from a note sent to my email list on Machine-Centric Science.
I'd love for you to subscribe.

  1. M. Minsky, The Society of Mind. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1986, p. 53. ↩︎