Ha! Now you're trolling. The answer is: "because the sites that generate reading ability (or whatever) *also* generate other 'abilities'", with "abilities" in scare quotes because many abilities are considered bad ... like the ability of a pimply faced white dude to shoot up a church or blow up a federal building.
In addition to polyphenism, there's robustness. If more than 1 site generates the same functional ability (reading), then do we write them all? ... just one of them? ... a probabilistically predictive handful of them? On 9/9/21 10:00 AM, Marcus Daniels wrote: > So find the sites that correspond to reading ability, or whatever, and WRITE > them. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com> On Behalf Of u?l? ?>$ > Sent: Thursday, September 9, 2021 9:51 AM > To: friam@redfish.com > Subject: Re: [FRIAM] gen'fur > > I was alerted to this article this morning: > > Can Progressives Be Convinced That Genetics Matters? > https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/09/13/can-progressives-be-convinced-that-genetics-matters > > It should delight those amongst us who rant about the "woke". 8^D But it > dovetails nicely with the fraught concept of equality in the other thread. > > Coincidentally, also on 9/6, the BIAPT announced their early career prize > winner Emily McTernan: > https://www.associationforpoliticalthought.ac.uk/biapt-2021-early-career-prize-winner-dr-emily-mcternan/ > > "In her forthcoming monograph, Dr McTernan develops her work on social > equality further, to advance a pioneering conceptual account – and robust > normative defence – of the phenomenon of ‘taking offence’. Therein, McTernan > contends, we should understand taking offence, under appropriate conditions, > as a civic virtue rather than a vice, as an emotion that embodies the > resistance of social inequalities within a community." > > > On 9/8/21 8:06 PM, Marcus Daniels wrote: >> From about a cancer rate of 10% (without mutation) to 50% (with) but it >> depends on the BRCA variant. >> >> https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_canc >> er.htm >> <https://www.cdc.gov/genomics/disease/breast_ovarian_cancer/breast_can >> cer.htm> >> >>> On Sep 8, 2021, at 4:07 PM, Frank Wimberly <wimber...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Is the Braca gene that little correlated with breast cancer? >>> >>> --- >>> Frank C. Wimberly >>> 140 Calle Ojo Feliz, >>> Santa Fe, NM 87505 >>> >>> 505 670-9918 >>> Santa Fe, NM >>> >>> On Wed, Sep 8, 2021, 4:57 PM Marcus Daniels <mar...@snoutfarm.com >>> <mailto:mar...@snoutfarm.com>> wrote: >>> >>> Yeah, it is hard to get excited about “unusual” variance. >>> Modern classification algorithms like gradient boosting make it >>> possible to predict phenotypes, and to me that is a lot more >>> interesting (and still possible to deconstruct).____ >>> >>> __ __ >>> >>> *From:* Friam <friam-boun...@redfish.com >>> <mailto:friam-boun...@redfish.com>> *On Behalf Of *Eric Charles >>> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 8, 2021 3:53 PM >>> *To:* The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group >>> <friam@redfish.com <mailto:friam@redfish.com>> >>> *Subject:* [FRIAM] gen'fur____ >>> >>> __ __ >>> >>> Gen'fur this, gen'fur that... and also the realities of biological >>> complexity.... >>> ____ -- ☤>$ uǝlƃ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
