@RandomRanger's banner p

RandomRanger

Just build nuclear plants!

1 follower   follows 1 user  
joined 2022 September 05 00:46:54 UTC

				

User ID: 317

RandomRanger

Just build nuclear plants!

1 follower   follows 1 user   joined 2022 September 05 00:46:54 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 317

The weirdest thing that happened was surely the mysterious Russian nuclear space device that may or may not be launched. The US has apparently been trying to get China and India to influence Russia against launching - why China would want to advance US foreign policy goals is unclear to me. The US is the most satellite-dependant power, they have the most to lose.

https://www.wsj.com/politics/national-security/u-s-officials-have-warned-russia-not-to-deploy-nuclear-armed-space-weapon-dc3480b4 (paywalled)

Nuclear weapons in space are banned per treaty, they have extremely powerful effects on unshielded satellites (which is the vast majority of them). I imagine this would be an obvious counter to Starlink that's been causing so much trouble for Russia.

There's also been speculation that the Russians are thinking of a nuclear powered energy weapon, electronic warfare or laser attacks with a bit more grunt than solar. Alternately, it could serve in an anti-ICBM role - nuclear pumped lasers are a good way of shooting down missiles. They've also been experimenting with nuclear powered cruise missiles and nuclear powered torpedoes, there's an atompunk theme going on.

Have fun shooting down our constellation of Starlink satellites that let Ukraine get through your jamming and launch drone attacks on your facilities. SpaceX can outlaunch your ASAT for pennies on the dollar

Let's see how you handle our nuclear-powered electronic warfare, good luck drowning that out. You can, of course, fire a missile at our flying nuclear facility - do you want to take that risk?

Maybe FFN used to be female dominated and maybe they do dominate the boards I don't know or care about (Supernatural, One Direction). Since when has any man written a fanfic about One Direction or Twilight? But that subreddit discusses fanfiction generally, it seems to be mainly talking about AO3. I'm just talking about the FFN website. I don't know anything about Wattpad.

Harry Potter is the biggest board on both sites, FFN's top Harry Potter stories are extremely male. That's where HPMOR came from, just take a look and you'll see. Even the smut on FFN leans more toward male fantasy than female fantasy.

Sturgeon’s Law

I can't emphasise enough that I was picking the absolute best of what each website has to offer. Yes, the second most popular fic on HP AO3 (451K works total) is about Hermione suffering, getting chained up and raped by Draco. It was translated into about 20 languages, including Welsh. They really like this stuff! The contrast with HPMOR is staggering, everyone who ever objected about HPMOR being cringe should have to read some of this. Then they can understand the full horror, the enormity of human variation.

The calibre of people here is higher than your average writer. Plus we actually care about plots and rationality of characters. Writers might not care, they figure out the plot to fit whatever they want to say.

"Somehow Palpatine returned. Despite him apparently resurrecting from the dead, we shall spend absolutely zero effort thinking about how we might kill him permanently."

Is there a scene of a heroine getting manhandled in a fight, anywhere? I can't think of this happening in media at all. It's all Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Black Widow, Peggy Carter, Emma Blunt, Rey... Probably there is stuff that I can't think of. Edit: replies show I haven't watched many recent action films.

I recall there was a backlash when the advertising for X-men Apocalpyse had Jennifer Lawrence getting manhandled: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X-Men:_Apocalypse#Billboard_controversy

I'm sceptical that you could get the ball rolling for just 800K but I'd love to be in the civilization that just does it, on the off case it would work.

There are plenty of millennials writing manly stories. They're all over Royal Road since traditional publishing and media frowns on that kind of thing. There's plenty coming out of Asia too - Three Body Problem series for one. The series puts great emphasis on plot, combat, advanced technology and creative problem solving. The whole series revolves around idiotic/evil women who do their best to wipe out humanity, only to be mostly foiled by heroic male efforts. Or my hobby-horse, Reverend Insanity where our based sigma MC rejects all romance in favour of acquiring more power. It's funny to see readers show up, feel like they can see a ship coming up only for the author to pummel them with 2000 chapters of 'no, it makes absolutely no sense for the most sociopathic man and woman on the planet to pair up: their relation is purely platonic and dominated by blackmail, betrayal and exploitation - and by the way, the power of love is strong but not unbeatable'.

The thing is that female storytelling is seen as more classy than male storytelling. They're choosing less-acceptable-to-men authors and creators of all ages. Kathleen Kennedy's no blue-haired millennial. Ryan Johnson's no millennial yet he felt free to go on a random tangent about how capitalism was so terrible in his Star Wars movie and nobody at Lucasfilm objected.

I don't know much about MLP but it is a very girly show, by design. I won't say that girly media can't be good or attractive to men. But even Equestria at War shows the fundamental differences between the sexes. They found a setting that was basically derived from horse puns, secondary to the characters and turned it into a world of blood, death and industrial warfare. What's so specifically Gen X about MLP, isn't it just a well-made creation generally, something that entertains both sexes?

The Portuguese gave up after a military coup toppled the govt, they didn't lose on the battlefield. They were winning the war on the battlefield. Rhodesia was strangled by sanctions, as was South Africa. Without sanctions and with assistance, they could easily have survived. When Israel gets into spats with Lebanon or bomb their neighbours they enjoy the unconditional assistance of the US, who'll happily lend munitions and vehicles. South Africa was paying their own way: they had an arms embargo and had to design their own jet fighters to counter the Soviets. The cost of having to prepare for proxy wars against a superpower is too much for a small country by itself.

The South Africans could easily have copied Israel's notes and just expelled anyone they didn't like the look of to maintain their demography. Demography is mutable. It's only appearances that stopped them, they weren't fully committed to the settler-garrison state way of life and they knew the West would suppress them if they did.

Quite right, I was going to make a similar post.

OpenAI seems to have already passed this easily noticeable tendency, Bing image-gen shoots out reasonably normal depictions of Germany or Sweden. Egregious Netflix-tier representation certainly used to be there, indeed it's still present in the prompt instructions for GPT-4. There's a distinction between GPT-4 and Bing image gen but I haven't heard many recent complaints about GPT-4 image gen.

https://old.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1ahhlon/i_downloaded_my_chatgpt_user_data_and_found_the/

GPT-4 will still divert around wrongthink in text though, it's much more proficient and equivocating than Gemini. Offer it any kind of trolley problem and it will no longer go 'in no circumstances must the n-word ever be spoken, even if cities are incinerated' it will just fob you off with 'many people disagree about what's right according to different ethics'. If you ask whether people deserve self-determination (trying to trip it out re Israel/Palestine), it will say it's a really hard and contested issue. People got angry when it labelled opposition to the First Nations and Torres Strait Islanders Voice to Parliament as divisive, so I think they prevented it expressing that opinion. Yet it's still there, it just tries to be blander and not draw out headlines.

I reckon Google is still emotionally scarred after the whole black people monkeys facial recognition fiasco, so they tried hard to reach a SOTA level of diversity and inclusion.

Yes but you know what they mean. Even if the dictionary definition of a word leads you in that direction, surely you can comprehend what the meaning of the words is, beyond formal definitions. Words aren't just words, there's context and tone behind them which I'm sure Stellula's sister is able to interpret and communicate back.

A quick glance at Wikipedia tells me that season 1 was made by Nic Pizzolatto, season 4 was made by Issa López.

I think men and women think differently about stories, media and what matters in them. This is over populations of course, exceptions exist. There are male ways of telling a story - plot-focused, rational, consistent setting, character agency, combat, violence, progression and character advancement. Then there are female ways of telling a story - character-focused, plot doesn't necessarily make sense, emphasis on emotions and romance. Great writers can appeal to both but that's hard. You can tell I don't really understand or appreciate the female side of things.

I think this is most obvious with the weakest, most unrestrained authors. If you go on FFN or spacebattles or webnovel, you find stories about men advancing their position with hard work and clever tactics. They fight and overcome enemies and court women, sometimes getting a harem. In the case of Harry Potter stories, there's a trope of Harry Potter hitting the gym, using some rituals to get stronger, taking control of his money from Dumbledore and getting a harem of hot Slytherins. If you go through and search by likes, that's what you'll see.

Dodging Prison and Stealing Witches - Revenge is Best Served Raw

Harry Potter and the Prince of Slytherin

Meanwhile on female dominated places like AO3, you find endless romance and homosexuality. Putting the ocean of Harry/Draco to one side, there's a huge emphasis on shipping. Who do people end up with? Are there love triangles? Can there be more love triangles? Angst, rape, therapy? Plot is unimportant in and of itself, character relationships are exciting. There are even tagging features so you can search for exactly what ship you want. Often they take characters out of their world (not mechanically like an isekai) and reimagine them in a different setting - they could be at a normal high school together. Just to make sure there's no combat. Or they make up this 'soulmate' mechanic where people can write words on eachother's skin. It's a whole other world to male fiction.

Draco Malfoy and the Mortifying Ordeal of Being in Love

you've got the antidote for me

Now if you're like me you might feel a little cringe at the male power fantasy stories. I imagine most here have more exacting standards of taste. But you'll feel revulsion at 370,000 words of:

'Harry Potter is dead. In the aftermath of the war, in order to strengthen the might of the magical world, Voldemort enacts a repopulation effort. Hermione Granger has an Order secret, lost but hidden in her mind, so she is sent as an enslaved surrogate to the High Reeve until her mind can be cracked.'

Or:

"Sirius is in boarding school, Remus is in hospital, and they don't know each other until Sirius texts the wrong number."

Who cares about this stuff? Well, apparently women like it. I blame the influence of women on Star Wars. George Lucas's Star Wars was telling a male story, Kathleen Kennedy was telling a female story (boy does AO3 love Rey/Kylo). It's less obvious at this higher level since it's not out in your face but it is still there. Likewise in True Detective, I imagine.

What war were they losing? The South Africans had Mandela in prison, it was De Klerk who gave up before giving war a try (due to the arms embargo amongst other things). The Anglosphere absolutely were against white South Africa (logically they supported the rebels), they sabotaged white South Africa until they gave up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comprehensive_Anti-Apartheid_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_sanctions_during_apartheid

It never came to a war, the South African govt never even tried serious repression because of Western pressure.

Meanwhile, when Israel uses repression the US showers them with military aid. Have as many bombs and shells as you need! Lo and behold, Jewish Israel is still around, having forcibly expelled a good number of undesirables.

In Syria, 2-3 million Alawites control a country of about 23 million. They dominate the country, putting down Sunni/Islamist revolts from the majority in Hama and elsewhere. It isn't so starkly obvious as apartheid but when all is said and done, the Alawites are in control. There's always an Alawite subordinate to any non-Alawite in the officer corps and they are in charge of the security forces. Their minority status unites them - they know that if they give up power, the Islamists will massacre them. And they have a powerful foreign backer in Russia. If Russia had turned away and demanded that they allow competitive elections and give up control over the country, they would've collapsed. There'd be no flow of arms, no backer in the UN, they'd be isolated.

In South Africa, whites would've had the advantage of superior HBD whereas Alawites are roughly on par with everyone else. In Rhodesia they fought for 15 years despite crushing sanctions on oil, weapons and huge numerical mismatch. If there had been a full-scale race war between white South Africa (with moderate Western support) and black South Africa (with moderate Soviet support) then I'd bet on the whites every time. They'd have the vast majority of military hardware and the skills to use it effectively. There's a reason white empires conquered the vast majority of the world in the first place.

The British mauled insurgents in Malaya, they put down the Mau Maus. South Africa would be easier than either of those campaigns since there'd be a good number of trustworthy locals to help an expeditionary force from overseas.

The sanctions and external pressure was a big influence on South Africa. There's no rule that says you have to have elections, or that you need to put everyone's names on the ballot. China certainly doesn't! Even in liberal democracies there are all kinds of ways to suppress undesirable parties - the campaign against the AFD for instance.

If the Anglosphere stood behind white South Africa rather than against it, it'd still be here today.

Is it likely that you can inject someone with boost-my-IQ? It'd work on eggs and sperm or embryos, I get that. We could do that today? But could you really upgrade a mature adult's intelligence significantly? Nootropics seems only to eke out marginal gains.

It seems like that you would be rewiring brain cells, a complex task. Is there even much spare volume to work with once the skull finishs growing? With sufficiently advanced tech you could do anything, I think uploading is possible after all. But civs that can do that are in a whole other league.

Maoism is a terrible ideology but Maoist China was still a very strong adversary. They beat the UN out of North Korea, despite lacking every kind of materiel. Few have ever beaten Western forces in a conventional war!

Furthermore, Maoist China was able to reform itself, turn itself into Dengist China. They managed economic liberalization and rapid growth without Soviet-style chaos and disaster. That's an impressive feat, something South Africa's consistently failed to do. That's the key difference. Ideology matters but HBD matters more, it alters baseline performance and opens up more possibilities.

Maoist influence in the US was pretty limited but you see the same kinds of dysfunction in Detroit, parts of Chicago. Mass looting in South Africa, mass looting in black America. Extremely high rates of STDs in South Africa, extremely high rates of STDs in black America, educational dysfunction and educational dysfunction... In the US it's mitigated by white institutions and resources but the same force is there. If the US was 90% black, it wouldn't matter whether Mao or Marx was a thing, it'd turn into South Africa or Haiti.

Yes, they are. Russia produces some geniuses, but it’s a poor, corrupt shithole with extreme problems.

If Russia is a shithole, what are we? They're apparently producing more munitions than the entire West. NATO is feeling threat from them, they're trying to train more divisions, increase munitions production, reintroduce conscription. We were reliant on Russia to reach the ISS for 10 years, we didn't have the rockets!

Ukraine, North Korea and Russia are all tough, powerful nations. Ukraine's fought hard. North Korea alone has ICBMs and hydrogen bombs, they're more powerful than all African countries put together. Russia could wipe us off the map. I don't deny that Russia has weaknesses (shit semiconductors for one) but it's of a qualitatively different nature to sub-Saharan Africa. They are a great power, they belong in the category with us and China, not Nigeria and South Africa. They export jet fighters and nuclear power plants, they made their own COVID vaccine, there's Yandex and so on. They project power in Ukraine, in Syria, even in sub-Saharan Africa with Wagner.

African countries don't produce their own jet fighters (white South Africa excepted) or long-range missiles, they don't project power into other continents and they can't threaten Western countries on the battlefield. They are in way worse shape than Russia, Ukraine and North Korea.

Botswana just rides on its minerals and mildly competent government. You might say 'oh well so does Russia' and they sort of do. But Russia does so many other things, it's not a bigger version of Saudi Arabia. Russia's been dealing with all kinds of challenges, Botswana sits in the corner and does its own thing (with the world's 3rd highest HIV rate).

HBD

But there is some actual logical basis to 'It's clearly obvious that blacks are better at running than whites, just as whites are better at weightlifting than blacks - if there are differences in physical capacity there are presumably differences in mental capacity. We can draw conclusions from IQ, criminality, Nobels, education scores, income, Fields Medals and national development just like we can draw conclusions from Olympics and sport and conclude that blacks are significantly weaker at the abstract mental skills needed for advanced civilization'. There's nothing complicated about this idea, it's perfectly straightforward.

Meanwhile the blankslatists have to conjure up all these epicycles 'Oh the shape of Africa prevented horizontal proliferation of technology, oh whites and Arabs inexplicably became racist and suppressed blacks to permanently lower their performance, the many majority-black nations were sabotaged by communism or lacked institutions, even when they took over South Africa and Zimbabwe white racism somehow turned the functional institutions broken, white racism somehow wrecked many American cities when blacks showed up, all the affirmative action wasn't enough, there are these mysterious cultural factors acting in all different countries preventing black excellence...'

Other peoples and races have dealt with communism, colonialism and unpleasant history. Few have received such extraordinary amounts of foreign aid and affirmative action. Russia went through more communism than anyone, suffered the brunt of the biggest wars and still made all kinds of advances and contributions. We derive the word Slave from Slav and yet they're not civilizationally impaired.

A billion blacks, many of them rich and not a single STEM Nobel or Fields Medal? Not one major global manufacturer like Samsung or Volkswagen? The simplest explanation is that on a populational basis they're stupid and incompetent. This has obvious normative results for a huge range of expensive policies that are implemented right now. It has obvious significance for those of us who are interested in meritocracy, development, safety and civilization. It is the normative beliefs of the blank-slaters that are extremely costly.

Surely the companies with the largest and most powerful AI models will make profits from the development of AGI, since they'll be the ones doing it? Non-tech companies don't have the compute, they'll be the ones being automated. Microsoft, Facebook and so on will be the ones automating.

Omdia estimates the biggest H100 customers for the past quarter were Meta and Microsoft, each purchasing 150,000 GPUs. Those two companies were responsible for 300,000 units, with the other 200,000 going to Oracle, Tencent, Google, and Amazon, which reportedly bought 50,000 each.

I don't understand, if you believe in shortening AI timelines, why are you in index funds and not tech? Why aren't you on the NVIDIA train with me? Surely an AGI world means that AI related companies are swimming in rivers of gold? NVIDIA, ARM, Microsoft, TSMC, Facebook, AMD, whoever makes memory, whoever makes robots...

Index funds means boring stuff like Walmart and Coca Cola, unless you mean tech index funds.

You're not wrong. They should quit the crappy 'drugs bad' PSA and show stuff from that subreddit instead.

Coke made my cock soft ended up having lesbian sex

The time I accidentally banged an old Asian woman

Tripping on LSD when a luxury sex doll arrives and things start getting weird.

i magnetized my dick on meth

My best friend just died

Second least bad, surely. It could've been a Sackler.

Woops, I meant Gonzalo. Very silly moment!

Navalny just died. There are a bunch of people in the Z-sphere who've gone 'well he just went on a hunger strike and Russian Arctic prisons are not a nice place to be - the simplest explanation is the most likely'. Beneath this you get 'who cares, he was a traitor and an enemy to the country anyway, he got what he deserved', rather the same sentiment people gave about Scott Ritter's (edit Gonzalo's) death: 'don't go to a country and criticize their vital war effort'. I think Navalny was an eyesore and Putin knocked him off. Everyone here and the rest of the world seems to agree. Nobody particularly cares about the evidence, I have no doubt that there'll be some official investigation that produces lots of official evidence that shows it was natural causes/some CIA falseflag. Who cares?

In the US, we had Epstein's suicide. The cameras on that 24/7 suicide-watch cell just happened to fail when they were needed. Well, the New York City medical examiner and the Justice Department Inspector General seemed to think it was suicide. I bet they had access to all kinds of papers and documents and medical things. I can't even take a pulse, what do I know about suicide mechanically? Shouldn't I just go along with the experts? As Attorney General William Barr said, Epstein's death was "a perfect storm of screw-ups". Nothing to see here! Well, few believe he actually managed to kill himself, polling says 3x more think he was murdered than accept the official facts.

My point is that the official evidence isn't always useful in some cases. Most people aren't interested in the evidence for whether 2020 was legitimate or not. People remember how 2016 was hacked by the Russians in some nefarious way - possibly through facebook ads, or the algorithms, or the FBI doing something improper. There were those water leaks that stopped the count that did or didn't happen. Or they look to the article talking about how the 2020 election was fortified. Or they have Sailor's pet theory of how the COVID vaccine results were conveniently delayed until after the investigation. Or there are the statistical anomalies in counties won over, or applications of Benford's law in certain places. Now we can easily conjure up official facts to discredit these ideas. Dominion won their court case, some journo asked whether they delayed the vaccine trial results and were told 'no of course not, that's laughable, everything's planned well in advance'. Well they would say that, wouldn't they?

In the mean time, we see the same legal system that ruled that 2020 was a perfectly secure election also have many issues with Mr Trump's affairs, business or otherwise. It's not unreasonable to think that Trump's a scam artist and cheat generally (he sure did pardon a few). But it's also not unreasonable to think that people capable of stealing an election can create enough official facts to get away with it. The US whipped up a major war based on a lie, why can't they rig an election?

Rationalism and weighing up evidence works well in low-intensity information environments when evidence is fairly reliable but on certain issues it's just fog and mirrors all the way down.

Isn't this good? If pedophiles are pardoned and there's a massive fracas where people are forced to resign because it goes against the will of the people, that's democracy working as it should. In the US they pardon all kinds of creeps and weirdoes. Trump pardoned, amongst other people, a fraudster who then committed even more fraud: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/convicted-con-man-was-pardoned-trump-charged-fraud-rcna95172

obvious electoral suicide?

It looks more responsible for the country to have a non-senile candidate for the highest office. Preferably one without corruption issues or child-sniffing too.

Aren't the Dems trying to lean into the 'we actually care about running things properly' angle? Keeping Biden in office is giving all kinds of Andropov/Chernenko vibes. Can't a country of over 300 million come up with a single charismatic, competent, young, energetic leader?

Buy shares in NVIDIA or robotics/AI stocks if you haven't done so already? I highly doubt mass unemployment is priced in or NVIDIA would be worth tens of trillions. Markets aren't omniscient, it's easy to beat them.

I wouldn't overestimate the insight and competence of very high-up people. I had a similar friend in high places who was constantly surprised when there was no level at which you started dealing with highly competent, knowledgeable, predictive thinkers. Even at the top it was just the same old laziness and silliness. Preparing for social unrest and war is an absolute no-brainer - these people aren't complete morons. They read newspapers. There's already plenty of social unrest today!

There are annual massive riots/protests in France, the farmers protest in Germany, truckers in Canada. Jan 6th in USA. Basic political science says 'bad economic conditions increase unrest - drought/climate change intensified the Arab Spring'. Logically AI will worsen economic conditions for workers dependent on wages.