|
Curvature of Earth posted:This is what Clarkhat and Anarcho-Papist think the future will be like. I have probably said this before, but I like that the demographics of NRx are such that half of them are going "The problem with social justice and progressivism is that they're RELIGIONS that persecute truth and science and free speech"  and the other half is going "You know, the Inquisition had the right idea"
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 02:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 10:25 |
|
|
The Vosgian Beast posted:I have probably said this before, but I like that the demographics of NRx are such that half of them are going "The problem with social justice and progressivism is that they're RELIGIONS that persecute truth and science and free speech" Many of them have latched onto the idea of progressivism / communism / liberalism being an off-shoot of Calvinism to the extent that they go on to support Catholicism to support their racism and bigotry, or so they think, don't think they know too much about Catholicism.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 03:30
|
|
|
I think they should go live in the feudal cyber-papacy future of BattleTech, so they have to pay ComStar for their porn. ComStar's rates are about $1 in 1985 dollars...per byte. How's that enlightened sci-fi monarchy working out for ya?
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
Merdifex posted:Many of them have latched onto the idea of progressivism / communism / liberalism being an off-shoot of Calvinism to the extent that they go on to support Catholicism to support their racism and bigotry, or so they think, don't think they know too much about Catholicism. I like that even if this is true, which is probably not the case because I don't trust NRx historiography as far as I can throw it, it does not prove anything other than the obvious, because genetic fallacy is a thing. It'd be like saying "Chemistry is descended from alchemy, which was mostly superstitious nonsense and false conceptions, so obviously chemistry is mostly false"
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
Woolie Wool posted:I think they should go live in the feudal cyber-papacy future of BattleTech, so they have to pay ComStar for their porn. ComStar's rates are about $1 in 1985 dollars...per byte. To be fair, $1 for 1 byte pushed through multiple light-years of space such that you can have near-real time interstellar communication is a steal.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 06:12
|
|
|
Wales Grey posted:To be fair, $1 for 1 byte pushed through multiple light-years of space such that you can have near-real time interstellar communication is a steal. I now can't stop thinking of the possibility of a sci fi story about groups of people desperately trying to invent a near instant interstellar communications network.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 08:27
|
|
|
The Vosgian Beast posted:They refuse to believe this, because any evidence to the contrary is just part of the Cathedral's stranglehold on academia. It's literally impossible to have a debate with someone who just outright rejects the use of evidence. Best you can hope for is just saying your opinions at each other
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 08:29
|
|
|
LW: Neo-reactionaries, why are you neo-reactionary? First comment: "Like so many who fancied ourselves prodigies (I got a 1600 on my SAT, I read Calvin and Hobbes, Encyclopedia Brown, etc.) ..." From the LW thread: "It's a good thing these intellectual titans weren't subject to the dysgenic effects of poor people mixing into their bloodlines." This is an awesome thread.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 10:08
|
|
|
divabot posted:LW: Neo-reactionaries, why are you neo-reactionary? quote:Through LessWrong, I've discovered the no-reactionary movement
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 10:20
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:If you associate with LessWrong, this should give you pause. Only a pause to reassure yourself that since you found it on LW, it must be in the approved collection of ideas for cool people like ourselves!! The very Correct Contrarian around whom you should all consider clustering, JUST SAYING posted:But there are also simpler things we could do using the same principle. Let's say we want to know whether the economy will recover, double-dip or crash. So we call up a thousand economists, ask each one "Do you have a strong opinion on whether the many-worlds interpretation is correct?", and see if the economists who have a strong opinion and answer "Yes" have a different average opinion from the average economist and from economists who say "No". Believing the same thing about physics that is completely outside your expert topic as the evidence-free loving what. So yeah. EY/LW put forward that you should believe whatever we do because the cool people believe all this poo poo. And NRx inveighles itself into that. It does flow the other way, of course. I must note again that MICHAEL ANISSIMOV SERIOUSLY BELIEVES IN ROKO'S BASILISK. Which is totally the white speck on top of the chicken poop. divabot has a new favorite as of 13:04 on Jul 22, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 12:59
|
|
|
So the very correct contrarian is not doing this survey to weed out all the people who will very confidently state what they believe is the truth about something that they have never studied. I wonder why he might not be considering that approach...
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 13:09
|
|
|
Merdifex posted:Many of them have latched onto the idea of progressivism / communism / liberalism being an off-shoot of Calvinism to the extent that they go on to support Catholicism to support their racism and bigotry, or so they think, don't think they know too much about Catholicism. Let me make sure I have this right. The liberal/progressive notion that everyone could have an equal shot at life, were it not for societal prejudices and systemic injustice = CALVINISM Scientific racism and the theory of an elite class of natural oligarchs = NOT CALVINISM  P.S. I wonder what these assholes think of Dorothy Day?
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 14:01
|
|
|
I have a friend who is a neuroscience major, and he posts stuff he learns about on his tumblr. He's managed, through no effort of his own, to gain LW followers. He's noticed that his posts tend to go through a reblog chain of LW person-neo-reactionary-actual loving proud nazi. It makes him really annoyed and uncomfortable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 15:04
|
|
|
The Vosgian Beast posted:I have a friend who is a neuroscience major, and he posts stuff he learns about on his tumblr. He's managed, through no effort of his own, to gain LW followers. The rationalists on tumblr are completely oblivious, or don't care, that actual nazis from /pol/ follow them. In fact, LWers are more than comfortable with such people; talking to them and what not.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
Oh boy. Everyone needs to read the article at that link. Michael Vassar isn't a neoreactionary (though he knows them), but is a Rationalist par excellence. Founder of startup MetaMed, whose business model was to give rich foolish people's medical problems to medically-untrained LessWrong alumni who would then solve your problems by sheer force of optimal rationality! Surprisingly, it failed, and they stiffed a lot of people. Here's Vassar's mindset. It should be familiar to any reader of this thread: Aspiring wisest human posted:It was getting late. I asked him about the rationalist community. Were they really going to save the world? From what? THE LESSWRONGERS SHALL, IN FACT, RULE THE EARTH. These people are just wonderful in every way: quote:She told me she had started a fight during a discussion about time management and how mathematicians have a hard time getting laid. I would say "these people are building your future! Doesn't that make you happy?" except these are the ones who failed to get the Google job so talk about their SATs and how the dysgenic masses are holding the white male genius down. But don't think these natural noblemen won't reach out and help their lessers. Here's Vassar again: quote:I walked outside for air. Michael Vassar, in a clinging red sweater, was talking to an actuary from Florida. They discussed timeless decision theory (approximately: intelligent agents should make decisions on the basis of the futures, or possible worlds, that they predict their decisions will create) and the simulation argument (essentially: we’re living in one), which Vassar traced to Schopenhauer. (If I were super-generous I'd call this a ridiculously cherry-picked reading of The World as Will and Representation through nerd-rapture-coloured glasses. I'd have to strain even for that, though.) quote:He recited lines from Kipling’s “If—” in no particular order and advised the actuary on how to change his life: Become a pro poker player with the $100k he had in the bank, then hit the Magic: The Gathering pro circuit; make more money; develop more rationality skills; launch the first Costco in Northern Europe. (Costco's been around in the UK for years, perhaps that's not northern or European enough.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 21:45
|
|
|
lol @ "tracing to Schopenhauer" What a beautiful rational appeal to authority; not to mention mock intellectualism at its finest.
|
|
#
?
Jul 22, 2015 22:16
|
|
|
divabot posted:Oh boy. Everyone needs to read the article at that link. You know I didn't flunk out of business school just so I could stand by and let someone even less qualified than me give business advice. You can't "open" a Costco store because Costco is not a loving franchise. All Costco stores are directly owned and operated by Costco Wholesale Corporation. He's welcome to apply for the role of general store manager alongside everyone else. The salary looks pretty drat good ($110,000+). But of course, Costco prefers to promote from within, so in addition to pissing away years in poker and Magic tournaments, be prepared to piss away even more staffing cash registors for a while. Or the actuary could just keep their drat job. A decade of experience and certification can net an ambitious actuary $200,000 a year or more.* Do you know how many small children I'd strangle to get a job that paid me that much? A lot. Every daycare in the state would be empty by the time I finished. It boggles my mind that someone who's solidly upper-middle-class would ask a career moron for job advice. *Granted, these are American salaries and not European, but hopefully they're in the ballpark. Curvature of Earth has a new favorite as of 03:54 on Jul 23, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
Gum posted:It's literally impossible to have a debate with someone who just outright rejects the use of evidence. Best you can hope for is just saying your opinions at each other See also "Austrian economics" and "praxeology," which is the economic equivalent of Lysenkoism and its political adherence to Lamarck's theories of heritability.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 03:14
|
|
|
eschaton posted:See also "Austrian economics" and "praxeology," which is the economic equivalent of Lysenkoism and its political adherence to Lamarck's theories of heritability. To be fair, Lamarck's theory was actually legitimate at some point. Austrian economics has relied on sleight-of-hand and willful misinterpretation since its birth.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 03:54
|
|
|
Sam Frank posted:He recited lines from Kipling’s “If—” in no particular order and advised the actuary on how to change his life: Become a pro poker player with the $100k he had in the bank, then hit the Magic: The Gathering pro circuit; make more money; develop more rationality skills; launch the first Costco in Northern Europe. Unless something's changed dramatically since I played M:tG, pro Magic players quit to play poker when they want to start making better money, not the other way around.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 04:28
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:Unless something's changed dramatically since I played M:tG, pro Magic players quit to play poker when they want to start making better money, not the other way around.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 04:29
|
|
|
Curvature of Earth posted:To be fair, Lamarck's theory was actually legitimate at some point. Austrian economics has relied on sleight-of-hand and willful misinterpretation since its birth. Both theories when first proposed were not unreasonable, but both Lysenko in the Soviet Union and Austrian economists rejected any evidence that didn't fit their theory for political reasons. Unfortunately Austrian economics still has plenty of powerful supporters still arguing for it primarily for political reasons, while Lysenko's promotion of Lamarck was finally discarded half a century ago.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 05:04
|
|
|
Annointed posted:I now can't stop thinking of the possibility of a sci fi story about groups of people desperately trying to invent a near instant interstellar communications network. It's been done.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 07:55
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:Unless something's changed dramatically since I played M:tG, pro Magic players quit to play poker when they want to start making better money, not the other way around. But Magic is nerdier, therefor it is the game of the intellectual elite  Also lol at reading Calvin & Hobbes and Encyclopedia Brown as a kid being a sign of genius.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 09:46
|
|
|
Konkvistador loved this WSJ piece and took time to emphasise the bit where it called liberals a bunch of girls. Comments a rich seam as always.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 16:08
|
|
|
divabot posted:Konkvistador loved this WSJ piece
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 16:26
|
|
|
GIANT OUIJA BOARD posted:But Magic is nerdier, therefor it is the game of the intellectual elite Now if he said The Magic School Bus, I might have agreed with him.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 18:18
|
|
|
GIANT OUIJA BOARD posted:Also lol at reading Calvin & Hobbes and Encyclopedia Brown as a kid being a sign of genius. When I was in first grade I tried to convince the school library to buy Calvin and Hobbes books because 'Calvin uses lots of big words!' It was a lovely comic strip that still holds up as a good work of humor and visual art, it's certainly a good thing for a kid or adult to enjoy, but it's certainly no sign of genius.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 19:01
|
|
|
It's a sign of the genius of Bill Watterson. And if the LW clowns read it more carefully, they might notice the irreverent, satirical tone that Watterson took toward Calvin's despotic personality.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 19:09
|
|
|
neonnoodle posted:It's a sign of the genius of Bill Watterson. And if the LW clowns read it more carefully, they might notice the irreverent, satirical tone that Watterson took toward Calvin's despotic personality. Oh, yes. I meant in the reader. Bill Watterson had a great deal of integrity as an artist and reading his writing about his work, was basically always striving to find new ways to grow and keep making his creative output more interesting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
Excuse me, but I read the funny papers as a child, therefore I am a genius.
|
|
#
?
Jul 23, 2015 22:50
|
|
|
GIANT OUIJA BOARD posted:Excuse me, but I read the funny papers as a child, therefore I am a genius. And I read Encyclopedia Brown, which frankly may have made me stupider. I still recall one case that hinged on "no real hot dog enthusiast would spread those condiments that way", and apparently I'm not the only one with fond memories of Encyclopedia.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 07:53
|
|
|
I'm sorry, I'm still looking through LW's Greatest Hits. When Science Can't Help is brilliant. Yudkowsky doesn't understand science (dig this post in which he recommends how to fix the process of science such that it would become literally how science works already), so thinks it doesn't work because it doesn't support his ideas. What example does he pick? sparkly elite-aster posted:Evolutionary psychology is another example of a case where rationality has to take over from science. While theories of evolutionary psychology form a connected whole, only some of those theories are readily testable experimentally. But you still need the other parts of the theory, because they form a connected web that helps you to form the hypotheses that are actually testable—and then the helper hypotheses are supported in a Bayesian sense, but not supported experimentally. Science would render a verdict of "not proven" on individual parts of a connected theoretical mesh that is experimentally productive as a whole. We'd need a new kind of verdict for that, something like "indirectly supported". So you see,  is beyond mere tawdry "science", we need rationality to connect our cherry-picked studies and demonstrate the ineffable truth that Bay Area transhumanists are heuristically superior to the blacks and poors.
divabot has a new favorite as of 22:31 on Jul 24, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 14:31
|
|
|
I will never stop being amused that Eliezer thinks the problem with science is that the consensus is too quick to change.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 14:40
|
|
|
The Vosgian Beast posted:I will never stop being amused that Eliezer thinks the problem with science is that the consensus is too quick to change. If I were bending over backwards to be fair, I'd get a copy of the book version of the sequences, Rationality: From AI To Zombies, and quote those versions. Of course, he left out the quantum physics sequence (because, despite years of correction of his basic errors, he refused to fix it and wasn't going to for the book version - way to Bayesian update) and, more importantly, it'd leave out the comments. But this would also involve reading it all again. I also suspect it isn't very neoreactionary. HEY EVERYONE ELSE! POST STUFF!
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 14:48
|
|
|
divabot posted:So you see, divabot posted:Yudkowsky doesn't understand science (dig this post in which he recommends how to fix the process of science such that it would become literally how it works already), so thinks it doesn't work because it doesn't support his ideas. What example does he pick? divabot posted:Evolutionary psychology is another example of a case where rationality has to take over from science. While theories of evolutionary psychology form a connected whole, only some of those theories are readily testable experimentally. But you still need the other parts of the theory, because they form a connected web that helps you to form the hypotheses that are actually testable—and then the helper hypotheses are supported in a Bayesian sense, but not supported experimentally. Science would render a verdict of "not proven" on individual parts of a connected theoretical mesh that is experimentally productive as a whole. We'd need a new kind of verdict for that, something like "indirectly supported".
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 15:02
|
|
|
We can use experiment to establish things that aren't directly measurable but which are implied by measurements via a successful theory? That's pretty mindblowing stuff, my mate Francis Bacon will amazed when he hears about this revolutionary new development.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 15:15
|
|
|
Hey everyone, wanna see the number one Dark Enlightenment comedian? https://twitter.com/jokeocracy
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 15:25
|
|
|
Peel posted:We can use experiment to establish things that aren't directly measurable but which are implied by measurements via a successful theory? That's pretty mindblowing stuff, my mate Francis Bacon will amazed when he hears about this revolutionary new development.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 10:25 |
|
|
The Vosgian Beast posted:Hey everyone, wanna see the number one Dark Enlightenment comedian? #1 Dark Enlightenment Comedian posted:the Anti-Cuckservative Uprising is the GOP's #Gamergate So he comes from the GBS school of comedy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2015 16:04
|
|