@Westerly's banner p

Westerly


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 4 users  
joined 2022 September 05 00:45:34 UTC

Talk to me on Discord! Westerly#7626


				

User ID: 316

Westerly


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 4 users   joined 2022 September 05 00:45:34 UTC

					

Talk to me on Discord! Westerly#7626


					

User ID: 316

This is a very Motteish, meta contrarian hipster thing to say. This seems absurd, contrary to reason and personal experience. Intelligent people are not right about everything, but I would find it hard to believe they are wrong more often than stupid people.

The upper classes are not entirely devoid of superstition and conspiracy theory, but talking to an average lower class person for even a few minutes generally exposes truly wild reptilian-level beliefs in a senseless mishmash. You are romanticizing retards

Sure this Bankman guy fucked up, but I think you’d be hard pressed to find any ideology without its share of bad actors. It can be fair to dismiss an ideology at some point based on this heuristic after enough consistent failures with few counterbalancing successes (maybe communism comes to mind as an example of this category). But does EA fit that condition?

Does it consistently lead people to bad actions? More frequently than other systems?

I really do not see what is wrong with their wording. Are you saying Politico made some specific diminishing statement that the NYT is trying to weasel their way around with their wording?

A somewhat related question, but just how does this outright denial of intelligence as a concept square with every day experience? I don’t even understand how this quasi religious taboo can hold up. I mean, are dogs not less intelligent than humans? Do dog breeds not differ in intelligence? Have they ever interacted with someone vastly less or more intelligent than themselves? When you interact with someone maybe 40 or 50 pts lower than yourself the difference is just glaring, I just don’t even understand how you can hold to a denial of intelligence in light of such experiences.

Hardcore fans are defined by their slavish devotion to some IP, if any group especially lacks taste it is hardcore fans. The tasteful enjoyers move on from a product when quality declines, the cultlike fans are the ones still buying iteration 37 even though quality went down the drain

”Groomer” as I understand it, is a person who’s making a covert attempt to directly modify a kid’s sexuality in unhealthy ways

This is the equivalent of wokes using “white supremacy” to include timeliness, dress codes and objectivity. Maybe you feel turnabout is fair play, but it’s dishonest and is a transparent attempt to leverage conditioned emotional reactions to a different, narrower concept against a newly broadened category

I also really doubt any supporters of this would say its purpose is to punish reds as opposed to “protect trans kids.” I think it’s fair to ask whether “protect trans kids” or “hurt red tribers” is a model more predictive of actual behavior, but you have to actually ask that, because this law is consistent with both so far as I can tell.

Can you please not use the midwit meme? You might as well just say “You’re a retard”, but for some reason the mods tolerate one but would never tolerate the other

All real experiences are being replaced with more optimized simulations. Real experiences have limitations to how much you can optimize them. Pets can literally be bred for cuteness, docility, smallness etc, not so with human children. Streamers can optimize friendship, sex workers/OF egirls for sexuality, retirement homes for elderly care, recorded music for friends/family singing. Real experiences limited by blood relationships, geographic proximity, reciprocity and non-specialized providers just won’t be able to compete in the future (present) and it seriously troubles me

Russia is not losing this war, the stakes are too high, so it’s going to keep going on. They cannot afford to give up

What exactly are the stakes? What exactly would happen to Russia that would be so intolerable if they did give up and just went home? Would it really be so bad?

Did some notable 9/11 truthers get murdered? Is this alluding to something specific?

Near group/far group

Your essay doesn’t even use rationalists as an example once in the cases you examine. You have two examples, Ligma Johnson and a Scott Adams statement. The victims of which are journalists and Paul Krugman respectively, neither of which would describe themselves as rationalists. Just a nonsensical essay

Why does he strike such fear into the heart of rationalists? Just ignore him and downvote

I’m nobody special, but neither is the guy that decides we need to have a policy ensuring no children starve, but his policy shapes evolution just the same. Nearly every policy that touches on life and death is influencing evolution whether you like it or not. At least we can acknowledge that and bring it into the discussion of tradeoffs. Instead you seem to just want to stick your head in the sand and pretend our actions have no effect on evolution.

I don’t seek to impose any values. I’m not arguing for sterilizing Africans or whatever you think I’m angling towards. I’m just trying to explain eugenic/dysgenic to someone that seems to be willfully misinterpreting it

I don’t even understand what argument you are making and neither do your interlocutors seem to. What is the point of the haggling over the price comment if it has (apparently) no bearing on anything?

Just being honest, it is pretty well known that you can post any uncharitable thing you want as long as you bury it in 500 words and don't descend into slurs.

Is he claiming to be king of all Ireland? Did the commentator specifically make a false claim regarding the ethnicity of his ancestors?

leftists are always on the lookout for things to subvert. Because extreme leftists fundamentally cannot create, only destroy

Oh come on this is ridiculous. While leftist entryism seems to be a real phenomenon, blanket stating that leftists are just fundamentally evil like this requires a little justification

All of these premises are just plainly ridiculous. They don’t follow from one another at all. Am I obligated to be friends with retards, schizos and sociopaths? Am I obligated to have sex with 100-year olds, men, and retards? Are blacks not allowed to say “I just feel more comfortable with black friends”? Are women not allowed to reject incels?

If the answer to any of these is “no” then we know what this is really about. This is just cover for browbeating white people for having white friends or partners, or anyone for rejecting trannies. If the answer to all of these is “yes” then this is such a silly fantasy it needn’t be taken seriously

Nobody thinks being obese is better than being fit, but pizza is still outcompeting healthy foods for an increasing portion of the population

Eh I doubt epistemic injury is a factor, I don’t think people think that deeply. Probably a combination of 1) deterrence when other men are around and 2) lies/imagination. As for 2, I’m sure some women are doing the whole “OMG that creeper was totally stalking me” thing. But several women I know not to be fabulists have related to me more instances of creepy behavior when they are alone and it is not unreasonable to assume male presence deters it.

Edit: Isn’t there any woman you trust completely to be honest and accurate on this? My wife hates minorities as much as any motte user but reports harrassment when on her own that I never see

If you have kids, do you worry that there's some random perusing Instagram or willing to train ai on them?

I have a child. I don’t care if someone uses photos for sexual purposes, the same person could masturbate to them from memory of seeing them in public. If you’re female, people will masturbate to you countless times without your knowledge and they have never needed AI to do it. People are weird, that’s life.

Am I once again missing something here? What do you mean by getting "Dorner'd"? Perhaps he was wrongfully fired, but my recollection was he then went on a killing spree and committed suicide. How is that analogous to getting assassinated for conspiracy theories?

What is the “community nurse” doing other than “finger wagging about dont drink soda”? Why won’t her words go in one ear and out the other? The fact that people continue smoking despite all the well-known harms and warnings suggests that a mild-mannered suggestion from some obese nurse will have no greater effect. What revelatory information about cigarettes or soda is the nurse going to provide? If you are so stupid as to give your baby soda rather than breast milk nothing can help your baby short of losing custody

That’s the feeling of your brain growing. Keep at it, you’re doing well!

This is just bitchy and unnecessary