X-Git-Url: http://unremediatedgender.space/source?a=blobdiff_plain;f=notes%2Fmemoir-sections.md;h=faa30c06947d0c8cd6b438b1c0d0113bca44744d;hb=d27f56e4fcdae5a8580a0f709d03f4007a46c9dd;hp=e84e571a2f89211f63c1f4d6c45f79ba885924fc;hpb=606364c0f76c7a8f9bb6856dc25a98ff3f118992;p=Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git diff --git a/notes/memoir-sections.md b/notes/memoir-sections.md index e84e571..faa30c0 100644 --- a/notes/memoir-sections.md +++ b/notes/memoir-sections.md @@ -1,5 +1,27 @@ -Notes from pt. 3–6 readthrough (post publication of pt. 1–2)— +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 +- 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 + + + +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 _ 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) @@ -25,33 +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) -_ 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) - -TODO blocks— -_ "Lenore" psychiatric disaster -- Eliezerfic fight conclusion -_ 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 -_ Tail vs. Bailey / Davis vs. Yudkowsky analogy +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 @@ -2797,16 +2821,14 @@ https://time.com/collection/time100-ai/6309037/eliezer-yudkowsky/ ----- -resisted from posting in Eliezerfic, left an eyeroll emoji instead— - -I mean, it's worth noting that their concept of a "good reason" literally includes "prediction markets think people will be happier this way". This is not a Society that gives a shit (as a terminal value) about non-Keepers having accurate information (or they wouldn't, _e.g._, gaslight Merrin about how famous she is). - -_Of course_ a Society that prizes freedom-from-infohazards as a core value is going to have lots of "good reasons" for the systematically-misleading-representations they make, that will seem genuinely compelling to the people of that Society who are in on it! - -One might have hoped that dath ilani would be self-aware enough to notice that things that seem like a "good reason" for a conspiracy _to dath ilani_, would not seem like a "good reason" to people from a Society that prizes freedom-of-speech? But if they've screened off their history (for the greater good, of course), they might not have a concept of what other Societies are like ... - -(Yes, I know we've been informed by authorial fiat that dath ilan has a lot of internal diversity, but there are necessarily limits to that if you're going to be a human Society specifically rather than a Solomonff inductor, and it seems clear that any faction that thinks gaslighting Merrin is morally wrong is on the losing end of the counterfactual warfare of democracy.) - -------- +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 +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