check in

[Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git] / notes / a-hill-of-meaning-sections.md

diff --git a/notes/a-hill-of-meaning-sections.md b/notes/a-hill-of-meaning-sections.md
index 3478963..bfc0abf 100644 (file)
--- a/notes/a-hill-of-meaning-sections.md
+++ b/notes/a-hill-of-meaning-sections.md
@@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mxZBrbVqZnU
 I realize it wasn't personal—no one _consciously_ thinking "I'm going to trick autogynpehilic men into cutting their dicks off", but
 
 the most recent pronoun update
 I realize it wasn't personal—no one _consciously_ thinking "I'm going to trick autogynpehilic men into cutting their dicks off", but
 
 the most recent pronoun update

-https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10159421750419228
+https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10159421750419228 

 
 > I would not know how to write a different viewpoint as a sympathetic character.
 [...]
 
 > I would not know how to write a different viewpoint as a sympathetic character.
 [...]


@@ -366,6 +366,11 @@ https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/wqmmv6NraYv4Xoeyj/conversation-halters
 
 If Scott Alexander's "The Categories Were Made For Man ..." had never been published, would we still be talking about dolphins and trees in the same way?
 
 
 If Scott Alexander's "The Categories Were Made For Man ..." had never been published, would we still be talking about dolphins and trees in the same way?
 

+Scott has so many fans—
+https://jasoncrawford.org/guide-to-scott-alexander-and-slate-star-codex
+https://nothingismere.com/2015/09/12/library-of-scott-alexandria/
+https://guzey.com/favorite/slate-star-codex/
+

 Nate on dolphins (June 2021)—a dogwhistle??
 https://twitter.com/So8res/status/1401670792409014273
 Yudkowsky retweeted Nate on dolphins—
 Nate on dolphins (June 2021)—a dogwhistle??
 https://twitter.com/So8res/status/1401670792409014273
 Yudkowsky retweeted Nate on dolphins—


@@ -374,4 +379,19 @@ https://archive.is/Ecsca
 my rationalist community has people asking a lot of questions already answered by my community's name
 
 cite to "Not Especially Related to Transgender"
 my rationalist community has people asking a lot of questions already answered by my community's name
 
 cite to "Not Especially Related to Transgender"

-https://twitter.com/fortenforge/status/1402057829142302721
\ No newline at end of file
+https://twitter.com/fortenforge/status/1402057829142302721
+
+"Hero Licensing": to provide an earnest-token of all the techniques I couldn't show
+
+uncritically (uncharacteristically uncritically) taking the newly-ascendant gender-identity theory for granted ("lots of women wouldn't be particularly disturbed if they had a male body; the ones we know as 'trans' are just the ones with unusually strong female gender identities"), without considering the obvious-in-retrospect hypothesis that "guy who speculates about his female analogue on a transhumanist mailing list in 2004" and "guy who thinks he might be a trans women in Berkeley 2016" are the same guy.
+
+https://arbital.greaterwrong.com/p/logical_dt/?l=5gc
+It even leaked into Big Yud!!! "Counterfactuals were made for humanity, not humanity for counterfactuals."
+
+If hiring a community matchmaker was worth it, why don't my concerns count, too?
+
+When I protested that I wasn't expecting a science fictional Utopia of pure reason, but just for people to continue to be right about things they already got right in 2008, he said, "Doesn't matter—doesn't _fucking_ matter."
+
+humans have honor instead of TDT. "That's right! I'm appealing to your honor!"
+
+The boundary must be drawn here! This far, and no further!