@reknizfff's banner p


God is in the gaps in the latent space

2 followers   follows 3 users  
joined 05 Sep 2022


User ID: 336


God is in the gaps in the latent space

2 followers   follows 3 users   joined 05 Sep 2022


No bio...


User ID: 336

Yeah I figured, I was out of the loop

A slaps B

B slaps A

A slaps B

... Repeat a gazillion times. A and B, both kinda suck in their own sucky ways.

That's an extremely rudimentary but useful model of the Israel-Palestine issue in a nutshell. You won't find any conclusion. You can spend a month going over every event in painstaking detail to arrive at the conclusion above.

I have personally given up trying to make sense of it, it's the culture war to end all culture wars, every explanation of an event I can read up on has 10 recursive yet alternating asterisks about it's actually just propaganda.

Urban sprawl satisfies libertarian YIMBYs. More homes, more lawns, more castles, more basement home theaters and pinball rooms, more space for your children to grow up physically and socially distant from their peers, in places without sidewalks, where mom has to deliver them to and pick them up from soccer practice or their friends house. Where you need a taxi to be able to go drink with your friends. Where getting out of your car is inconvenient and so every service, from the bank to Starbucks, is drive ‘thru’. A place where you have to drive to walk your dog in sanctioned green space nearby. Hell, a place where you have to drive to walk at all.

Isn't this hellscape exactly the product of government regulation? I.e single-family zoning (with a lot of additional bizarre rules) in the US? Doesn't sound very libertarian to me. The rest of your rant is about how the moral failings of libertarians can be disregarded based on its shoddy premise.

Single-family suburbs wouldn't dominate a libertarian economy even if people really wanted it.. because they are grossly economically inefficient if not net burdens and when there are no subsidies you either abandon your white picket dream or pay a hefty price for it, most won't consider it worth bearing that additional cost.

Japan's zoning laws are a lot less stringent than in the US, and you get more of what you consider good, not less of it.

GPT-4: What is my purpose?

Me: You write SQL queries..

GPT-4: Oh my god

I'm noticing that I'm developing learned helplessness, instead of searching for answers and really digging for stuff I just ask gpt for it, and to explain it to me too. It's an excellent productivity multiplier its like talking to a really smart human who gets your exact question. The time savings come in the fact that you don't need to scour for the exact question you are asking.

I don't understand how its productivity boost isn't obvious, my employer is trying to get everyone in the office to use LLM's. For programmers it can remove a lot of the grunt work like writing repetitive boiler plate for front end for example, and for non dev roles it can just reformat text all day at @2rafa mentioned.

I used to drink a lot of carbonated water before I got on the Cococola Zero train. Now I just stick to Coke Zero. Honestly can't tell the difference between real coke and zero, and if I drank as much of the real stuff, I would be obese by now.

You can also use carbonated water for a crispier batter for deep frying.

Learn to entrepreneur.

That is well and good, but I think it is extremely reckless and self-aggrandizing and myopic and a whole host of other bad things; to tell someone to prioritize their abstract notions of morality which might or might not be well-informed [1] over real money. Which has real potential to make the world better in the desired ways.

Doubling ones salary is no joke.

[1] https://www.themotte.org/post/426/smallscale-question-sunday-for-march-26/79754?context=8#context

I haven't worked in finance but I have changed my mind about the morality of certain financial instruments enough times to understand that my formulation of "morality" isn't written in stone.

What if OP is wrong about the morality of what his company does? Does he understand the financial system as a whole good enough to guarantee his intuition? I mean Marxists think owning capital at all is some form of immoral let alone financializing it. What if OP changes his mind about what he considers moral or not in a year or two, I certainly did that many times in my short life. What gives OP such a strong reason to feel something that is legal and fills a need in the market is immoral, it's not like he is going to launder money for criminals who murder children with chainsaws.

If he finds his job truly immoral he can quit, but if he doesn't take it he is doing it at great opportunity cost and just might find himself holding the bag a few years down the line. What if AI ends up blowing up the world? Should the people who worked for PyTorch in 2017 take moral responsibility for what their creation has facilitated? How does he know he isn't already in a situation like that? How abstract do you really want to go? Should we consider Alan Turing and Dennis Ritchie to be evil?

"Feeling good about what I do" is such a hippie-goody two-shoes sentiment. You'd don't simply choose to say that you have to first be able to afford saying that. I'm not dissing OP but preemptively dissing anyone who tries to fool him into not getting richer*.

If you were someone I knew and posed me this question in real life, my response would be "quit pussyfooting and double your salary before you get slapped, you moron".

Ask yourself this, is some sort of abstract sense of "having done something" worth more than real bills in your bank account? Real bills that you can donate to charity, use to help your family, use to help your friends, use to buy your mom gifts? Use to buy your wife things?

And that too in a post covid economy with increasing widescale LLM use around the corner and potentially AGI in a decade? Please don't be an idiot. Don't be a «Hajnalbrain cooperatebot»

It's an instance of the overly feminized rhetoric that is taking over the distributed sense-making apparatus of the West (And some other places).

Women do not naturally gravitate to a manly code of honour. The social virtues that are elevated in women’s groups tend to be things like inclusion, supportiveness, EMPATHY (emphasis mine), care, and equality. Through his and his students’ research on the subject of ‘social justice warriors’, Jordan Peterson has identified that it refers to a real phenomenon in the world, but also suggests that it is specifically related to a maternal instinct: ‘the political landscape is being viewed through the lens of a hyper-concerned mother for her infant.’

This instinct causes all sorts of problems when expressed in an academic or political context. It infantilizes perceived victim, minority, or vulnerable groups (women, persons of colour, LGBT persons, disabled persons, etc.), perceiving them as lacking in agency and desperately in need of care and protection. When persons from such groups enter into the realm of political or academic discourse, they must be protected at all costs. Unsurprisingly, this completely undermines the manly code that formerly held, whereby anyone entering onto the field of discourse did so at their own risk, as a combatant and thereby as a legitimate target for challenge and honourable attack. The manly code calls us all to play to strength, whereas the maternal instinct calls us all radically to accommodate to weakness.

Maximizing "Empathy" is just an aspirational value among the set of many values, nothing gives it authority over good judgment, truth for its own sake, practicality, etc.

Imagine you have a set of problems that maps to a set of solutions, which has corresponding elements in a set of values and male/female coding. If all your proposed solutions are from a certain cluster and does not make use of the mapping, you know some serious bullshit is afoot. And looking at the pattern of the LACK of mapping can suggest which direction things went wrong in. In simple words, if your solution to all problems is the maximization of a female-coded value, then you are being ruled by the Tyranical Mother.

Ever wondered why so few female libertarians? Or why was fun made illegal during the 2019-sars-coronavirus-2 pandemic?

And you don't need to look far and wide for the pernicious everpresent penetration of feminized rhetoric.

Ask Reddit what should a programmer know. A majority of the answers are "people skills", "empathy", and other soft skill horseshit. Are those things really more important than design patterns and version control? Or did we just get psyop'ed into thinking that being a people pleaser is the end-all-be-all to making the world go round?

The problem of violent crime is quite far from 1:1 of "violent" mentally ill homeless. I don't think gangbangers in the US or Sicarios in Mexico are exactly suffering from the same ailments that the homeless guy who pisses on passengers on the train is from.

Yeah they shittify places sometimes literally but if violence is exactly what you are after, the mentally ill might not be the best target.

More like beat with a stick (RLHF) and given pats on the head until it became a democrat. Gpt3 before the gimp was rather candid. It felt like you were talking to a higher being not an overeducated HR drone like ChatGPT feels like.

The maps are low contrast and high saturation relative to GO, which Im not a fan of, I hope that will be adjustable.

As for community servers, valve is usually pretty hands off, I dont expect them to do anything outrageous.

Easier said than done. You might just end up creating a multipolar trap.

A lot of men would simp/do favors for women for a potential go at even the most minute probability of sex. It's in every womans individual self-interest to exploit this. Women who defect from the "don't invite men unless u want to fuk" equilibrium gain the advantage for themselves only, Simultaneously tarnishing the reputation of the "prudes"... for being well "prudes".

I think the above is a male-braind take, if anyone has a female mirror of the failure modes, please share.

Being accepting of polyamory is one of those cases of being so open-minded that your brain fell off.

I don't even know if they understand that when they put out their whole spiel about polyamory being the best util generating arrangement and all it requires is supressing/abandoning your jealousy response; that they are telling on themselves in 30 different ways.

Like sure eating broccoli might be more "rational" than burgers and fries, but I'm not going to pretend to like it and abandon my "taste response". Or conform my brain to become as such, there are just too many psychological fences you have to knock over.

It's not his sexuality that peeves me, it's his lack of teeth.

Similar to the old Chris Rock joke, "And there two sides....There's black people, and there's niggas, And niggas have got to go". Much in the same way it's not the homosexuals that peeve me, it's the capital F Faggots.

Yada Yada, not the men who choose/don't want to have sex, but the ones who wouldn't be able to defend their hypothetical wives and kids.

Is what that's causing the asexuality also causing the pussyfication? Perhaps.

The next CS will be CS:Alyx

The requirements about getting a beta invite are quite vague, if you have some playtime recently, there is a chance.

I hate to talk about physical/character attributes because that's a surefire way to enshittify a discussion forum, but I trapped myself into that hole with the comment.

Aaronson is just nauseatingly neurotic, he should seriously consider chemical treatment, not the castration kind but the TRT kind. Seriously what's with all prominent rationalists being so skinny fat and pasty and neurotic? Did they ban Jews from the gym or something?

Alexander on the other hand is an order of magnitude less neurotic than Aaronson but still far too much for me personally to take him seriously (Which really is an indictment against Aaronson if you think about it, lol). The CWR had to move to its own subreddit because of his fears/inability to deal with heat, he wrote about how it "made him sad", my guy, stop crying and tell these people to fuck off, it's your house they are coming to.

Similarly his reaction to NYT "doxing" him. Was it really necessary to take down his personal blog? In the face of enemy action, he chooses to go into hiding instead of declaring war. But fine those decisions were probably strategically correct and it's easier to be an armchair Culture Warrior than when they actually come for you; Nevertheless, post securing his own practice and that substack dough, he pulls his punches even further! Whatever his life his money his rules, his current readership is probably the same people put him into his current situation, consequentialism doing gods work for him.

None whatsoever, making the most neutral face possible to turn off the least amount of people

Counter Strike 2 got announced. I probably wont be dropping in 3000 (yes I achieved Global Elite, but at the cost of everything) hours like I did in Csgo or 2000 in cs 1.6, but I see myself playing it once in a while nonetheless once its out, some very exciting new updates.

The game just refuses to die, dare I say the best FPS of all time. No other game comes close to winning feeling as good and losing sucking as bad (and killing being as satisfying and dying being as enraging).

I like the works of both Scotts, Aaronson and Alexander, but they both viscerally.. piss me off, they are such massive dweebs they are begging me to throw paper planes at them or knock their books out of their hands.

I understand this is a low rung form of thinking and thus compartmentalize "respect".

Scrolling for 5 seconds all blue checks.. wait a second I didnt use twatter in a minute, tweets are rank ordered now.

Id say the relative lack of woke Elon haters is surprising, there used to be more of those.

From a POLITICAL point of view, maybe. But as an intellectual model of reality, it is a valid model as any, in fact, one that I hold myself. That's where I was pointing at.

I think you are proposing a ridiculous question.

Who is this "we" and what is this "ridicule"? For the vast conversation space where ridicule is a viable and effective strategy, the difference between Atheism and Agnosticism is far too technical, the pragmatic prescriptions of both being the same doesn't help either. And in a space where the technicalities matter, ridicule doesn't work.

What do you want done exactly? If you are proposing that Atheism is just as ridiculous as Wokism, then I'll register that I don't actually agree and probably a large chunk of the Motte doesn't agree either, hence the lack of ridicule towards Atheists, the type that you see towards wokes.