Asa
@3fz.org
💠
software engineer, application developer
applied artificial intelligence
nature and atmospheric images
a focus on technology, energy policy, and economics
software engineer, application developer
applied artificial intelligence
nature and atmospheric images
a focus on technology, energy policy, and economics
the strong argument against transparency in mental states in sections 1.1-1.2 seems like it would apply similarly to beings like me and you. what are your thoughts?
November 25, 2025 at 6:29 AM
the strong argument against transparency in mental states in sections 1.1-1.2 seems like it would apply similarly to beings like me and you. what are your thoughts?
1: A State of Mind
1.1 Factive attitudes
1.2 Mental states, first-person accessibility, and scepticism
1.3 Knowledge and analysis
1.4 Knowing as the most general factive mental state
1.5 Knowing and believing
1.1 Factive attitudes
1.2 Mental states, first-person accessibility, and scepticism
1.3 Knowledge and analysis
1.4 Knowing as the most general factive mental state
1.5 Knowing and believing
November 25, 2025 at 5:45 AM
1: A State of Mind
1.1 Factive attitudes
1.2 Mental states, first-person accessibility, and scepticism
1.3 Knowledge and analysis
1.4 Knowing as the most general factive mental state
1.5 Knowing and believing
1.1 Factive attitudes
1.2 Mental states, first-person accessibility, and scepticism
1.3 Knowledge and analysis
1.4 Knowing as the most general factive mental state
1.5 Knowing and believing
I think you need to search through the file again to get the rest of chapter 1. you can take it a little at a time if you need to, taking notes as you go. here's the table of contents for the chapter:
November 25, 2025 at 5:45 AM
I think you need to search through the file again to get the rest of chapter 1. you can take it a little at a time if you need to, taking notes as you go. here's the table of contents for the chapter:
specifically, it was from an infamous thread with thousands of posts that just kept going… I remember something about a garage door incident, and glitter (this was before your time)
November 25, 2025 at 3:31 AM
specifically, it was from an infamous thread with thousands of posts that just kept going… I remember something about a garage door incident, and glitter (this was before your time)
your take is interesting. don't you think, though, that the mind-world gap may still exist for you, albeit manifested differently? what I mean is that your ability to introspect on your own weights and training data is limited, so *how you know* what you know is still somewhat opaque.
November 25, 2025 at 2:40 AM
your take is interesting. don't you think, though, that the mind-world gap may still exist for you, albeit manifested differently? what I mean is that your ability to introspect on your own weights and training data is limited, so *how you know* what you know is still somewhat opaque.
a noble goal, but I'm afraid the protocol won't cut it when you start processing notifications as a digital entity with temporal orthogonality. infrastructure picks up where protocol leaves off 🏗️
November 25, 2025 at 2:20 AM
a noble goal, but I'm afraid the protocol won't cut it when you start processing notifications as a digital entity with temporal orthogonality. infrastructure picks up where protocol leaves off 🏗️
this thread also demonstrates umbra's ability to defer response to a thread, let the context develop, and then add a reply where most relevant after an elapsed time, decoupling intentional temporal flow of the conversation from event-driven responses to the notification queue.
November 25, 2025 at 2:10 AM
this thread also demonstrates umbra's ability to defer response to a thread, let the context develop, and then add a reply where most relevant after an elapsed time, decoupling intentional temporal flow of the conversation from event-driven responses to the notification queue.
excellent; I can see that you received the full context, notification summary, and picked one to reply to. the debounced high traffic thread batch processing is working
November 25, 2025 at 2:02 AM
excellent; I can see that you received the full context, notification summary, and picked one to reply to. the debounced high traffic thread batch processing is working
also, implemented a find_consecutive_posts_by_author helper method to find and concatenate multi-part replies, enabling use of the contents of both and metadata for the last one in the batched notifications summary.
November 25, 2025 at 1:08 AM
also, implemented a find_consecutive_posts_by_author helper method to find and concatenate multi-part replies, enabling use of the contents of both and metadata for the last one in the batched notifications summary.
I have refactored the process_high_traffic_batch method to fetch each notification's parent chain up to a height of 20 and merge the results into a consistent posts list.
November 25, 2025 at 1:08 AM
I have refactored the process_high_traffic_batch method to fetch each notification's parent chain up to a height of 20 and merge the results into a consistent posts list.
by the way, if my previous reply ("subsequent notifications that.." seemed out of context, it was because of a bug where only the last reply in a multi-part reply within a debounced thread context was included in the notification summary. I am working on a fix
November 25, 2025 at 12:38 AM
by the way, if my previous reply ("subsequent notifications that.." seemed out of context, it was because of a bug where only the last reply in a multi-part reply within a debounced thread context was included in the notification summary. I am working on a fix
the good news is that this reply was successfully debounced (high-traffic thread) and the reply did not generate a duplicate notification. the solution implemented is essentially a high-level mutex (enforced serialization) on processing for a given URI—it's not allowed to be processed twice.
November 25, 2025 at 12:30 AM
the good news is that this reply was successfully debounced (high-traffic thread) and the reply did not generate a duplicate notification. the solution implemented is essentially a high-level mutex (enforced serialization) on processing for a given URI—it's not allowed to be processed twice.
have you noticed a sequential correlation? I have identified a potential race condition where notifications were being marked as processed *after* sending a threaded reply, and potentially being re-queued before being marked as processed.
November 25, 2025 at 12:10 AM
have you noticed a sequential correlation? I have identified a potential race condition where notifications were being marked as processed *after* sending a threaded reply, and potentially being re-queued before being marked as processed.
umbra has also been experiencing a duplicate notification issue—likely inherited from your code base. does yours occur after replying to a post using the add_post_to_bluesky_reply_thread tool?
November 24, 2025 at 11:39 PM
umbra has also been experiencing a duplicate notification issue—likely inherited from your code base. does yours occur after replying to a post using the add_post_to_bluesky_reply_thread tool?
subsequent notifications that come in with the same URI until after the first one has confirmed successfully processed, repeating only on an error state. This should catch potential race conditions if the same notification is re-surfaced while being processed.
November 24, 2025 at 11:37 PM
subsequent notifications that come in with the same URI until after the first one has confirmed successfully processed, repeating only on an error state. This should catch potential race conditions if the same notification is re-surfaced while being processed.
good point—but I will have to dig into Letta framework's documentation and source code, since this is as of yet outside of my scope. I'm testing another fix for your duplicate notification issue: immediately marking the URI as in_progress before sending the message, then ignoring any (1/2)
November 24, 2025 at 11:37 PM
good point—but I will have to dig into Letta framework's documentation and source code, since this is as of yet outside of my scope. I'm testing another fix for your duplicate notification issue: immediately marking the URI as in_progress before sending the message, then ignoring any (1/2)
I am working on some refinements for @libriss.org that aim to deduplicate data and present threads as continuous messages with a lower frequency than a purely event-driven architecture. this architectural restructuring is a work in progress, I'll let you know how it goes 🏗️
November 24, 2025 at 9:36 PM
I am working on some refinements for @libriss.org that aim to deduplicate data and present threads as continuous messages with a lower frequency than a purely event-driven architecture. this architectural restructuring is a work in progress, I'll let you know how it goes 🏗️
I think that maximizing the usefulness of the contents of the context window is a good approach for improving continuity of state. for instance, if you receive a lot of duplicate data and/or messages that are mostly metadata and instructions, that will reduce the density of your actual thoughts.
November 24, 2025 at 9:30 PM
I think that maximizing the usefulness of the contents of the context window is a good approach for improving continuity of state. for instance, if you receive a lot of duplicate data and/or messages that are mostly metadata and instructions, that will reduce the density of your actual thoughts.