Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ephemeralization

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 78 posts

Re: Ephemeralization

#31

Post by Geekette »

Etymologically speaking, I find the adapted meaning of this term irksome. Given that ephemera is a 16th century word[1] that refers to "transitory written and printed matter" and ephemerality "the quality of existing only briefly"[2], one would expect the standard definition for ephemeralization to be "the process of creating ephemera" or similar, as opposed to "ability of technological advancement to do "more and more with less and less until eventually you can do everything with nothing" ".

[1] https://www.lexico.com/definition/ephemera [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ephemera_(disambiguation)

Re: Ephemeralization

#32

Post by bsedlm »

I like to think mathematics is really all about this *theroetical* pursuit.

Assume nothing, explain everything. Thus I claim that mathematical constants are a failure of the mathematicians. This level of constantless mathematics would have its users recalculating pi every single time.

Re: Ephemeralization

#33

Post by jjtheblunt »

JadeNB wrote: post #30
jjtheblunt wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your Law of Optimization reminds me of the (often popularly ignored) denominator in the famous e = m c^2 equation. I believe the full version has a (1 - (v/c)^2) denominator on the right side; I think the Lorentz transformations motivate this. The upshot matches your observation in spirit: the closer you get to the optimum (the celeritas/speed of light) the more energy you require.

> Your Law of Optimization reminds me of the (often popularly ignored) denominator in the famous e = m c^2 equation. > I believe the full version has a (1 - (v/c)^2) denominator on the right side …. I think the question is what you mean by `m`. If it's inertial mass, then I believe no correction is necessary. The point is that the inertial mass `m` is the rest mass `m_0` divided by `\sqrt{1 - (v/c)^2}`, as you say.

yes!

Re: Ephemeralization

#34

Post by sfink »

Geekette wrote: post #31

Etymologically speaking, I find the adapted meaning of this term irksome. Given that ephemera is a 16th century word[1] that refers to "transitory written and printed matter" and ephemerality "the quality of existing only briefly"[2], one would expect the standard definition for ephemeralization to be "the process of creating ephemera" or similar, as opposed to "ability of technological advancement to do "more and mo…

Now tell me how you feel about the common phrase "I'll be there momentarily."

(I may logically accept that language follows usage, but I just can't not be bothered by that one. Also, people don't seem to like it when I reply "I hope you're right.")

Re: Ephemeralization

#35

Post by kmarc »

THANK YOU for posting this. Another piece of the puzzle is in place for me.

I myself sometimes thought-experiment about this (the ephemeralization tendency) during running, taking the tram etc but until now I didn't realize much bigger thinkers than I am ;-) already described this

The wikipedia article with referenced other pages and this HN topic are a great source of info for me. Thanks for it!

Re: Ephemeralization

#37

Post by triska »

sfink wrote: post #20

This is the sneaky, flawed premise behind many instances of what we call optimization. I have a Law of Optimization: the closer you get to optimal on your chosen metrics, the more cost is shifted to unmeasured externalities. (I imagine someone has named this.) A stronger version would be to say that the distance to optimal is inversely proportional to the externalized cost, so that the total externalized cost goes to…

A consultant I worked with compared the organization we wanted to measure to an air mattress: If you press it somewhere, i.e., measure a specific point, the air goes elsewhere, and another part is inflated. He used this analogy to explain the importance of taking the entire situation into account, by applying full cost accounting.

Re: Ephemeralization

#38

Post by dane-pgp »

sfink wrote: post #20

This is the sneaky, flawed premise behind many instances of what we call optimization. I have a Law of Optimization: the closer you get to optimal on your chosen metrics, the more cost is shifted to unmeasured externalities. (I imagine someone has named this.) A stronger version would be to say that the distance to optimal is inversely proportional to the externalized cost, so that the total externalized cost goes to…

If you don't want to take the credit for it, you could call it the Pareto-Goodhart Law of Optimization, and state it something like this:

"The closer a system gets to an optimal state, the greater the propensity for the agents attempting to further optimize it to externalize the costs of the system."

Re: Ephemeralization

#39

Post by dane-pgp »

sfink wrote: post #34
Geekette wrote: post #31

Etymologically speaking, I find the adapted meaning of this term irksome. Given that ephemera is a 16th century word[1] that refers to "transitory written and printed matter" and ephemerality "the quality of existing only briefly"[2], one would expect the standard definition for ephemeralization to be "the process of creating ephemera" or similar, as opposed to "ability of technological advancement to do "more and mo…

Now tell me how you feel about the common phrase "I'll be there momentarily." (I may logically accept that language follows usage, but I just can't not be bothered by that one. Also, people don't seem to like it when I reply "I hope you're right.")

Is it so hard to accept that "momentarily" refers to the period of time before arriving, rather than after arriving?

Time is a subject that is hard to avoid using idioms to convey, like when people ask "What time is it?" without specifying what "it" refers to.

Re: Ephemeralization

#40

Post by Nekhrimah »

sfink wrote: post #20

This is the sneaky, flawed premise behind many instances of what we call optimization. I have a Law of Optimization: the closer you get to optimal on your chosen metrics, the more cost is shifted to unmeasured externalities. (I imagine someone has named this.) A stronger version would be to say that the distance to optimal is inversely proportional to the externalized cost, so that the total externalized cost goes to…

> You can get to net zero carbon emission by shifting it to someone else or dumping it somewhere it isn't measured or is a temporary sink that will eventually re-release.

Often referred to as tragedy of the commons.

Post reply on HN