From: M. Taylor Saotome-Westlake Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2019 21:27:23 +0000 (-0800) Subject: check in X-Git-Url: http://unremediatedgender.space/source?a=commitdiff_plain;h=a8cc549d90219702b893c99fb78f632b60789ad5;p=Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git check in I got distracted by the internet and local news, but writing is really important so I can finally be at peace! --- diff --git a/content/drafts/i-tell-myself-to-let-the-story-end-or-a-hill-of-validity-in-defense-of-meaning.md b/content/drafts/i-tell-myself-to-let-the-story-end-or-a-hill-of-validity-in-defense-of-meaning.md index 9f48b2e..6e5b654 100644 --- a/content/drafts/i-tell-myself-to-let-the-story-end-or-a-hill-of-validity-in-defense-of-meaning.md +++ b/content/drafts/i-tell-myself-to-let-the-story-end-or-a-hill-of-validity-in-defense-of-meaning.md @@ -108,6 +108,6 @@ And if the community whose marketing literature says they're all about systemati [section: the community is politically constrained] -[section: "Against Lie Inflation" (and less violently https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/tSemJckYr29Gnxod2/building-intuitions-on-non-empirical-arguments-in-science ) made me scream in fury, because] +[section: "Against Lie Inflation" (and less violently https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/tSemJckYr29Gnxod2/building-intuitions-on-non-empirical-arguments-in-science ) made me scream in fury (punch the lightswitch cover), because] [section: the success of "Heads I Win" made me feel better; interesting how re-shared de-emphasized the political aspect] diff --git a/notes/Feb_2017_Facebook_meltdown_guide.txt b/notes/Feb_2017_Facebook_meltdown_guide.txt index c98870e..e56a224 100644 --- a/notes/Feb_2017_Facebook_meltdown_guide.txt +++ b/notes/Feb_2017_Facebook_meltdown_guide.txt @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@ https://www.facebook.com/zmdavis/posts/10154817202665199 https://www.facebook.com/zmdavis/posts/10154817329655199 https://www.facebook.com/zmdavis/posts/10154817359255199 +https://www.facebook.com/zmdavis/posts/10154839157745199 (quick postmortem notes) March/April— https://www.facebook.com/zmdavis/posts/10154901694685199 (don't talk to psychiatrists or cops) @@ -46,7 +47,6 @@ https://www.facebook.com/zmdavis/posts/10154971932190199 (order of the transpare https://www.facebook.com/zmdavis/posts/10154975747360199 (rationalist community power play) https://www.facebook.com/zmdavis/posts/10154976644315199 (can't find my backpack) - -https://www.facebook.com/zmdavis/posts/10155049296600199 +https://www.facebook.com/zmdavis/posts/10155049296600199 (unconference scuffle) Ben's commentary: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/um3FHuHfcHh98YYs9/duncan-sabien-in-defense-of-punch-bug#9SK3NpevW5BffjfH8 diff --git a/notes/i-tell-myself-notes.txt b/notes/i-tell-myself-notes.txt index bd52e4b..73a8d8f 100644 --- a/notes/i-tell-myself-notes.txt +++ b/notes/i-tell-myself-notes.txt @@ -490,9 +490,9 @@ https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/ctpkTaqTKbmm6uRgC/failed-utopia-4-2 The short story ["Failed Utopia #4-2"](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/ctpkTaqTKbmm6uRgC/failed-utopia-4-2) portrays an almost-aligned superintelligence constructing a happiness-maximizing utopia for humans—except that because [evolution didn't design women and men to be optimal partners for each other](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/Py3uGnncqXuEfPtQp/interpersonal-entanglement), and the AI is prohibited from editing people's minds, the happiness-maximizing solution ends up splitting up the human species by sex and giving women and men their own _separate_ utopias, complete with artificially-synthesized romantic partners. -At the time, [I expressed horror](https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/ctpkTaqTKbmm6uRgC/failed-utopia-4-2/comment/PhiGnX7qKzzgn2aKb) at the idea in the comments section, because my quasi-religious psychological-sex-differences denialism required that I be horrified. But looking back eleven years later (my deconversion from my teenage religion being pretty thorough at this point, I think), the _reasoning just makes sense_ (though you need a handwave to explain why the AI in the story doesn't give every _individual_ their separate utopia—if existing women and men aren't optimal partners for each other, so too are individual men not optimal same-sex friends for each other). - +At the time, [I expressed horror](https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/ctpkTaqTKbmm6uRgC/failed-utopia-4-2/comment/PhiGnX7qKzzgn2aKb) at the idea in the comments section, because my quasi-religious psychological-sex-differences denialism required that I be horrified. But looking back eleven years later (my deconversion from my teenage religion being pretty thorough at this point, I think), the _argument makes sense_ (though you need an additional [handwave](https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/HandWave) to explain why the AI doesn't give every _individual_ their separate utopia—if existing women and men aren't optimal partners for each other, so too are individual men not optimal same-sex friends for each other). +verthandi [on my reading, it's an important part of the argument that _verthandi_ are a _separate thing_, not just synthesized women] @@ -512,3 +512,7 @@ https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/QZs4vkC7cbyjL9XA9/changing-emotions Arguing with a specific person's published words is important, because otherwise you can strawman [Am I the asshole?](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmItheAsshole/) + +(I told people that my father was coming to pick me up at the end of my 72-hour (== 3 days) evaluation period, but that it wasn't fair that I couldn't rescue everyone.) + +blegg commentary: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/GEJzPwY8JedcNX2qz/blegg-mode#aAgSDZ4ddHpzj9fNN