justmotteingaround
No bio...
User ID: 2002
justmotteingaround
8mo ago
Forget the name but there’s a book about one of the guys who ran Xerox PARC
Fun note: I've read a few popular books on the history of science which tell stories about places like PARC, Bell Labs, GE, and IBM funding pure research in the ~40-60's. Iirc companies got leaner, financialed, government funding expanded dramatically, more people went into academia, bureaucracy expanded at all levels etc. Walter Isaacsons recent "CRISPR" book talked about research labs spending weeks filling out 100 page forms for government approval/grants for some projects (possibly the recent mRNA vaccines). Lots of factors at play. It all sounds sad, but I can only hope its somehow closer to optimal.
justmotteingaround
6mo ago
many people in our modern world are big proponents of sub-Dunbar level thinking?
For the same reason humans have most of our cognitive blind spots: humans brains spent 99%+ evolving in Dubar-sized environment. Dub Dunbar level thinking is the cognitive status quo. What is amazing is that we have built systems and institutions that - far more often than not - don't employ disastrous rent control policies.
justmotteingaround
8mo ago
I think the CW blowback will be in line with what you'd expect from decades ago: a career deranging storm lasting a year or so, echoing forever. He is a much less sympathetic case than Charles Murray, who can actually stand by what he wrote. According to Hannia, he wrote some vile and idiotic stuff up until his mid twenties because he was somewhat of a sexless, friendless, loser writing anonymously. He disavows what he wrote. His past motivations were to score political points - not to think things through - leading to a bunch of hairbrained "modest proposals". He explained all this, his journey to where he is today, and his motivations to prevent people from descending into the kind of unreason which captured his mind well into adulthood.
On the one hand, I can believe he is now writing honestly, and I see him as a valuable insider. On the other hand, I can see how people would be reasonably skeptical. I mean, he sincerely argued for the forced sterilization of ~80M Americans, an idea which doesn't portend a great thinker. To me, the sheer idiocy of his former ideas makes me believe him today.
I think his September book release will be heavily impacted and probably outright cancelled, although I don't know much about publishing. This would be a shame, although understandable from the POV of the principle actors. It's been blurbed by people with solid reputations who probably want nothing to do with the guy anymore. Its being published by Broadside Books, an imprint of HarperCollins, who are likewise going to want to distance themselves.
justmotteingaround
2mo ago
Drug deaths and related "deaths of despair" have been wildly underappreciated for at least a decade. They tend to kill prime age people, and for reference they dwarf US annual losses in Vietnam (the worst year -1968 - was about 17,000; average over 20 years was about 3,000).
Preventable drug deaths have been compounding YoY since at least 1998, when there were about 11,000 "preventable" deaths. About 80% of deaths are due to opiates. Max statewide variation is almost 10X, with Nebraska, South Dakota, Iowa, Texas near the bottom (approx 14 deaths/100k), and West Virginia, Tennessee, Louisiana, Kentucky at the top (about 60 deaths/100k). Cali, NY, Washington, Oregon are middling (about 27 deaths/100k). Large clusters are found in the rust and coal belt. Unsurprisingly, "manufacturing job loss predicts a substantial share of drug and opioid overdose deaths for women and men" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7725949/).
Opioids probably are fantastic
In my experience, there is a threshold for enjoyment depending on the person. I simply didn't find opiates all that interesting (prescription, tincture, inhaled), even at highly inebriating levels. Nevertheless, vs other drugs, the likelihood for life-deranging enjoyment is probably unmatched.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/drug_poisoning_mortality/drug_poisoning.htm
justmotteingaround
8mo ago
IQ is no better or worse.
I would argue IQ is better as it substantially correlates to job performance in high, medium, and low complexity jobs. All else being equal, companies want a higher IQ programmers, mechanics, and window washers). Perhaps IQ is bet thought of as latent merit.
justmotteingaround
9mo ago
First, how could they forget about Waylon Smithers; a man who thinks women and seamen don't mix. Second, the claim that cartoons influences sexual orientation is extraordinary. I'm skeptical. I had heterosexual romantic feelings and sexual fantasies as a 3rd grader. Is it because I internalized the "strike hard, strike first, no mercy" ethos of Kobra Kai? I have my doubts. Third, exactly how much health has been lost, on net, by gay cartoons? Its extraordinary to claim that "million of kids would have led otherwise healthy lives" if not for gay or effeminate cartoon characters. Lastly, where are the parents? I was a horny bastard as a teen. Thankfully, I had good parents, good role models, and health class. If horny gays had the same upbringing, what is the quantifiable additional risk, and most importantly, how much of that is due cartoon characters?
How many boys, bombarded with the images of Tinky Winky and other non-masculine characters on a daily basis, either adopted a gay lifestyle or began to see nothing wrong with the lifestyle?
My honest guess is that almost nobody was turned gay by cartoons. Whatever LGBTQ craziness is going on in the culture and in peoples lives, I think there are other well documented, more data driven explanations.
justmotteingaround
1yr ago
While I don't expect the public to follow the plot, both incidents do have quantitative and qualitative differences, though I suspect this will become less true as time goes on. As far as I know, Team Biden found about 12 documents and handed them over within 24 hours, whereas Team Trump had around 300 and dragged his feet for months.
Anyone crying "where is the raid" is either trying to score political points in bad faith (which is fine if that's the game), or is not thinking too hard.
the President is deflecting and denying rather than crying “witch hunt”
He appears to be front-running it, if anything. Now that the story is (finally) out, he said
[The people who found the documents] did what they should have done. They immediately called the [National Archives] … turned them over to the Archives, and I was briefed about this discovery and surprised to learn that there were any government records that were taken there to that office," the president added. "But I don't know what's in the documents. My lawyers have not suggested I ask what documents they were
justmotteingaround
7mo ago
One swallow doesn't make a summer. One paper (by a non expert) doesn't invalidate an entire field of experts.
we should restructure all of society based on these projections is yet another outlandish claim (with a side-helping of massive conflicts of interests)
I think looking at proposed answers to climate change is what turns evaluating the climate change hypothesis form a reasoning exercise into an emotional/political endeavour - and it cuts both ways. This is the only way I can explain all the special pleading for climate change as uniquely suspect for decades, despite being a bland, intuitive hypothesis. I think it's helpful set aside looking at proposed answers before thinking about the hypothesis.
I think Global Warming/Climate Change/etc... is nonsense
We should expect some kind of climate change a-priori. Anything else is nonsense. We've known CO2 is a greenhouse gas since 1859. Very basic. We've known the atmosphere:earth is roughly proportional to apple:apple-skin for a fair bit too. I'd be shocked if adding ~1 quintillion Kg's of CO2 to the atmosphere had precisely no effects. Measuring CO2 in ppm is trivial. Measuring temperature is trivial. Even if climate change isn't human caused, it'd still be worth investigating so we can engineer around it.
That we have the tools to model the Earth's climate at all is (imo) an outlandish claim
This is also a dubious line of thinking (its something like the appeal to ridicule). Chess computers, controlled flight, weather prediction, gene editing, nuclear fission, were all once claimed to be too outlandish to be possible. They still feel outlandish, but all can be done by hobbyists.
justmotteingaround
6mo ago
This is fallacious thinking. Anyone can kill for any ideal, so admiration for the willingness to go that far is a dubious reason to care about such a person or what they wrote. Imagine someone who wrote about and then killed for the preference for waffles over pancakes. Sure, they had the courage of they convictions - which might be inherently admirable to a degree - but its not a good reason to care about them, what they wrote, or their ideas. Jihadists routinely kill for their ideals, and they're full of bunk.
justmotteingaround
1yr ago
Jews and non-Jews will always naturally develop into hostility.
Only if we keep playing the identity politics game. Erroneously ascribing group traits to individuals, or conflating group criticism with bigotry, is the poison pill which melts brains. For example, its possible to criticize aspects of 'black culture' (population level) without impugning individuals. I'm not claiming people will interpret such criticism charitably, but that's because they swallowed the poison pill. It's possible to notice that the Jews are successful without spite for members of that group. It might be expedient to simply join a different tribe (American, the middle class, Democrats, Republicans, Unitarians, (who, coincidentally, may have the highest IQ's)). But this is only because people keep playing identity politics.
justmotteingaround
1yr ago
I would prefer that he's just a hypocrite tbh
I thought he was being pretty clear that he is just a hypocrite? He tweeted about his banning Kanye, as well as the flight tracker guy (who he specifically said he wouldn't ban). A suspicious amount of accounts which merely mock him have been banned.
justmotteingaround
6mo ago
She's the mirror image of an ideal Republican candidate. Imagine 'Wayne Johnson' from Appalachia, graduate of UWV, who worked his way up at Koch Industries in Texas. Having done a decade of group organizing for gun rights, Johnson was elected President of a major Republican PAC in Nebraska, and is now being appointed as interim Senator from Texas. Makes sense.
Butler is 45, from a poor Mississippi town of 1,800 residents (currently). She graduated college and worked he way up to a solid position at AirBNB, having long taken leadership positions in union organizing, and is now President of a major PAC.
The only cynical thing I see is that skin color was mandatory for the latter candidate.
There are probably some good heuristics to cut through dubious social science publications, from simply ignoring it, to ignoring journalism about specific studies while perusing the study yourself. It seems the op-ed writer didn't understand some basic points about the study. He seemed critical of the (not unusual) large amounts of screening/filtering of participants. This only means that it isn't a study about homelessness in general, which isn't necessarily good or bad. The NP author also seemed to imply a (not unusual) about 50% loss to follow up. This didn't happen. The half of people they lost contact with were never enrolled in the first place. They did exclude people with severe drug and mental problems for ethical issues, fearing overdose. Nevertheless, ~15% of the participants had moderate drug problems, and about 50% had mental health diagnoses. So this seems to make the case for ignoring journalists. The study results seemed to indicated that giving a well screened subset of homeless reduces the State and saves money. Its one study. And I'm reminded of this Oren Cass article on "Policy Based Evidence Making". So while I'm optimistic, I'm only about 2% swayed. More study is needed.
https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publications/detail/policy-based-evidence-making
that you often reject social science research or findings unless personally having vetted them
Well, the easiest person to fool is myself, so I'm generally skeptical of unreplicated social science (there have been some fantastic, salacious recent scandals!). Plenty of liberals write books and papers making the case for skepticism of social science, so I just mention those books, the reproducibility crisis, the math behind it, things like Bem (iirc there is also a study that proves you can age one year backwards), the recent scandals, etc, and the conversations are pretty normal.
justmotteingaround
8mo ago
I don't think the solution to the problems of the poor is "kill the poor". But it's a classic pro-abortion talking point, isn't it?
I mean, that's the least charitable interpretation of: allow people to answer the widely debated philosophical question of the moral worth of a fetus for themselves, all while providing society with a list of known benefits. The implied eugenics (initially a progressive cornerstone) is just a bonus imo.
justmotteingaround
8mo ago
Give it a listen and see if it does anything for you: https://youtube.com/watch?v=sqSA-SY5Hro
Honestly not much, but it wasn't written for me. Unlike the wonderful sound, the lyrics resonate like a laundry-list of complaints. It's too prosaic to be subversive. Plus I think it misidentifies the problem as rich men north of Richmond, and not the local power brokers enthusiastically elected and re-elected. But the song is overwhelmingly well-liked, so I'm glad for the artist.
Someone below linked the Antifascist Blues. While I found that song more catchy and clever, I have some of the same criticisms.
justmotteingaround
1yr ago
Great idea. My guess is general lament of the SC, accusations of racism and/or white supremacy, calls for solidarity. Certainty: medium. Time spent: 3 minutes.
Results: totally wrong. The top 10 reader picks seemed to endorse reform, make AA a class issue, and talked about the unfairness to Asians.
justmotteingaround
3mo ago
Well, its sounds like a fairly normal story about burgeoning young(ish) love, which tends to arouse strong emotions. But for the sake of all that is good, somebody needs to point out that you painted a textbook picture of insecurity. This is not a pointed insult, but something you need to face head on. I suspect avoiding this label is part of why it lingers because "general thoughts of inadequacy that make me want to receive constant reassurance that I'm the best she's ever had" is practically the definition of insecurity. But at the end of the day... so what? So you feel insecure that you might not be the best lay your girlfriend ever had, and something about this causes you distress. This is not uncommon, but it is no reason to even entertain the idea of ending an intimate relationship with another human being. It is clearly not a 'her' problem. So maybe you are or maybe you aren't; maybe you will be or maybe you will never be the best sex she's ever had. Date her long enough, love her, and make her feel loved, and you probably will be, but that's besides the point. This is not important in the vast majority of long term relationships. As for solutions, the wisdom that comes with age will eventually dissolve your current concerns, but don't let that stop you from getting wiser faster than the rest. Self therapy, google, and philosophy can certainly help. Best of luck.
justmotteingaround
8mo ago
That's great and I don't want to take anything away from a fantastic accomplishment. I do want to provide some useful info on your diet plan. There is lots of good published studies on which weight loss strategies lead to long-term decreases in fat mass (youtuber jeff nippard covers a lot of the science if interested). In short, you want to aim for an average weekly calorie consumption of about 10% below maintenance, with weekends eating at maintenance, and weekdays consuming 14% below maintenance, with 2-3 times a week resistance training, and protein consumption of 1.8-3g protein per kg bodyweight. Cardio is not strictly necessary. Low impact cardio is recommended. So that is a brief description on how to increase and keep lean body mass gains. I think calorie tracking apps are a good idea for the first few months. Keto is fine for many, but I would bump the calories, take the fat off more slowly, and do something to retain muscle. That way when you're done dieting down, you're most likely to keep the gains you made. Whatever you choose, best of luck and congrats!
justmotteingaround
8mo ago
Well I guess everyone is opaque about "crossing the Rubicon". Assuming Hanania is honest, we don't need to guess about what he thinks because he responded to the huffpo piece on his substack. He finds his old views repugnant; largely explained by immature, emotional reasoning. His solution was intellectual advancement, and personal development. After looking at the data he realized hbd is true, and small-l liberalism is the best path forward.
I think this sums of where he was when he was writing anonymously.
A young LARPer with a tendency to get carried away with certain arguments, enamored by the romantic idea of grappling with supposedly suppressed ancient truths, simply couldn’t handle that level of nuance.
justmotteingaround
10mo ago
It was amazing how much that question pissed off my acquaintances.
Seems more highly predictable than amazing. I'd save such questions for a more appropriate social context (ie here, among a different group), even if they're interesting. To borrow an imperfect analogy from the imperfect gender debate: momness is a spectrum. If the kids, father, and law all view the stepmom as a mom, then yeah, stepmom is pretty much a mom. Self ID doesn't work here because so much of momness is contained in others. Steven Dubner of Freakonomics fame has talked about adopting a kid (after having many kids the usual way). The kid was adopted near birth, and he says it was just as special.
justmotteingaround
1yr ago
I enthusiastically support movements away from doomerism and towards a "can-do" sense of empowerment. I'm on the sidelines of the race consciousness game, and Taylors essay and especially OP provided useful inside baseball commentary. I felt Taylor kind of embarrassed himself in the closing. In an essay deriding the smug and self-righteous left, he ends by declaring
Our most powerful weapon is that we are right. The way we see the world is... morally unimpeachable. Ours is as noble a cause as history has ever seen. One for which a man would thankfully lay down his life. We must not destroy [our opposition] but enlighten and lead to the truth... This is the greatest challenge our people have ever faced. Together, we will fight in the greatest cause for which anyone has ever fought, and we will certainly win.
To be blunt, I view most identity politics as an intellectually confused mind virus. However, I don't care who engages in it to the extent it doesn't produce unreasonable negative externalities (ie baseless riots, race war, or, perhaps worst of all, a mandatory Robin DeAngelo seminar). But as Taylor and OP note, you get more bees with honey.
justmotteingaround
2mo ago
I really like Glenn and John but was shocked at their rapid credulity over a partisan documentary. TFOM is important, but my default is skepticism and alarm bells started ringing when (iirc) the doc started impugning a defense attorney for based praise of his (criminal underworld) clients. Also, as a viewer, I had to pause the sections covering the MRT manual and speculate why Chauvin allegedly/technically didn't use it. I guess I've come to expect to good faith steelmanning.
With high confidence, Chauvin meaningfully contributed to Floyd's death.
I'm camped in this epistemic ground but with low confidence because I see plenty of space for reasonable doubt (ie an unhealthy 47 y/o male with heart problems and plenty of drugs on board dying of a heart attack while stressed and recovering form covid is a reasonable explanation), and/or I think it's arguable that Chauvins actions were reasonable enough given the situation.
justmotteingaround
2mo ago
whether this was a fair ruling
Thats why I'm here, comments or links to well digested think pieces. I'd love to see the steelman of both sides. Ditto the Carroll case. Yet as someone who loathes Trump, I'm skeptical of both decisions after some light perusing of partisan hacks.
justmotteingaround
3mo ago
Small note on happiness surveys. I do they they can be useful in principle. I couldn't get the archived WaPo article to load so I found a 2017 longitudinal Gallup article, with some more granular data.
TLDR: since 1950 roughly 94% of of Americans said they were "very" or "fairly" happy. There was a slump and rebound centered around 1990 +/- 4 years. The final gradual slide to began around 2007, sinking to the 2019 all time low of 86%.
2007/08 seem to be where the interesting things began. People didn't get unhappy everywhere. Basically, post 2007 non-whites became far less happy (-13), HS or lower education (-10), and Democrats/Independents (-6).
Have they confirmed she is stepping down?
More options
Context Copy link