* need introductory sentence before first reference to "we" or "the community"
+ * it is merited to touch on the nearest-unblocked strategy history somewhere in this piece, even if I may also need to write a longer "A Hill of Validity"
+ * also need a short statement of what I'm fighting for (AGPs are factually not women, and a culture that insists that everyone needs to lie to protect our feelings is bad for our own intellectual development; I want the things I said in "Sexual Dimorphism" to be the standard story, rather than my weird heresy)
+
+ * my "self-ID is a Schelling Point" and "On the Argumentative Form" show that I'm not a partisan hack (maybe also publish a brief version of )
+
4 levels of intellectual conversation https://rationalconspiracy.com/2017/01/03/four-layers-of-intellectual-conversation/
+> I find the "(chromosomes?)" here very amusing. I am also a Yudkowskian, Eliezer; "female human" is a cluster in thingspace :)
+https://twitter.com/EnyeWord/status/1068983389716385792
> But Twitter is at least not *ontologically confused* if they say that using preferred pronouns is courtesy, and claim that they're enforcing a courtesy standard. Replying "That's a lie! I will never lie!" is confused.
https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1067302082481274880
-
> Lying about atheism, in a conv about atheism, is defecting in a coop effort about atheism.
https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1226605895091507200
+Twitter comments about "despite all my attempts to narrow it"
+
+Trying to turn me into a Jane Austen character
+
+https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/ax695frGJEzGxFBK4/biology-inspired-agi-timelines-the-trick-that-never-works
+> But I suppose I cannot but acknowledge that my outward behavior seems to reveal a distribution whose median seems to fall well before 2050.
+
More Yudkowsky playing dumb—
> What separates your stance from "I consider 'parmesan' to refer to only cheese from the Parma region in Italy and I don't appreciate being asked to lie"?
projects / Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git / blobdiff