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
Maybe it's a death con 3 reference?
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
What part of the tweet you linked is a "mafia-like threat"?
Its entirety: «Whatever happens to @Twitter, new social platforms need to center trust and safety from the outset, or risk being subject to the same fate. In the meantime, **@elonmusk has put Twitter on deathwatch. It didn’t have to be this way.**»
I suppose there is some plausible deniability here, but when Twitter is «dying» because they coerce advertisers to leave it... It is a threat. Or rather, an admission of hostility.
in which they claim they've documented a rise in anti-semitic posting
Have they ever reported a decline in anti-semitic posting? Antisemitism works like Shepard tone. And there have been so many false reports from ADL and their affiliates about increases in... right-wing extremism, attacks on trans people, anti-semitism, whatever, I have little interest to check again.
In any case, the very premise is illegitimate. Even if expectations of reduced censorship under Musk lead to more unhinged posting, this does not justify their actions.
I'd expect something more devious, from car crash to bizarrely self-admitted pedophilia.
Edit: that, though, is in any case vastly too crude. Musk can be made to implode, if needed, by more conventional means like Tesla stock crashing or whatever, those cartoonish punishments are improbable.
I am confused about these events.
Obviously this is coordinated, yet again, by the ADL, who have come out of the closet and started issuing mafia-like threats publicly. In fact they are doing this under their old StopHateForProfit «coalition of social justice» framework, which they first used when bringing Zuckerberg to heel two years ago. (From a quick search, it seems I'm the only guy who keeps bringing this up). (Related Forbes article). Zuckerberg, however, did not fight back remotely as openly.
That's... a bit too much, too soon, surely? They aren't yet feared enough, and their commitment to reposting 4chan/pol/ anti-Jewish memes when not intimidating the richest guy on the planet makes them look profoundly unserious. Or do their backchannel threats have more bite, as indicated by those hints from corporations? Because as it stands, I wouldn't be surprised if this ends with Greenblatt's ignominious removal and the organization being discredited.
Maybe I shouldn't be surprised, and this is The Thing shedding the skin of wokeness and used-up assets; maybe they'll be spent to inflate credibility of Twitter that nevertheless will, as Musk promised originally, to install a censorship council. There are many theoretical ways to run circles around the public here.
Then again, mamma mia, how crude.
...Or, looking at replies to Musk's posts, eg here – maybe Greenblatt et al are rationally assessing their dominance. Huh.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
I wasn't even sure it is present in our lexicon, but OP uses it. In my experience it comes from Russian Satanist Warrax, apparently quoting Eliphas Levi.
Involtation to an egregore is a term borrowed by Warrax from Jewish kabbalistics in an attempt to define Satanism. «Involtation» in this case means «connectedness», «egregore» something like «archetype». Thus, to racial Russian it translates roughly as «being connected to some idea».
The phrase first appeared in Warrax' «FAQ on Satanism» and went like this:
A Satanist is one who has an involtation to the egregore of Satan.
Those who wish to understand the deeper meaning of this phrase are advised to read the article «Sepulka».
Also, involtation in general is the establishment of an atsral connection between two objects. Or the actions that follow it. And originally, it was outright the infliction of damage by witchcraft with the help of a figurine representing a victim – a volt.
Among other things, "involtation to the egregore" has spawned several secondary memes. For example, «disinvolt» means «to break a friendship with someone» or simply «to remove them from one's friend list», e.g. after the publication of Kholmogorova's letter, Warrax conducted a session of mass disinvoltations.
Daniil Andreyev, whom I've previously mentioned here, also uses this term in his magnum opus:
I seem to recall, for example, that within Jewish mysticism can be found the concept of the egregor; however, it is difficult for me to judge how closely the term corresponds to the meaning given to it here, if only because of my less than superficial knowledge of Jewish theosophy. In any case, what is meant here by egregors are variomaterial formations that take shape over large collectives from certain emanations of the human psyche.
Egregors do not have monads, but they possess a volitional charge of limited duration and the equivalent of consciousness. Every state, even Luxembourg, has its own egregor. They are essentially static, passive beings. The majority of egregors do not take part in the struggle between the demonic and Providential forces in Shadanakar. There are some, however, that side with the demonic camp.
When egregors disintegrate, their equivalent of consciousness disappears as well, dispersing into space. They do not experience any pain at such times.
To the extent that it is possible to speak of the landscape of those planes, the sakwalas of egregors are characterized by yellowish swirls of space in which the egregors themselves stand out as somewhat denser than their surroundings.
Huh!
Well there's the flippant answer that Google Brain or even Deepmind are not hyped enough...
But if we're talking ratios, something like Salesforce? And Apple, I suspect they will start dropping bombs soon. Amazon is very quiet, and they release decent models. (Upd: there are good works out of Autodesk, Adobe and Nvidia, but it's all media/asset generation and par for the course).
OpenAI is clearly the most overhyped. People underestimate Altman's talent for showmanship (Emad even apes his antics). I doubt GPT-4 will be as much of a shock as everyone is getting warmed up for.
P.S. I do not actually think that Meta AI are weak scientifically. It's just that their models are meh and they release them with much pomp, overpromise and deceptive advertising. Recent Galactica is a marvel of engineering, but people's takeaway was that it can prove how every odd number is prime. Zuckerberg's negative charisma field rubs off on them I guess.
On another note, I still have hope for Schmidhuber.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
see this thread where - germans are domesticated/brachycephalic, swedes aren't - he claims this impacts "national character", but I can't think of any strong psychological differences between swedes and germans, let alone those large enough to support that theory.
Well to begin with, Swedes have like zero hardcore authoritarian tradition, and are markedly less anal/conscientious/workaholic, about equal in psychological intenseness (mild) but less conformist, and have better taste and manners but worse engineering? That's just my gut feeling.
Let me check: according to Hofstede, they actually differ. Near-equal Individualsm, somewhat greater (but still on the lower side) Power Distance in Germans, everything else is totally dissimilar. Germans score 66 on Masculinity and Swedes 5 (that's the lowest score among all surveyed countries! By the way: Norway 8, Netherlands 14, Denmark 16, France 43, UK 66). 65 vs 29 on Uncertainty Avoidance, Germans score 30 points more on Long-Term Orientation, and ~40 points less on indulgence. Not sure how this translates to individual distributions, and Hofstede is probably obsolete, you could try to find better comparisons, I believe the pattern will remain directionally correct because it jives with what I know of Sweden and Germany, and Germans and Swedes.
They are of course very close genetically. And it may be that race science bros are hallucinating distinctions. But given that this almost Hakan-tier nuanced speculation was popular with people who also noticed currently verified continental-level trends, and that people most obsessed with dunking on them also deny continental-level trends... I'd urge to consider that perhaps some of us are just better at noticing fine shades of national characters, be they genetically or just culturally mediated.
How much life they have underneath this apathy, how much cheerfulness, playfulness! Heaps of ability, of talent - all this can be seen in little things, in idle conversation, but it can also be seen that there is only no content, that all of their life's own forces have boiled over, burned out, and require new, refreshing beginnings. The Japanese are very lively and natural; they have few absurdities of the Chinese sort; for example, that heavy, pedantic, obsolete and unnecessary scholarship which only makes people stupid. On the contrary, they inquire into everything, ask about everything, and write it all down. Almost all of the Dutch travelers who have been to Edo say that the Japanese have purposely sent to them their scientists, to borrow something new and useful. Meanwhile, the Chinese scholar does not even dare to express his thought in a lively, common language: it is forbidden; he must express himself as is shown in books. If the Japanese stick to the old, it is only out of fear of the new, even though they are convinced that the new is better. They themselves feel bored and yawn, whereas the Chinese, according to stories, have none of this. Decidedly the Japanese are the French, the Chinese are the Germans of this realm.
Goncharov, 1855. I remember this giving me pause.
claims like "This difference in memory accounts for the difference in interests: Jews like politics, finance, the law, the real, present world. Northwest Europeans prefer history, fantasy, nerdy stamp collecting and the pursuit of meaningless knowledge for its own sake." are total nonsense then. (Jews are also incredibly interested in meaningless knowledge, fantasy, history, nerdy stuff - also math science arts etc)
People with high IQ produce prominent individuals in all fields. Not in visual arts though: I believe there does not exist a single genius-level Ashkenazi painter (I love Levitan), especially if we remove critic-driven gallery art. Like, what, Chagall? No, some of his stuff is good, he's not Joan Miró, but... So there is a big difference in major subfactors of intelligence, at least. And I think SBF and MacAskill are a fine pair to illustrate how this «fantasy vs finance» isn't nonsense.
But that'd be more anecdata.
What about distributions and ratios? It's a serious question. What is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence, of course. But nuh-uh-ing a schizoposter is boring.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Overhyped, like all Facebook models. An interesting and perhaps unnerving milestone in marrying LLMs to game agents, but it's narrowly specialized and it only works for blitz – for now.
As for your post.
Namely, if the goal is egregoric anti-proliferation, do not make it easier for more agents to develop egregoric systems. Do not try to create your own egregores. Do not reward the propagation of any egregores, regardless of their particular ordinal position in the chain of propagation (viz. recognize downstream grifters as loyal opposition and treat them as such). Dismantle the egregores that you host yourself.
Herd immunity against mimesis starts with you.
This is a loser's strategy. «Egregores» are not some autonomous living pests, for they dissolve in random noise without support, but a matter or engineering; and there is an entire industry dedicated to endowing you with an unauthentic Dasein. It can only be resisted on equal terms. If you don't play the game, you will be played, or swallowed whole by bit pieces of players. What you call egregores are tools of extrapolated agency, which begin with humans. Let us not forget this in the age of machines.
We’ve open-sourced the code and published a paper to help the wider AI community use CICERO to spur further progress in human-AI cooperation. You can also visit the CICERO website to learn more about the project and see the agent in action. Interested researchers can submit a proposal to the CICERO RFP to gain access to the data.
Thanks, Mark, Yann.
@HalloweenSnarry you once asked why I stan Zuckerberg. This is why: when they concoct man-made horrors beyond your comprehension, they hand it over much more often than their competitors. I am 99.7% sure those are feeble prototypes compared to some of the classified NSA/NCSC/Unit 8200 stuff, but hey, it's something to play with, at least.
EVA is the first open-sourced billion-scale vision foundation model that achieves state-of-the-art performance on a broad range of downstream tasks.
Thanks, CCP.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Wouldn't domestication proceed by subtle neurological changes, rather than bulk physical ones? Genetic variation in temperament exists, and wouldn't selection on that make much more sense than head-shape?
False dichotomy bordering on the absurdity heuristic; subtle changes in cell behavior may be evolutionarily easy to reach (particularly on timescales he discusses, i.e. dozens of generations) though selection on pathways that affect embryonic cell migration and, say, characteristic relative white matter tract lengths and thus gross anatomy, and not strictly on microscopic scale; and indeed, if head shape as such is not being strongly selected upon, it can be thrown around by apparently unrelated pressures. Specifically, domestication syndrome in animals corresponds to allometric cranial changes; there is a (fairly contested) model attributing it to neural crest alterations.
For all I know, within-population temperamental variation is still linked to head shape in the way he describes. I admit I haven't checked.
Spain and italy don't have significantly lower national IQs than norway/UK/germany/france (according to lynn 2010, 98/97 vs 99/100
According to Lynn, speaking of Italy as a coherent population with some average IQ is very misguided, Sicilians don't even crack 90 while Northerners get to 103. I am not sure about Spain but it does seem to me that, indeed, an average native German is more than 1 point above a Spaniard, and Scandis are obviously not «99/100». In at least one large sample of elderly Western Europeans, there is a gamut of over 1 SD in «categorical fluency» and «episodic memory» task performances. (Admittedly, contra Uriah, they are correlated).
4 points aren't nothing on the population level.
Why you say this is explained by migration is beyond me; migration can explain many distributions, but that's a minor elaboration on selection.
generally intelligence isn't just made up of 'memory', but much more complicated
Sure, but come on now, he doesn't assert that it is.
I couldn't figure out what 'oceanic quivering' is by searching 'from:crimkadid' on twitter so idk.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Basically straight to Obsidian, probably via this script, or some predecessor. The worst thing about it was garbled image OCR that got embedded into md files. Not pretty.
I wonder. Everything valuable about Onenote is either implemented natively, or via community plugins, or is a nothingburger. Command palette > OneNote UI. Even drawing is supported okay-ishly now with ExcaliDraw.
Obsidian tables are not as nice. There's no Excel integration (but there is some csv support). There is multi-frame and tabs, but no multi-window. No straightforward OCR. Eh, I can live with that.
I barely have an opinion on this, particularly about millions or coordinated efforts. However, I'm a big believer in object permanence, which reasonable polite debate eschews and instead demands evidence of the object being visible right now. A group is not even on par with a two-year old individual.
We know that NAMBLA still exists, albeit a shadow of its prime; it was bigger in the past, when the afterglow of sexual revolution still inspired unreasonable hopes for the slipperiness of the slope in all sorts of people.
We know that a number of French intellectuals who have played an enormous part in shaping Western culture, and particularly its academics, «teachers and community leaders» part, have been defenders of legality of sex with what we consider to be minors, and particularly with boys.
An open letter signed by 69 people, including Jean-Paul Sartre, Michel Foucault, Gilles Deleuze, Roland Barthes, Philippe Sollers, and Louis Aragon[11] was published in Le Monde in 1977, on the eve of the trial of three Frenchmen (Bernard Dejager, Jean-Claude Gallien, and Jean Burckardt) all accused of having sex with 12- and 13-year-old girls and boys.
The greatest among them, in fact the most cited academic in history, probably sexually abused prepubescent Tunisian boys. His arguments for drawing the line on 13 years can be read here.
(To be clear: in principle, I agree with Foucault there that, regardless of orientation, the obsession with fixed age as a Schelling point, to the complete dismissal of particulars of the case, is indefensible idiocy and the prime example of High Modernist approach to disciplining the society. Conservatives are beyond hope if they believe that high age of consent is «trad» or pride themselves on upholding muh rules and red lines. It's the same issue as their preoccupation with counting and recounting votes and «illegal immigrants»; coping strategy of simpletons cheated out of their inheritance and myopically tracing lines of the fundamentally hostile contract, hoping to find some gotcha, a technical defect in wording. But that's beside the point).
NAMBLA counted among its members the lauded poet and activist Allen Ginsberg, whose Howl was so fruitfully used as a starting point by our dear Scott in his iconic Meditations on Moloch:
"Attacks on NAMBLA stink of politics, witchhunting for profit, humorlessness, vanity, anger and ignorance ... I'm a member of NAMBLA because I love boys too -- everybody does, who has a little humanity."
NAMBLA quotes proudly:
"An Icon of American Letters" "Despite his status as an icon of American letters, Ginsberg remains controversial. The recent sale of his collection of memorabilia to Stanford University became an explosive topic when the executive board of that august bastion of conservatism discovered his relationship with NAMBLA." Nevertheless, Stanford reportedly paid Ginsberg over $2 million for his manuscripts and memorabilia..
Another poem by Ginsberg, Sweet Boy, Gimme Yer Ass, you can read yourself.
There are many cases of actual, no-equivocation grooming perpetrated by politically salient «allies», and I remember at least two cases where people got off to the idea of persuading boys to take the pink pill. (Some Catboy Ranch on Discord? I don't collect this stuff). Long ago I was also acquainted, hilariously enough, with a very left-wing, very active,«community leader» type gay psychiatrist, obsessed with assholes and dominating femboys, who tried to groom me and a number of my friends and younger people I looked after on the internet. (The main result of his actions was an uptick in pervasive Russian antisemitism). This suggests to me that it is not so rare.
My point is that those movements were/are a tip of the iceberg, made of the most vocal and irrationally daring proponents of the view that fundamentally arises out of rather widespread sexual preferences. Generally people who have those preferences can figure out good positions to preach and help legitimize them without explicit coordination, evil cackling and so on.
On top of that, teenagers are horny. Gay teenagers too, desperately so; you can see people with really wild bios popping left and... left in political debates, and most aren't trolls or LARPers. For one who has been repressed as a teenager, it would not be unthinkable to empathize with that and perceive further relaxation of sexual mores as helping those kids find happiness; don't you think?
Alternative sexualities are trivial distortions of the default reproductive drive, and combinations thereof; deformations of self-identifying and target patterns. Young, prepubescent boys are attractive to a subset of adult men precisely because they are men with a relatively feminine appearance and psyche (this has been acknowledged throughout history, codified in temporary names and dresses and attitudes – from the most benign and non-sexual, like Japanese boys wearing female-styled kimono, to the most explicit practices like bacha bazi). It is an inevitable inference, available to Thai peasants and American doctors alike, that blocking puberty and initiating HRT will preserve and augment those desirable traits.
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. If there are incentives for a thing to exist and to stay hidden, means to stay hidden, and past hints of its existence, then it may well exist to this day, and indeed may well have grown.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Sovereign is she who only fights back.
Perhaps I'm too misogynistic, but this story of wishing to get conquered seems ridiculous (and reeks of second-hand cuckold fantasies, sorry). I don't believe we need any deep analysis of female support for liberal immigration policies, there isn't that much agency here.
Women usually commit to ideological positions that are endorsed by the distributed moral authority of the reference group, and rationalize it with readily available arguments; they are more conformist, more agreeable and, thanks to the incentive structure in education-to-early-career pipeline and their success there, more advanced in their addiction to teacher's praise and fellow user's like and retweet. The reference group being largely made up of fellow women, background social network radiation, media characters, Dem politicians, microcelebrities and such, women arrive at supporting liberalism, unless insulated in deep red bubbles. Liberalism of the sort endorsed by DNC, aka the current thing, feels like common sense, just what decent sane people vote for as a matter of course; indecent, insane, deplorable, mean people, racist grandpas who've regrettably survived COVID, and their ilk support the opposite of the current thing, and associating with them lowers one's intuitively calculated social credit score. On top of that, there is simple political power.
Power is based, powerlessness, meekness, nebbishness is cringe. Based thing is based, cringe thing is cringe, the evolution of society is guided via cringe policing and the side that can inject cringe/based connotations into the discourse better wins. We've seen this analyzed and practically applied countless times, starting with Torches of Freedom, or perhaps much earlier, at the dawn of universal suffrage.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Thanks for your effortful comments but I've lost interest in this chain. There are many nitpicks and objections we could discuss (e.g.: Affirmative Action does not substantially harm Jews who, having very high average scores, make it in regardless, but it reduces the relative representation of White Gentiles in prestigious institutions, and accordingly the political power of this competing demographic; iirc Sailer had addressed this years ago, as well as Jewish opposition to AA, that didn't survive this basic observation). What would come out of it, though?
I basically agree with KMac's lens of Judaism as a group evolutionary strategy, provided in the Culture of Critique. Religions in general are group evolutionary strategies, though the effect is understudied. I also accept broad strokes of his characterizations. Where we differ is in value judgements. I am not that enamored with Northwestern Europeans and their Church-molded mentality, and not that unsympathetic to Jewish traits, doctrines and approaches. Even pretty silly and biased critiques like The Authoritarian Personality have more truth than strongly identifying Whites like KMac, who only recognize humblebrag-worthy faults like «too altruistic» or «not clannish», are willing to admit; if anything, my people have been illustrating this spectacularly since February, and no doubt many NWEs would have gone down the same path with modest prodding. It's not just a libel.
The quasi-conspiratorial issues, leftism, ingroup preference, whatever, those are anodyne. The most devastating and perhaps the most contentious point of those KMac raises is the trait of self-deception prevalent in Jews both on individual and organizational level, its unusual strength, unironically reminding one of doublethink, and its scarily opportunistic nature; though perhaps we need another term, because other peoples self-deceive too, just not so productively on average. Either one sees it, or one does not. It changes everything about the topic, and precludes the possibility of productive engagement between the two camps. In my mind, it's an undeniable reality that cripples your observations like «many liberal-left Jews that supported these things are sincerely ideologically universalist and I have not yet seen strong evidence that their positions would be explained primarily in functionalistic terms».
The establishment of the state of Israel in 1948—and Israel’s military victories over larger Arab forces in 1949, 1956, 1967, and 1973, fostered a surge of pride in Jewish Americans. From antiquity until the creation of the Jewish State, Jews were largely people of the book, merchants and scholars. The creation of Israel unified them into one strong peoplehood, with a homeland and with an army committed to defending the Jewish people worldwide. For the first time in centuries, Jews around the world were no longer victims but architects of their own secure haven that they could flee to in crisis. From the establishment of the Jewish State until the beginning of this century, Zionism came to replace religious observance amongst secular American Jews as a core element of their own Jewish identities. […]
The “New Antisemitism,” also known as anti-Zionism or hatred of Israel as an acceptable stand-in for the classical hatred of Jews, initially gained currency in universities and in leftist intellectual circles. It has since metastasized to much of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party. Today, several U.S. congresswomen have claimed that Jewish Americans have dual national loyalties.
And so it goes, into rather absurd places, including the victim card:
While we undoubtedly face grave challenges as American Jews, we must not give up. Until now, due to lack of information and fear of rejection and persecution, many American Jews have been complicit as anti-Zionism morphs into the new antisemitism. Now is the time to stand up, fight back with all our remaining might and hold antisemites accountable.
We must form alliances with groups that share the same Judeo-Christian values of freedom and democracy, inspire today’s Jewish youth to be proud of their people and the Jewish homeland, and bring Israel back to the center of our Jewish life in the diaspora.
Or straight from the horse's mouth, right at the top of the hierarchy of the party preaching universalism:
"You can be, all at once, completely Jewish, completely pro-Israel and completely American,” he said.
Schumer bellowed a pro-Israel message at the annual event, while calling out fellow politician Rep. Ilhan Omar who had questioned the Jewish ability to be pro-Israel and pro-American at the same time.
Stunning and brave. (Can you be at once completely Chinese, pro-PRC and completely American? It seems you can't even work for civilian Chinese semiconductor companies and be American these days. This is the qualitative difference in diasporal lobbying power).
This self-contradictory doublethink, the demand to support your double standard in deed and vociferously deny the existence of double standard in word, comes naturally to those universalists, and it is swallowed without objection by Americans, so I do not believe there will be crippling problems with the transition to a more explicit state of affairs.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Onenote is amazing but the absence of interoperability sucks. I have used it on and off for years, eventually exported everything and was all the happier for it. Unique features like infinite canvas are not that helpful, it turns out.
Inline calculation was neat.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
A branch here is purged and my comments are only visible through my profile. Same here. It's not technically a deletion, but responses to deleted/hidden posts are non-discoverable within the thread. We seemingly don't have the old reddit mechanic where [deleted] was a legitimate node.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
See edits.
Anyway, what I'm asserting is that the presence of bluster of this kind is not enough to disqualify the proposition as «uniformly just nonsense». Something like 25% of Uriah's conjectures may well prove correct. If I were to bet on it, I'd say that brachycephalization-domestication thesis, episodic memory vs. «stamp collecting» adaptations and the bit about Oceanian quivering smell less like bullshit than Japanese Omega-3 one, but all of it is within the realm of sane academic hypotheses, if not Overton-compliant ones.
Milk Lobe is... controversial in my mind.
Well Galton got further than 90% of modern social scientists (whose received wisdom still looks like this) with just that plus a bit of math. Directionally the same, it seems, happened for the whole Hajnal line discourse, Indian Aryan issue and other topics. We've been hearing a lot of cackling from the wannabe sophisticateds about stupid racist nazi chuds obsessed with foreheads and brow heights or using CaLiPeRS to reach conclusions about intelligence; but time and time again it seems like calipers work to an extent. So I think there are grounds for cautious optimism about this approach.
Pre-20th century, or perhaps more to the point, pre-Civil Rights guys were less technically informed but also less mindkilled and could reason freely on the basis of what is now unattainable purity of real experience; explicitly rechecking and refining their intuitions with modern tools could be a legitimate way to revitalize anthropology in the broadest sense.
That said, wilder schizoposter accs are merely riffing off the aesthetic of gentlemen scientists, if not scholars of the occult.
For about 13 years, in different forms.
Used to be a physical notebook, with the chronicle of ongoing problems and solutions and dreams and other stuff. Now Obsidian-based pile of Markdown files (primarily). I hope to one day integrate it all – maybe neural networks will soon get up to the task of OCRing my scribbles.
I have a backbone structure in the form of a diary, where I write things I generally do not want to forget or might find valuable to review in a year or more, plus registration of mundane events that might or might not come in handy later (health/security concerns), plus everything else from drafts of Motte posts to documents to code to dumps of web pages, sometimes interlinked for convenience.
All of this is streamlined with templates. The daily template looks like
-
Headline (date, one-line summary)
-
Mission
-
Day Planner section with a more or less precise timetable that is parsed into time tracker with notifications
-
Diary section
-
What I have read (links to files or webpages)
-
What I have written/made (links to files)
The Weekly note template consists of a mission, one-paragraph summary, a table for recurring observations, and expanded links to individual days.
There are independent hierarchies of nested tags and folders, plus some minor structures implemented with dataview.
I believe that my system, like many others of this sort, is a product of path-dependency and cognitive sluggishness, far from optimal for its purposes, so I'm uninterested in providing more details and spreading it. There are communities of people obsessed with journaling, GTD, Zettelcasten, you name it; they care a great deal about optimizing it, but it doesn't seem to help very much.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
There’s genes for wanting to ejaculate when seeing a woman, but no gene for “wanting to ejaculate inside a woman and wait nine months to create a child”.
There are genes for everything, if you squint hard enough. Liking children and big families can be as heritable as any typical behavioral trait, which is to say, moderately-to-strongly heritable. Then again, that's not how heritability works: the environment determines how specifically slight biases in neural wiring and biochemistry will play out, projected onto the adult behavioral repertoir. It's just that we cannot very well control environmental cues.
Some people can. Some cultures are better at this than others, more austere and accepting of paternalistic authority and explicit social engineering. What will happen in practice, I believe, is that the observed contemporary selection on traits genetically correlated with high fertility (low IQ, ADHD, high BMI, high time preference, addictions... undesirable stuff, to be blunt) will somewhat degrade the average quality of the population – and then cease, as benefits of childlessness grow, contraception becomes easier and technical surrogates of sex and companionship improve; the very traits currently making them «genetically fertile» will flip-flop into encouraging functional infertility, without any change in those traits' biological foundation.
Meanwhile, traditionalists who succeed at dodging the secularization pipeline will grow, polish their cultural and genetic adaptations to self-sufficiency, and eventually constitute the majority of humans. Then, analyzing the general population, one will see that traits promoting adherence to traditionalism – heritable too, of course – are genetically correlated with fertility, despite being orthogonal to any sex-related behavior or aspects of reproductive biology. Speculating further: it'll be stuff like rigidity of emotional attachments, tolerance for noise and cramped conditions, fascination with children, visceral distrust of strangers, perhaps even disgust and fear of companion animals, high clannishness, high agreeableness, lack of open-ended curiosity, and general mental health (whether or not contemporary P-factor amounts to a real thing).
This is, IMO, the parsimonious and conservative model which isn't discussed enough.
Incidentally, I think this is also a good example in favor of @tailcalled's Phenotypic Null Hypothesis argument, which was poorly received here.
A more systematic overview of the field can be found here.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Yeah I'm moderately pissed that my comments disappear without forewarning or mod ping.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
«Schizoposters» with more or less believable hot takes about human biodiversity and essential qualities of «races» are prevalent in the esoteric right Twitter, chiefly in BAP's circles. The greatest among them all was Hakan Rotwrmt (RIP), and MIYA BLACK HEARTED CYBER ANGEL BABY was a close second; both were apparently collective accounts ran by extraordinarily witty people.
See our resident spammer Carlsbad (?) burrowing into the BAP network.
I haven't read his most recent thread - but his output before that was uniformly just nonsense, and there wasn't any truth or value in it whatsoever, not even in an 'adjacent to truth' sense.
On that basis are you saying this? His inferences are straining credulity, but he cites genuine data.
DaseindustriesLtd
late version of a small language model
3yr ago
Beautiful rhetoric. Still: no, «wokeness» is substantially different from «Marxism», The Thing you oppose and which had been partially incarnated in their shapes predates both, and it is far from obvious that you will accomplish anything of worth with this line of argument.
You are approaching this instrumentally, starting from your own intents and purposes rather than essences of things. Wokes are «similar people», they are posing danger to your values that's of a nature similar to the Marxist menace, and their own chosen labels are not nearly as toxic as «Marxism» or «Communism», so you do what they do with Fascism and every right-wing movement and idea they want to see dead, spreading the reputation-killing poison wide – and thin. It may work to an extent, with audiences already receptive to overarching critique of left-wing ideologies; but really this is a tactic for the side that has the higher ground and can dictate terms of engagement.
Leftism is vast; one doesn't have to be a «doctrinaire Marxist» to appreciate this fact. It's more of an intellectual ecosystem than a doctrine, or an entire class, like «Mammalia» (I wonder: if reptiles had class consciousness, would they assume that foxes and hares are on the same side?) and most elements of the ecosystem are more concerned with internecine sectarian conflicts than with an organized front against aliens. Leftists are aware of having even more irreconcilable external enemies, of course, and constantly seek to form a united front, with varying success. Sometimes, the combination of those drives causes the entire system to evolve and reinvent itself. When they deprioritize Marxism, it is natural to suspect this to be a tactically expedient, insincere rebranding. But when your allies scream that Marxism is dead and this new Thing is not it – you'd do well to check if you aren't tilting at windmills, while the giant, having shed its skin, is safely plundering the town behind your back.
The Thing has always had two morphs – the more populist and the more esoteric, Wycliffe's brand of proto-socialism and Cathars, Conjuration des Égaux and mainline Jacobinism. In the last century Marxism, too, had explicitly diverged into two very distinct schools, loosely speaking, Lenininst (Bolshevik, Stalinist, Maoist, whatever) and Trotskyist (the real structure is far more complex, with the Anarchist tradition, Western clubs etc. participating in the horizontal meme transfer). The former has seized much of the globe (and a sliver of its wealth) though the combination of brutally enforced party discipline centered around personalist leadership, severe political-military fusion, appeal to the lower classes and unlimited opportunism. Its last significant bastion is the People's Republic of China. The latter has spread, rhyzome-like, through the intellectual classes of the developed world. They are so different as to make the common moniker of Marxism inapt; and all evidence one needs to see this is the fact that America with its violent immune reaction to Communism proved to be a fertile soil for rapidly speciating Ivory Tower doctrinaires. Wokeness is a product of their unholy aggregation on the basis of American identity politics and race issues; and while obnoxious, it's an inherently crumbly substance – little in common with the steel edifice of Bolshevism that proved to be the apex predator in the competitive world of 20th century totalitarian systems.
Crucially, though, I think you are wrong about the potential of wokeness. It is a diminished strain, not in some moral sense but in the sense of its motive power. It promises no salvation and doesn't have alluring intellectual content. It's a slightly more respectable elaboration of anarkiddies: shock troops and unwitting expendables of The Thing. Like an inactivated vaccine, it is unlikely to kill the host by itself, and indeed may inoculate the body politic instead. It's a historical tangent, a red herring.
The problem with attacking Wokeness as Marxism is that not only is Marxism dead in the West, but Wokeness may be discarded just as well, and the Thing, ever protean, will again reform behind your back, even appropriating convenient parts of your rhetoric and sounds of your voice.
This is why I think more people should read Shafarevich's Socialist Phenomenon and learn to see The Thing as such.
In a more conspiratorial/whimsical mood, 2 years ago [revisited]:
[…] This doctrine bore different names, but in its deepest essence it is singular. The supreme Trilobitism, the real Lizardism, the Genoine Cromagnonism, the authentic Atlanteanism, the Sacred Faith of Babylon and Carthage, Living Ethics, Pure Islam, The Truth of Revolution, Authentic Socialism, Scientific Communism, Intersectional Feminism, European Social Democracy, Active Humanism, the Great Animation –
– these are just some of its most glorious names,
behind all of which stands the One Order,
the holy
thidivine
sevenfold
billion and trillion unfathomable immeasurable
beyond vast immensely hundredravenously
GREAT
DOCTRINE OF COMMON TASK
– The pointing finger of Progress.
And only the obscuration of creatures, their ossified nature, their unbelief, and self-interest of reactionary forces, made the Teaching warped in its implementation, leaving smouldering ruins and mountains of corpses after a yet another attempt. All this is trifling compared to the fact that the Brotherhood has always survived. And always, after a little regrouping, it guided the world back to the fulfillment of the Great Dream.
There is no doubt that sooner or later it will succeed, even if at the cost of the Universe's existence. Since – let the world perish, let every quantum of radiation, all leptons and baryons be devoured by the abyss of vacuum, let it happen! Let it be! - but may the precepts of the Brotherhood be fulfilled! When the countenance of the Light-bearing Lord shines over the stunned existence!
One day I should translate the whole piece, and do it well.
All establishment sources and authorized establishment underdogs seem committed to frame this primarily as a failure of crypto and not of Bankman-Fried and his cronies; the sentiment on Twitter and HN and in other places is also being amplified in this direction (with bafflingly basic takes like «non-custodial wallets are hard what if I forget my password, this is dangerous for clients», so I guess normies have been primed for the next step in their disempowerment).
Bankman-Fried, being a psychopath of some sort, is committed not to admit blame in any nuanced analysis, he'll apologize pro forma for «fucking up», but when going into details he will blame external forces like CZ, insufficient regulation, crypto bros, whatever, indeed, as per OP's link, he intends to spin such schlock about victory stolen from him in the last minute at Sorkin. So platforming him, and promoting his narrative, is in the establishment's interest, even if in the end he only compromises his own defense.
P.S. Me, not long ago, speculating:
An Antisemite in June:
More options
Context Copy link