Notes from pt. 3–6 readthrough (post publication of pt. 1–2)—
_ fullname Taylor and Hoffman at start of pt. 3
+_ footnote clarifying that "Riley" and Sarah weren't core members of the group, despite being included on some emails?
_ be more specific about Ben's anti-EA and Jessica's anti-MIRI things, perhaps in footnotes
_ Ben on "locally coherent coordination": use direct quotes for Ben's language—maybe rewrite in my own language (footnote?) as an understanding test
_ set context for "EA Has a Lying Problem" (written by Sarah, likely with Michael's influence—maybe ask Sarah)
_ cut lots of words from December 2019 blogging spree
_ in a footnote, defend the "cutting my dick off" rhetorical flourish
_ mention Nick Bostrom email scandal (and his not appearing on the one-sentence CAIS statement)
-_ somewhere: mention that "Not Man for the Categories" keeps getting cited
_ revise and cut words from "bad faith" section since can link to "Assume Bad Faith"
_ cut words from January 2020 Twitter exchange (after war criminal defenses)
_ revise reply to Xu
_ cut lots of words from Scotts comments on Jessica's MIRI post (keep: "attempting to erase the agency", Scott blaming my troubles on Michael being absurd)
+_ do I have a better identifier than "Vassarite"?
+_ maybe I do want to fill in a few more details about the Sasha disaster, conditional on what I end up writing regarding Scott's prosecution?—and conditional on my separate retro email—also the Zolpidem thing
-TODO blocks—
-_ "Lenore" psychiatric disaster
-- Eliezerfic fight conclusion
+slotted TODO blocks—
+✓ psychiatric disaster
+_ "Agreeing With Stalin" intro recap
+_ recap of crimes, cont'd
+_ Dolphin War finish
+_ lead-in to Sept. 2021 Twitter altercation
_ Michael Vassar and the Theory of Optimal Gossip
_ plan to reach out to Rick / Michael on creepy men/crazy men
_ reaction to Ziz
_ State of Steven
_ complicity and friendship
_ out of patience email
-_ the hill he wants to die on
-_ recap of crimes, cont'd
-_ lead-in to Sept. 2021 Twitter altercation
-_ Dolphin War finish
-_ "Agreeing With Stalin" intro recap
+- Eliezerfic fight conclusion
+
+blocks to fit somewhere—
+_ the hill he wants to die on (insert somewhere in "Standing")
+_ Tail vs. Bailey / Davis vs. Yudkowsky analogy (new block somewhere)
+_ mention that "Not Man for the Categories" keeps getting cited
+
------
https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/1684947017502433281
> Keir Starmer agrees that a woman is an adult human female. Will Ed Davey also rejoin the real world, science & the English language by reversing his view that a woman can "quite clearly" have a penis? Inability to face reality in small things bodes ill for more serious matters.
-Analysis of my writing mistake (show this to Jackie!!)
+Analysis of my writing mistake
https://twitter.com/shroomwaview/status/1681742799052341249
------
SK on never making a perfectly correct point
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/P3FQNvnW8Cz42QBuA/dialogue-on-appeals-to-consequences#Z8haBdrGiRQcGSXye
+
+Scott on puberty blockers, dreadful: https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/highlights-from-the-comments-on-fetishes
+
+https://jdpressman.com/2023/08/28/agi-ruin-and-the-road-to-iconoclasm.html
+
+https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/BahoNzY2pzSeM2Dtk/beware-of-stephen-j-gould
+> there comes a point in self-deception where it becomes morally indistinguishable from lying. Consistently self-serving scientific "error", in the face of repeated correction and without informing others of the criticism, blends over into scientific fraud.
+
+https://time.com/collection/time100-ai/6309037/eliezer-yudkowsky/
+> "I expected to be a tiny voice shouting into the void, and people listened instead. So I doubled down on that."
+
+-----
+
+bullet notes for Tail analogy—
+ * My friend Tailcalled is better at science than me; in the hours that I've wasted with personal, political, and philosophical writing, he's actually been running surveys and digging into statistical methodology.
+ * As a result of his surveys, Tail was convinced of the two-type taxonomy, started /r/Blanchardianism, &c.
+ * Arguing with him resulted in my backing away from pure BBL ("Useful Approximation")
+ * Later, he became disillusioned with "Blanchardians" and went to war against them. I kept telling him he _is_ a "Blanchardian", insofar as he largely agrees with the main findings (about AGP as a major cause). He corresponded with Bailey and became frustrated with Bailey's ridigity. Blanchardians market themselves as disinterest truthseekers, but a lot of what they're actually doing is providing a counternarrative to social justice.
+ * There's an analogy between Tail's antipathy for Bailey and my antipathy for Yudkowsky: I still largely agree with "the rationalists", but the way especially Yudkowsky markets himself as a uniquely sane thinker