From f9403e41f55d8e1767684c3dc95ff69595684cf2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "M. Taylor Saotome-Westlake" Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2022 20:01:32 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] November 5 is problematic but November is still serious MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit A friend of the blog points out that an earlier commit message was lying about the cable being out all weekend. That's ... not good. But it's also not a total collapse of my planning credibility. We've seen me finish long pieces before. An 86K word piece is mostly just seven 12K word pieces stapled together, with some additional oversight. It's objectively reasonable to expect me to find some new Ainslie–Schelling points and make November serious! --- ...exhibit-generally-rationalist-principles.md | 18 ++++++++++++------ notes/memoir-sections.md | 12 +++++------- 2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) diff --git a/content/drafts/agreeing-with-stalin-in-ways-that-exhibit-generally-rationalist-principles.md b/content/drafts/agreeing-with-stalin-in-ways-that-exhibit-generally-rationalist-principles.md index 60c825a..54dfa6d 100644 --- a/content/drafts/agreeing-with-stalin-in-ways-that-exhibit-generally-rationalist-principles.md +++ b/content/drafts/agreeing-with-stalin-in-ways-that-exhibit-generally-rationalist-principles.md @@ -340,13 +340,13 @@ Accusing one's interlocutor of bad faith is frowned upon for a reason. We would Accordingly, I tried the object-level good-faith argument thing _first_. I tried it for _years_. But at some point, I think I should be _allowed to notice_ the nearest-unblocked-strategy game which is _very obviously happening_ if you look at the history of what was said. I think there's _some_ number of years and _some_ number of thousands of words of litigating the object-level _and_ the meta level after which there's nothing left for me to do but jump up to the meta-meta level and explain, to anyone capable of hearing it, why in this case I think I've accumulated enough evidence for the assumption of good faith to have been _empirically falsified_. -(Obviously, if we're crossing the Rubicon of abandoning the norm of assuming good faith, it needs to be abandoned symmetrically. I _think_ I'm doing a _pretty good_ job of adhering to standards of intellectual conduct and being transparent about my motivations, but I'm definitely not perfect, and, unlike Yudkowsky, I'm not so absurdly miscalibratedly arrogant to claim "confidence in my own ability to independently invent everything important" (!) about my topics of interest. If Yudkowsky or anyone else thinks they _have a case_ based on my behavior that _I'm_ being culpably intellectually dishonest, they of course have my blessing and encouragement to post it for the audience to evaluate.) +(Obviously, if we're crossing the Rubicon of abandoning the norm of assuming good faith, it needs to be abandoned symmetrically. I _think_ I'm doing a _pretty good_ job of adhering to standards of intellectual conduct and being transparent about my motivations, but I'm definitely not perfect, and, unlike Yudkowsky, I'm not so absurdly mendaciously arrogant to claim "confidence in my own ability to independently invent everything important" (!) about my topics of interest. If Yudkowsky or anyone else thinks they _have a case_ based on my behavior that _I'm_ being culpably intellectually dishonest, they of course have my blessing and encouragement to post it for the audience to evaluate.) What makes all of this especially galling is the fact that _all of my heretical opinions are literally just Yudkowsky's opinions from the 'aughts!_ My whole thing about how changing sex isn't possible with existing technology because the category encompasses so many high-dimensional details? Not original to me! I [filled in a few technical details](/2021/May/sexual-dimorphism-in-the-sequences-in-relation-to-my-gender-problems/#changing-sex-is-hard), but again, this was _in the Sequences_ as ["Changing Emotions"](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/QZs4vkC7cbyjL9XA9/changing-emotions). My thing about how you can't define concepts any way you want because there are mathematical laws governing which category boundaries compress your anticipated experiences? Not original to me! I [filled in](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/esRZaPXSHgWzyB2NL/where-to-draw-the-boundaries) [a few technical details](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/onwgTH6n8wxRSo2BJ/unnatural-categories-are-optimized-for-deception), but [_we had a whole Sequence about this._](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/FaJaCgqBKphrDzDSj/37-ways-that-words-can-be-wrong) Seriously, you think I'm _smart enough_ to come up with all of this indepedently? I'm not! I ripped it all off from Yudkowsky back in the 'aughts _when he still gave a shit about telling the truth_. (Actively telling the truth, and not just technically not lying.) The things I'm hyperfocused on that he thinks are politically impossible to say, are things he _already said_, that anyone could just look up! -I guess the point is that the egregore doesn't have the logical or reading comprehension for that?—or rather the egregore has no reason to care about the past; if you get tagged by the mob as an Enemy, your past statements will get dug up as evidence of foul present intent, but if you're doing good enough of playing the part today, no one cares what you said in 2009? +I guess the point is that the egregore doesn't have the logical or reading comprehension for that?—or rather, the egregore has no reason to care about the past; if you get tagged by the mob as an Enemy, your past statements will get dug up as evidence of foul present intent, but if you're doing good enough of playing the part today, no one cares what you said in 2009? Does ... does he expect the rest of us not to _notice_? Or does he think that "everybody knows"? @@ -356,13 +356,19 @@ Yudkowsky [defends his behavior](https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/13568121 > I think that some people model civilization as being in the middle of a great battle in which this tweet, even if true, is giving comfort to the Wrong Side, where I would not have been as willing to tweet a truth helping the Right Side. From my perspective, this battle just isn't that close to the top of my priority list. I rated nudging the cognition of the people-I-usually-respect, closer to sanity, as more important; who knows, those people might matter for AGI someday. And the Wrong Side part isn't as clear to me either. +There's a number of things that could be said about this,[^number-of-things] but to focus on what's most important, I reply— + +[^number-of-things]: Note the striking contrast between "A Rational Argument", in which the Yudkowsky of 2007 wrote that + + + + [TODO: there are a number of things to be said to this— * A Rational Arugment" is very explicit about "not have been as willing to Tweet a truth helping the side" meaning you've crossed the line; - * It's not clear anyone he usually respects was making this mistake; it seems likely that the original thread was subtweeting Eric Weinstein, who was not making this mistake * it's if anything more plausible that trans women will matter to AGI, as I pointed out in my email ] -But the battle that matters—the battle with a Right Side and a Wrong Side—isn't "pro-trans" _vs._ "anti-trans". (The central tendency of the contemporary trans rights movement is firmly on the Wrong Side, but that's not the same thing as all trans people as individuals.) That's why Jessica joined our posse to try to argue with Yudkowsky in early 2019. (She wouldn't have, if my objection had been, "trans is fake; trans people Bad".) That's why Somni—one of the trans women who [infamously protested the 2019 CfAR reunion](https://www.ksro.com/2019/11/18/new-details-in-arrests-of-masked-camp-meeker-protesters/) for (among other things) CfAR allegedly discriminating against trans women—[understands what I've been saying](https://somnilogical.tumblr.com/post/189782657699/legally-blind). +The battle that matters—the battle with a Right Side and a Wrong Side—isn't "pro-trans" _vs._ "anti-trans". (The central tendency of the contemporary trans rights movement is firmly on the Wrong Side, but that's not the same thing as all trans people as individuals.) That's why Jessica joined our posse to try to argue with Yudkowsky in early 2019. (She wouldn't have, if my objection had been, "trans is Fake and Wrong; trans people Bad".) That's why Somni—one of the trans women who [infamously protested the 2019 CfAR reunion](https://www.ksro.com/2019/11/18/new-details-in-arrests-of-masked-camp-meeker-protesters/) for (among other things) CfAR allegedly discriminating against trans women—[understands what I've been saying](https://somnilogical.tumblr.com/post/189782657699/legally-blind). The battle that matters—and I've been _very_ explicit about this, for years—is over this proposition eloquently stated by Scott Alexander (redacting the irrelevant object-level example): @@ -421,7 +427,7 @@ I like to imagine that they have a saying out of dath ilan: once is happenstance I could forgive him for taking a shit on d4 of my chessboard (["at least 20% of the ones with penises are actually women"](https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10154078468809228)). I could even forgive him for subsequently taking a shit on e4 of my chessboard (["you're not standing in defense of truth if you insist on a word [...]"](https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1067198993485058048)) as long as he wiped most of the shit off afterwards (["you are being the bad guy if you try to shut down that conversation by saying that 'I can define the word "woman" any way I want'"](https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10158853851009228)), even though, really, I would have expected someone so smart to take a hint after the incident on d4. -But if he's _then_ going to take a shit on c3 of my chessboard (["In terms of important things? Those would be all the things I've read [...] describing reasons someone does not like to be tossed into a Male Bucket or Female Bucket, as it would be assigned by their birth certificate"](https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10159421750419228)), +But if he's _then_ going to take a shit on c3 of my chessboard (["the simplest and best protocol is, '"He" refers to the set of people who have asked us to use "he"'"](https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10159421750419228)), [TODO cap off chess analogy— @@ -440,7 +446,7 @@ The turd on c3 is a pretty big likelihood ratio! * "Blood Is Thicker Than Water" followup https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1404700330927923206 -> That is: there's a story here where not just particular people hounding Zack as a responsive target, but a whole larger group, are engaged in a dark conspiracy that is all about doing damage on issues legible to Zack and important to Zack. This is merely implausible on priors. +> That is: there's a story here where not just particular people hounding Zack as a responsive target, but a whole larger group, are engaged in a dark conspiracy that is all about doing damage on issues legible to Zack and important to Zack. This is merely implausible on priors. I mean, I wouldn't _call_ it a "dark conspiracy" exactly, but if the people with intellectual authority are computing what to say on the principle of "it is sometimes personally prudent and not community-harmful to post [their] agreement with Stalin", and Stalin cares a lot about doing damage on issues legible and important to me, then, pragmatically, I think that has _similar effects_ on the state of our collective knowledge as a dark conspiracy, even if the mechanism of coordination is each individual being separately terrified of Stalin, rather than them meeting with dark robes to plot under a full moon. diff --git a/notes/memoir-sections.md b/notes/memoir-sections.md index 78bc198..8f96884 100644 --- a/notes/memoir-sections.md +++ b/notes/memoir-sections.md @@ -12,12 +12,10 @@ sections— - prelude to pronouns post dedicated day each?— -_ the dolphin war +_ the dolphin war (6 November?) _ Michael Vassar and the Theory of Optimal Gossip _ Sasha disaster - - With internet available— _ record of Yudkowsky citing TDT as part of decision to prosecute Emerson? _ university library sells borrowing privileges @@ -44,8 +42,8 @@ _ 13th century word meanings _ weirdly hostile comments on "... Boundaries?" - far editing tier— +_ It's not clear anyone he usually respects was making this mistake; it seems likely that the original thread was subtweeting Eric Weinstein, who was not making this mistake _ "I Wish You Well" as breakup song _ the function of privacy norms is to protect you from people who want to selectively reveal information to hurt you, so it makes sense that I'm particularly careful about Yudkowsky's privacy and not Scott's, because I totally am trying to hurt Yudkowsky (this also protects me from the charge that by granting more privacy to Yudkowsky than Scott, I'm implying that Yudkowsky said something more incriminating; the difference in treatment is about _me_ and my expectations, rather than what they may or may not have said when I tried emailing them); I want it to be clear that I'm attacking him but not betraying him _ pull "agreeing with Stalin" quote earlier in ms. to argue that Yudkowsky apparently doesn't disagree with my "deliberately ambiguous" @@ -61,6 +59,7 @@ _ elaborate on why I'm not leaking sensitive bits, by explaining what can be inf _ footnote on "no one would even consider" _ post-Christmas conversation should do a better job of capturing the war, that Jessica thinks Scott is Bad for being a psychiatrist _ conversation with Scott should include the point where I'm trying to do AI theory +_ consistent-ize reference to Somni getting it in pt. 4, with mention of protest in pt. 3 _ Anna "everyone knows" we don't have free speech 2 Mar 2019, self-centeredness about which global goods matter _ footnote to explain why I always include the year with the month even though it could be inferred from context _ make sure to quote Yudkowsky's LW moderation policy before calling back to it @@ -86,8 +85,6 @@ _ first EY contact was asking for public clarification or "I am being silenced" _ Nov. 2018 continues thread from Oct. 2016 conversation _ better explanation of posse formation _ maybe quote Michael's Nov 2018 texts? -_ 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 _ erasing agency of Michael's friends, construed as a pawn @@ -116,9 +113,10 @@ _ Anna _ secret posse member _ Katie (pseudonym choice) _ Alicorn: about privacy, and for Melkor Glowfic reference link -_ someone from Alicorner #drama as a hostile prereader (Swimmer?) +_ hostile prereader (April, J. Beshir, Swimmer, someone else from Alicorner #drama) _ maybe Kelsey (very briefly, just about her name)? _ maybe SK (briefly about his name)? (the memoir might have the opposite problem (too long) from my hostile-shorthand Twitter snipes) +_ maybe Big Yud (ask #drama about the politics/ettiquitte) marketing— _ Twitter -- 2.17.1