nonsense formality : rdf / resource description framework

RDF study : so far it seems to be a problem of verbosity, and overallocation of significance to the concepts of subject, predicate, and object. Since there are no fixed definitions for { S, P, O }, it follows that there can be no fixed definitions for the relationships { SP, PO, } ( and by extension, SPO ). So the whole thing is just pointers, as binary functions, stacked to the 1st and 4th degrees.

( informal syntax scribling ) 

• SP and PO are just 1-ary pointers
• SPO is just a 2-ary pointer ( a pointer to a 1-ary pointer )
• SPOG is just a 3-ary pointer ( a pointer to a 2-ary pointer )
• SPOGM... is just a 4...-ary pointer ( ditto, etc. )

OK, back to reading. Now I have to try and falsify my hypothesis about this.

LLMs and mathematical "creativity"

Well, there are only two things in consciousness. Consciousness is information processes + qualia, and for this kind of discussion we can ignore qualia.

If mathematicians had a robust, quantified, understanding of how creativity works, from a phenomenological point of view, I am sure they might disagree that LLMs are not creative. Arguably, creativity is all LLMs do. ( Set union operations, associated with the Default Mode Network, synthetic thought. ) LLMs are simply bad at logic. ( Set intersection operations, associated with the Central Executive Network, analytical thought. ) But we have ATPs for that, so the parts are on the table, but they are not always put together nicely.

But what is the data? Well the data operated on by pure mathematicians is basically language ... the ability to discuss properties of language, and to identify unnamed behaviours of language, and to create new names and new grammar to discuss those.

If we go to applied mathematics, then we are simply back in the realm of physics, and we need to talk about machines have sensors, sensory data types that match human sensations, and then the ability to put that data in planes of space-time, and then to form and test hypotheses about that data. 

review of life

I have not known impressive people, most of my life; but I have listened to many speak about their lives, and been friends with a few.  

I have little interest in the political history of my country and planet, but I have spent now some months studying such things in public.

I have not been a foodie since decades past, but I would, and I did serve food in business. I do not think much of cars or clothing, but others do so I have studied such forms of thought and speech.

I find that life has little to offer, so it is in making a grandiose exhibit of nothing, that we partake of it in its fullness.