@Isomorphic_reasoning's banner p

Isomorphic_reasoning


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 08 01:01:18 UTC

				

User ID: 961

Isomorphic_reasoning


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 08 01:01:18 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 961

This isn't true. They were originally developed to solve equations. The physics applications came much later

If lawyers and doctors were smarter, they'd get right on it too, at least by demanding regulators put massive burdens of evidence to prove that models perform better than humans do.

Please dont encourage them. Legislation slowing the adoption of broadly superior AI over conventional doctors is likely to cost thousands of lives

Whenever I've read about jobs displacement from AI, invariably experts have opined that "the creative stuff will go last"

This hasn't been a reasonable position for at least a couple years, anyone saying that is not a real expert and has an outdated conception of AI capabilities

They did not fail because of lack of funding so adding more funding without addressing the actual problems will likely make things worse

You're not going to bullshit the work itself, the hard sciences don't allow for it.

That's exactly my point. The fact that the subject matter can't be bullshitted is exactly what gives these subjects merit. It means they have real truth content.

I have a math degree. This doesn't resonate with me at all. I think the CS, physics and chemistry majors would agree. The people who only learn how to bullshit are the people who major in bullshit things like "business administration" or "literary criticism" maybe these degrees just shouldn't exist.

There is no such thing as a credible case for the questions you posed. There are cases that superficially sound credible but actually make too many assumptions. In my opinion such a case is actually worse than just saying "I don't know".

The best political analysts of our time struggle to predict the economic impacts of a single peice of legislation a few years out with any decent accuracy. So when you ask a mere student to predict something orders of magnitude more difficult like the impacts of a grand change on a distant civilization that spanned centuries, you are only testing their ability to tell a story, not to get at the truth.

The only thing an avowed rationalist would say to such a question is "I don't know and neither do you"

I think just as an example, in history, I’d ask students to write about counter factual versions of the events in question. How does history look different if Rome had adopted Mithraism instead of Christianity? How does history look different if the French or American Revolutions fail?

This isn't a history exercise, it's a creative fiction exercise and treating it like a history exercise does nothing but instill false confidence in students about their ability to reason about situations with far too many unknowns

Which category? Most blacks in America are descendants of slaves. There has been relatively little migration from Africa since then

I would prefer it because it's more honest

If there's genuine medical uncertainty the only responsible choice for an expectant mother is total abstinence and an expectant father is completely justified in requesting that from his partner

You're not alone, i support iq testing immigrants too

This is a nothingburger. It sounds like the plan was all his and the chatbot just went along with generic encouragement. It's not like it convinced him to do it.

The entire Harvard case was specifically about Asians.

because the amount won’t wipe out an entire university degree

That doesn't mean people with university loans don't benefit. If you have 50k in loans and that gets knocked down to 40k you essentially just got a free 10k

Even if due to hbd blacks won’t be presidents often

I'm not sure this is true. Democracy is weird. Being president doesn't require exceptional intelligence. Looking at our last 5 presidents (Clinton, bush, Obama, trump, Biden) none of them had stellar test scores. I think Obama was the host of the 5 but even then his LSAT was below average for Harvard law

Every other ethnic group is most likely to find someone who shares their political beliefs by finding someone who shares their skin color, except white progressives.

This isn't true. What about black trump supporters? For every ethnic group it is true that if you choose the minority political orientation for that group members of the intersection of the ethnic group and minority political orientation wil be more likely to find people politically aligned with them in other ethnic groups.

I would use the detroit example to go the exact opposite direction. There actually is a very strong signal to detroit when their trade balance is off. If detroit is consuming more than it's producing then on net dollars are flowing out of detroit and very quickly the citizens will run out of money and be forced to either start making detroit more productive or move somewhere else where they can be productive. The only way a city in decline can be sustained long term would be if somehow dollars were continually being injected into the local economy in a way that was completely disconnected from production. Oh wait, that's exactly what's happening. So now the prescription is clear, end the entitlements and redistribution and the city will be forced to come back to a trade balance.

It doesn't sound like you're responding to my point at all. You're just adding another difference on top

“The casting couch is just prostitution” Pro

The casting couch is much more immoral than prostitution because the resources that are being traded for sex often do not truly belong to the person trading them. When the director chooses to hire the actress who gives him sexual favors over the actress who refuses but would be better for the role he is essentially defrauding the production company and anyone who has financial interest in the film.

the effect of being raised by the type of woman who becomes a single mother,

Not just being raised by her, sharing her genes as well.

This is an incredibly interesting take that I haven't heard before. If it's right they misjudged their audience badly but there is still a certain cleverness to it

You completely missed my point. My point was that intelligence is important enough for reasons outside of "moral superiority" that even if we all make it very clear that intelligence is not the same as morality that acknowledging one group is more intelligent than another will still not be easy in the same way that acknowledging one group is more athletic is.

I agree that the intelligence axis is for the most part orthogonal to the evil/good axis but i still think you're downplaying just how important intelligence is. Intelligence is the primary quality that seperates men from beasts. It was a necessary part of nearly every societal advancement ever made. Almost everyone would be better off if they, their neighbors and their countrymen were more intelligent. If one group is on average less intelligent that reflects very poorly on that group and that's true even without adding any mythos about intelligent being equivalent to moral virtue. Now that doesn't mean we should stick our heads in the sand to avoid truths that are offensive but i don't think pretending they're not offensive is helpful either. Personally I think the best way to make the truth of HBD more palatable instead of downplaying the importance of intelligence is downplaying the importance of race. A white man with an IQ of 80 is less intelligent than a black man with an IQ of 120. Population means mean nothing when evaluating individuals.

You don't have to see unintelligence as a specific moral failing or believe it impossible to be both unintelligent and righteous in order to recognize the fact that, broadly speaking being intelligent is better than being unintelligent