X-Git-Url: http://unremediatedgender.space/source?a=blobdiff_plain;f=notes%2Fa-hill-of-validity-sections.md;h=1898109e597aa5db68545f9ddbcc791305a8a974;hb=9359f59b131b538cd4a9f13cc6c858acb8eb1218;hp=65c41ec21a82cbc3b4d27bdbdcf36223556ccc8e;hpb=4a85593500159cacd8620f5c7bb4890921ef51e4;p=Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git

diff --git a/notes/a-hill-of-validity-sections.md b/notes/a-hill-of-validity-sections.md
index 65c41ec..1898109 100644
--- a/notes/a-hill-of-validity-sections.md
+++ b/notes/a-hill-of-validity-sections.md
@@ -475,3 +475,14 @@ And the thing where David Xu interprets criticism of Eliezer as me going "full p
 https://twitter.com/esyudkowsky/status/1374161729073020937
 
 > Also: Having some things you say "no comment" to, is not at *all* the same phenomenon as being an organization that issues Pronouncements.  There are a *lot* of good reasons to have "no comments" about things.  Anybody who tells you otherwise has no life experience, or is lying.
+
+"Speak out in order to make it clear how not alt-right you are; nothing wrong with that because I'm not lying" is being inconsistent about whether signaling and mood-affiliation matters—it's trying to socially profit by signaling pro-Stalin-ness, while simultaneously denying that anyone could object (because you didn't lie—pivoting to a worldview where only literal meanings matter and signals aren't real). Can I sketch this out mathematically?
+
+3 January 2020 text from Michael to me:
+> because I want to make it very clear to you, and to encourage you to make it very clear to others [...] that you are experiencing extremely articulate and extremely by the book trauma, caused in a very canonical manner by institutional betrayal and causing silencing of a sort very similar to that which causes investigation of sex crimes to be problematic (as in the high quality current Netflix show "Unbelievable", which you all might benefit from watching)
+
+Forget it, Jake—it's the rationalist community
+
+https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/FaJaCgqBKphrDzDSj/37-ways-that-words-can-be-wrong
+> The act of defining a word to refer to all humans, except black people, seems kind of suspicious.
+That's not the only implication on race of the philosophy of categorization—actually, I'm going to bite the bullet here; "Eurasian" is actually fine as a paraphyletic category (and @CovfefeAnon uses it productively)