domain:archive.ph
CertainlyWorse
No one is coming. It's just you.
16hr ago
I don't have a direct reply, but I'm going to piggy back off this post because I'd written up a related issue. I’d like to look at the prisoner exchange ratio.
We’ve looked at this issue various times before on The Motte, with amazement at the disparate ratio of prisoners being exchanged on each side, and the risks involved in releasing terrorists freedom fighters in a prisoner exchange only to have the prisoners commit attacks on Israel in the future.
This time its 20 Israeli hostages against a list of 1900 Palestinian prisoners.
One way of looking at this is that it’s a release of ‘Prisoners of War’ and that all POWs are released at the cessation of hostilities. Except that the hostages were civilians deliberately taken as.. well as hostages, to prevent military advancement and also as leverage in negotiations such as this peace deal.
In addition, the list of 1900 is not limited to ‘POWs’ captured during the latest war, but includes 250 other terrorists freedom fighters that have attacked Israel prior to the current war)
If this peace plan doesn’t hold then Hamas would have bolstered its force by almost 2000 fighters, not for this war, but the future wars to come.
I don't blame Trump and other peacemakers for trying and I am a fan of lasting peace, but this exchange ratio has always been a bugbear of mine and I don't think I'm alone. At a minimum they should stagger out the prisoner release with the 250 non-POWs to be released after the peace holds for 5+ years.
The_Nybbler
If you win the rat race you're still a rat. But you're also still a winner.
16hr ago
She's been around forever, but was still having major exhibitions last year. Her connection to woke/leftism is mostly through her association with Hillary Clinton campaign chair John Podesta.
I've got a tab of verapamil, which is similar to a beta blocker. In practice they've usually died down quickly enough that I don't have time to fetch and take it, which is good.
Did the surgeons or cardiologists not give advice regarding lifestyle modifications or exercise tolerance?
They did, in Japanese lol. Broadly they said, "Look, just don't worry about it. Do whatever exercise you like - it won't help but it won't make things worse. In practice go on living your life the same as ever." Which is... nice and all, and better than the alternative, but somehow less reassuring than 'eat salad, never let your heart get above 160, and we want you to wear a 24h ECG once a year' or whatever. I try not to think about it too much, or else I will turn into a hypochondriac.
It seems to be genetic (at least one of my elderly relatives used to have it I think) and to die down as you get older.
FtttG
16hr ago
I explicitly stated that I don't think the Israel-Palestine conflict will come to a complete end any time soon, so I don't know why you're pointing that out. It doesn't seem like a productive contribution to the discussion.
self_made_human
amaratvaṃ prāpnuhi, athavā yatamāno mṛtyum āpnuhi
16hr ago
Had keyhole surgery (catheter ablation) a couple of years back when it flared up to multiple several-minute bouts of 180bpm a day. Much better now, only once every few months, but I live in fear of it getting worse and needing surgery again. Realistically could be a lot worse but it's made me risk-averse in a way I dislike.
Now that is far more serious than I'd like. Did they not give you beta blockers for as-required symptomatic relief? Did the surgeons or cardiologists not give advice regarding lifestyle modifications or exercise tolerance? This is far out of my wheelhouse, but I don't want you to be unduly anxious, even if you are right to worry.
Cool! That's today to Weds, or next week?
Next week! I'll DM you closer, once I know the exact dates.
Best of luck!
Thank you again!
greyenlightenment
investments: META/FBL, TSLA, TQQQ, TECL, MSFT ...
16hr ago
Has there ever been a Middle East deal what wasn't 'cautiously optimistic'. Things can pop off at any moment. There was a long stretch of peace following the death of Yasser Arafat, so who knows..
functor
16hr ago
The Palestine situation is not over. Israel is continuing to oppress Christians, is continuing to occupy parts of the west bank, is continuing its war in Syria and is continuing its meddling in other country's policies. AIPAC's absurd meddling hasn't gone away. The US is still wasting billions and billions on Israeli interests in the middle east and Israel is still making it hard for refugees to return from Europe.
self_made_human
amaratvaṃ prāpnuhi, athavā yatamāno mṛtyum āpnuhi
16hr ago
If you know the right prompt, you can get the models to leak OAI's profile of you. That includes usage stats. I believe I'm now at 95%+ GPT-5T usage, and almost zero for plain 5. The only time I use it is by accident, when the app "forgets" that I chose 5T in the model picker.
For any problem where you need even a modicum of rigor, I can't see a scenario where I wouldn't pick 5T over 5. If I need an instant answer, I use Claude. The free tier lets you use 4.5 Sonnet without reasoning, but it's still solid.
I will admit that I have barely used 5, because I gave it a few tries, found it barely better than 4o, and never touched it again. I just like 5T too. It has a bit of o3 in it, even if not quite as autistic. I really appreciate the lack of nonsense or sycophancy. 5 is far from the Pareto frontier on any aspect I care about.
OracleOutlook
Fiat justitia ruat caelum
16hr ago
Environmentalism vs Reindustrialzation in the US. For Military purposes we need to reshore rare earth refinement. This will undoubtedly lead to some desert in Nevada getting radiated and risk the extinction of some heretofore undiscovered species of jackalope.
Alternatively, bringing freedom and democracy to Venezuela. The latest Nobel Peace Prize winner was practically begging Trump for it.
self_made_human
amaratvaṃ prāpnuhi, athavā yatamāno mṛtyum āpnuhi
16hr ago
Thank you.
I’m curious about these medical exams and studying. Are there some candidates you’ve met that can just ace them without studying, based solely on general medical knowledge and above average recollection from both medical school and hands-on training in the years before their specialist qualification? Or is it like some legal qualifications, where even a towering intellect needs to rote memorize that the answer is a section 37 part 3 form and not a part 4 and that a certain period is 13 working days and not 12?
I don't think that it is possible to pass just about any medical exam with zero studying, in the literal sense. But I definitely know or have heard of people who can get by with much less of it in the way of "total hours of effort". The very best young doctors I know (in terms of academic performance and successful entry into difficult specialties) were both very smart and very hardworking.
There are people who have retained far more than I did from med school, which definitely came in handy for them. I wasn't the most motivated of candidates back then (because my performance didn't matter as long as I passed, and I only ever failed one minor exam in the last decade), but I put far more effort into career-defining or gatekeeping exams later.
For example, the very first exam a foreign doctor needs to clear to get a license to practice in the UK is the first PLAB exam. It was always oriented around a UK curriculum, but now is/will be entirely subsumed into the same British end-of-medschool exam that is the UKMLA. A British med student would have a very significant innate advantage simply because that's their default curriculum, whereas a foreign grad would need to learn additional information about UK guidelines (holding all else equal, which I will happily grant isn't true, British med students are very good on average).
Once the PLABs were done, I had to give another exam called the MSRA, where the advantages for the locals diminish. The exam has roughly the same core topics as the PLAB/UKMLA, but will drill much harder into the nitty-gritty details. These details aren't comprehensively covered in med school, so that's when your own effort begins to come through.
The next step is usually the membership exams of one of the Royal Colleges. In my case, the MRCPsychs. At that point you are well beyond "innate" or general knowledge. Almost everything is new.
Not all RC exams are made alike:
Something like the MRCPsych Paper A heavily rewards rote memorization. There's no exam where it isn't important, but some others will test your practical and critical thinking skills harder than others.
Or is it like some legal qualifications, where even a towering intellect needs to rote memorize that the answer is a section 37 part 3 form and not a part 4 and that a certain period is 13 working days and not 12?
You would have to be God to derive medicine from first principles. For mere humans, no matter how smart, there's no choice but to resort to empiricism and knowing what works. Medicine, for all its scientific underpinnings, remains a deeply empirical and at times atheoretical field.
For example, why do antipsychotics increase the risk of pneumonia? Nobody knows. Why do clozapine and olanzapine cause the most weight gain (within antipsychotics)? Fuck knows. There is no logical chain that leads from the pharmacology of clozapine to it causing more weight gain than ziprasidone. We only know these things through observation.
The exam questions reflect this reality. They do not ask you to model the interaction of dopamine antagonists with hypothalamic appetite centers. They ask: "Which of the following drugs is most associated with weight gain?" This is not a test of your reasoning. It is a test of your internal lookup table. You either pass the herblore skill check or you don't.
And that is a good question. It's information that is in some way relevant to clinical practice.
Freud's nonsense isn't. Neither is Monkey Business. I don't know why I need to learn the name of the dude who invented modern antipsychotics, or why I'm being asked that. Yet those make up an unfortunate amount of the syllabus.
Corvos
17hr ago
I will probably be in London sometime between Monday to Wednesday next week
Cool! That's today to Weds, or next week?
I presume you've gotten that looked at? My impression is probably anxiety, and CBT or the drugs would help if that's the case. Maybe even just a beta-blocker for symptomatic relief if it gets bad.
Had keyhole surgery (catheter ablation) a couple of years back when it flared up to multiple several-minute bouts of 180bpm a day. Much better now, only once every few months, but I live in fear of it getting worse and needing surgery again. Realistically could be a lot worse but it's made me risk-averse in a way I dislike.
That's true. This exam isn't the end of the world if I fail, just £500 I won't be getting back. But I do very much want to pass it in one go - deferring it is an option, but I'll only be getting busier in the future and I'm already a bit overdue for an attempt.
To moan in general, the exam is designed by sadists, with much of it of limited/negative utility in actual psychiatric practice. But I am not credentialed enough to be consulted on such topics, so I'm dealing with it. It's also pointlessly hard, but eh, I can manage that too.
Good to hear that it's not do-or-die, at least. Worst comes to the worst, spreading the study out over a longer period will make you much more likely to retain the knowledge.
Best of luck!
Corvos
17hr ago
GPT-5T is incredibly smart
Do you find it reliably better than default 5? It seems to me that it's rather over-done and prone to skip ahead to something that is not necessarily what I want, rather than answering the specific query and working through with me as I prefer.
sun_the_second
could survive a COD lobby and a gay furry discord server
17hr ago
What was stopping him before? Israel had already been accused numerous times of being callous to their hostages' safety, Hannibal Doctrine etc.
Stefferi
Chief Suomiposter
17hr ago
There is also some irony, or possibly some future culture war conspiracy theories, about how this will not get Trump a noble peace prize, since they announced that late last week.
This led to some incredibly stupid discussions I've seen with both leftists and rightists assuming that the Machado selection was some sort of a woke Yass Queen finger in the eye towards Trump instead of doing just the barest amount of Googling to recognize that this was very much in the line with the Trump admin foreign policy goals, ie. getting rid of Maduro, which was then confirmed with Machado going out of her way to congratulate and give credit to Trump after the selection.
orthoxerox
If you can read this, you're using a custom theme
17hr ago
What will stop Netanyahu from attacking the Strip again? Now that there are no hostages he can just turn it into fine rubble. It's not like American military and intelligence aid to Israel will stop if he does that.
Thank you for the detailed, succinct write-up. I intended to make a top-level post using the presumptive end of the current Gaza conflict as a jumping-off point to ask a much broader question, namely:
What will the next Current Thing™ be?
In May of last year, I argued that media minutes, column inches and the forefronts of public consciousness follow a Pareto distribution, in which one issue clearly dominates at the expense of all others. In Ireland (and presumably a significant chunk of the Anglosphere and also the entire world), a list of these "primary" issues over the past decade or so looked as follows:
- Brexit (June-November 2016; intermittently recurs as a secondary topic whenever there's a lull in one of the subsequent primary topics)
- Donald Trump election and presidency (November 2016-March 2020)
- Covid (March 2020-January 2022)
- George Floyd/BLM protests (May 2020-September 2020) [I'm cheating a little bit; while the protests were ongoing they seemed to take up exactly as much space in the discourse as Covid, then after they died down Covid returned as the sole current thing)
- Russia-Ukraine war (February 2022-October 2023)
- Israel-Gaza war (October 2023-present)
I'm not saying the Israel-Palestine conflict is permanently over: as a cold conflict which periodically goes hot for 77 consecutive years, it would be very impressive indeed if the imminent cessation of hostilities represented a decisive end to the conflict. But I do think there's a very good chance that it stops being the "primary" issue that dominates the discourse, and retreats to the status it occupied prior to October 7th, 2023. Diehards will still emblazon their balconies with Palestine flags, you have not heard "from the river to the sea" for the last time, there will be periodic calls to boycott and divest — but it will go back to being a page 4 story. I strongly suspect that the era of copycat attacks on random Jewish civilians in First World nations has come to an end.
Which invites the obvious question: what will the next Current Thing™ be?
Playing the game on Easy Mode, and the answer might be that something which was a secondary issue for the last two years now jumps forward to become the pack leader in the Pareto distribution. Sometimes the easy, obvious answer is the correct one: activists had been complaining about police mistreatment of black Americans for years prior to the murder of George Floyd, and Putin's invasion of Ukraine could not have come as a complete surprise to anyone with even the most passing familiarity with the geopolitics of the region. In this framing, obvious candidates for the next Current Thing™ include AI, the ongoing debate about immigration from the global south, and Orange Man Bad. In the latter case, it's entirely possible that all of the "ceasefire now" people will quickly realise that their moment in the limelight has passed, exchange their keffiyehs for black bloc and get back to partying like it's 2017.
Playing the game on Hard Mode, the answer might be something completely unexpected. In January 2020, who among us could have foreseen that a virus in Wuhan (whether from a lab or a wet market) would determine the course of our lives for pretty much the duration of March 2020-December 2021? In this light, do any of you have candidates in mind for dark horse black swan events which could dominate the discourse for the next two years or so?
it also might depend on what you mean by 'faster' or what you are doing. but if you are multiplexing streams inside of TCP like HTTP2 then this can be slower than separate HTTP/1.1 streams because a single missing packet on the HTTP2 TCP stream will block all the substreams whereas a single missing packet on a HTTP/1.1 TCP stream will only effect that one HTTP/1.1 TCP stream. by 'block' i mean the data can't be delivered to the application until the missing packet arrives. the data can still be buffered in the OS so you can imagine if you were just looking at a very large transfer with a very small amount of missing packets and you were only worried about the overall transfer time then this is not really 'slower'. but if you are very worried about the time it takes for small amounts of data to reach the other side then this can be 'slower'. a good example of this would be some kind of request-response protocol.
A short prompt of good news for starting the week- the likelihood of the current Gaza conflict ending just got significantly higher today, as Hamas has released at least the first 7 of 20 surviving hostages to Israel, with more expected later today (or maybe already completed), as part of a Trump-mediated peace deal that is excepted to culminate in a regional summit this week.
Big if carried through, and while there was leadup to it last week, there was a fair bit of (and fair grounds for) skepticism on if the deal would actually be followed through. There were questions on if Hamas even could deliver all the living hostages given how the hostages were often not under Hamas's direct organizational control (but sometimes under other groups), and this deal does not address the bodies of the dead hostages, among other things.
There is also some irony, or possibly some future culture war conspiracy theories, about how this will not get Trump a noble peace prize, since they announced that late last week.
That said- and I think this is good news in general- it's also worth noting this doesn't mean stability or even a lasting peace. While the Yemen-based Houthis have indicated they will stop their Red Sea attacks so long as Israel upholds the ceasefire, this runs into complications like how Hamas has already engaged in gun battles with gazan clans as it tries to re-assert control, which goes significant premise of Hamas being removed as the military and civil authority of Gaza. Which remains a huge, unanswered question which could restart this problem all over again, if Hamas remains in power for lack of anyone actively displacing. The NYT is running a piece on how mediators are already signaling this isn't a comprehensive deal for either side.
One thing that isn't in question, however, is that the return of the still-living hostages is going to reshape the underpinnings of Israeli politics, as the post-October 7 war cabinet coalition that kept Netanyahu in power will lose much of the reason for being. This means political instability, for worse or for better, as Israel rebalances. The next election would be no later than late next year regardless, and could come earlier.
Absent some new (and detrimental to all) nonsense, this means that a lot of the people who only supported Nnetanyahu because of the war will likely be more willing to withdraw their support and trigger early elections, which would be no later than about a year from now anyways. This does not, however, mean a general discrediting of the Israeli right, and a decades-belated return of the Israeli left (whose original decline was after the failure of the gaza withdrawal almost two decades ago). The war was a significant polarizing effect on Israeli politics and society, and while I'd not bet on Netanyahu I'd also not bet on any part of the political left seen as opposing the war for pro-Palestinian reasonings.
I'll end it there. While there is plenty of reasons things could yet again get worse, and while I am sure eventually they will, for the moment I'll encourage people to view this new news as good news, which can well make many people's lives better.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
17hr ago
This is my third or fourth attempt to read this book. In the past, I've gotten a few hundred pages deep only to fizzle out as it didn't go anywhere in particular. It's incredibly difficult to read, not so much because of the footnotes or the pure length as because of the structure of the story.
I'd previously enjoyed DFW's shorter work, and to some extent I think Infinite Jest is just a really large short story collection that links together in intricate ways to produce a bigger work. A lot of the chapters, or sub-chapter units of the book, really constitute stories or vignettes or essays of their own, and their significance to any broader plot (indeed the existence of any broader plot) only becomes significant later. DFW's brilliance in writing essays and short stories gives you these really gripping moments throughout that seem to have nothing to do with the entire rest of the story. DFW also uses very non-linear storytelling, with a confusing in world neologism for years, to obfuscate what you are seeing and when.
Then you have the overall setting, which is sort of semi-sci-fi magical realist near future-past in a way that's incredibly difficult to find your bearings in. When I read Tolstoy, I know what the rules of the universe are because they are the rules of my universe. When I read Asimov or Tolkien, I can quickly grok the rules of the universe because they're very different from the rules of our universe in specific fairly well explained ways. Infinite Jest's universe is different in confusing and non-specific ways, and it's not clear when narrators are unreliable or taking the piss, or when we're supposed to take things seriously. At times DFW chooses to be brutally realistic, at times absurdly fantastical, nearly always pessimistic in outlook.
It's also disgusting, viscerally disgusting in a way that only a writer as talented mechanically as DFW can be. Everyone is asymmetrical, everyone is disgusting, bodily acts are described in extensive detail, rape abuse illness and addiction are commonplace, deformity is everywhere. It's just how the book is, but there are significant sections that are just viscerally unpleasant.
Finally, I think the book has gotten a lot harder since its publication, in that it represented a fork from the past around the publication date. For my partner in my book club, who was a teenager when it was published and read it for the first time when she was in art school in the early 2000s, there are a lot of references or just moods that make more sense to her than they do to me, ten years her junior. It's very like Stranger in a Strange Land in that way, a retro-futuristic work that projects the current mores and world forward. In your mind you have to back up to 1995, then fast forward to a world where some technologies never develop and others hyper-develop.
That said, my foolproof method for reading difficult books is to just keep swimming. This developed when reading the great Russians, in that way that Americans typically get confused by the use of first name or surname or patronymic or title or affectionate diminutive to refer to the same character, I used to get stuck trying to figure out who exactly was who in Anna Karennina then I decided one day that I should just keep reading and I'd figure that out later, and that worked. I approach everything confusing in DFW the same way, I just keep reading and I figure it out later. I think this is what @Rov_Scam is getting at, knowing that it's an important book he keeps trying to read it while understanding everything said but it's impossible to understand everything so he can't read it; his brother just read it without worrying about understanding everything and was fine.
The other aid getting me through this reading is my book club, in which I meet up with a pretty lady every few hundred pages and we discuss the book and its themes and broader philosophical topics over drinks. And this creates accountability in that as a man I can't let a pretty woman mog me at something, and also makes the book easier in that discussion helps explain things. Marx's famously dense Kapital was originally published in France serially in socialist newspapers for workers to read in clubs, they wouldn't (probably couldn't) understand such a book on their own, but in a group it becomes comprehensible. The lack of reading groups is one of the unfortunate consequences of our world today.
It's truly a work of rarely-reached genius, a fitting heir to the western literary canon (though in my mind the canon truly ends with Joyce). It's highly prescient philosophically, it has a lot to say about modern concerns on AI. Though I also kind of think the whole book is just about internet porn. Everyone on this forum should put in the work to read it, it's worth it, but I can also see how its cultural impact is mostly negative rather than directly influential.
I do wonder if Parker and Stone were influenced by Infinite Jest when they wrote South Park, though.
atelier
Jimmys: unrustled
18hr ago
The government shouldn't have any idea how you spend your money, but wants to incentivize certain spending. The only way that can be reported is with a citizen provided form. That's the original reason.
Do the filing prep firms lobby to keep it that way, long after the government collects a lot of this information elsewhere. Absolutely.
FiveHourMarathon
Wawa Nationalist
18hr ago
From a revenue maximizing perspective: It's essentially the same as using coupons and discounts for price discrimination at a grocery store. You capture additional transactions from customers willing to put in the work/inconvenience of shopping from the discount rack or using coupons, and broadly speaking these are mostly transactions that otherwise wouldn't have occurred because those customers would not have been getting enough consumer surplus from the transaction at the original price. You offer different prices to people with different willingness to pay by placing slight inconveniences in the way, people who really want to pay less will go through the inconveniences while people who don't care about paying more won't. With taxes, people who really don't want to pay those taxes (or people sufficiently sophisticated that their objections to having to pay those taxes would actually matter to the system) avoid paying those taxes in various ways, through complex deductions and schemes to funnel money one way or the other. People who don't really care about their tax bill (or people who are low-class enough that their complaints won't matter to anyone but their bartender) just pay the taxes because they don't care enough to figure out all the ways to avoid them.
From a freedom maximizing perspective: At the time it was put in place, this method minimized the degree to which the IRS surveilled individual Americans. This is mostly negligible today, when privacy has been so thoroughly compromised under law and custom that it feels irrelevant. But at the time this was an important consideration.
Intertia: But mostly, I think the best steelman is that changing the system would have unpredictable effects on the economy. Between two thirds and three quarters of Americans get a tax refund. The average refund (I couldn't find the median where I looked) is around $3,000. This is essentially a forced savings program by the IRS, in which Americans are forced to save a small amount from each paycheck and then given the money back in a lump sum later. This might have systemically important functions at this point which lead to significant switching costs nationally. For example, it's pretty well known that the best time to sell a cheap used car is around tax refund season, as lots of poor people who otherwise spend as fast as they get it suddenly have a pile of cash and need a car. People also often spend that money on home repairs or security deposits to move houses. Though they also often, of course, blow it on vacations or poor decisions. While the system that leads to a tax refund might be inefficient in and of itself, at this point if we got rid of this system we don't know what impact it might have. Poor people might stop being able to buy used cars, as they go back to saving nothing. Cheap flights to Florida from northern cities might dry up as middle class folks stop getting a tax return in the colder months and eyeing up tickets. Plus, regardless of the total taxes paid, once you get rid of the refund, people won't notice the extra few bucks every week, but they will notice the lack of a big lump sum every year, and will feel worse about it. The tax filing system is a way to trick children into feeling like they're paying less.
Lizzardspawn
18hr ago
It is poorly worded rule. You are totally allowed to build consensus by convincing and persuading people. You are not allowed to assume already existing consensus on a topic. I am not sure that it is philosophical, but mostly practical. Posts that starts with - "We all agree that" usually are not very productive, not consistent and show that the poster has rarely faced any intellectual adversity and mostly has been in circlejerk places.
I do note that the main article currently on the English language section of Yomiuri, a Japanese paper, is about Gaza.
More options
Context Copy link