|
ikanreed posted:Can I inject my barely related opinion here? Plenty of dumbass nerds fart words out of their mouth about logic and reason while not actually understanding it in the slightest. The types that drone on about how rational they are? They're usually the least rational people there are. At least regular folks will happily admit they weren't using logic to make their decisions. Nerds will make a decision based purely on emotion then turn around and act like a smug piece of poo poo while trying to act like they're so ~enlightened~.
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 19:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 12:38 |
|
|
oh, MetaMed Deep Throat has found and is reading this thread, and has offered to answer questions about MetaMed via me. (that are (a) safe for them to answer (b) are ethical to answer at all, e.g. that don't violate HIPAA in letter or spirit.) Look into the eyes of Smug Eliezer and ask away ...
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 19:34
|
|
|
divabot posted:oh, MetaMed Deep Throat has found and is reading this thread, and has offered to answer questions about MetaMed via me. (that are (a) safe for them to answer (b) are ethical to answer at all, e.g. that don't violate HIPAA in letter or spirit.) Look into the eyes of Smug Eliezer and ask away ... What was the feeling among the founders when it failed? Did some accept that being a doctor is hard or did they all just blame society for not being ready for them? Edit: also I want to punch that you in the face now diva, sorry, the avatar is just that effective.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 19:39
|
|
|
Cavelcade posted:What was the feeling among the founders when it failed? Did some accept that being a doctor is hard or did they all just blame society for not being ready for them? I'm not Deep Throat, but here's a blog post from Zvi explaining that they failed because the masses are too stupid to actually want healthcare.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
divabot posted:oh, MetaMed Deep Throat has found and is reading this thread, and has offered to answer questions about MetaMed via me. (that are (a) safe for them to answer (b) are ethical to answer at all, e.g. that don't violate HIPAA in letter or spirit.) Look into the eyes of Smug Eliezer and ask away ... Did anyone at MetaMed point out that if the company succeeded it would mean that doctors everywhere are somehow incapable of basic statistics? How come no one brought up the process of differential diagnosis and how it relates physician-patient interactions? Because that is another obviously fatal thing. I mean...what I really want to know is how everyone assembled didn't miss the stunningly obvious red flags? Was anyone on staff actually familiar with the practice of medicine at all?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 22:33
|
|
|
Cavelcade posted:What was the feeling among the founders when it failed? Did some accept that being a doctor is hard or did they all just blame society for not being ready for them? Metamed Deep Throat: "Qwertycoatl pretty much nailed it, they blamed people who did work and basically whined about how they shouldn't have had to be a business or that the world wasn't ready for them." Cavelcade posted:Edit: also I want to punch that you in the face now diva, sorry, the avatar is just that effective. mate, I see that picture and I want to punch that me in the face. Hate Fibration posted:Did anyone at MetaMed point out that if the company succeeded it would mean that doctors everywhere are somehow incapable of basic statistics? They literally believed that doctors in vast numbers are somehow incapable of basic statistics. Or rather, of Yudkowsky's flavour of Bayesian statistics. They had doctors on staff! Including Scott Alexander %-D
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
divabot posted:They literally believed that doctors in vast numbers are somehow incapable of basic statistics. Or rather, of Yudkowsky's flavour of Bayesian statistics. Ughhhhhh. The sheer arrogance on display there is insane. Obviously ALL the other doctors forgot basic methodology, but me? I'm a smart one.  So I've hung out with rationalists a little bit. And there's a something that some people in STEM have, the good ones anyways. It's nothing to do with skill or knowledge, it's almost like a spark or a creative spirit. It can be difficult to verbalize. But you know it when you see it. The reason I bring this up is... almost none of them loving have it, like bizarrely few of them do? It's not a super rare thing, is what I'm saying. At this point I would confidently say that if you take the population of rationalists with STEM qualifications, on average the work they do is of lower quality than the general population of people who work in STEM.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 22:58
|
|
|
Did anyone even use the service? Or did it not get to that stage?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 23:02
|
|
|
Some questions: 1) How useful actually do you think the reports were? Better than asking a doctor who doesn't specialise in your problem, kind of meh or dangerously wrong? 1b) What did they do when the answer was "actually your doctor already did everything that can be done"? 2) I heard rumour about employees getting screwed over when the thing collapsed. Any juicy gossip that can be shared? Qwertycoatl has a new favorite as of 23:10 on Jun 15, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 23:04
|
|
|
divabot posted:Metamed Deep Throat: "Qwertycoatl pretty much nailed it, they blamed people who did work and basically whined about how they shouldn't have had to be a business or that the world wasn't ready for them." To be fair, there are studies showing that doctors, like most people, tend to be surprisingly bad at statistics.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 23:07
|
|
|
Qwertycoatl posted:Some questions: Ooh, I have some of that actually.   Names removed to protect the innocent.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 23:10
|
|
|
Hate Fibration posted:So I've hung out with rationalists a little bit. And there's a something that some people in STEM have, the good ones anyways. It's nothing to do with skill or knowledge, it's almost like a spark or a creative spirit. It can be difficult to verbalize. But you know it when you see it. The reason I bring this up is... almost none of them loving have it, like bizarrely few of them do? It's not a super rare thing, is what I'm saying. At this point I would confidently say that if you take the population of rationalists with STEM qualifications, on average the work they do is of lower quality than the general population of people who work in STEM. I've seen this kind of thing in action in the sciences, and in my experience the people with the "creative spark" are generally just higher up on Bloom's Taxonomy than the ones without. Bloom's Taxonomy is just a hierarchy of levels of learning on a given topic, from rote memorization at the bottom through applying knowledge to solve a problem in the middle and up to the top levels, one of which (the absolute pinnacle in some versions) happens to be called "creation." potatocubed posted:One of the first things I learned in formal logic was modus tollens -- and yet these kings of reason ('reason') don't seem able to apply it to their own ridiculous enterprise. I really wish they taught actual logic and philosophy of science to STEM people (I guess philosophy of mathematics for the M folks). It would solve a surprising number of problems, I think.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 23:18
|
|
|
More from MetaMed Deep Throat!SHY NUDIST GRRL posted:Did anyone even use the service? Or did it not get to that stage? "I think about ten people, counting discounted people who got it for free for whatever reason. I don't actually know how much the average person paid." Qwertycoatl posted:Some questions: "For like two people? Apparently useful, in their opinion at least. For everyone else? loving useless and a waste of money and resources I hoped to god did not financially burden them. The idea that someone poor would use this service instead of conventional help, or left their families with funeral debt weighed on me constantly and one of the reasons I'm planning on going public is this type of ignorance could have been way less comical and way more dangerous (was it dangerous? not to my knowledge. thankfully)." Qwertycoatl posted:1b) What did they do when the answer was "actually your doctor already did everything that can be done"? "Never worked with clients but I get the impression you get a report and the more "everything that has been done has been done" you were the more - well at that point you either got fringe theories, generic well known advice, or both." Qwertycoatl posted:2) I heard rumour about employees getting screwed over when the thing collapsed. Any juicy gossip that can be shared? "gently caress You, Pay Me. This was the rallying cry of the contractors who were treated like "the help" and had to fight for pay. Zvi's blog post on having to cut wages and bonuses makes my blood boil after how hard the former President, who is not Zvi, made getting your god damned pay check. That said, I don't think Zvi ever actually refused to pay us for work done and delivered." Hate Fibration posted:Ooh, I have some of that actually. "Holy poo poo I think I know who you are talking to so I'll shut the gently caress about them so we don't reveal each other but I did not know the extent that the final fight between "the help" contractors and "the elite" rationalists amounted to. Five years later and there is still poo poo you learn."
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 23:35
|
|
|
I don't have any questions that people aren't already asking but christ. Thanks, MetaMed Deep Throat. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2017 23:57
|
|
|
Are the metamed people planning any more debacles in the future?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 00:29
|
|
|
Burning Man is only two months away. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
Goon Danton posted:I've seen this kind of thing in action in the sciences, and in my experience the people with the "creative spark" are generally just higher up on Bloom's Taxonomy than the ones without. Bloom's Taxonomy is just a hierarchy of levels of learning on a given topic, from rote memorization at the bottom through applying knowledge to solve a problem in the middle and up to the top levels, one of which (the absolute pinnacle in some versions) happens to be called "creation." Huh. I'm not familiar with Bloom's Taxonomy. I'll look into it! divabot posted:
Yeah. What went on behind the scenes is pretty horrifying. I don't even know this person and I'm like...furious on their behalf. I actually started talking to them because I was friends with some people in the community and said friends' behavior concerned me. This individual had mentioned negative experiences with rationalists publicly and I wanted to hear their story to see if I could get a better idea of what was going on and if these people were as unpleasant as they seemed. It turned out to be much worse. Man, people who I talk and interact with associate with the people behind Metamed. And they're fine with it! It makes my skin crawl and I will probably cut ties with all of them shortly here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 04:24
|
|
|
divabot posted:More from MetaMed Deep Throat! Thanks shadowy anonymous person!
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 07:08
|
|
|
Hate Fibration posted:Huh. I'm not familiar with Bloom's Taxonomy. I'll look into it! Wait, that poo poo isn't beaten into you in middle and high school where you're from? (i'm guessing america?) The poo poo's so thoroughly ingrained in me that i'm not sure i could write a research question without thinking in terms of bloom taxonomy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 07:55
|
|
|
Goon Danton posted:I really wish they taught actual logic and philosophy of science to STEM people (I guess philosophy of mathematics for the M folks). It would solve a surprising number of problems, I think. For example: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/hallq/2012/05/moral-theory-isnt-as-helpful-as-many-people-think/ http://www.patheos.com/blogs/hallq/2012/04/from-the-archives-is-studying-philosophy-beneficial/ http://www.patheos.com/blogs/hallq/2012/03/scientists-making-use-of-philosoph/ http://www.patheos.com/blogs/hallq/2014/06/philosophy-vs-programming/ http://www.patheos.com/blogs/hallq/2014/08/philosophical-incompetence-as-an-existential-risk/ http://www.patheos.com/blogs/hallq/2013/04/a-summary-of-the-problems-i-see-with-philosophy-and-why-im-thinking-of-going-back-anyway/ http://www.patheos.com/blogs/hallq/2013/02/you-dont-need-a-philosophy/ Chris Hallquist might not be a reacto but taking him as an exemplar of philosophy breeding modesty in techbros sets the bar dangerously low, I think.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 20:39
|
|
|
danger-carpet posted:Chris Hallquist might not be a reacto but taking him as an exemplar of philosophy breeding modesty in techbros sets the bar dangerously low, I think. Hallquist got better and is now loudly apostate from LessWrongism, even as his social group is still largely the rationalists. "When I started writing about the crackpot tendencies in the LessWrong community ..." (Scott replies, Hallquist re-replies.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
Scott Alexander is such a little turd... suggesting Hallquist does "not have sufficient g-factor to follow the detailed arguments on Less Wrong." The fact that these guys want to freeze their brains is so loving hilarious and crazy, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2017 23:26
|
|
|
Sax Solo posted:Scott Alexander is such a little turd... suggesting Hallquist does "not have sufficient g-factor to follow the detailed arguments on Less Wrong." My favorite thing about his rebuttal is these two quotes side-by-side: quote:We need more people who are able to evaluate difficult moral and intellectual arguments and come to apparently-bizarre but in-fact-very-important conclusions, even when there is not a knock-down scientific argument proving them correct quite yet. quote:You get AMRI Nutrigenomics, where a bunch of people with PhDs and MDs give a breathtakingly beautiful analysis of the complexities of the methylation cycle, then use it to prove that vaccines cause autism. By all means, know as much about methylation as they do! But you’ve also got to have something they’re missing!
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 00:03
|
|
|
divabot posted:Hallquist got better and is now loudly apostate from LessWrongism, even as his social group is still largely the rationalists. "When I started writing about the crackpot tendencies in the LessWrong community ..." (Scott replies, Hallquist re-replies.) The best part of that fight was that Hallquist was dating Scott's ex at the time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 00:14
|
|
|
And here I was thinking the Dark Enlightenment were into historical fact.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 01:22
|
|
|
The Vosgian Beast posted:The best part of that fight was that Hallquist was dating Scott's ex at the time. We're all very disappointed in your lack of compersion, Scott.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 01:34
|
|
|
Sax Solo posted:Scott Alexander is such a little turd... suggesting Hallquist does "not have sufficient g-factor to follow the detailed arguments on Less Wrong." jensen was a loving piece of poo poo and probably racist but it's hilarious to see even morons like scott who're huge fans of hbd and iq research (being a loving shrink, you can imagine what little authority or knowledge scott has when it comes to these matters, but the dangers of having a hereditist psychiatrist remains) use the concept of g and g-factor in this cartoonishly misconceived, misunderstood way, as a synonym for iq itself. far as i can tell, this started with yudkowsky, and we all know how well he knows what he's talking about when it comes to most things.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 01:57
|
|
|
IIRC Eliezer was much less interested in which "races" were dumber, and more interested in evidence of g (that is, as i understand it, that intelligence has a genetic factor) and evidence that it's probably determined by many genes and not under that much selection pressure. This would mean that once we identify those genes and have good prenatal gene therapy, suddenly everyone with the money will be able to make their kid the next Von Neumann. And this will be a big societal change, so we should prepare for it by...joining polyamorous statistics cults? Though it did always made me uncomfortable when the ashkenazi studies got used as evidence. Supposedly intermarriage and a tradition of selection for intelligence-linked traits means their iq is slightly higher than comparative populations? I dunno, it neither goes to prove much, nor is it controversial, except in what it leads to for racists. (Eliezer is not racist like Scott is)
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 03:41
|
|
|
BENGHAZI 2 posted:Sounds exactly like something a magic player would think up TBF there was, at one point, a Magic pro who made a fair amount of money off of pharmaceuticals. Ecstasy, namely, he went to prison for several years.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 04:01
|
|
|
It's not entirely NRx related but I really want to make a long post about the Art Renewal Centre. It's kind of only interesting to artists though? Would anyone here care?
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 12:27
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:IIRC Eliezer was much less interested in which "races" were dumber, and more interested in evidence of g (that is, as i understand it, that intelligence has a genetic factor) and evidence that it's probably determined by many genes and not under that much selection pressure. This would mean that once we identify those genes and have good prenatal gene therapy, suddenly everyone with the money will be able to make their kid the next Von Neumann. And this will be a big societal change, so we should prepare for it by...joining polyamorous statistics cults? G is not the "genetic" factor of intelligence. It's the "general" factor of intelligence. It's supposed to describe the extent to which skills in one kind of task will transfer to a completely unrelated task. Classically, intelligence researchers address the concept in terms of "g loading" or how well a given IQ test translates into other, unrelated tests.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 12:47
|
|
|
Neon Noodle posted:It's not entirely NRx related but I really want to make a long post about the Art Renewal Centre. It's kind of only interesting to artists though? Would anyone here care? Tangents keep threads alive 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 13:04
|
|
|
Relevant Tangent posted:Tangents keep threads alive User:post combo
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 13:46
|
|
|
Make way for a BIG POST toot toot  Art Renewal Center (ARC) is a non-profit organization founded/run by a billionaire guy named Fred Ross. They are an advocacy organization for a particular type of extremely conservative, realistic painting (known as "academic" art). They also offer "certification" for art schools that teach artists how to paint in their approved style. They also have annual awards for works created in their approved style, and certify certain artists as ARC Living Masters™.  Fred Ross, being a Very Wealthy Man, wanted to collect some fine art. He was unhappy with the state of modern art ca. 2000 (spoiler alert, most contemporary art is poo poo), and discovered the work of a mid-tier French painter named William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1825-1905).  Le Printemps by Bouguereau Bouguerau was moderately popular in his day, but doesn't really figure into anyone's concept of "art history" because his work was kitschy and without any serious point of view or original development. He was, without a doubt, a technical master. The guy could paint the human figure! Nobody disputes that. But in the general outline of art history, Bouguereau is just not that "important," considering the giants of art who were his contemporaries (i.e., the motherfucking Impressionists  ).The ARC really, REALLY wants people to know that Bouguereau was like the greatest painter ever to live. To ARC, the fact that Bouguerau was forgotten in favor of FRAUDS like PICASSO is a shameful conspiracy by people who want to destroy art itself. Now, if you browse the ARC web site, there are some great artists among their heroes! John Singer Sargent! Anders Zorn! Michelangelo! Alphonse Mucha! Goya! It's not that they have no taste at all. The problems are a little more subtle. For one thing, they're obsessed with academic technique (which they call, "realism") to the exclusion of emotional or intellectual expression. The art schools they bless (called "ARC-Approved™ Ateliers") teach a particular curriculum based on what's known as "sight-size." This is a system where you set up a canvas at a particular distance from your subject so that the picture you're making and the subject are the same size at the distance you're drawing. You train yourself to copy EXACTLY, from a master drawing (usually from a 19th century series by a guy named Charles Bargue), from plaster casts, and eventually from the live model. One of the ARC-Approved Ateliers was at a place called Founders College (since closed), which was a private college for Objectivists, where men were men, women were women, and you're gonna paint that apple CORRECTLY. This system produces people who are often able to achieve very accurate representations of what they see. The only problems with it are:
"OK OK, get to the  part." If you're following our story so far, you might be thinking, Neon Noodle, this obsession with romanticised European figurative art seems kind of… ? And you would be CORRECT. One of the most insidious things about ARC is that they have pretty much re-invented the aesthetic philosophy of the Third Reich! Hooray! They're also totally tone-deaf about it. They don't see the similarities, and they can't imagine why their conception of art might be…problematic?When ARC was founded in 2000, this wasn't really on anyone's minds (except, you know, us  but we're always whining so who cares). But the anti-modernism philosophy has influenced a LOT of younger artists. And this has taken place alongside the other aspects of neo-reactionary ressentiment, like the hatred of postmodernism, "SJWs," the rise of white nationalism, etc.The ironic thing is that, folks like ARC don't view their beliefs as political in any way. They don't like it when art is "political." They want art to be about pretty maidens and heroic poses. They don't see that this, in itself, is a political viewpoint about the role of art in society and the acceptable political/social content of art. The modern artists who were included in the Entartete Kunst exhibition didn't just make "ugly" art for no reason, or because they didn't know how to paint "correctly." They had opinions. They were often satirists and commentators on WWI and the state of Weimar society. Artists like Otto Dix:  Trench Warfare by Otto Dix Or Max Beckmann:  The Night by Max Beckmann Here's what the Fuhrer thought was "good" art:  The Rewards of Work by Gisbert Palmie (fun fact, Hitler drew Disney fan art and watched Snow White and Pinocchio in his own private screening room) ARC hates Modern Art. Like, a lot: Fred Ross posted:The modern world is a boiling cauldron of all sorts of great and absurd ideas, feelings, pathos, pathologies, psycho pathologies, humiliation, and dehumanizing ideas … and yet … yet even beauty, too, is still here amongst us, here in this hall and throughout the world, and her manifestations in modern times have been insufficiently expressed. So, find her in your homes, find her in the streets, find her in your communities and in nature, and especially, find her in each other … and save her … save her … protect and cherish her … and exalt her back to her rightful place … a place of supreme prominence, and bring her back into these our greatest institutions and our highest citadels of society and culture. The concept of beauty/art as a woman who must be saved from the ravages of degeneracy is a recurring trope in Reactionary thought. Aside from being paternalistic as h*ck to women, it fits right in with other metaphorical notions of purity and virginity in peril. THIS poo poo IS NOT INCIDENTAL TO REACTIONARY PHILOSOPHY. IT IS NOT JUST A SIDE-DISH. IT IS THE MAIN COURSE. Hitler was an artist. His vision was an aesthetic vision. Reaction (and neoreaction) IS AN AESTHETIC PHILOSOPHY. In my opinion, it's an aesthetic philosophy MORE than it is a political philosophy. I don't think Fred Ross is a Nazi, or even any sort of political reactionary. But I think he's painfully naive if he can't see the connection between his aesthetic philosophy and the other times this philosophy has reared its head. Also, his taste in art sucks.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 14:21
|
|
|
I became aware of the ARC a while ago and I'm definitely impressed as hell when I see a Boug, but the most striking painting in that post is the Dix. A purely technical exercise of painting certain subjects as close to a certain standard as possible isn't an art, it's a sport. Gymnastics rather than dance. (I remember meeting someone on the Internet a long time ago who held that the only criterion of artistic quality was photorealism. Bizarrely, or maybe not bizarrely, this was on a science fiction forum.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 15:05
|
|
|
I'm curious as to how ARC would respond to an artist like Kehinde Wiley. He has incredible technical abilities and bases much of his work on classical European paintings, but he also smashes it together with contemporary "lowbrow" black identity as a political statement. Peel posted:(I remember meeting someone on the Internet a long time ago who held that the only criterion of artistic quality was photorealism. Bizarrely, or maybe not bizarrely, this was on a science fiction forum.) I truly believe that the aesthetic beliefs of internet reactionaries are significantly informed by the fluff art of sci-fi and fantasy IPs. Warhammer 40k in particular. I guess according to the ARC, Boris Vallejo would be considered inherently superior to Picasso.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 15:39
|
|
|
goodog posted:I'm curious as to how ARC would respond to an artist like Kehinde Wiley. He has incredible technical abilities and bases much of his work on classical European paintings, but he also smashes it together with contemporary "lowbrow" black identity as a political statement.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 15:44
|
|
|
goodog posted:I truly believe that the aesthetic beliefs of internet reactionaries are significantly informed by the fluff art of sci-fi and fantasy IPs. Warhammer 40k in particular. I guess according to the ARC, Boris Vallejo would be considered inherently superior to Picasso. Well, Boris is listed as an ARC Living Master™.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 15:53
|
|
|
Neon Noodle posted:Good question! Another angle to all this, of course, is that ARC is in part a scam to make a certain set of paintings "collectible" by the very wealthy. The value of new art is always contentious, and it's subject to arbitrage. With their racket, ARC can cherry-pick artists and deem their work worthy of a $$$$ price tag, outside of the power structure of the degenerate gay Jews of New York who control the modern art scene. So the liberal billionaires can collect Jeff Koons, and the conservative billionaires can collect "ARC Living Masters." So it's essentially a more elitist version of Thomas Kinkade factories selling fake Americana nostalgia to the silent majority? putrid aidsman posted:Well, Boris is listed as an ARC Living Master™. That rules. The guy who did the poster to the Aqua Teen Hunger Force movie is apparently preserving the moral character of Western culture.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 16:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 12:38 |
|
|
Neon Noodle posted:Here's what the Fuhrer thought was "good" art: All good ideas are 2000 years old and Roman. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2017 16:07
|
|
