@Lykurg's banner p

Lykurg

We're all living in Amerika

2 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 December 29 10:51:01 UTC

Hello back frens

Verified Email

				

User ID: 2022

Lykurg

We're all living in Amerika

2 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 December 29 10:51:01 UTC

					

Hello back frens


					

User ID: 2022

Verified Email

There's an endless list of substances that, if used recklessly or without sufficient knowledge, lead to harm.

And very few of them are tempting to use in such ways. Those substances doctors have in fact used in harmful ways. The US just recently had a dustup about opioids.

That would entail a full lecture

It really shouldnt. Listing of the action mechanisms of those drugs is not an explanation - if thats all you would do, the high-level answer is "its just a coincidence". It doesnt explain why no non-recreational drugs do the same. If there is some receptor pathway that necessarily connects the curative and recreational parts, then what makes you think they are distinct?

That's akin to borrowing happiness from tomorrow at a very high interest rate, it doesn't end well.

If were talking about the effect of a ~one time experience, then comedowns arent necessarily relevant. We might imagine for example someone seeing "Wow, its possible to be happy" and that giving him hope in life. That hope might point down the abyss, but thats only measurable when you get there.

But taking this at face value: do you think peoples lives are worse for alcohol? Theres a hangover there too, and in the narrow pleasure-pain accounting, youre not coming out ahead - yet there are many apprently non-addicted people who are using it a decent amount.

It's highly reductive to dismiss such advances as "Drugs can make you feel better when used responsibly".

Yes, thats the point. The value of the cliche depends on not thinking you can outsmart it.

Nobody has lost their job or family because they drink too much coffee.

I am well aware. The link is not directly related to my point here, and I was wondering more about the idea that shes better off for it.

It also remains fascinating, the way people will respond to every part of my comment but the main one. Why do you think apparently different drugs work in such similar ways here?

Not either of these unfortunately. Definitely post-split, likely post-covid. My top guess is that it was linked in theschism. Will play with the search engine, thanks.

Prescribing cocaine and heroin is, unfortunately, not a viable cure for depression.

Has anyone tried? In the manner of these studies I mean, not by just looking at addicts. People whove done heroin generally report that naive use is an experience beyond anything they had before. I would not be surprised if this influences people even months later. But it also might not, there are always those pescy details. E.g. maybe it overlaps too much with the alcohol high to show effects in our society.

Its more that we have now found multiple drugs with different mechanisms of action, but apparently similar in terms of how they are used and effect against depression, and all of them are used recreationally for their short-term effects. That suggests to me that it works off the recreational bit, and it again wouldnt be super surprising if it did. "Drugs can make you feel better when used responsibly" is hardly a new insight - the entire problem is the way they lead to non-responsible use.

Also curious what you think of this one.

A number of trials have concluded, with, as far as I can tell by eye-balling them quickly promising results.

IDK, this "Drugs are actually, like, medicine, maaan" has been around for a while, and generally dont seem like someone youd want to end up as. Its getting "scientific" now that the taboo has weakened, but... no shit it looks promising, youre literally trying drugs for mood. If the researcher cant make that look promising, how on earth did he get a PhD?

It also seems like theres some disorder in your post. The last paragraph before "The aftermath:" for example has a lot of redundancy and sounds like it was supposed to be before those other instances. I thought the part about pharmacokinetics was double as well, only realised now that one is about the nausea and one the whole thing.

I need help finding an old post. I think I remember the phrase "dark organic society" followed by either "theory" or "bullshit". It was about the idea that society organises itself in certain ways regardless of explict, program-driven organising, and interpreting parts of progressivism as a despair reaction to that. I thought it was on baliocs tumblr, but google disagrees that its on tumblr at all. /u/gattsuru because you might have been the one that linked me back then.

I'm trying to write up an effortpost about *** conditions

You have been awarded the hapax legomenon price for extraordinary achievements in rationalist brainwrangling.

Wait, does the API search work again?

Recently watched a video...

I wonder how much you could condition yourself against abrasion. I know people can run on gravel at least.

If it was 2 v. 2 I'd prefer some kind of tag-team format, since actual two v. twos inevitably turn into 1 v. 2s, which always end badly for the one.

I did mean to see the dynamics defending multiple directions. Just make it so the team loses with the first knockout/tap.

The variation could at least be semi-realistic, to be in keeping with the original idea. Longer/no rounds, ground that really sucks to be on, 2v2, etc.

logos means 'word'

And "Stimme" means voice, and "Pravda" means truth, and "Rta" mean order, and yet their derived terms overlap strongly with its and each other. In this case the concepts, if not the words, seem to be by shared descent, but I wouldnt be surprised if the chinese have something like it as well.

I think its fairly clear that there is a general intelligence, even if there are subfactors. There is some correlation between different abilities even across animal species, where it makes no sense for a whole species to be adversely effected wrt intelligence. You might say this is just parallel selection, but then you have to explain why needing those abilities correlates so broadly.

We do not construct human minds from mechanical components, and we cannot identify mechanical components within them

We can identify neurons, which are not quite as predictable as transistors but pretty good. I think we can also grow and arrange them controlledly to some extent, though not at the scale of a human brain. We can in fact gears-model simple organisms on an individual neuron basis. So it seems to me that if we are uncertain whether brains are "mechanical but intractably complex", we should be similarly uncertain about LLMs.

I indeed dont understand the difference you make between axioms and inference. Even if we could build brains, couldnt you equally claim that "its axiomatic" whether the non-manufactured ones are also mechanical? If I could predictable control people in a gears-model way, are they still mechanical while Im not looking? Is it actually an illusion and I can actually only "control" them into doing things they would do anyway, even though I feel like I could have chosen anything? Whos to say that I have a 1/6 chance of dying when I spin the revolver and put it to my head, just because everyone else does?

I/O is not Read/Write

You dont really have read/write access to your harddrive either, unless you open it up and look with a microscope. The "direct" access you get as a normal user is just a very reliable introspective report.

we can, in fact, point to the gears in CPUs and RAM and do gear things with them, and this is in fact the best, most efficient way to manipulate and interact with them.

Thats because the computer is designed to be understandable and manipulable. Its not the least bit difficult to write a programm or OS that doesnt have meaningful interactable gears for you, and transistor-level analysis is not the best, most efficient way to interact with computers. I mean, we talk a lot about LLMs here, and I dont think they are the same thing as humans, but it seems like they pass an non-mechanical by your criteria.

The single determining criteria of autism vs schizotypy was an oversensitivity vs undersensitivity to errors in sensory prediction.

Im sceptical of this because for me this differs a lot between different kinds of sensations. E.g. I can never "forget that youre wearing it", whatever "it" is, but it takes effort to not tune out music in under a minute, even if Im not doing anything else.

Have you ever actually gone in, and lost the whole budget quickly? I can understand that the experience of winning might override the knowledge of -EV, but thats definitionally not something that can happen most of the time.

Im especially wondering about the olde times when there was no house and its all peer-to-peer betting, where presumably the others want to stop betting as you want to keep going.

The alternative is you giving swords to their kid secretly, me telling my nieces and nephews that God doesn't exist and is made up, and so on and so forth.

I think some level of stating your opinion is a normal part of social relationships. I dont know if /u/Iconochasm's situation is like that, but handing the kid a foam sword there when youre talking with them, or saying you dont believe in god when it comes up, seems pretty reasonable. Dont do it in secret, dont make a plan for converting them, but expecting your kid to have zero exposure to the beliefs of a dinner guest seems pretty crazy to me. Yes, it will be a point of friction, of course it will be, but some level of friction is also a normal part of social relationships - interpreting any amount as a sign youre doing something wrong is a symptom of nerddom.

Do you mean that "normal" tomboys are autoandrophiles?

At least where I live, the alcohol thing is stable without any real legislation (beyond the age limit). You can buy it at the supermarket and almost all restaurants, I would guess you can order it over delivery services too. But alcohol consumption around 30% higher than the US, and statistic on alcoholism... vary wildly in absolute levels but generally the US seems to be higher in most comparisons.

The one time I went gambling in a Casino was a rush. I see why people get really into it, I felt an urge to return and try my luck for months afterwards.

Can you elaborate? I dont understand this at all. Some games of chance are fun games, but they are so also without staking money.

Why is it even illegal to drink while driving? If you can drive after having a beer, it should be fine to have it during, no? (I have also never heard of anyone doing this, but Im far away.)

I am guessing (but this is only a guess ) that your actual preferred solution would be something like disenfranchising Jews, denying them the right to vote or own property in non-Jewish lands, and shipping them all off to Madagascar

That seems unlikely to me. SS presumably doesnt believe in magic soil, and so would have no reason to think that it makes a difference long term whether theyre shipped to Israel or Madagascar.

Hm, did not expect to end up sympathetic about the murder part. Can you link the essay?

If you or OP were to look at the X account, the pinned tweet makes the analogy to Ignatiev directly.

Your link is dead. Not sure how it happened in an hour, but try to link to images directly rather than their google images display.