BurdensomeCount
Waiting for a 21st Century Sulla...
The neighborhood of Hampstead is just at present exercised with a series of events which seem to run on lines parallel to those of what was known to the writers of headlines and "The Kensington Horror," or "The Stabbing Woman," or "The Woman in Black." During the past two or three days several cases have occurred of young children straying from home or neglecting to return from their playing on the Heath. In all these cases the children were too young to give any properly intelligible account of themselves, but the consensus of their excuses is that they had been with a "bloofer lady." It has always been late in the evening when they have been missed, and on two occasions the children have not been found until early in the following morning. It is generally supposed in the neighborhood that, as the first child missed gave as his reason for being away that a "bloofer lady" had asked him to come for a walk, the others had picked up the phrase and used it as occasion served. This is the more natural as the favorite game of the little ones at present is luring each other away by wiles. A correspondent writes us that to see some of the tiny tots pretending to be the"bloofer lady" is supremely funny. Some of our caricaturists might, he says, take a lesson in the irony of grotesque by comparing the reality and the picture. It is only in accordance with general principles of human nature that the "bloofer lady" should be the popular role at these al fresco performances.
User ID: 628
Socrates refused the love of Alcibiades and then drank hemlock.
Alcibiades died around 5 years before Socrates was sentenced to death. Also Alcibiades was a scoundrel of a human being, (probably) defacing sacred statues, sending Athens to a doomed expedition in Sicily, betraying his city, defecting to its enemy Sparta, then running to the Achaemenids when they got wind of his general shittiness, overthrowing the democratic government of his home city and replacing it with an oligarchy, general philandry all over the place and then finally coming to an ignoble end by being assassinated after he had become too big of a problem to ignore for the real powers that mattered.
I don't know what Socrates ever saw in him, this relationship always seemed very incongruous to me.
Sure, here's an article from Slate from last year: https://slate.com/technology/2022/11/brain-development-25-year-old-mature-myth.html
Quoting:
They also found important clues to brain function. For instance, a 2016 study found that when faced with negative emotion, 18- to 21-year-olds had brain activity in the prefrontal cortices that looked more like that of younger teenagers than that of people over 21. Alexandra Cohen, the lead author of that study and now a neuroscientist at Emory University, said the scientific consensus is that brain development continues into people’s 20s.
But, she wrote in an email, “I don’t think there’s anything magical about the age of 25.”
Yet we’ve seen that many people do believe something special happens at 25. That’s the result of pop culture telephone: As people reference the takeaways from Cohen and other researchers’ work, the nuance gets lost. For example, to add an air of credibility to its DiCaprio theory, YourTango excerpts a passage from a 2012 New York Times op-ed written by the psychologist Larry Steinberg: “Significant changes in brain anatomy and activity are still taking place during young adulthood, especially in prefrontal regions that are important for planning ahead, anticipating the future consequences of one’s decisions, controlling impulses, and comparing risk and reward,” he wrote.
And further down:
To complicate things further, there’s a huge amount of variability between individual brains. Just as you might stop growing taller at 23, or 17—or, if you’re like me, 12—the age that corresponds with brain plateaus can differ greatly from person to person. In one study, participants ranged from 7 to 30 years old, and researchers tried to predict each person’s “brain age” by mapping the connections in each person’s brain. Their age predictions accounted for about 55 percent of the variance among the participants, but far from all of it. “Some 8-year-old brains exhibited a greater ‘maturation index’ than some 25 year old brains,” Somerville wrote in her Neuron review. Some of those differences might be random genetic variation, but people’s behavior and lived experience contribute as well. “Childhood experiences, epigenetics, substance use, genetics related to anxiety, psychosis, and ADHD—all that affects brain development as well,” said Sarah Mallard Wakefield, a forensic psychiatrist.
Bolding mine.
Seriously read the whole article, it's not too long and definitely worth it.
With artificial wombs you can get the state to rear children and tax the populace to fund it. Plus, right now there is a massive shortage of children to adopt with waiting lists over a decade in many places, which suggests that there is a shortage of children without parents who want to take care of them (which is what is primarily produced by artificial wombs, but produced not that much by natural wombs).
Yeah, the rise of incels seems to be the strongest evidence you can get that the sexual revolution failed on its own terms, rember, it promised to bring cheap, easy and free sex to all who wanted it, not just women.
Yeah, the whole "Non-westeners value human life less" refrain is straight up BS. We value human life just as much as you do (or at least not so much more less than the Europeans it's a big difference), it's just that we also value lots of other things more that westerners don't.
A family honour killing their daughter after she copulated with the son of her father's sworn enemy isn't an example that their culture values human life very little, it's an example of that culture valuing honour a lot more than a western culture does.
I would expect gay people to be more intelligent on average than straight people in the US, if only because homophobia is mostly only prevalent in low intelligence areas.
My understanding of the DKE is that self-assessment is poorly correlated with objective ability in such a way that poor performers overrate their performance and good performers underate theirs.
This is not the "public consciousness" understanding of the DKE. That is the claim that "people who say they are real good and talk about how good they are are actually no better or even worse than the people who say they are bad".
poorly correlated with objective ability in such a way that poor performers overrate their performance and good performers underate theirs
This is not how poor correlation is usually defined either in real life, that's normally given by r, and you can have very high r while the statement "poor performers overrate their performance and good performers underate theirs" (say r = 0.99, an out of the world level correlation for anything in the social sciences) is still true.
The origin of it, which is far more reasonable, is along the lines of seeing a sign saying "visiting hours 3-5 pm" at a hospital, from which we can glean that visiting isn't allowed outside this window. Thus the existence of an "exception" carved out from a general rule suggests the existence of said rule in a broad sense, but you're not using it that way :(
I didn't actually know this, I always thought that the idiom was stupid, but this explains a lot.
Ah, we call it mahr in our (Muslim) system, it's money given by the Groom's family to the Bride's family to provide for her in case the marriage doesn't work out for her, it's a sort of insurance no different to how a college education is insurance for a woman since she now has the skills to work for herself and be able to live a decent life if the union with her husband goes south (yes, in reality I know modern college education is nothing of the sort, but that's beyond the point here, we care about the intention, not the results).
The standard dowry you mention the woman's family gives the man's family is actually Haram.
If it was simplifying relationships between the sexes, it's a failure. It got things so bad people are reinventing inferior and more primitive norms to what we had before.
Case in point: student debt is a modern form of the dowry system, but instead of the money going to her father it goes to college administrators...
I would be a lot more pro sexual revolution in a world that had artificial wombs than one that didn't. I feel that the sexual revolution happened about a hundred years before it's time and that it's biggest failure are happening because we don't have the technology yet to mitigate them. Much like how a car machanic is a useful job for society in 1950 but a useless one in 1750, the sexual revolution has certain "prerequisites" to work well that aren't satisfied by the society of today, but will probably be done so in the next century.
For an example I have pretty much nothing against the sexual hedonism in Brave New World, over there it's perfectly fine and a good thing for the citizenry.
There are known differences between sperm cells with an X chromosome and those with a Y chromosome (Y chromosome cells swim faster but X chromosome cells live longer if I remember correctly). You can very easily change the natal gender ratio if you come up with a procedure or something that selectively kills those sperm cells with a Y chromosome.
By doing this you can e.g. change the societal gender ratio to something like 2 women for every man, and at that point the replacement rate drops from 2 to 1.5 children per woman.
No artificial wombs even needed!
So so much of pop science is utter garbage that it is amazing it ever got the reach it did.
Another example is the "human brains don't mature until 25" BS, where even the authors of the original paper from where this statement comes from don't agree with it and are surprised that this, out of all the claims in the paper, was the takeaway which entered public consciousness...
they eat turkey bacon
There is nothing wrong with eating turkey bacon as long as the animal was slaughtered in a halal manner.
Ah, I was thinking of Ghenghis, not Noonien Singh.
One of those is not like the others...
This is an excellent idea all things considered. The west can basically absorb this easily, Europe is close to 500 million people, another 2 million is just 0.4% of the population, which given Europe is now losing people in net is going to stem that decline too for a few years.
Plus the usual "It's all fighting aged men" doesn't apply here, almost half of the Gazans are women, and their low age means they won't be putting pressure on the healthcare/retirement systems for a long time.
Yeah, I firmly believe myself as being smarter than 99% of the population (and have seen enough independent confirmations of this that I have very high confidence in this) but I would never think that I am smarter than Elon Musk. I would take a bet easily that Musk is smarter than me. It's amazing how plenty of people chastise those who think they are smarter than a large portion of the population but then these very same people think they are at the same level as Musk etc...
Seconded. Just go to South Asia and get yourself an apartment for like 6 months in an upscale area. Let it be known you are an American doctor and you just came here for a quick break before you start practicing. Go to upscale meeting places like art galleries and cultural attractions etc. and mention in passing that you are single but wouldn't mind getting married and you will quickly find yourslef a not too religious not too traditional woman who commits to you. You'll pobably find many such women, giving you your pick of the pack, and as an added bonus these women will probably be more honourable and less kooked in the head than your average westerner.
Once you start placing different values of different types of "helping nazis" you're back to consequentialism but with extra steps, for how do you decide what types of helping nazis are worse than others?
Consider a case where a Nazi soldier asks you for the passcode to a safe which contains some amount of money inside. The Nazi wants to take the money inside and use it for general Nazi purposes. You can lie and tell him you don't know the passcode in which case he won't get the money or give him the passcode by telling the truth. I think it is clearly worse to tell him the passcode if the safe contains $1 billion vs if the safe contains 50 cents plus a used chewing gum wrapper.
In the latter case it might very well be worth just giving the password instead of lying, but in the former case you really shouldn't do it.
How do you decide how much worse handing $1 billion to the Nazis is vs handing them 50 cents under a deontological system to see if the "badness" is more or less than telling the lie "I don't know the passcode to the safe" if not for some form of consequentialism?
This here. I once ordered some (depleted) uranium for shits and giggles; imagine my surprise when it actually turned up and then I had to dispose of it...
Ok, replace Nazi soldier asking for whether there are jews in the attic with your Nazi neighbour asking for whether you have a potato peeler they could borrow because theirs broke.
I suspect deontologists would still not see lying to not giving your Nazi neighbour a potato peeler as just as good a trade compared to lying to not let Nazis capture a Jewish family.
Consider two worlds, identical except in world A Alice refuses to reveal whether she is hiding Jews in the attic/Bob gives his Nazi neighbour a peeler while in B it's the other way around where Alice reveals the location of the Jews while Bob refuses the potato peeler. According to the deontologist's position both these worlds are equally good/bad, but I suspect very few people would in reality see it that way.
People (including those from the same genetic population as those who take another route) can be destroyed by 'bad' memes and elevated by 'good' ones that are bestowed on them by other peoples
Best extant example of this is North vs South Korea, same people, same genetics, same language even, but one has the meme of capitalism and the other the meme of communism. See the massive difference it makes to living standards.
This is my go to example of the importance on environment on a person's/society's living standards, but the people who generally argue in favour of environment/against genes having a large impact don't seem to like it very much for some reason or the other...
This is about the only thing which would make me support OpenAI again but unfortunately will never happen. I don't for a second believe Altman is supportive of free (as in speech) AI in the hands of the masses, but the AI safetyists are even worse on that regard.
- Prev
- Next
Yeah, if only 7% of the meaning comes from words, then this dude who has Wernicke's Aphasia is communicating just as much as a videolink of a normal conversation where 7% of the time the screen disappears and the person is muted. I find that basically impossible to believe
More options
Context Copy link