BANNED USER: temperamental dysregulation
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
Tell me about it.
User ID: 745
Banned by: @Amadan
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
That's all a bit too high-level, but I do not agree. Japanese values today are similar to Japanese values many centuries to millenia ago: long time orientation, Malthusian industriousness, suppression of self, painful politeness, respect for hierarchy and obsession with neatness. Do not mistake adaptation of the form to the technological context of the era (which makes their modern-day Samurai arrogant bosses instead of murderers, among other things) for substantial change of some philosophical or biological underpinning. Hajnali Europeans are, deep history aside, products of the Catholic Church and accompanying selection pressures, which probably have only changed direction in the last century or so. Right now this is all going tits up, of course.
Jews and the Chinese, on the other hand, are not all that stable. From what I can tell, 2rafa is both genetically and behaviorally rather distinct from ancient Hebrews, and the Chinese of course have had a sequence of regime changes. I'd say directional positions of «human firmware» from 20 to 50 generations ago are mostly preserved in all large modern populations.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
That's not a contradiction if the country is funding that consumption through more debt (both public and private) or through selling assets. That's not sustainable
If I've learned anything from observing the American Debt drama, it's that increasing debt is the most sustainable thing in the world.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
It doesn't have much/anything to do with HBD, just appreciation of how AGP works. Sorry to get your expectations up.
I have always found Teletubbies creepy, good to know it was due to the hidden agenda.
But
The Independent referred to his “camp, handbag-carrying antics,”
This reminds me of that recent trolling trend on Twitter where mean e-girls claim that some absolutely normal behaviors (drinking water in public, carrying things in your hands, using pockets) are actually "gay" and their simps encourage this nonsense as if they've never done that.
No Teletubby is a valid male role model. Nor female. Find more humanlike role models for your children.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
The same that Moldova, Serbia, Albania and Bosnia have despite being lily white?
They're swarthy, though.
But in any case corruption is as explicable by HBD as IQ.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
No, their understanding is exactly correct: people cling to power, and power worship is rationalization of the status quo, to minimize losses from opposing the strong or getting crushed along with the weak. Might is right because it can redefine terms, in a perfectly postmodernist manner: words mean whatever the stronger party wishes them to mean, so the only question is, as Humpty Dumpty argued, which is to be master. And with the next master, new meanings come, so no learning from history is possible. Of course, theorizing to the effect that the Universe (devoid of God in your picture, incidentally) is so configured as to make each successive Master in some objective sense external to the struggle more deserving, and his meanings Truer, is nothing more than Just World theory. The world is not obliged to be just.
Kamil flaunts his faux-wise Asiatic cynicism of the Russian prison cell, and the fact that you prop this up as evidence is quite hilarious. Once again, even Greks knew better.
"How dare you paddle around in my stream and stir up all the mud!" he shouted fiercely. "You deserve to be punished severely for your rashness!"
"But, your highness," replied the trembling Lamb, "do not be angry! I cannot possibly muddy the water you are drinking up there. Remember, you are upstream and I am downstream."
"You do muddy it!" retorted the Wolf savagely. "And besides, I have heard that you told lies about me last year!" "How could I have done so?" pleaded the Lamb. "I wasn't born until this year."
"If it wasn't you, it was your brother!"
"I have no brothers."
"Well, then," snarled the Wolf, "It was someone in your family anyway. But no matter who it was, I do not intend to be talked out of my breakfast."
And without more words the Wolf seized the poor Lamb and carried her off to the forest.
(There's a moral lesson in italic at the bottom).
You've really corn cobbed yourself. Just admit that your whole belief system stands on air and adopt something more mature.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Yes. Too well in fact. Have you heard of antisocial punishment?
To the extent that civilization runs on game theory, it's about iterated games where effective punishment is prosocial. These arrangements reward everyone, but, alas, they happen to reward "better stock" disproportionately – so from the perspective of their lessers who do not observe all inputs or do not care, it's like the ultimatum game.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
In case it isn't clear, I am not advocating for reinstatement of apartheid. Admittedly I do not have strong feelings either way, blacks oppressing whites right now is not morally better in my book, but what does it matter.
There are less extreme options, though.
On 4 August 1972, Amin declared that Britain would need to take on the responsibility for caring for British subjects who were of Indian origin,[3] accusing them of "sabotaging Uganda's economy and encouraging corruption".[2] The deadline for British subjects to leave was confirmed as three months, which came to mean 8 November. On 9 August, the policy was expanded to include citizens of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.[3] The position of the 23,000 Indians who had been granted Ugandan citizenship (and in particular those who held no other citizenship) was less clear. Not originally included, on 19 August, they were seemingly added to the list, before being re-exempted three days later following international protest. Many chose to leave rather than endure further intimidation, with only 4,000 known to have stayed.[3] Exemptions for certain professions were added, then later removed.[3][2]
«The Indians only milked the cow, but they did not feed it to yield more milk. There are now Black faces in every shop and industry. All the big cars in Uganda are now driven by Africans, and not the former bloodsuckers. The rest of Africa can learn from us.»
At the time of their deportation Indians owned 90% of the country's businesses and accounted for 90% of Uganda's tax revenue. The real value of salaries and wages plummeted by 90% in less than a decade following the expulsion, and although some of these businesses were handed over to native Ugandans this was ineffective as most did not know how to run them. Uganda's industrial sector which was seen as the backbone of the economy was damaged due to the lack of skilled workers.
Thousands of Indians returned to Uganda starting in 1986 when Yoweri Museveni assumed power. Museveni criticized Amin's policies and invited the Indians to return.[26][8] According to Museveni, "Gujaratis have played a lead role in Uganda's social and industrial development. I knew that this community can do wonders for my country and they have been doing it for last many decades." The Indians resurfacing in Uganda have helped rebuild the economy of Uganda, and are financially well settled.[8][27]
Despite making up less than 1% of the population, they are estimated to contribute up to 65% of the country's tax revenues.[2] Sudhir Ruparelia, who is of Indian origin, is the richest man in Uganda and has an estimated fortune of $1 billion.[2]
Yes, it is trivial to see where Idi Amin (by all accounts a horrible human being) was coming from in this case. He's probably even correct to an extent – Uganda is still dirt poor, Indians or no, whereas Indians themselves are «financially well settled»; this can't feel okay to natives.
But recognizing that someone has to pay taxes to keep the system running, denouncing racism, and guaranteeing whitey an equal measure of legal protection and opportunity for political and administrative representation, would certainly help South African fortunes, I believe. (It's amazing to me how many people still don't want to leave South Africa, despite being able to).
This would come at a price of the collective whitey becoming disproportionately powerful, of course – if through less unfair means. Which is unacceptable. So they will keep digging and doubling down, until their power grid and other vital infrastructure properly collapses and their governance degrades to Haitian levels, probably. Maybe it's still worth it.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Thanks, I hate it. I knew they locked up under Covid but didn't track the extent. It is still overwhelmingly likely that they're better off on things like HIV and drug abuse but fine, let's accept this is cold comfort in face of being starved to death by a psychotic tyranny.
Still, I'd say this supports my basic thesis that HBD can paper over even patently insane «culture». This kind of state is not supposed to work. It couldn't work in Africa especially – it'd have imploded long before getting nukes. And
Recently there have been signs the authorities could be preparing to open the border. Myong Suk and Chan Ho, who live along the border, say most of those in their towns have now been vaccinated against Covid - with the Chinese vaccine they presume - while in Pyongyang, Ji Yeon says a good number of people have received two shots. Furthermore, customs data shows the country is once again allowing some grain and flour over the border from China, possibly in an attempt to ease shortages and stave off a much-feared famine.
Seems like Kim will fail to exterminate his subjects or get toppled, again.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
I just think this means those metrics are shit. They have an orderly society, life expectancy 8 years higher and virtually zero HIV vs. 14% of the population being positive. This ought to count for something.
I don't trust either of those countries' statistics very much, though.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
@HlynkaCG says, true to style, that this demonstrates all-importance of Culture, rather than HBD. He's right in a sense. But first, I want to discuss how he is also wrong.
In short, HBD is misunderstood. It is an issue of culture, and has been increasingly an issue of culture for most of Anthropocene.
Forget this speculative pablum about Cold Winters rewarding long term preference and complex social order. I do believe it, of course; it explains the bulk of initial conditions of our path-dependent historical trajectory; it doesn't matter. I've lived most of my life in a place with rather fucking cold winters, in a house designed to withstand those; sometimes, the homeless took refuge from the cold in its entrance lobby equipped with centralized heating – they'd have frozen to death otherwise. A denizen of Honshu can survive in what is basically a shed made of paper and wood planks. In terms of human capital, Japan is leagues above Russia – like 10 points in IQ, and time preference gulf that translates to 6x difference in implicit interest rates. How so?
Whites came to South Africa and made it a fertile land, and in centuries they have not become any less industrious, nor have their fields turned to wastelands (until they were excised as racially alien, and the infrastructure left behind got broken). Why?
Protestant European countries have minimally dysgenic fertility, whereas Latin America and the Middle East are hit the hardest. Does all that heat kill high-brainpower sperm first, or what?
For the longest time we have been kings of the hill, we thoroughly dominate this planet, no beast and certainly no frivolity of climate decides whether we thrive or go extinct. Even the most wretched countries have carrying capacity orders of magnitude higher than what the era of Cold Winters relevance allowed. No. Society is humans' environment. Culture is humans' selection pressure. The measure of our fitness is how well we fit in. Whether you are praised by a local pastor and your children held in high esteem for your success in retail business, or your store looted and your children taken hostage for ransom determines - on average – how many grandchildren they will be able to raise; and whether, in the long run, that which grows around your grave will be a nation of thugs or genteel shopkeepers. HBD tells us how well a person of a given extraction, ceteris paribus, will be likely to perform on a batch of rigorous and meaningful tests relative to others. Deep history tells us why that is so. Culture is the mechanism by which ceteris is prevented from being paribus; both directly through environmental inputs and more importantly through what they were for your ancestors. For all practical purposes, it does not matter what came first, chicken or egg, gene alleles or the criteria by which they get effectively judged as worthy of continuation: this is a self-sustaining loop either way. It does not matter that my people could, in a society different from Russia, be more than what they actually are, more than Japanese, perhaps. They – us – demonstrably fail to build anything better than Russia. And Black South Africans, under their own power, have demonstrably failed to build anything better than what the Apartheid regime was; the best idea they could muster was to flip the table.
Of course, one can claim that the absence of indignity inherent to second-class citizenship is worth all that. But – is there really dignity to be found in brutality and corruption, chaos and fear, squalor and pathetic self-deception? Their current troubles have nothing to do with whitey, except in the sense that they cannot sustain the country that whitey has built; so the Gods of Copybook Headings come to collect their due.
HBD is downstream of culture, in a way that feeble, equitable, painless interventions and charitable self-sacrifice by the stronger party cannot negate. The less virtuous cannot rule and become more virtuous in the process. You will have to have a culture where virtue is rewarded, even if that puts some strongly self-identifying, cohesive group in a bad spot. And to have that culture, you have to have at least a seed of people who maintain it effortlessly among themselves. This can be done, for a time, in virtually any society. But let us say that is it not easy to pull oneself by the hair out of the bog. Society is not just upstream of individual biology – it is less mutable than that.
Now, as for what makes Hlynka right. It's that in this scheme there is such a thing as pure culture, the culture of governance and highest-level decisionmaking, which can rapidly change and impose that change on the whole underlying structure; and in South Africa it is terrible.
But if you squint, the culture of the US is pretty similar. Do Americans not lambast «whiteness»? Do their dignitaries not take the knee for a thug, while honest people are canceled? Do they not piss all over the legacy of the whitey, overturn his monuments, ruin education and academia he had created? Is this not what this place owes its existence to?
I exaggerate of course. The serious point is that both American and South African political culture disdains the notion of owning your mistakes, and is ignorant of the feeling of limits. The only respectable response to a failure is to double down and accuse your enemies of meddling; chutzpah is the measure of sincerity. (I've been astonished recently to see Douglas Hofstadter admit he has been wrong about AI – this is not how American Public Intellectuals are supposed to operate. «It's a very traumatic experience when some of your most core beliefs about the world start collapsing.» Well, I'm sorry for your loss, man, try to not have smug and absurd beliefs next time.)
But this abysmal cultural regime is normal. Not doubling down, stopping digging when you find yourself in a pit, actually thinking, is anomalous; the project of rationality was premised on making this anomaly pay rent. Opinions differ as to whether it worked out. Extreme cases of nations being clearly worse than normal for pure cultural reasons are very popular – North Korea, Argentina… But that's grasping at straws.
So there not being much difference in «pure culture», the reason America is not South Africa is still HBD. To wit, there are plainly too many good people, industrious people, smart people, to let it fail; they patch the gaps with tax money, duct tape and high technology faster than new gaps show up, and fast enough to attract even more of the same sort of people, increasing the delta between America and less fortunate nations. Japan, too, does not make sense politically, and their economic system is a mess – but the Japanese have high enough human capital to bear the burden of their culture. They'd have been able to bear Kim's regime as well. After all, Koreans manage somehow, and Koreans are their peers, HBD-wise.
Some states don't have that luxury. South Africa is failing as a state, for example. Its culture is terrible on every level and it is not blessed enough by HBD to cover it up.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
That's not even the point. 1% of the speed of light is achievable, but in any case people don't observe ayys in space, so the idea that they'd have to cover some interstellar void in some "reasonable" time is a mere conjecture. UFOs that figure in these reports allegedly move at tens of Ma. But they screw with laws of physics in the process – no inertia, no exhaust, no friction, no sonic booms, no apparent energy use, no nothing; routine four-figure accelerations in the course of prolonged encounters. If we could figure doing that for macroscopic objects (not to mention housing complex tools or life), it'd be even cooler than interstellar travel.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
It's easy to tell about one's labors and days. More of a challenge with one's times. Especially our times. Why is that?
In Carbon times, there were a lot of smartasses thinking about the future. No wonder people knew little about their own era. Everything important was declassified on average in a century, and a lot of interesting things were revealed about great tank victories, assassinations of presidents, moon landings, contacts with reptilians and so on.
But, although people lived in the darkness, they knew some things about their present and past. For example, that a certain great tank battle really happened on such and such a date in such and such a place. Or that such-and-such a president had really been assassinated in such-and-such a city.
The rudiments of freedom remained with the people of that time, too. It was still possible to argue with each other and even with the officialdom, although it was connected to many risks.
And you could say anything you wanted about the future - they wouldn't kick you from there. That's why in Carbon they were constantly writing articles and novels about the coming epochs. They'd say they'd have it this way, and this way, and this way.
Well, here we are in the future. And it turns out that even with the most naive predictions of our ancestors, it is difficult for us to debate.
Because today we know nothing about the world. We don't know anything at all. But we can't talk about it - the very belief in the existence of "secrets" is strictly punished and is called "conspiracy" (yes, I'm alluding to my most famous punch-in, but I'll talk about it later).
The list of what we know for certain is very short. You can count it on your fingers with me. One hand will suffice.
[…]
That's it. No, really.
Thought there'll be something more? Check it on your own.
We do not know the answer to the rest of the questions that our inquisitive ancestors used to ask: whether machines think, what are the limits of technological growth, who has the real power over the world and the Cloud, what the exact political map of space looks like and who is the beneficiary here.
But not because anything is hidden from the people. Nothing needs to be hidden now.
The implant with the "QQoo" doesn't highlight excessively distant expeditions of human curiosity. We don't even know what our economic system is - feudalism? Capitalism? Post-capitalism? Meta-socialism? Maybe even some total klepto-corporate communism? I personally tried to figure that out for one of my punch-ins and couldn't.
The questions aren't posed like that anymore.
They're not posed like anything at all, because they've ceased to be raised.
– Pelevin, KGBT+
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Why would Schumer's move be evidence in support of the ayys? Perhaps he's as tired of this nonsense as any old dinobeaver, and tries to call the UFO people's bluff – by showing that there is no legitimate claim of their quest being suppressed – and exhaust the excuses faster. (I won't claim this comports well with my earlier hypothesis that @2rafa has kindly mentioned; if anyone, Chuck would've been in on the joke).
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Hardware has to work in reality.
No. High-fidelity simulations in MuJoCo and such suffice for the most part, and other kinks will be ironed out with learning on fleet data.
There is no need to solve end-to-end manufacturing first, we already have hardware overhang with robots, they will walk and indeed run soon after ML grants them decent cerebellums.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
There is no substitute for generation of new workforce – whether young people or robots. Debate can only be had about a) the timeline for supplementing people with robots (and, seeing as robots are a software problem, it's wild to me that people look at e.g. Midjourney evolution in the span of 1.5 years and believe this won't move as well as a human in a decade; yes it is the same problem) and b) legitimacy of austerity strategies and, perhaps, as the trendy folks put it now, degrowth. Even Zeihan, much as I loathe him, points out flaws of even highly successful attempts to weasel out of this predicament. Canada imports skilled immigrants, at like 3% of the nation annually now. Is this sustainable? How many skilled Chinese and Indians are out there? And how many Filipinos do you need to replace one Tsinghua graduate in lifetime tax contribution? But Phillipines, too, has only one big batch left; their TFR is 1.9, and given that these trends appear to accelerate for later comers, it's very probable they'll collapse to 1.2-1.5 in less than 10 years. How many countries can hope to do better than Canada does attracting useful immigrants?
I am not sure how seriously and charitably people peddling immigration as a long-term solution should be taken at this point. They seem either in thrall to a bona fide population replacement conspiracy, trying to do maximum damage in the limited time left (thus I suspect they'll side with AI doomers), or just looking for lost keys under the lamppost, suggesting more of the same to policymakers who are unwilling to hear anything else and perhaps unable to pursue it.
I do not notice them actually calculating net expected contribution of immigrants using any realistic trait distribution analysis (of course this is HBD stuff but you don't even need to explicitly acknowledge HBD, tracking results of previous batches and controlling for selection effects would do enough). It's just appalling, condescending arithmetic – here, Europeans (avg age X), here, young Kenyans (avg age X/2); promise old white farts they will be tended to (if perhaps with a bit of ethnic contempt) in their retirement homes if they vote for importing the latter into cities their nonexistent grandchildren could have kept running, mix and blend. Can this promise be borne out? Of course this is just Kirkegaard, the racist pedophile etc. etc. The question is, how do respectable experts like Dr. Myrskylä conclude something radically different from the same research?
What really gets under my skin, though, is how fertility collapse and its implications are suddenly mainstreamed only now. To be specific, I think it started around 2020, with the BBC headline Fertility rate: 'Jaw-dropping' global crash in children being born. You don't say?
"That's a pretty big thing; most of the world is transitioning into natural population decline," researcher Prof Christopher Murray told the BBC.
"I think it's incredibly hard to think this through and recognise how big a thing this is; it's extraordinary, we'll have to reorganise societies."
Strange how demographers took ages to notice that the dreaded «population bomb» had its fuse all pissed over by modernity (Ehrlich was very persuasive with his deep voice, I guess). Strange because all the way back in 2004 (and based on much older data), there's been a book The Pentagon's New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century by one Thomas P. M. Barnett, American geostrategist. It said, for instance:
THE FLOW OF PEOPLE, OR HOW I LEARNED TO STOP WORRYING AND LOVE THE POPULATION BOMB
When I turn fifty, I will worry about my PSA, or my prostate specific antigen. But at forty-one, I worry about my PSR, or what the United Nations calls my potential support ratio. My personal PSR is currently projecting out at 1.5, meaning my wife and I have three kids we hope will be willing to support us in our old age. So if Vonne and I split Emily, Kevin, and Jerome between us, we'll each end up with 1.5 persons working on our behalf after we reach sixty-five. … By the time our planet reached the third millennium, our PSR dropped to nine to one. That's not too bad, primarily because Globalization II (1950-1980) involved only a fraction of the global population (America, Western Europe, Developed Asia). But the decline is accelerating.
My wife, Vonne, and I are in the process of adopting a baby girl from one of the poorer, interior provinces of China. We're not doing this to raise our personal PSR, but it will incidentally have that effect, and in so doing we are—in a tiny way—setting in motion the migration that will have to be repeated millions of times in the decades to come as the Core's population grows older much faster than the Gap's: the movement of people from there to here. This great shift defines the first of the four massive flows I believe are essential to protect if Globalization III is going to advance.
Sometime around 2050, humanity will begin to depopulate as a species. That's right. In about five decades the world will reach a turning point that, in past ages, would have frightened us if we were able to understand its significance. But in the middle of the twenty-first century, the fact that we'll begin depopulating as a species won't seem scary (though it's never a bad idea to keep a close watch on those damn, dirty apes!), and we should welcome this turning point, even as it presents us and the globalizing world with a task of immense proportions.
What's so amazing about this upcoming reality is how, for decades, all we've heard about from the experts is that overpopulation is the real threat, and how we'd all eventually be eating soylent green or at least some indigestible tofu. I don't know how many frightening educational films I was forced to sit through in grade school, all of which suggested the world was simply going to suffocate under the crushing weight of all these people! Instead, I'll probably live to witness this amazing turn of events, a culmination of tens of thousands of years of effort on the part of humanity to grow its numbers and—by doing so—come to dominate the planet Earth.
…My parents had nine kids, but those nine kids have only begotten eleven kids so far, and except for the international adoptions, my siblings and I are pretty much done. That reduction-by-generation effect is spreading across the Core right now, but the trend will not reach much of the Gap until late in the twenty-first century. At 2050, the UN predicts, the forty-nine least-developed economies will still feature fertility rates above the replacement value of 2.1, meaning much of the Gap will still be growing even as the global population peaks. … Too many of the two billion young will be in the Gap, while too many of the two billion old will be in the Core. Someone will have to turn us over in our beds when we're old, and our population trends simply aren't providing that someone.
most Americans should expect to retire in their mid-seventies, not their mid-sixties or—God forbid—their mid-fifties. The news, unfortunately, looks a lot worse for insular Japan and xenophobic Europe. If America has its problems with immigrants, what with bilingual education and all, our issues pale when compared with those of the rest of the Old Core. Europe already has its share of right-wing, anti-immigration politicians exploiting people's worst impulses, and Japan has such a dismal record of accepting immigrants that the Land of the Rising Sun is heading toward its sunset at warp speed. According to the UN, Europe is likely to let in about 300,000 immigrants per year between now and 2050, when it really needs to let in something in the range of 1.5 million each year if there's any hope its PSR won't drop below two to one by mid-century.
And so on. I like to quote that book. Barnett is a honest-to-God ideological Globalist, so one gets the feeling he'd have cheerfully advised for replacement migration on some pretext even if he were convinced as I am of the promise of automation. But at least he provides evidence that we had decades to discuss alternative plans, and instead we debated (in English, of course, not in Swahili) whether not having a baby is the best way to cut carbon emissions .
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
«Loyalty» is the pillar of right-wing sentimentalism, same as «justice» is the pillar of the left. (Strawmanned versions: «bootlicking» and «envy», respectively). The Left can't not pander to the wretched and the weak, even if their weakness is purely a matter of theatrical convention. The Right cannot not elevate and justify champions, even if those are small-minded, pointless scum or, at times, straight-up enemies. Something something The Lion, Our Hero, The Manly Leader, The Great General and His Loyal Horse, the true Man of the Right feels part of his soul would die if those were trampled upon.
And so The Left feels compelled to trample.
Seriously though, defending a horse's grave from «desecration» makes no less sense than defending a street-painted pride flag from skidmarks, so this is a fine test of mobilization potential.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Yeah, if you select the best of the best, instead of compounding the failures of AA and rank cronyism. In other words, if you do it like a normal hospital. But you'd have to somehow concentrate those qualified black employees from other centers, and those would lose their diversity qualifications.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
FWIW, they claim it's the same model. Some people believe it may be difference in sampling strategy – speculative sampling, early exit decoding or some other tactic to cut costs.
Surely some blacks (and even more of their diverse progressive allies) do. But that reflects badly on those people, seeing as whiteness – as per the infamous Smithsonian definition – is basically just being a decent person (or at least a non-troublesome employee), whereas Affirmative Action is never just affirmative action, never just redistributing the pie of prestige; it carries costs that may measure in lives.
Specifically Hanania cites the story of King/Drew aka «Killer King» Medical Center in Los Angeles, created in response to race riots and operated by representatives of «black community». The overall impression he seeks to convey is one of absolute fraud and profanation in service of ethnic prejudice; incompetent, criminally insane and malicious people playing doctor, giving up halfway and playing longhouse; callously watching deaths of their patients; covering up tragedies with an attitude that'd be chillingly pragmatic if it weren't also naive and self-defeating due to their stupidity. When, in defense of Affirmative Action, Justice Jackson argues – duplicitously and libelously – that black babies have a higher chance to survive in the hands of black doctors (implying that they risk death in the hands of non-blacks), it's precisely mitigations to Affirmative Action fiascos of the King/Drew type, removing high-risk babies from hands of low-skilled doctors, that make her argument superficially plausible.
Right-wing ideas on Culture War topics usually have at least three tiers of radicalization (iceberg meme.jpg). Tier Zero is Hlynka or Sowell-style conservative critique of raw denial, where problems with the default liberal narrative exist but may still be plausibly excused by pure social mechanics – liberals are just wrong about which ones. Tier One is where HBD, sex differences and such innate factors are recognized, but only myopically: people stick to the defensible, scientifically rock-solid motte of standardized aptitude measurements, merit, and economic optimality. Tier Two is where science is thinner, but subtle effects add up to extremely ugly conclusions. This is where you understand, among all else, that it's never just about IQ or SAT; that a great share of MtFs are not «women in man's body» or «men deluded about being women» or even «perverts» but something far more problematic; that… but it's stagnant due to most people chickening out earlier (after all, even in the tiniest niche there'll be crazy people dedicated to sniffing you out), thus rife with esoteric bullshit and self-serving ideology, and can get you banned even here. This isn't thebailey,org, after all.
But There's a Tier One and A Half. It's what you conclude once you allow yourself to think about implications of Tier One for even a little while.
IQ is meaningful because the complexity of everyday life is g-loaded. Conscientiousness and lack of bias are meaningful because tradeoffs of every line of work test human character. Abandon those measures or their solid proxies, and the demerits can compound, until catastrophic tail events become the norm and the civil structure collapses like South African power grid.
It doesn't take much. The society relies overwhelmingly on Swiss Cheese defense: the simplest way to prevent disasters is to use cheese types with small holes. Affirmative action makes the holes in the cheese bigger. An unqualified nurse injects more sedative than needed. A careless doctor doesn't check it in time. A corrupt supervisor doesn't pick up the early signs to remove them, then covers up the fatality. A racially motivated activist excuses the track record by saying whitey don't pay up enough. You create a bubble of horror where there was none.
I am not sure about Hanania's playbook. He flirts with banal racists and disses conservatives for not embracing the strong points of progressive paradigm. It may be incoherent. But his political intention seems simple. I presume it's just delegitimizing those horror-creating processes and mainstreaming opposition to them, so that the world where progressives win will be livable. To that end, he will troll and dunk and do whatever, but he won't swear fealty to any political team that's playing house instead of instrumentally shaping reality.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
This hasn't been reasonable since Moravec's Paradox became known.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
On the contrary, this seems consistent with the belief that any functioning adult in the US is richer than God.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
For what it's worth, Brockman and Altman seem to say that GPT-5 will be in an entirely different format, either a purely B2B offer or something direct-to-research institutions, so I am not sure if that bet would be resolvable.
Is cooperation structurally indistinguishable from submission as well? What about domination? Are all equilibria "structurally" exactly the same, irrespective of total payoff and underlying conditions determining optimality of strategies? You sure find it easy to smudge borders of categories when it serves a narrative. I really like this unabashed postmodernism, @fuckduck9000 would do well to meditate on it.
Game theory does offer something of a moral judgement, implicitly – by imposing an objective unidimensional yardstick of an agent's performance. He who cannot make peace with the thought that his payoff is the smaller one, and makes it even less, burning commons out of pure spite, is irrational; thus, evil.
(Mistake theory posits that people doing that are not «evil», they are just literally too dumb to tell whether they are diminishing their payoff. This certainly is often the case for a fraction of players).
More options
Context Copy link