The way this is supposed to work is that you just make your arguments and trust that good arguments will outcompete bad ones; emailing people begging for a clarification is kind of rude and I want to acknowledge the frame in which I'm the bad guy (or pitably mentally ill)—but I was taught that arguing with people when they're doing something wrong is actually doing them a _favor_—I was taught that it's virtuous to make an extraordinary effort
bad-faith nitpicker—I would be annoyed if someone repeatedly begged me to correct a mistake I made in a blog post from five years ago or a Tweet from November
-I wouldn't hold anyone to standards I wouldn't myself—for whatever that's worth http://zackmdavis.net/blog/2018/07/object-vs-meta-golden-rule/
+I wouldn't hold anyone to standards I wouldn't myself—for whatever that's worth http://zackmdavis.net/blog/2018/07/object-vs-meta-golden-rule/ (not a coincidence that are positions aren't reversed)
Losing faith in guided-by-the-beauty-of-our-weapons
_Why_ is it humorous? Because you don't like sports? (["Though, since you never designed your own leg muscles, you are racing using strength that isn't yours. A race between robot cars is a purer contest of their designers."](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/29vqqmGNxNRGzffEj/high-challenge))
+It's alarming when someone who shattered all your dreams with logic ten years ago, then turns around and tells you your dreams can be real by definition
+
https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1067300728572600320
https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1065666629155995648 "The only leaders in the current ecosystem who express any kind of controversial opinion, ever, are organisms that specialize in subsisting on the resource flows produced by expressing that kind of controversial opinion."
if THAT is now too politically contentious to affirm in public, we're DEAD
-http://zackmdavis.net/blog/2016/09/concerns-ii/ "you yourself admit that your model won't assign literally all of its probability mass to the exact outcome?!"
-
-"category boundaries" were just a visual metaphor for talking about beliefs? There's a little naive Bayes model in my head with "blueness" and "eggness" observation nodes hooked up to a central "blegg" category-membership node, such that I can use observations to update my beliefs about category-membership, and use my beliefs about category-membership to predict observations. The set of things I'll classify as a blegg with probability greater than p is conveniently visualized as an area with a boundary in blueness–eggness space, but the beliefs are the important thing.
-
http://zackmdavis.net/blog/2016/07/concerns/
-(I'm avoiding naming anyone in this post even when linking to their public writings, in order to try to keep the _rhetorical emphasis_ on "true tale of personal heartbreak, coupled with sober analysis of the sociopolitical factors leading thereto" even while I'm expressing disappointment with people's performance. This isn't supposed to be character/reputation attack on my friends and intellectual heroes—I just _need to tell the story_ about why I've been crazy all year so that I can stop grieving and _move on_.)
-
+http://zackmdavis.net/blog/2016/09/concerns-ii/ "you yourself admit that your model won't assign literally all of its probability mass to the exact outcome?!"
"Don't Revere the Bearer of Good Info" https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/tSgcorrgBnrCH8nL3/don-t-revere-the-bearer-of-good-info
casuistry
-Schelling: "One must seek, in other words, a rationalization by which to deny oneself too great a reward from the opponent's concession, otherwise the concession will not be made."'— this was basically what I was hoping to do with "Where to Draw The Boundaries?"—I was hoping to get a victory on _just_ the philosophy-of-language part
-
Eliezer's NRx 2013 vs. 2019 takes
In the English language as it is spoken today, third-person singular gender pronouns _do_ have truth conditions. If a stranger crossing your path is rude to you, you'll say, "What's _her_ problem?" or "What's _his_ problem?" depending on your perception of their secondary sex characteristics.
I'm grateful to [...] for actually helping me, but I feel incredibly betrayed that Scott is playing dumb about philosophy (and doesn't want to talk to our coalition anymore), Eliezer will PRIVATELY admit that he has no objections to my philosophy arguments but is playing dumb about how the things he said in public were incredibly misleading (and doesn't want to talk to our coalition anymore). I have more conversation-bandwidth with Anna because I've been friends with her for 10 years, but Anna doesn't believe in free speech; she'll privately sympathize that it's bad that we're in a situation where political factors are interfering with being able to have an honest public conversation about philosophy, but
-
+> "friendship, supplication and economics"
This whole multi-year drama _should_ have been a three-comment conversation. If we were _actually trying_ to do the systematically-correct-reasoning thing
Random Commenter: Hey, that can't be right—we had a whole Sequence about
Robot cult leaders:
+
+> "Those who are savvy in high-corruption equilibria maintain the delusion that high corruption is common knowledge, to justify expropriating those who naively don't play along, by narratizing them as already knowing and therefore intentionally attacking people, rather than being lied to and confused."
+
+Steve said it's funny that Ziz and I are ragequitting over opposite things, and I couldn't help but want to phrase it as "She thinks our institutions are transphobic; I don't think they're transphobic enough"
+
+"I guess an "only delusional people get to self-actualize" equilibrium is better than "no one gets to self-actualize, because the general public wouldn't allow it if they knew the truth" if those _really were_ the only two options
+
+> Katie quoting my comment: "Folks, I'm not sure it's feasible to have an intellectually-honest real-name public conversation about the etiology of MtF. If no one is willing to mention some of the key relevant facts, maybe it's less misleading to just say nothing.\" 01/15/2017
+
+> [I am actively hostile](https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1164241431629721600) to neoreaction and the alt-right, routinely block such people from commenting on my Twitter feed, and make it clear that I do not welcome support from those quarters. Anyone insinuating otherwise is uninformed, or deceptive.
+
+; I'm a weird guy; I would like to believe there could be a cis woman like me. Not obvious that I acutally know any. My sister is a natural experiment; hands vs. finger; "felt sense"]
+
+https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/KmghfjH6RgXvoKruJ/hand-vs-fingers
+
+
+I don't _care_ if the blatantly-misleading statements were carefully worded to permit a true interpretation such that they're not technically "lying."
+
+This situation is _fucked_. I don't care whose "fault" it is. I don't want to "blame" anyone. But as the first step to making things less fucked, I need to _write about the world I see_—and you are, still, a pretty prominent part of my mental universe.
+
+Katie Herzog and Jesse Singal
+
+Heinlein
projects / Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git / blobdiff