@tikimixologist's banner p

tikimixologist


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users  
joined 2022 September 04 23:09:57 UTC
Verified Email

				

User ID: 257

tikimixologist


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 0 users   joined 2022 September 04 23:09:57 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 257

Verified Email

Here's a little bit of incomplete thinking about the classic "13/53" number, which is a ballpark figure (varying year to year) that represents the fact that black people are overrepresented by a factor of about 5x in crime. I see a lot of people tend to interpret this number as "black people are 5x more likely to commit crimes", but that might not actually be the case.

Concretely, there's two ways this stat could come about:

a. There are 5x as many black criminals per capita and each black criminal commits crimes at 1x the rate of white criminals.

b. There are 1x as many black criminals per capita and each black criminal commits crimes at 5x the rate of white criminals.

There is of course a continuum between them, but I think it's useful to focus on the two endpoints because the endpoints have totally different policy responses and also suggest totally different causes.

For example, the policy response to (a) is that we need more police to catch a lot more black criminals. The policy response to (b) is that we need longer prison sentences for the criminals we have in order to prevent the same guy from doing 4 more crimes.

They also suggest different causes. Scenario (a) suggests something (HBD, special kinds of poverty not reflected in census stats) causes blacks to have a higher criminal propensity, whereas (b) suggests police might just be extra lenient towards black criminals thereby giving them more time on the street in which they commit more crimes.

Interestingly, while the theory of police abandonment will get you cancelled today, it was very much the theory pushed by black community leaders in the 90's. It was one of the things leading to "3 strikes" laws (long prison sentences for the 3'rd crime in order to get rid of the very worst criminals).

I have recently discovered some weak evidence in favor of theory (b) while going down an internet rabbithole on a totally different topic. Specifically, look at the first graph in this analysis:

https://github.com/propublica/compas-analysis/blob/master/Compas%20Analysis.ipynb

The "decile score" of the x-axis is a reasonably predictive index of a convicted criminal committing new crimes. The dominant features in the model generating the index are things like "# of previous crimes", "was the current crime violent", etc. As can be seen from the graph, white criminals are overrepresented on the left tail (little repeat crime risk) of the graph, whereas black criminals are spread evenly. Of course, this evidence is very weak - it's only about criminals up for parole in a certain region of Florida.

Does anyone know of more data on this?

I'm going to use this text, posted in last week's thread, as a jumping off point to make a little effortpost on a boring area that's actually kind of important, and where I know a little bit: treasury management!

If the FDIC or other banking entity does not cover deposits, any business that depends on SVB and has a

$125K bimonthly payroll will have to do furloughs or layoffs. That's basically any business above ~15-20 people.

... From a survey of my VC and startup friends, it seems reasonable to assume that 25% of that are extremely dependent on SVB (e.g. payroll, no cash sitting elsewhere, and incoming customer payments aren't going to cover anything).

This will only happen if your CFO is incompetent and doesn't do treasury management.

Treasury management - the most basic practice of any corporate finance department - is the practice of managing corporate cash in order to earn interest on what isn't being used , ensure that whatever cash is needed by the business is available, and also minimize tail risks like your bank going belly up.

Step 1 is observing that you can get 4.5% on 4 week treasuries. These are, regardless of amount, backed by full faith and credit of US Gov.

Now suppose you are a business with $500k of biweekly expenses ($500k due on Mar 15, $500k due on Mar 31). You have $20M in venture capital remaining which gives you about 1 year 8 months of runway.

All of that - minus $500k or so needed for short term investments - goes into 4-8 week treasuries which you reinvest whenever they mature. This earns 4.5% or about $900k/year in essentially free money. Money sitting in government bonds with duration < 90 days is called cash equivalent by corporate finance people.

Your not incompetent CFO just extended your runway to 1 year 9 months.

Step 2: ensure that the maturity dates of these cash equivalents line up to your payroll dates. $500k cash is due on Mar 15 for payroll/etc. Fortunately, $500k worth of your 4 week treasuries got turned into cash on Mar 9 (typically the maturity date is thurs).

Another $500k cash is due on Mar 31. You have another $500k worth of 4 week treasuries maturing into your bank account on Mar 30 (a thurs) or maybe Mar 23 (also a thurs) if you really want to be safe.

Step 3: line up a short term credit facility.

Some expenses are less predictable. Part of the job of CFO is to project these expenses, come up with upper bounds, and inform the CEO what it will cost if these bounds are exceeded. Then the CFO goes to a few banks and lines up credit facilities - a $2-3M line of short term credit backed by cash equivalents from step 2.

Step 4: have a few bank accounts including one at a "too big to fail".

That's treasury management, obviously oversimplified.

Now suppose your CFO actually did his job. It's Mar 13 and SVB just imploded. You had $500k sitting in SVB for Mar 15 payroll and that's locked up. Here's what you do:

Mar 11: Quickly call up your credit facility and tell them to wire $500k to your payroll provider on Mon. Call your payroll provider and tell them to confirm with the bank that this is happening to avoid any snafus.

Mar 13-14: As soon as SVB allows it, wire the $250k FDIC insured money to your credit facility. Also redirect treasury maturity payments to said account, and take another $250-270k of cash equivalent and don't reinvest them.

Mar 16 or Mar 23 (a thursday when your maturity payment gets deposited): get $270k worth of 4 week treasury maturity payments from the US govt. Wire this money back to your credit facility.

Net result is that you make payroll with no interruption. You just lost $250k to SVB's errors and paid your credit facility $20k in interest. The end.

In a previous open thread, the topic of immigration in Europe came up. At the time Sweden was being discussed and it was unclear to what extent immigrants were contributing to crime and other social problems. Unfortunately Sweden's publicly accessible data isn't sufficient to really dig into the issue.

Then I discovered this link which actually does address the issue of immigrant crime in Europe quite directly, albeit in Denmark instead of Sweden. It also addresses issues such as welfare use. As it turns out the racist right wing seems to be completely correct on facts.

Financial Contribution

Danes and western immigrants to Denmark are, on average, positive contributors to Denmark during their working years. The same is true, though less so, of "Other non western". However it turns out that the controversial group of immigrants - MENAPT (Middle East, North Africa, Pakistan and Turkey) - are net negative contributors at every age.

A breakdown by country (for countries with at least 5000 immigrants to Denmark) is provided and the result is exactly what the far right would predict: white people, Indians and Chinese make good immigrants and contribute positively to Denmark. The average American benefits Denmark to the tune of about $12k/year, the average Indian a little bit less. The average Somalian costs Denmark about $18k. Thais, Vietnamese and Filipinos are net neutral.

Crime

Western immigrants commit crime at rates more or less equivalent to Danes. Non-western immigrants commit about 3.5x more violent crime (including murder) and 7x more rape.

Crime rates can be further broken down by country of origin. After adjusting for age and gender, we find that again the racist far right are entirely correct in their views. Somalians have crime rates about 7x that of Danes. Americans, British, Indians and Chinese have crime rates about half that of Danes. I was surprised to see that Israelis and Thais have higher than average crime rates.

Conclusion

In countries where data is available (such as Denmark and the US), said data strongly supports the position of educated internet right wing racists. Some countries, such as Sweden, try to obfuscate the data as much as possible to the point of not describing criminals.

I argue that the most reasonable thing we can do is assume that for nearby countries more or less similar patterns apply even if we lack data drilling down at the level of individual subgroups.

(I use "educated" as an important caveat. I do not necessarily expect a random American racist to make distinctions between Indians and Pakistanis, though a random Brit might. However the typical racist motte poster certainly does.)

First, it is well established that managers of companies do not always act in the best interests of the companies themselves.

Very true. For example, managers are well known to keep workers who should be fired - either to maintain their "empire" or just because it's socially uncomfortable to fire people they've formed relationships with.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/real-dev.stlouisfed.org/wp/2005/2005-040.pdf https://www.nber.org/papers/w3556 https://pure.eur.nl/en/publications/cultural-influences-on-employee-termination-decisions-firing-the-

Similarly, managers - as employees themselves - are incentivized to minimize accountability and maximize their own compensation.

How do unions counteract this, in either the general case or even in specific cases like education?

were able to push back on all sorts of proposals by administrators which we disliked and rationalized as being unlikely to inure to the benefit of students (newsflash: teachers know more about their students than administrators do).

Fixed that for you. Sure is convenient that teaching methods teachers find boring (phonics, direct instruction) are bad for students and all the studies showing otherwise are wrong.

“For seven years in a row, Oakland was the fastest-gaining urban district in California for reading,” recalls Weaver. “And we hated it.”

The teachers felt like curriculum robots—and pushed back. “This seems dehumanizing, this is colonizing, this is the man telling us what to do,” says Weaver, describing their response to the approach. “So we fought tooth and nail as a teacher group to throw that out.” It was replaced in 2015 by a curriculum that emphasized rich literary experiences.

https://time.com/6205084/phonics-science-of-reading-teachers/

But it exists within the realm of psychology, and therefore effective treatments will also be within the realm of psychology: therapy and medications.

I don't think the conclusion follows.

I, like many men, have a similar problem to transgender folks: I'm Dwayne Johnson in the body of a 40+ computer programmer. The solution is squats, deadlifts, bench press, road work and clean eating, not therapy and medication. Body transformation >> body acceptance, at least in this particular case where body transformation has so many other benefits. And it's pretty easy to reverse the transformation and go back to dad bod if desired.

The principle that "what starts in psychology stays in psychology" seems to be false.

Now in the transgender case it's trickier because body transformation doesn't work very well and it seems like the desire for body transformation is often far less permanent than the transformation itself. But that is fundamentally a question of cost/benefit analysis (and I think the modern world is getting it wrong).

Abstract principles like what you describe don't help. If we had a 100% perfect and reversible gender transition, there would be no reason not to let people try on an opposite gender body just for fun.

As it happens, I liked the administrators in question. THAT"S THE POINT: The nature of any organization is that agents, such as school administrators, often are incentivized to act in a manner not conducive to the mission of the organization,

Here's the most I can make out of your reasoning:

  1. Agents don't necessarily act in the best interest of the principal.

  2. ...

  3. A second set of agents will somehow fix or improve things.

Can you fill in (2)? The closest you come is "teachers know more about their students than administrators do", but you now seem to be backing away from this claim.

If you're not claiming the second set of agents is somehow better aligned with principals, what are you claiming? Or maybe you aren't claiming (3) at all?

such as pressure to teach how to game standardized tests, and pressure to rubber stamp principals' funding priorities.

Ok. I'll bite.

Teaching the mechanics of testing along with techniques for ballparking and figuring out certain answers are definitely wrong is not an unreasonable demand. I know there's a claim that "teaching to the test" somehow involves techniques that don't convey the material, but in the rare occasions someone has shown me what it actually involves it's mostly teaching the actual curriculum instead of whatever the teacher feels like.

If you want to argue this claim of mine, a great way to do so would be to a real high stakes standardized test from CA or NY and explain the mechanics of getting students to do well on this test without also learning the material well. A bad way would be saying the words "teaching to the test" or "game the test" with no specifics.

Teachers have no demonstrated ability to be administrators or competent stewards of funds, so I don't know why I should care what they think about funding priorities.

The thing about fraud/scams is that the supply curve slopes downwards. When you put in hoops to jump through you raise the cost of doing fraud as well as the cost of being a real person just trying to do their thing. The name of the game is to raise the cost for scammers by a lot, but for real people by only a little.

Right now, the cost of doing fraud/scams is mostly being good at selenium scripting through a botnet (cheap). An $8 charge passing through the ordinary financial system is a lot harder to do. Certainly far from impossible, but the set of people who can both do selenium scripting through a botnet and pass fake charges through the financial system is much smaller - the net result is we get less of it.

Here's a short list of people who I can say with 100% certainty know and have deeply internalized this fact: Peter Thiel, Elon Musk, Max Levchin, David Sacks, Reid Hoffman, all of whom got very rich by doing a good job putting this principle into practice.

Why can’t we make a giant metropolis in Oklahoma? And build it to 30 million people.

Or better - why can't we make a giant metropolis in Silicon Valley? The current population density of the San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA Combined Statistical Area) is 1.1k/sq mi and it has 7.7M people. The density of Brooklyn is 38k/sq mi and San Francisco is 18k/sq mi.

If we increased the density of Silicon Valley to that of Brooklyn, we could fit 266M people there. We could fit 21M people alone in Santa Clara (San Jose plus a couple of suburbs) if we increased the density to San Francisco or Cambridge levels.

If you want to do it on unoccupied land, there is literally unoccupied land the size of San Jose directly adjacent to San Jose.

I believe the theory is that once bluechecks are common, anyone without them will be more suspicious. Musk also mentions that bluechecks get priority in ranking, meaning unverified EloonMuskCryptoGiveaway is buried way down in the replies.

I didn't say I think it will necessarily work, I was just laying out my best guess as to theory. The specific theory:

General use case:

  1. Verification is easy to get, so people get used to seeing bluechecks next to @joespizzastamfordct, @marietoplessnerd, etc.

  2. !!@! Elon Musk Cr1pt0 Giveaway !!@! doesn't have a bluecheck.

  3. People more likely to spot the scam due to lack of a bluecheck.

This is a plausible use case and hardly unprecedented. Companies with real money on the line (read: financial institutions who take losses for scams their customers fall for) put significant effort into educating customers to distinguish between real calls and scams.

In the replies use case:

  1. Elon Musk tweets "journalists often lie".

  2. 5,000 people reply including Jason Calcanis, Kanye West, Taylor Lorenz, Aella and the real Mike's Computer Repair of Talahassee are at the top since they are verified.

  3. Regular guy decides to read the replies and actively scrolldown to even see the crypto scammer.

I have no idea if this will work, but there are clear mechanisms by which it can work.

Of course, I also think it's plausible that Musk is doing it merely to inflate away the value of journalist's favorite status symbol. Now Taylor Lorenz is no more special than Mike's Computer Repair of Talahassee.

I discussed #2 at some length.

No, you mentioned things teachers unions do. You did not explain how they improve decision making or benefit students in aggregate. If you're merely claiming that in at least one case they do (but might be negative value in aggregate), I don't disagree with that claim.

Yes, teaching how to game the test is not utterly devoid of value. But that is a red herring. The issue is whether teaching that, in lieu of teaching substantive material

If what you describe actually exists and takes a non-trivial amount of time, that would be bad. Can you please explain how to actually do this for a real standardized test in one of the 10 largest US states which was given in the last 10 years? I claim that it's not possible, except for some very trivial stuff that doesn't take much time such as "if you can rule out 2 choices out of 4, select one of the remainder at random."

I've had people tell me a few theories about how this might happen when I press the issue, but on the rare occasion they don't refuse to be specific, googling actual standardized tests suggests that their theories are impossible. Would you care to provide mechanics, as well as a link to the specific standardized test on which you think it works?

There have been similar protests that included a small amount of illegal behavior every time a Republican has been elected president since 2000.

https://wgntv.com/news/hundreds-of-peaceful-trump-protests-overshadowed-by-violent-acts-arrests/

Some of these anti-Republican protests were even organized by foreign powers: https://thehill.com/policy/technology/358025-thousands-attended-protest-organized-by-russians-on-facebook/

Did those people not, in some way, think their actions might lead to Trump being deposed? Their explicit statements to the media suggest they too were engaging in a coup attempt:

“Trump is illegal,” she said. “He is in violation of the constitution. I am doing everything I can to prevent his presidency.”

Boeing, Raytheon and Exxon all contribute fairly equally to Dems and Repubs. All favored Biden over Trump.

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/raytheon-technologies/summary?topnumcycle=2022&contribcycle=2022&lobcycle=2022&outspendcycle=2022&id=D000072615&toprecipcycle=2020

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/boeing-co/summary?topnumcycle=2022&contribcycle=2022&lobcycle=2022&outspendcycle=2022&id=d000000100&toprecipcycle=2020

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs//summary?topnumcycle=2022&contribcycle=2022&lobcycle=2022&outspendcycle=2022&id=D000000129&toprecipcycle=2020

The republicans will be more loyal to the military industrial empire and wall street than to their working class voters. Four years of Trump, and he delivered on everything he promised to Israel and almost nothing he promised his base.

It is true that the left and their allies in the military industrial empire did prevent Trump from ending existing wars and conspired to mislead the American people about him (ze russkies!!!). Wall St has been solidly part of the left for 20 years.

You might be confusing Trump and the populist right with Liz Cheney.

Regular people don't have to spend $8/month for either of my mechanisms work.

The closest thing to "regular people" who get a bluecheck in my example is @joespizzastamfordct. Those sorts of people absolutely do pay for similar things on other social media: WhatsApp business accounts, linkedin pro, google map's "not the closest or best but they paid us so they get to the top" search results, yelp for business.

I guess you didn't read my links carefully. The specific quote I provided of a woman trying to prevent his presidency was from an inauguration day protest (i.e. before Trump assumed the presidency) at literally the location where he would be inaugurated. Violent actions - e.g. setting a car on fire - also happened. So by your stated criteria, it was a coup attempt.

But I guess you can gerrymander your definitions even more carefully now that I've pointed this out.

The protests against Bush in 2000 and 2004 were also pre-inauguration, and were generally aimed at influencing the vote counting process.

it was literally a protest in the sense that nothing they could do at this point could make Trump a not-President and they were just expressing their frustration.

You seem to be claiming that because anti-Trump protesters (including violent ones) had no hope at achieving their stated goal of preventing him from becoming president, they are "just expressing their frustration". But when anti-Biden protesters (mostly peaceful) engaged in protest but had no hope of stopping Biden, it's a coup attempt. Weird.

Do they want it? Clearly they were crazy about Black Panther. Black Panther is, aside from being a better-than-average and more imaginative capeshit title, a coherent movie inherently valorizing black people.

I will strongly dispute the idea that Black Panther is coherent. Various pieces from the movie: (spoiler warning!)

  • As we have seen in real life, being a semi-hereditary monarchy on top of natural resources leads to a nation skilled in science and technology.

  • Villain: "Ok Mohammed Bin Salman, you've defeated me in this battle to rule our Kingdom and I'm about to die. Here's a historical reference to stuff that happened in Brazil 150 years ago."

  • The central conflict of the movie is about Trumpian isolationism vs Clintonian internationalism. Black Panther starts the movie rescuing some Congolese women from child soldiers wishing to (presumably sexually) enslave them. But he's unmoved and still wants to build the wall. Then he changes his mind after hearing what life was like in Oakland 1992 (not, you know, Rwanda 1994, one country over from Wakanda) and becomes an interventionist.

It purports to be take place in a foreign country, but the entire country is nothing but vague ideas that American writers saw on the History Channel. For example, it's Africa and they watched a documentary about the Maasai in 1850, so modern soldiers should look like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Panther_(film)#/media/File:Dora_Milaje_in_film.jpg Also they watched Animal planet, thought Rhinos were cool and noticed they live in Kenya, so unobtanium doesn't just power technologies like clean energy and lasers but also improved animal husbandry.

This is not a coherent movie. It purports to tell a story about Wakanda, but every single plot line is driven by characters caring more about Americans of the same race as them than their own corner of the world. (And by "same race", I mean US Govt defined race as opposed to Bantu/Nilotic/Pygmy/etc. )

Almost every capital city in the developed world (and big parts of developing) is struggling with unaffordable rent, insane house price rises etc.

Tokyo isn't. Guess why.

So there is the minor problem that I have with YIMBY people - why do you think that building more will actually solve the problem with unaffordable housing?

Simple arithmetic. The problem is a lot of people want to live in or near central london or wherever, but there are too few houses for them. If we double the number of homes and they aren't vacant, twice as many people have satisfied their desire to live in or near central london.

If prices are still high, we probably just didn't add enough homes.

We have been adding lanes to highways since time immemorial (aka the 50s) and the congestion is still here.

A congested 10 lane highway is helping twice as many people reach their destination as a congested 5 lane highway. So it sounds like the main problem is that we didn't add enough lanes.

There are plenty of empty highways, which indicates that one can build highways that meet and exceed the demand.

Should we even solve it? Is it ok to infringe on the right to move to actually strike a balance.

That probably is what california NIMBYs would like.

Is someone really going to impersonate @joespizzastamfordct? Is that enough for joe to pay 100/month?

It's $8/month. And the answer is yes, that's pocket change for @marietherealtor - she regularly spends 10x that on things like donuts + paper fliers + balloons for an open house. It's quite cheap if you put it into the category of marketing/reputation spend.

Assuming the average person reading replies scrolls down a full screen, you need between 3 and 7 people who replied to ElonMusk/ye/etc to be verified and spam is pushed down.

But hey, probably you have a better grasp on stopping scams than Elon Musk (early Paypal) and David Sacks (early Paypal). At least one person in this conversation is also experienced in stopping organized crime from doing scams online (albeit not at the same scale) - is that person you?

Principals, whose jobs depend on how students perform on state tests, have an incentive...[to do things that]...I never claimed...worked.

I'm pretty confused here. Principals push you to do things that don't improve performance on tests because...they are incentivized to improve performance on tests?

On the flip side:

I don't have all the details on what was in the proposed curriculum because I threw it away.

we also have teachers refusing to teach the curriculum they are assigned.

It is in the interests of students that a teacher need not fear being fired for focusing instead on the analysis standards.

At least it is if you assume some random teacher knows better about what students should learn than the semi-democratically chosen school officials who created the curriculum and decided what was important enough to be on the tests.

I don't understand this complaint about the death penalty specifically. The alternative to the death penalty in most cases is life imprisonment which barely seems better. Why are false positives with life imprisonment ok, but the false death penalties not?

Moreover, life imprisonment lets us pretend that we'll fix the false positives later on, even though I see little evidence we actually will.

Overall this argument seems like an isolated demand for rigor.

According to Wikipedia Martha's Vineyard has the infra to handle 85,000 visitors (the difference between MV's year round population of 16k and their summer population of 100k). Quickly browsing travelocity suggests there are easily places for 50 people to stay in their beach front guest houses. The first few results were "beach house, sleeps 6", "resort condo, sleeps 4", etc.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martha's_Vineyard

I do not recall anyone calling the National Guard when Obama brought in in 400 celebrities and 200 servants: https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2021-08-04/barack-obama-scales-back-60th-birthday-party-amid-delta-variant-spread

If you believe that the normal MV guests require different "infrastructure" than summer vacationers and that you can't just drop these guys into some beach houses, maybe you can be specific about what infra they need and why you can't?

I think the realistic option is some flavor of (3). We already see this in the real world.

Consider an oil well in Iraq or Sudan, protected by the US military or PMCs, primarily constructed from parts designed and built in Texas or Germany and exporting oil to global markets. The local people have essentially no economic value to the people operating this well. Mostly they don't interact, unless someone on the oil well wants to try Sudanese food.

This is economically pretty equivalent to the scenario where 1% of people generate 99% of production that you've described.

Wouldn't the huge collapse in aggregate demand caused by the withdrawal of billions of people from the market sink a lot of those rich people?

No. I think you don't understand the role of aggregate demand. Here's the classical Keynesian story:

  1. Exogenous shock brings real productivity below real wages.

  2. Workers refuse to take a pay cut due to nominal wage stickiness. Net result is workers who could be productive stop working and total output drops.

  3. Raise AD to produce inflation, thereby tricking these workers into taking a (real) pay cut.

You've already assumed these workers cannot be productive which invalidates step 2 of Keynesian economics. There is no output drop. Their real productivity is zero, therefore there is no possible amount of inflation which can reduce their real wages low enough to put them back to work.

(There are other flavors of Keynesian economics which use other forms of nominal rigidity, but I can't see how any of them are applicable. E.g. here's a very plausible one: bank lends you money to buy some CRE but insists on you maintaining a certain LTV. If you lease it out at a lower rent, LTV necessarily goes up. If it goes unoccupied, you can plausibly delay the assessment that would result in triggering your LTV covenant and having to pony up cash to the bank. Hence many commercial landlords will let buildings go unoccupied.)

To answer your question of who could solve individual problems, usually individuals.

For example poverty can be solved by getting a job, avoiding drugs and not becoming a single mother.

Poor drinking water for an individual living in Flint can be solved for the individual by leaving Flint - it's not as if Michael Moore didnt give people a heads up about Flint 33 years ago.

The second example comes from the NPR sting, where Veritas used deceptive editing to imply that NPR executives were very eager to accept a $5 million donation from a Sharia group in exchange for coverage input.

Huh?

The edited Veritas video portrays the same thing as the unedited Veritas video: NPR exec clearly states that they won't let a donation influence their coverage, but also NPR exec is totally sympathetic with and yes-manning this guy. That's even visible in the takedown video you linked.

But as a milestone it's probably the first time anyone even attempted to define AI ethics, isn't it?

I don't think it's the first time. There are a few serious attempts to do this which mostly fall short and also fall into the trap of being super careful to obfuscate what they are actually saying so the rest of academia doesn't cancel the researchers.

I vaguely recall seeing /r/sneerclub sneering at someone who gave a talk where he put these multiple disparate ideas into the same powerpoint and said "can't catch em all".