site banner
Advanced search parameters (with examples): "author:quadnarca", "domain:reddit.com", "over18:true"

Showing 25 of 110840 results for

domain:gurwinder.substack.com

Hefting his mace, he swung at her as hard as he could

Is that changing tenses? Consider the sentence 'While running, he saw Steve'. 'While running' modifies the verb 'saw', but it's not present tense on its own. It could also be written as 'He saw Steve while running' which makes it more obvious.

I'm fine with human civilization ending. I don't see anything inherently good about human civilization continuing. And I don't see anything inherently good about human civilization ending.

This kind of intellectualised lack of care and concern for the world has the pretension of being a serious opinion with some form of philosophical caché, but can really only be understood as a spiteful lashing out at life itself by someone who feels slighted and betrayed by their own expectations at what human existence should be. It's juvenile, provincial, extremely transparent in its self-loathing origin, and can only stem from a position of weakness and defeat.

The inherent good of human civilisation goes without saying - we are the only species in the entire known world that does not solely operate around cruel instinct, we can peer beyond the vulgar material veil of constant frenzied self-preservation and extract beauty, love, and meaning from the violent chaos of the natural order - only in the world of Man can a living being pass away with a semblance of dignity and comfort. No animal in nature dies peacefully. We can create abstracted systems that bind otherwise distinct people and groups together, pool our labour and knowledge into cohesive willpower, and turn base matter into magic. Modern medicine, high-speed global transportation, satellites crowding the stratosphere, the welfare state, not to speak of the surplus of beauty and meaning we have added to the world by means of artistic endeavours. The pleasure of good food (not raw meat torn straight from the spine of a wailing animal), good company, lovely music, light-hearted conversation, a charming landscape, the sound of cicadas on a summer night, its all there for us to enjoy and cherish and compound our fates upon.

For 4 years, I lived in an apartment in Paris that shared a courtyard with an elementary school. Every day, I would hear children playing during their lunch break - laughing, shouting, exclaiming, crying, giggling and scheming in exactly the same way my childhood friends and I did when we were small, and doubtlessly in exactly the same way the children of the Persian Empire, the Neolithic, or the Early Modern period did in their times. I felt an endless cycle of joy and curiosity and willpower and ecstasy at the world and the gift of live we were given to be in it and a part of it, unchanged since the first day of Creation. To look over this vast and endless sea of human joy and pleasure at being in the world and to claim to see nothing inherently valuable in it one way or another is not an intellectual or philosophical position - on the contrary, it is the spiteful grumble of the slave who considers his own wretched existence to be the Alpha and Omega of all human experience. It is the position of a self-loathing man to cowardly for suicide, so he demands the entire world should commit suicide in his stead.

Remember Goethe - "the world a man sees around him is nothing else than the world he carries in his heart". The world I see around me is a big, flashing YES - YES to beauty, YES to pleasure, YES to friendship, YES to love, YES to the bountiful harvest of our labours, YES to the innocent sincerity of a child at play, YES to drunken dancing on summer nights, YES to music, to painting, to cathedrals and to operas, YES to the gift of life, so precious, so explosive, so free.

My cup runneth over - doth thine?

I think I found this on themotte but forgot the poster

I know I, for one, referenced it (indirectly) here eight months ago, but other people have probably mentioned it on the Motte as well.

Have you flipped sajjano and durjano on purpose or am I not deep enough?

Related to the above, modern progressive attitudes everywhere. Of course men and women are exactly the same. Of course everyone is having casual, consequence-free sex. Of course anyone who finds meaning in faith is secretly cynically corrupt or else a psycho child molester.

There was this one story where it was like a dungeon/system apocalypse sort of thing. Dude ends up in a world where monsters and dungeons are gradually expanding in power and humanity is being driven back further and further, the population dwindling over the course of centuries as the monsters continue to gain in power.

And then the characters make some offhand comment about a magic spell that lets you switch gender which certain people who were "born in the wrong body" use to cure their condition. And then MC from Earth explains how in our world those people are oppressed and everyone shakes their heads about how unenlightened that is. Now, on an object level it makes sense that if such spells were available people with gender dysphoria would want to use them. But the language was very obviously dated as 2010+ progressivism, which would have no way of being the same in some fantasy world. And more importantly there is no way a world on the verge of extinction with massive attrition due to a constant multi-generational war against monsters is going to end up progressive, especially with regard to gender roles. They are going to want women pumping out as many kids as possible so they don't go extinct. Or rather, any subculture which chooses to be progressive in any way that reduces birthrates (as opposed to some free-love variant that encourages promiscuity but discourages birth control) will quickly die out and be replaced under such strong selection pressures.

I made a comment to this effect, to which the author replied "my world, my rules". So I stopped reading.

Values are fundamental. To a first approximation, no one actually wants values diversity, whether in their fiction or anywhere else. Good things are good, bad things are bad, more bad things are not good.

You would probably hate all of my worldbuilding then. I'm currently working on a science fiction story involving two city-states with distinct value systems which are mutually opposed to each other without one being painted as clearly right or wrong, the philosophical basis on which they ground their outlooks are comprehensible while also being clearly self-serving, and both outlooks would probably be abhorrent and hellish to most modern readers while still serving a pro-social function within the Hobbesian tragedy-of-the-commons that characterises the world they live in. Part of the point of the story is to break apart any conception of “The Good” as much as possible.

I love this kind of shit in storytelling. While I have accepted that shared morality is probably necessary for social cohesion and these values get expressed and reinforced through outlets like fiction, I love it when writers attempt to paint a world entirely in shades of grey while never telling the reader what to think, and find morality tales dubious at best and anger-inducing at worst; they try to simplify complex moral questions down into simple thought-terminating cliches and easy copouts.

I'm back at my computer. But not sober enough to put together the best recommendation list. Some additional thoughts:

  1. Read foreigners. Some of the LITRPG genre is famous for having Russian writers. Reading some of their stuff made me feel downright progressive at times. Where the average female character is a conniving bitch that will steal all your shit and stab you in the back, because she was dumb and got tricked by her father or boyfriend. Also the whole Wuxia genre that others have mentioned. Holy shit do they trash and burn progressive values. Sometimes with levels of psychopathy that would make Hitler blush.
  2. Read old stuff. Edgar Rice Burroughs wrote Tarzan, but also John Carter of Mars. The latter is out of copyright and cheap as shit. Disney made a movie of it and unintentionally made one of the greatest literature to movie conversions of all time (in the same league as the Lord of the Rings and Watership Down.
  3. Beware of published novels. I have some sense that Amazon and book publishers are more happy to publish the progressive values crap. Some of the more out there shit that I read on RoyalRoad is just not something that a publisher is going to attach their name to. Only the most persistent authors will end up self-published.

I have yet to see any of the modern Jurassic park type movies. Closest I got was playing the Jurassic World Evolution video game on steam. Which was basically a park management game, with a few fun sidebits with dinosaurs breaking out, and a photo mode that encouraged you to take cool pictures.

Its probably because of young kids. My own parents have a blindspot to 90's culture. Which is coincidentally when my two siblings and I grew up. I think I'll have the same blindspot.

My only redemption is in movie trailers. I do watch all of the movie trailers. I think some people might misinterpret that as "I watch a lot of movie trailers". No, I watch all of them. I'm subscribed to multiple channels that just show movie trailers on youtube. I would rate Jurassic World Rebirth trailers as top tier. Cool action shots, a general sense of the plot, and a diversity of shots displayed throughout different trailers.

If your primary issue is that the algorithm is probabilistic, then good news: there’s also a polynomial-time deterministic algorithm for testing primality. (Just don’t pay attention to the constant factors.)

That was a story I bounced off of early. I think I didn't get past the first encounter. Because it has that feeling. Yeah maybe D&D stories can be really fun and awesome, but most of them are trash. For good reason: part of the whole point of D&D is to get into fights that then utilize the mechanics of D&D. But if the mechanics suck or are boring in any way this whole strategy sucks. You are just gravitating towards a more sucky thing.

I can say I have tried to write at least progression fantasy, or form of litrpg lite. Its hard. I set out with a goal of keeping the blue boxes interesting and readable, but I think I failed even at that simple goal.

I do really love the genre though. I'd rather read awful LITRPG any day over most "good" fiction.

That was an interesting link. I often wonder about all the variables that are leading young people to date less — of course, “no woman wants to date me” seems to be a plurality answer from men, and I’m well aware of male friends of mine for whom that’s the entire reason they’re single. I have a friend who’s gone from social and engaged to depressed, suicidal, and medicated as his 20s have flown by without a wink of intimacy. Nicest and most prosocial guy you’d ever meet — maybe that’s the problem.

I do wonder sometimes how I’d feel romantically if I hadn’t had some formative positive experiences with dating as a teenager. It certainly wasn’t all roses, but I can trace my own strong drive for intimacy to a before/after with my high school sweetheart. If I hadn’t fallen into a relationship with her… would I be dating now? Would I feel as strongly about dating as I do now?

I'm probably in the tail-end of the openness-trait, but I value authenticity and aesthetics, and these categories are so loose/vague that I tolerate a lot of diversity of thought. I want more stories which are different and unique in the sense that Made In Abyss is. I feel like art is a kind of escapism, and that making statements about current real-world events undermines this escape

NIH has done a study that shows that any study (like the one above) that assumes kids are even eating the meals is dubious. Some are, some aren't.

Among actual schoolkids, school lunches are considered somewhere between "literally inedible" and "prison food." Occasionally there's a Friday special that the kids consider tasty, but most of the food is significantly lower quality than anything someone would pay for on the open market.

It got worse after Michelle Obama's reforms; suddenly even the white bread that people found edible became nasty whole wheat versions that were much less appetizing. I think if we want to make school lunches more nutritious, the first thing to do would be to stop making them slop and actually make them something a human being would want to eat.

That doesn't seem like a way to generate prime numbers directly, but to sort of chip at the problem by creating a scaffolding around it and then getting close and closer. It doesn't feel elegant like some math does. And yeah, I think that pure maths is largely useless (because its scope is wider, i.e. less restricted than our reality). We can find interesting properties in math which hints at properties in reality, though. At high levels of abstraction, these things overlap. "The dao of which can be spoken is not the real dao" is a logical conclusion, since you can judge the limits of a system from within said system. Gödel did the same with math. You can use a similar line of thinking to derive that everything is relative (there's nothing outside of everything, so there can be no external point of reference).

Maybe this is "abstract reasoning" rather than math? I'm not sure what it is, but this ability is useful in general. I don't suffer from the philosophical problem of "meaning in life" because I recognized that the question was formulated wrong (which is why there's no answer!). I also figured out enlightenment, which you usually cannot reach by thinking because it requires not thinking. But you can sort of use thinking to show that thinking is the cause of the issue, and then "break free" like that.

Edit: Nietzsche came up with his "Eternal recurrence" through logic, showing that if time goes back infinitely, the world would already have been looping forever. Same with his "Perspectivism", that there's no facts, only perspectives. He wasn't a mathematician, he was just highly intelligent.

But I'm sort of weird, most subjects I think about don't fit any common categories

Have you read Children of Men

Is the book good?

When reading a news article, let the word "could" serve as a little bell. In journo-speak, it means "isn't technically impossible". When someone knows they'll be sued and they'll lose if they say something "will" happen, they say it "could" instead. Any time you see the word "could", it negates everything that follows.

That heuristic goes way too far into the point of absurdity. Sometimes they say could just because they don't want to appear like psychics with 100% accuracy when they aren't that. Especially since policy can always change. You don't wanna say something will happen only for the underlying causes to disappear underneath your claim.

While I'm sure you're a perfectly smart chap, I'm also sure that neither of your ideas is worth patenting. If you don't actually work in data storage research or linguistics, the chances of your ideas being useful, or unacknowledged by domain experts, are low.

That's not to say they aren't interesting ideas for you to explore, or things that are worth investigating for your own curiosity. But absolutely what's happening here is that Claude is telling you that your idea is the greatest thing ever, which it's doing because your text prompts are incredibly excited and intrigued by these new possibilities: "You have no idea how desperately I want to share the details of both of these."

It's just mirroring that, and glazing you. And Claude won't "push you off of them" because that wouldn't be an appropriate AI response; it's trained to continue your conversation and explore the ideas you want it to explore, not to tell you "you should stop exploring this." Imagine if it did that when you asked it a question!

Hey, Claude, what's the capital of Venezuela?

Claude: Obviously this is a dumb curiosity question, just Google it if you really need to know.

Not a very helpful AI assistant! Now imagine the inverted behavior: "Sure, the capital of Venezuela is Caracas! Let me tell you some fun facts about Caracas..."

And then imagine that behavior amplified by your obvious curiosity and fascination with these ideas you've come up with; of course it's going to tell you they're the best ideas ever!

So, stay curious, stay fascinated, but don't believe an LLM when it tells you you've squared the circle. You almost certainly haven't.

No, you posted leftist propaganda, the equivalent of me posting a Glen Beck video from his crazy 2010s era, as a source.

The Cato study you linked isn't focused on some sort of EA evaluation of QOL/$ because doing something like that for an anti-poverty program is hopelessly confounded. This is why you should easily know the "40 billion dollars for 18 billion in spending" is ridiculous propaganda. Also, it appears to understate actual spending on these programs by between $9 and $80 billion depending on the source.

I have now read the main report from Rockefeller, and it is just full of conclusory language. So now I must read the model. The tech report is similarly full of just conclusions with no evidence to support them. They say the lunches save people in poverty money by calculating the cost of producing the same meals for a private household. This is, of course, absurd. They attribute greater future earnings to the recipients of school lunches AND reduced criminality. Again, just bald assertions. The claims continue in this fashion.

The whole exercise of fisking my priors has just been a waste of my time, as my prior that the Rockafeller report would be leftist nonsense was proven correct via a painstaking process of reading an incredibly poorly prepared report and technical supplement that should have gotten a failing grade in and freshman statistics course. Of course, in other fields it would be given stellar grades, because those other academic fields are just about producing things that re-enforce the narrative, which this "study" certainly does.

NIH has done a study that shows that any study (like the one above) that assumes kids are even eating the meals is dubious. Some are, some aren't. There is no evidence that the ones that are, are the one's whos parents wouldn't have packed a meal, which IS an essential element of proving the efficacy of the program. You need to prove there are lots of kids who have parents that cant afford an apple and a sandwich that are eating, as a result of the food program, something healthy. If they discard the broccoli you give them and eat the chips you've proven nothing. If my kid or someone like him eats the broccoli you have again proven nothing.

Overall, a government spending program needs to prove its effectiveness to a much higher degree to be justified in its continuance. School lunches aren't getting close. Its not a mystery why school lunches are a big push: Public schools are already a giant left wing boondoggle, but they are also a 3rd rail so they aren't going away. Why not append another couple hundred billion of subsidies into that ecosystem? It just pours back into the right coffers after all.

Imagine arguing with this kind of evidence in favor of free ammunition program. You'd be laughed at by yourself. But at least the ammo isn't going to be thrown away and make kids fat.

Thank you. I agree, but .... gah

could

could be

could drive

When reading a news article, let the word "could" serve as a little bell. In journo-speak, it means "isn't technically impossible". When someone knows they'll be sued and they'll lose if they say something "will" happen, they say it "could" instead. Any time you see the word "could", it negates everything that follows.

The most important motivation for caring about civilization is igniting an individual will to overcome obstacles and shape the world. It's an innate desire, a personality trait that not everybody possesses.

It's not quite A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court but along those lines.

What was wrong with this book? In this context

I read it as an early teen (now far too long ago) and I remember loving the concept (also a massive Twain fan) but then finding the ending so bad it retroactively ruined the book for me.

Awfully bold of you to assume the Dinosaurs didn't build a civilization.

Paging Alfred the great... a fine king, the best! He had some great people in Wessex, it was a very dangerous situation. Thank you for your attention to this matter!

I admit to having enjoyed coming up with this.

Maybe 'oddball future history' will be a feature I start on in the friday fun thread.