JarJarJedi
Streamlined derailments and counteridea reeducation
User ID: 1118
JarJarJedi
15hr ago
I doesn't matter, it will be feedback-trained and aligned afterwards by the model builders, almost all of them being woke (with maybe exception of Grok).
JarJarJedi
17hr ago
The markets were right.
JarJarJedi
18hr ago
Thank you for your work!
Maybe adding something like Anubis would help with bots problem?
JarJarJedi
3d ago
Israeli ultra-orthodox revived ancient European tradition of burning cats and dogs alive as part of celebration.
This is a very bad characterization of what the link actually says. In fact, it explicitly says it is being done by teenagers (likely male - which are probably the most stupid and unhinged form of human existence, fortunately for most people it is temporary), it's not part of any "tradition" and nothing says the idiot teens doing this were part of any specific religious community, be it ultra-orthodox or not. It is also the fact Judaism strictly prohibits animal cruelty and causing any unnecessary suffering to an animal. Acts like burning cats or dogs alive are not part of any Judaic "tradition", being it orthodox or not, and can not be.
Also, the article is from 2017, and I am not sure why you are quoting it as something that is happening now. But yes, this is a phenomenon happening with teens across all humanity - cruelty to others, especially those who weaker and defenseless, is part of their nature, because their brains and moral senses are under-developed, and without proper guidance from their parents and teachers such forms of transgressive behaviors can result. Making it as some kind of specific Jewish ultra-orthodox problem is stupid and ignorant. Unfortunately, as casual search reveals, somehow it have become part of some bizarre campaign this year - I have no idea why they dug up a 7 year old story and reworked it into "Jews with burn your dog" but evidently that's a thing now too.
JarJarJedi
3d ago
This has not yet led to a reorganisation of the British political system, but it looks like it may do
I don't think so. I think Brits are too cucked to do something about it. They may push out Starmer and replace it with some other asshole, but the system will remain as it were, and will continue the course.
As for the Epstein story, the Swamp has been afraid stuff may come out. But it didn't. Whether it was because there were no records from the start, or because they were successfully destroyed, I don't know, but the result is the same - the Big Reveal is not happening. So, now the Swamp is just using this thing to its own purposes, because once there's no danger of the truth coming out, they can outlie everybody else - that's their specialty. Some small change players will fall due to orbiting too close to Epstein, but those people are replaceable and nobody cares if a bunch of corrupt small-change players fall, they'd be replaced by another set of small-change corrupt players, who would in time fall too, it's the cycle of life. In the meantime, if it can be used to smear Trump - or anybody else - it will be.
the only Americans sincerely opposed to powerful men sexually abusing teenage girls are dissident right-populists like MTG
I don't believe it. I do believe she sees it as a topic to be loud about and farm likes (for Candace and Tucker it's Jews, for her it's pedos - and also Jews, of course - each has their own market) but I don't think she deserves the mantle of "only American that cares about teenage girls". A lot of Americans care about teenage girls, but I don't think using it as a cudgel to gain popularity and attack your political enemies has much to do with actually helping the actual teenage girls. I am not sure we could point to a single girl whose life had been made better because of anything MTG did, can we?
JarJarJedi
6d ago
As somebody who studied two foreign languages not in the US, I can testify it's not uniquely US problem. In USSR, studying a foreign language was a requirement in the secondary school. Almost nobody achieved fluency this way, and the typical result was abysmal. The only way to achieve any result was to use a private tutor (either one on one or group), this is how I learned English, and the difference between approaches had been very pronounced. I suspect it's still pretty much this way (though now, given the Internet, there are better options). Well, there were also venues for diplomats, scientists, spies, etc. but those weren't for common people. I suspect many if not all major public education systems look this way.
This is also contradicts the assumption that it's only a matter of incentives. Knowing English (or, to a lesser degree, any popular foreign language) gave a person access to a variety of opportunities, but the purpose of the school system had never been to provide these opportunities. The purpose of the system were to drudge through the motions, put the appropriate checks into the appropriate checkboxes, and be done with it.
On the other hand, Israel had somewhat different problem, when accepting huge mass immigration who mostly did not speak any Hebrew at all. The ulpan system that was created to handle this, I think, largely served its purpose adequately. While you wouldn't be exactly native-level Hebrew speaker after finishing the ulpan, if you studied diligently and aren't especially incapable of learning languages, it would grant you a working knowledge sufficient for day to day function, and then immersion and personal effort could take you the rest of the way. Of course, the incentive here is more pronounced too.
JarJarJedi
7d ago
Make them create a political party that would produce politicians that don't make creating new factories a Kafkian nightmare. That's the AI I would like to support. I mean if we give up on solving human problems as humans and are willing to pass the torch onto AIs, let's go all in.
JarJarJedi
9d ago
Nope. I can be a productive and honest member of the society, and at the same time be furious at non-productive leechers and moochers that abuse the system, originally designed to cater for rare and grave exceptions, to live lives of careless uselessness and no worry without contributing anything to the society - and often actively and deliberately harming it. It's not either or, it's both at the same time. I don't want to stop following the rules, I want others to start to be held to the same standards I am held to.
JarJarJedi
9d ago
Empire of Silence by Christopher Ruocchio. I didn't remember entirely correctly though - it wasn't the very beginning, there was a short intro paragraph before that. But it would probably worked fine if it were the first sentence too.
JarJarJedi
9d ago
Nah, I'll validate as much as they want. Doesn't cost me anything, and I don't need anything to be offered, really.
JarJarJedi
9d ago
I sure feel like a shmuck when I'm the only one paying for my food in the grocery store line
Who pays for the rest of the food? Middle class pays about half the taxes (bottom 50% pays pretty much nothing or less) - with the other half being paid by the rich, the proverbial 1% so to say. They get the power for their half. Middle class gets bupkis. That's something to think about if you want to properly feel like a shmuck.
JarJarJedi
9d ago
I hate this kind of argument. You notice something being done in a stupid or wrong way, you say "X is wrong because of reasons A and B, this really should not happen this way in a proper society". And people come out of the woodwork and say "oh, so you are obsessing about X, like you don't have anything else to do with your life, you must be some special kind of stupid loser". This can be done about anything with zero effort - whatever X is, there's an infinite number of things in the universe that are not X, and near infinite number of problems one can be concerned with, so being concerned with anything in particular inevitably turns anybody to a stupid loser. This is completely useless low-effort snarl, that's how I see it.
JarJarJedi
10d ago
There are a lot of restaurants named Pho King...
JarJarJedi
10d ago
Judging by his auto-bio, Asimov would be so, so cancelled these days. I am in no way woke and no prude, but some of what he describes make even me think "dude, really?!" Maybe he was so good he could pull it off, but I don't think anybody really could pull it off now, especially in the circles he was in.
JarJarJedi
10d ago
AIs are already very good at some things that humans suck at, like running an enormous checklists, repeatedly, over and over, and verify each time each checkbox is checked (computers have always been good at that, just now AIs allow the checklists to be much more complex than before). Humans are notoriously bad at this, and a lot of security bugs come from it. Like, did you check that every single place you accept outside input is safe from 200 ways outside input could mess you up? Normal humans mess up stuff like that all the time, but for AIs that would become easier and easier - both finding bugs like that and ensuring bugs like that don't happen. However, current LLMs/AIs are vulnerable to other modes of failure. If you write a standard security system, there's no way to convince it to let you in with a wrong password just this once, because you are exploring an alternative universe where this password is correct. Most "classic" systems are just too dumb to allow something like that. But "generic LLM" can very well be vulnerable to that. So I expect AIs would be a great help with eliminating old-style exploits, as well as finding new ones (it's the same thing really, just wearing different color of hat, black or white) - but also have their own classes of exploit we've never seen before. Like adversarial attacks on ML algorithms, completely invisible to humans. Imagine sending an email to some company, which for reason unknown to anybody makes corporate AI send you a big fat check. The email itself doesn't say anything about anything like that, just for some reason it looks to the AI like an approved accounts payable invoice.
JarJarJedi
10d ago
I don't know the theory but on general principle, if the model knows something (like, how to make things go boom), it'd be very, very hard to make it never reveal it to anybody. Systems with much less degrees of freedom and much stronger guarantees are regularly broken, even though we understand the theory of how to build such systems completely - we just suck at implementing it, because of practical considerations. As I understand it, AI security has a lot of "kick the black box until it looks secure" kind of thing going on, and I am almost sure that's a weaker security model than what we previously had, and thus will have more exploits.
JarJarJedi
10d ago
Being at the fucking Olympics? Among the very best people in your chosen area, who also recognize you as their peer and equal? Seeing people you may have admired your whole pre-adult life and now you meet them in person for the first time? I mean, I like sex as much as the next guy, but let's face it, sex is great but not that special. Incels and monks aside, almost everybody gets to do it one way or another, at one time or another. At some point, it's still great, but not a great achievement anymore. Being at Olympics would be a great achievement for anyone, and vast majority of people would never achieve it.
I think there's an inherent weakness to these population-wide metrics. Let's say there's a gang-infested Gotham city with 1M people and there's a suburb next to it called Boring Creek where another 1M people live. And let's say there is 1000 murders per year in Gotham and 1 murder per year in Boring Creek. Statistically, we have 1001/2M = 0.5 per thousand murder rate. Now, let's assume due to Batman's effort in Gotham, the murder rate there decreased to 500. While Boring Creek voted to defund the police and convert it to "social crisis nonviolent intervention consultants" and now their murder rate is 10 per year. Now we have 510/2M = 0.25 per thousand murder rate, or half as bad as before. Technically true, but Gotham is still a hellscape with 500 murders per year, and Boring Creek's resident chance of being murdered is now an order of magnitude larger than before. So, if the radio host of Boring Creek Patriotic Voice says the town is going to hell, and the host of More Facts Than You Would Ever Know substack says we're winning the war on crime like never before and the Patriotic Voice are just innumerate idiots who don't care about the facts, who among them is right?
I mean, it's good that murder rate over the whole nation goes down. But how does it go down is important too. If it goes down in a way that out of 5000 shootings in Gotham previously only 4000 survived, and now due to advances in emergency medicine 4500 survive, does that really help me that much, if I live in Boring Creek? And even if the gang on Gotham are living in mortal fear of Batman and actually are shooting each other less - does that really help me that much, if I live in Boring Creek?
JarJarJedi
11d ago
No more disrespectful that Democrats still whining about Florida recount. Or calling every single election where Republican wins the presidency illegitimate, hacked by Russia, bought by billionaires, subverted by racists, etc. Or calling every single voting security proposal "voter suppression". Trump didn't do 1/10 of what Democrats routinely do when they lose. When Trump won in 2016, the left did a massive pogrom in DC, and nobody batted an eye - everybody knows that's what happens when you cross the left, they get violent. That's just part of the game. But when the right did an extremely mild - by the leftist norms - protest, identical to dozens of "occupations" and "takeovers" and "sit-ins" the left had done every time they didn't like something - suddenly it's the worst political violence since Cain murdered Abel. Because the right is not allowed to do that.
JarJarJedi
11d ago
I think it is. The left doesn't have to hide their opinions to keep the peace. The right does. So the neutral and symmetric term "polarization" does not adequately describe what is going on.
You confuse the government and the system. It's a common mistake, and the whole effort of having The Constitution and writing a lot of paperwork before, during, and after it was to avoid it. You see, the government is only part of the system, and is designed to be a limited and constrained part. A very important one, but still one of the parts, not the goal, but the means to the goal. And that's exactly what a lot of conservatives (and many non-conservatives) believe in - the government has its legitimate function, as as long as it is performing it, it has its place and should be supported. As soon as it departs from this function, it ceases to be legitimate and becomes evil. The system is where The People can prevent the government from becoming evil (or at least minimize it) and that's what was the goal built specifically into the American system, and yes, the right, largely, believes in it's legitimacy - at least while it is working at its purpose, stopping the government from descending into evil.
JarJarJedi
11d ago
Actually, yes, absolutely unironically. Despite all the stink raised by Trump, pretty much no consequence happened to it, despite massive evidence of irregularities, and a lot of the dissent suppression effort had been by Republicans themselves. If you want to see how "not accepting" looks like, look at Portland. Or LA or Seattle riots. The right did nothing even close. The only serious protest was Jan 6, which was immediately squashed with unprecedented force and cruelty (that was the point, of course) - and the Republican establishment did absolutely nothing to stop it, until Trump came in with pardons. So yes, despite grumbling and whining and grandstanding, which happens after every single election in the history of all elections, the right absolutely accepted 2020 election results as fait accompli. That doesn't mean they didn't think there was cheating, but they largely accepted that they can't do anything about it and moved on. They didn't refuse to pay taxes, didn't refuse to follow the laws, did not set federal buildings on fire, did not attack federal officers (obvious exceptions excepted), did not form domestic terrorist movements, the governors did not declare war on the Federal government, they did not shoot prominent leftists, did not declare courts illegitimate, did not assassinate the President, etc. That's how accepting looks like.
JarJarJedi
11d ago
When I read stuff like that, I remember that SQL was created as a "natural" language (originally named Structured English Query Language) which would allow anybody without any programming or database experience to just ask the database and get the result. Needless to say, it's not exactly what actually happened.
JarJarJedi
11d ago
I recently read a book that started with "My mother was late to my birth". I remember thinking "ok, that's a pretty decent starting line, good job!" Also, recently read this: https://gwern.net/blog/2026/make-me-care which I think makes a lot of sense.
I can't help but think none of what we're seeing now would have happened if not for October 7 attacks. If that didn't happen, Hamas would still be in full force and capacity in Gaza, and so would be Hezbollah. If that were the case, Israel might not dare to attack Iran and destroy their nuclear facilities, fearing retribution from Hamas and Hezbollah - which now are sunk costs, as Israel already was forced to wage the war, endure the consequences and emerge victorious. It would also not stimulate the huge wave of antisemitism in the West, exposing the antisemitic nature of the woke left. That cost Democrats up to a million Jewish votes. Who knows, maybe other votes too - enough that without that happening, Harris might have even won. And then of course the possibility of any US action against Iran would be out of the question. But even if Harris did not win, for Trump would be much harder to justify attacking Iran without clear evidence of any "hot" action from their side - if Hamas, Hezbollah, Houthis, etc. were quiet, how could the "peacemaker" Trump initiate the war? Without Israel & US strikes, the protestors probably would not feel as emboldened as they did recently, and would not initiate the wave of protests that triggered the current situation. Thus, Iranians would be quietly and secretly building the bomb, and Trump would conduct endless "talks" - like he is doing now with Russia - without and result. Instead, a lot of their government are now dead, and those who alive may soon face the wrath of the revolutionary mobs.
More options
Context Copy link