coherence

Democratic centralism == coherence: there is a single interpretation imposed at some level of coordination.

consciousness likely has this role in our brain, but this is not the case at the level of our society or state under capitalism.

Link to original

Coherence is a way of letting N processing elements do the work of more than N processing elements, because there is some emergent communication happening between them.

One challenge with the notion of coherence / consistency / minimization of constraint violations is that it is a semantic notion - already at the level where a representation is established…

→ Can we map this onto a syntactic criterion that we can establish in a general enough way?
→ Or is there a good proxy, e.g. an energy based notion: How many operations does a model need to keep current when connected to a processing stream? How well are you able to predict the data that you care about?
→ In a system with fixed amount of resources: Can you organize the system in such a way that you can perform the most valuable computations using the available resources … something like coherence might emerge as a sub-goal, something the system would need to optimize in order to produce the desired performance.
→ It could also be that the system has to develop a market in order to do that: Agents need to decide which software to run, but an individual agent does not have the capacity / is not entagled enough with the larger environment in order to do that: Intermediate layers arise that decide how many compute credits the individual agent gets.

Energy in the mind are compute credits.

Link to original