Not necessarily. Maybe just cross the last, best breakpoint.
Yes, this could be. My first reaction was that this would be boring. Like what happens after the breakpoint is crossed? Would we be done? Would we have nothing to do and would life be totally easy from then on? However, it might be that you cross the last breakpoint and then the situation changes and now you have to cross the breakpoint again in new, interesting and challenging ways.
This article felt way easier to outline than Friedmanâs. This one was way more detailed, I donât know whether thatâs easier or not, because I have to make less choice about what to include. But I think it has mostly to do with how this article is better written and seemed to be based on a tree.
I started writing notes on the concepts in this article. However it took a bit too much time and effort, so Iâll come back to it later when I have powered up.
The notes are evergreen notes. Iâm not too caught up in following the principles exactly. Like I think you could write a bit longer than what you would if you strictly followed the atomic principle. I want to research more about this note taking method, but I donât think itâs currently a bottleneck.
Stuff in double brackets, [[note name|alias]], are links to other notes. I only have this one note on breakpoints. The links are to notes to be made in the future.
I use Obsidian so I think Iâll make an Obsidian Publish site with my philosophy notes when I have more notes.
The note:
breakpoints
[[binary goals]] works well with factors of discrete categories; some categories are evaluated as failures and the others as successes. however continuums donât seem to work with [[binary goals]]; there are infinitely many categories. we canât possibly go through each category and evaluate each as a success or failure. does that mean we have to [[maximization|maximize]] continuous factors? no, because of breakpoints.
to use [[binary goals]] for analog factors we have to split up the analog spectrum into manageable amounts of discrete categories. breakpoints do this by specifying a point on the analog spectrum where a qualitative difference happens. each goal for analog factors ought to be evaluated by whether the outcome crosses the breakpoint, success, or not, failure.
At this point I would probably decide to split something into other notes like excess capacity, good enough or optimizing.
crossing a breakpoint means itâs good enough for whatever goal we were trying to accomplish. good enough should be taken literally, not as âI wanted to do better, but this was all I managedâ, it means optimizing this factor doesnât help anymore. if thereâs no qualitative difference then it doesnât matter.
optimizing a factor past its breakpoint (without crossing another breakpoint for this factor) could even be worse. it could be worse by causing another factor to cross a breakpoint in the wrong direction. for example by taking up too much storage space, time, attention, etc.
quantitative differences that donât cross any breakpoint donât matter at all. there are many small optimizations that do help a little, which is because they cross insignificant breakpoints. since theyâre qualitative differences theyâre breakpoints. But since they only make our lives slightly better theyâre not worth our consideration.
since breakpoints are sparse most quantitative differences donât matter. that means most optimizations donât matter. we should focus on crossing the breakpoints of [[bottlenecks]]. we can get big wins with less effort by having correct focus.quotes
Introduction to Critical Fallibilism:
â A breakpoint is a point on an analog spectrum where thereâs a qualitative difference rather than merely a quantitative difference. [âŚ] Breakpoints split an analog spectrum into discrete categories. By using breakpoints, we can deal with everything in small digital terms. And each individual breakpoint can be dealt with in a binary way: there are two sides of a breakpoint, and a value falls on one of those two sides.
Letâs say I wanna work on fixing my sleep(e.g. sleeping too late) does me being able to lay on my bed without falling have excess capacity? Like the issue of me staying on my bed is not a concern cuz im not dealing with a faulty matress or sleep walking. I know I could try sleeping on the ground or couch but for now im able to rest on the bed for as long as i want as I attempt to go to sleep.
Letâs say I wanna rerun a souls game, but I notice that im stuck on a boss and dying a lot. Is it ok to say that me dying a lot is crossing a breakpoint? Something im doing while living and fighting the boss is not good enough for the goal of beating the game.
This sounds similar to TOCâs weakest link
I could tell you my opinion if you want to, but I think you could figure it out if I ask you some questions. So: why is the concept of breakpoints necessary for CF?
Necessary? Uhh cuz then it would be hard to separate digital stuff from analog stuff I think. Like it would be hard to address a goal without using breakpoints i think
Is dying a lot to the boss analog or digital? I havenât played the game so I wouldnât know. You might have to give some details.
idk i didnât think you could say if something is analog or digital like that. idk if itâs analog or digital
I think an example could be like dark souls 3. And living long enough while hurting the boss is important cuz if you donât do one then the boss doesnât get defeated
Im looking at the defs again:
Ok i think i could answer your question:
I think dying a lot to the boss is analog cuz amount of deaths could be 5, 10, or 15, or more. Thatâs a lot of possible values
Yeah, âa lotâ implies different quantities. But donât you only have to beat each boss once to beat the game? I guess you can die a lot but try again.
Yeah you only need to beat each boss once to beat the game. Sometimes bosses are optional
yeah you can
What is the breakpoint of dying a lot to a boss? What amount?
1 Like
@Dface You canât find an answer? Thatâs what you mean by the like? I can tell you my answer if you donât want to try more.
I gotta go do something rq ill be back. i liked cuz I wanna showw i read your post
1 Like
I forget what breakpoints are intuitively, but I think the breakpoint for a hardish boss is 5 times cuz like what attack is killing the player so much? For one of the hardest bosses the breakpoint is like 20 cuz what phase of the boss is the player having the most trouble with?
Yes your bed has excess capacity for holding you up without you falling. Itâs plenty strong, stable, balanced, etc.
1 Like
FYI itâs not. I originally developed the key CF ideas by building on Popper without integrating ideas about bottlenecks, breakpoints or stuff like that.
Oh i like this sentence cuz it talks about the bed in a 3rd person way
Is it not necessary in the sense that you need it to deal with continuums? If breakpoints didnât work wouldnât continuums be a big problem for CF? Like something people would dismiss CF over because it canât handle those types of situations?