I had a horribly interrupted and just generally bad sleep last night.  One might imagine, after decades of insomnia, one would be relatively inured to the paucity of sleep one gets, and that the relative worsening of a single night would make little difference, but it doesn’t appear to be so.

Of course, it’s possible that something else is making me feel particularly horrible, and it has nothing to do with my exceptionally fractured night’s sleep.  It’s also even possible that the two facts are causally linked but in the other direction, and that whatever is making me feel bad is what made my sleep worse than usual, not the other way around.  It’s difficult to tell without more information.

It’s also possible—thought extremely unlikely—that everything I’ve experienced since early August of 1988 has been a dream, and soon I will awaken in the recovery room after my open heart surgery, thinking, “Damn it, I survived,” which is roughly what I thought when I first woke up from that surgery.  It was not a pleasant awakening; I was cortically blind for about a day (though I didn’t realize it at the time), I was (obviously) in quite a lot of pain, I had three chest tubes and a couple of central lines and an endotracheal tube inserted into me, and my hands were strapped to the bed rails.  I probably looked vaguely like something out of an H. R. Giger painting.

Anyway, the point is I feel really worn down this morning.  I almost wish that I hadn’t brought my laptop computer with me, because my backpack feels like it weighs twice as much as usual.  That’s an illusion, of course, but the experience is salient even if misleading.

I resaved this original file for yesterday’s blog post with a new name—not overwriting the original draft of yesterday’s post—in order to avoid having to start a new post with that (cr)Aptos font and change it to Calibri.  I wonder how many people like the new default font, how many people really don’t care, how many people, like me, dislike the new font, and how many people don’t mind it so much but don’t appreciate the whole “change for the sake of change” nonsense that motivates so much of the computer industry these days.

“All improvement is change, but not all change is an improvement,” as Eliezer Yudkowsky has said.  I could not agree more if I tried with both hands (which I am doing, at least while typing).  This is one of the reasons I hate political and related slogans in movements that simply talk about making “change”.  Change in general is easy enough to make.  If you ignite some thermite and napalm in the middle of a house, that will change the house.  For that matter, so will hitting the house with a tornado, or a large asteroid.

Does any environmental organization say, “Let’s work together to make real climate change”?  It would be slightly humorous, I suppose, but it would miss the point.

As an aside, the southbound train just pulled into the station across the way, and my computer automatically logged into its Wi-Fi and saved the draft of this post to my OneDrive, because apparently I’ve logged into that train’s Wi-Fi in the past and saved the link.  That’s pretty nifty, when you think about it.  Now it’s pulling out and soon I will lose that connection.

The ease of such things, and their automaticity, is quite remarkable and useful, though of course, it entails certain vulnerabilities as well.  Still, it’s fascinating just how well the nature of such codes as used in Wi-Fi signals allows them to transmit useful information with barely any connectivity.  This is the real difference between digital and analog signaling, and it’s one of the things that makes me want to study Information Theory more deeply.

I have an audio textbook (very basic) on information theory, but I don’t tend to listen to my audio books except during long walks, and I’ve fallen off that wagon a bit.  But still, Information Theory is really very cool.

If I were able to get good nights’ sleeps, if I were able to rest, I think I would be able to console myself with nothing more than learning about more of these really interesting subjects and having my own thoughts about them*.  As it is, though, I’m so tired and in pain and worn out that most days I just fantasize about going to sleep and never waking up.  It would be nice to have a better future than that, but there’s no good reason for me to expect it.

Meantime, I’ll keep writing this and, as I did yesterday, also write about a page a day of my new story until it’s done.  I hope each of you—and all of you collectively on average—feels better than I do today.  Come to think of it, if each of you feels better than I do, then your average, perforce, will be better than my level.  That’s trivial mathematics**.

*They’re not necessarily banal or unoriginal thoughts, either.  I predicted the tech stock bubble burst in the late nineties well in advance, I recognized an issue with LLMs and the like quite some time ago that was discussed in a Sabina Hossenfelder video yesterday, and I even had some ideas about the reversibility of time and the possibility of the big bang happening in both “directions” that I’ve discovered is similar to some real ideas from real physicists.  I’m not saying I had unique or remarkable or singular insights, but I don’t just passively take in stuff.  I build mental models—I don’t necessarily learn quickly, but I do learn deeply—and they can be useful, at least when I believe in myself.  In the nineties, I did not have the courage of my convictions, and I let a bank talk me into investing in a tech fund, despite my misgivings…and before very long, the fund had lost half its value.  Humility can be a false virtue sometimes.

** Incidentally, it’s possible in principle for 90% of people to be above average, but not for 90% of people to be above the median.  The median is defined, mathematically, as the midway point along an ordered list of ascending values in a group, so literally 50% of the members are at or above the median and 50% are at or below.  With the average—which usually refers to the arithmetic mean, in which one sums all the numbers of a group then divides the sum by the number of members of that group—one can have rare situations such as 90 of a hundred people getting a 51% on an exam and the remaining 10 getting 10%, which would give a mean score of 46, so that indeed, 90% of the test-takers would be above average.