X-Git-Url: http://unremediatedgender.space/source?a=blobdiff_plain;f=notes%2Fa-hill-of-validity-sections.md;h=09106e5a6761a8f8d88eca9466a62aad864e24bc;hb=11aa5f9aaea409d046abc4c51eb9afc6f697aacd;hp=f0303111b7c04d7575854d622f5d4f7fcfdc9bae;hpb=7b3fd116179347cbee749e1a1ba2d144b1b954d4;p=Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git diff --git a/notes/a-hill-of-validity-sections.md b/notes/a-hill-of-validity-sections.md index f030311..09106e5 100644 --- a/notes/a-hill-of-validity-sections.md +++ b/notes/a-hill-of-validity-sections.md @@ -1,18 +1,21 @@ on deck— -- § about privacy norms, and my secret research project (research report on gout) -_ finish and polish § on reaching out a fourth time -_ talk about the 2019 Christmas party _ Let's recap _ If he's reading this ... _ Perhaps if the world were at stake +_ ¶ about social justice and defying threats _ ¶ about body odors _ regrets and wasted time +_ talk about the 2019 Christmas party _ excerpt 2nd "out of patience" email with internet available— +_ Sarah Barellies cover links +_ "watchful waiting" +_ Atlantic article on "My Son Wears Dresses" https://archive.is/FJNII _ in "especially galling" §: from "Changing Emotions"—"somehow it's always about sex when men are involved"—he even correctly pinpointing AGP in ordinary men (as was obvious back then), just without the part that AGP _is_ "trans" _ "look at what ended up happening"—look up whether that exact quote from from http://www.hpmor.com/chapter/47 or https://www.hpmor.com/chapter/97 +_ Discord history with Scott (leading up to 2019 Christmas party, and deferring to Tailcalled on SSC survey question wording) _ Gallileo "And yet it moves" _ Discord logs before Austin retreat _ examples of snarky comments about "the rationalists" @@ -27,6 +30,7 @@ _ refusing to give a probability (When Not to Use Probabilities? Shut Up and Do far editing tier— +_ quote one more "Hill of Meaning" Tweet emphasizing fact/policy distinction _ conversation with Ben about physical injuries (this is important because it explains where the "cut my dick off rhetoric" came from) _ context of his claim to not be taking a stand _ rephrase "gamete size" discussion to make it clearer that Yudkowsky's proposal also implicitly requires people to be agree about the clustering thing @@ -38,7 +42,6 @@ _ address the "maybe it's good to be called names" point from "Hill" thread _ explain "court ruling" earlier _ 2019 Discord discourse with Alicorner _ edit discussion of "anti-trans" side given that I later emphasize that "sides" shouldn't be a thing -_ first appearance of "Caliphate" _ explain the adversarial pressure on privacy norms _ first EY contact was asking for public clarification or "I am being silenced" (so Glomarizing over "unsatisfying response" or no response isn't leaking anything Yudkowksy cares about) _ Nov. 2018 continues thread from Oct. 2016 conversation @@ -48,8 +51,6 @@ _ clarify sequence of outreach attempts _ clarify existence of a shadow posse member _ mention Nov. 2018 conversation with Ian somehow; backref on bidding for attention again; subject line from Happy Price 2016 _ Said on Yudkowsky's retreat to Facebook being bad for him -_ explain first use of "rationalist" -_ explain first use of Center for Applied Rationality _ erasing agency of Michael's friends, construed as a pawn _ mention the fact that Anna had always taken a "What You Can't Say" strategy _ when to use first _vs. last names @@ -57,7 +58,15 @@ _ explain why I'm not being charitable in 2018 thread analysis, that at the time _ January 2019 meeting with Ziz and Gwen _ better summary of Littman _ explain Rob -_ explain or omit first mention of "egregore" +_ edit the child transition section in a way that Kay Brown would be OK with, have a few sentences about Clever Hans before the wrap-up + + +terms to explain on first mention— +_ "Caliphate" +_ "rationalist" +_ Center for Applied Rationality +_ MIRI +_ "egregore" people to consult before publishing, for feedback or right of objection— @@ -166,7 +175,12 @@ Because of the particular historical moment in which we live, we end up facing p I view this conflict as entirely incidental, something that [would happen in some form in any place and time](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/cKrgy7hLdszkse2pq/archimedes-s-chronophone), rather than having to do with American politics or "the left" in particular. In a Christian theocracy, our analogues would get in trouble for beliefs about evolution; in the old Soviet Union, our analogues would get in trouble for [thinking about market economics](https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/09/24/book-review-red-plenty/) (as a [positive technical discipline](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_theorems_of_welfare_economics#Proof_of_the_first_fundamental_theorem) adjacent to game theory, not yoked to a particular normative agenda). -Incidental or not, the conflict is real, and everyone smart knows it—even if it's not easy to _prove_ that everyone smart knows it, because everyone smart is very careful what they say in public. (I am not smart.) Scott Aaronson wrote of [the Kolmogorov Option](https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3376) (which Alexander aptly renamed [Kolmorogov complicity](https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/10/23/kolmogorov-complicity-and-the-parable-of-lightning/): serve the cause of Truth by cultivating a bubble that focuses on truths that won't get you in trouble with the local political authorities. This after the Soviet mathematician Andrey Kolmogorov, who _knew better than to pick fights he couldn't win_. +Incidental or not, the conflict is real, and everyone smart knows it—even if it's not easy to _prove_ that everyone smart knows it, because everyone smart is very careful what they say in public. (I am not smart.) + + +(which Alexander aptly renamed [Kolmorogov complicity](https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/10/23/kolmogorov-complicity-and-the-parable-of-lightning/): + + Becuase of the conflict, and because all the prominent high-status people are running a Kolmogorov Option strategy, and because we happen to have to a _wildly_ disproportionate number of _people like me_ around, I think being "pro-trans" ended up being part of the community's "shield" against external political pressure, of the sort that perked up after [the February 2021 _New York Times_ hit piece about Alexander's blog](https://archive.is/0Ghdl). (The _magnitude_ of heat brought on by the recent _Times_ piece and its aftermath was new, but the underlying dynamics had been present for years.) @@ -1081,17 +1095,18 @@ https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1404821285276774403 > It is not trans-specific. When people tell me I helped them, I mostly believe them and am happy. ] - https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/cyzXoCv7nagDWCMNS/you-re-calling-who-a-cult-leader#35n > In fact, I would say that by far the most cultish-looking behavior on Hacker News is people trying to show off how willing they are to disagree with Paul Graham I'm totally still doing this > it's that it's hard to get that innocence back, once you even start thinking about whether you're _independent_ of someone - If Scott's willing to link to A. Marinos, maybe he'd link to my memoir, too? https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/open-thread-242 My reaction to Marinos is probably similar to a lot of people's reaction to me: geez, putting in so much effort to correct Scott's mistake is lame, what a loser, who cares +This is the same mechanism as "Unnatural Categories Are Optimized for Deception"!! +> journalism is usually trustworthy because trustworthiness is the carrier vehicle. It's occasionally corrupt, because corruption is the payload. +https://www.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/lje3nu/statement_on_new_york_times_article/gnfrprx/?context=3 -------- @@ -1200,3 +1215,5 @@ It's totally understandable to not want to get involved in a political scuffle b An analogy: racist jokes are also just jokes. Alice says, "What's the difference between a black dad and a boomerang? A boomerang comes back." Bob says, "That's super racist! Tons of African-American fathers are devoted parents!!" Alice says, "Chill out, it was just a joke." In a way, Alice is right. It was just a joke; no sane person could think that Alice was literally claiming that all black men are deadbeat dads. But, the joke only makes sense in the first place in context of a culture where the black-father-abandonment stereotype is operative. If you thought the stereotype was false, or if you were worried about it being a self-fulfilling prophecy, you would find it tempting to be a humorless scold and get angry at the joke-teller. Similarly, the "Caliphate" humor only makes sense in the first place in the context of a celebrity culture where deferring to Scott and Eliezer is expected behavior. (In a way that deferring to Julia Galef or John S. Wentworth is not expected behavior, even if Galef and Wentworth also have a track record as good thinkers.) I think this culture is bad. _Nullius in verba_. + + [TODO: asking Anna to weigh in] (I figured that spamming people with hysterical and somewhat demanding physical postcards was more polite (and funnier) than my recent habit of spamming people with hysterical and somewhat demanding emails.)