X-Git-Url: http://unremediatedgender.space/source?a=blobdiff_plain;f=notes%2Fmemoir-sections.md;h=faa30c06947d0c8cd6b438b1c0d0113bca44744d;hb=d27f56e4fcdae5a8580a0f709d03f4007a46c9dd;hp=3647637d694e07b8648246f242e92e1b582c6ad9;hpb=d5e7eef8d4e47c778c6a0e58407b04744a3d9526;p=Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git diff --git a/notes/memoir-sections.md b/notes/memoir-sections.md index 3647637..faa30c0 100644 --- a/notes/memoir-sections.md +++ b/notes/memoir-sections.md @@ -1,9 +1,9 @@ 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 +✓ "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 @@ -17,7 +17,9 @@ _ 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 -Notes from pt. 3–6 readthrough (post publication of pt. 1–2)— + + +pt. 3 edit tier— _ 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 @@ -45,17 +47,35 @@ _ we can go stronger than "I definitely don't think Yudkowsky _thinks of himself _ try to clarify Abram's categories view (Michael didn't get it) _ cut lots of words from December 2019 blogging spree _ in a footnote, defend the "cutting my dick off" rhetorical flourish +_ choice quotes in "end of the Category War" thank you note +_ 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 + +pt. 4 edit tier— _ mention Nick Bostrom email scandal (and his not appearing on the one-sentence CAIS statement) _ 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 + +pt. 5 edit tier— +_ quote specific exchange where I mentioned 10,000 words of philosophy that Scott was wrong—obviously the wrong play +_ "as Soares pointed out" needs link +_ can I rewrite to not bury the lede on "intent doesn't matter"? +_ also reference "No such thing as a tree" in Dolphin War section +_ better brief explanation of dark side epistemology +_ "deep causal structure" argument needs to be crystal clear, not sloopy +_ it's a relevant detail whether the optimization is coming from Nate +_ probably cut the vaccine polarization paragraphs? (overheard at a party is not great sourcing, even if technically admissible) +_ elaborate on how 2007!Yudkowsky and 2021!Xu are saying the opposite things if you just take a plain-language reading and consider, not whether individual sentences can be interpreted as "true", but what kind of _optimization_ the text is doing to the behavior of receptive readers +_ Scott got comas right in the same year as "Categories" +_ cite Earthling/postrat sneers +_ cite postYud Tweet ------ With internet available— +_ Earthing/postrat sneers _ Is http://www.overcomingbias.com/2011/01/be-a-charity-angel.html the best link for after-the-fact prize funding? _ P(doom) _ Michael on OB in 'aught-eight on smart kids internalizing rules meant for the norm of reaction of a dumber population @@ -2807,3 +2827,8 @@ bullet notes for Tail analogy— * 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 + +Something he said made me feel spooked that he knew something about risks of future suffering that he wouldn't talk about, but in retrospect, I don't think that's what he meant. + +https://twitter.com/zackmdavis/status/1435856644076830721 +> The error in "Not Man for the Categories" is not subtle! After the issue had been brought to your attention, I think you should have been able to condemn it: "Scott's wrong; you can't redefine concepts in order to make people happy; that's retarded." It really is that simple! 4/6