- "Agreeing with Stalin" recap intro [pt. 5]
- social justice and defying threats [pt. 5]
_ last email and not bothering him [pt. 5]
+_ the Death With Dignity era [pt. 5]
_ scuffle on "Yes Requires the Possibility" [pt. 4]
_ confronting Olivia [pt. 2]
_ "Lesswrong.com is dead to me" [pt. 4]
_ recap of crimes, cont'd [pt. 5]
_ lead-in to Sept. 2021 Twitter altercation [pt. 5]
_ Jessica's experience at MIRI and CfAR [pt. 5]
-_ the Death With Dignity era [pt. 5]
_ regrets, wasted time, conclusion [pt. 5]
_ include Wilhelm "Gender Czar" conversation? [pt. 2]
With internet available—
+_ "Human Evil and Muddled Thinking"
+_ my "swimming to shore" comment
+_ compile ancillary KP doctor's notes page and linky
+_ Jessica's memoirs
+_ the recent MIRI dialogues
+_ "war criminal defense" dunk
_ "When you strike at a king"
_ real-name blog post: jr. member of save/destroy/take-over the world conspiracy
_ Sequences post making fun of "just make a really big neural net"
_ update "80,000 words" refs with the near-final wordcount
_ the "outright bad faith" clause in "Your Price for Joining"
_ less afraid of hurting O.
+_ secret posse member pointing out that it worked better because it was Oli
+_ update "karma at press time"
_ better explain "lie inflation" ambiguity
+_ backlink AGP in women post (time permitting) in pt. 2 "don't think it's the same thing"
_ backlink "I've decided to drop the pseudonym" to pen name drop post
_ backlink (/2022/TODO/blanchards-dangerous-idea-and-the-plight-of-the-lucid-crossdreamer/)
_ backlink "I again refer to" Happy Price
> I am broadly fine with people devoting 50%, 25% or 75% of themselves to longtermism, in that case, as opposed to tearing themselves apart with guilt and ending up doing nothing much, which seems to be the main alternative.
for normal people, when your favorite author gets worse, you just shrug and accept it and enjoy the classics, but when your favorite author is also the Pope of your religion and also in several Discord servers with you, you end up wasting a lot of time scrutinizing their emoji-reacts
+
+I write the space everywhere because that's the dominant usage ([since 2011](https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=transman%2Ctrans+man%2Ctranswoman%2Ctrans+woman&year_start=2000&year_end=2022), according to Google ngrams). I don't want to turn off potential readers by failing a simple shibboleth test; I want those readers to be turned off by my actual ideas.
+
+(_I_ don't censor my comment sections of people whom it "looks like it would be unhedonic to spend time interacting with".)
+
+-----
+
+ * Yudkowsky is _on the record_ [claiming that](https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10154078468809228) "for people roughly similar to the Bay Area / European mix", he is "over 50% probability at this point that at least 20% of the ones with penises are actually women". What ... does that mean? What is the _truth condition_ of the word 'woman' in that sentence? This can't be the claim that 20% of males would benefit from a gender transition, and in that sense _become_ "transsexual women"; the claim stated in the post is that members of this group are _already_ "actually women", "female-minds-in-male-bodies". How does Yudkowsky reconcile this claim with the perponderance of male-typical rather than female-typical behavior in this group (_e.g._, in gynephilic sexual orientation, or [in vocational interests](/2020/Nov/survey-data-on-cis-and-trans-women-among-haskell-programmers/))? On the other hand, if Yudkowsky changed his mind and no longer believes that 20% of Bay Area males of European descent have female brains, can he state that for the public record? _Reply!_
+
+ * Yudkowsky is _on the record_ [claiming that](https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10159421750419228?comment_id=10159421986539228&reply_comment_id=10159423713134228) he "do[es] not know what it feels like from the inside to feel like a pronoun is attached to something in your head much more firmly than 'doesn't look like an Oliver' is attached to something in your head." As I explained in "Challenges to Yudkowsky's Pronoun Reform Proposal", [quoting examples from Yudkowsky's published writing in which he treated sex and pronouns as synonymous just as one would expect a native American English speaker born in 1979 to do](/2022/Mar/challenges-to-yudkowskys-pronoun-reform-proposal/#look-like-an-oliver), this self-report is not plausible. The claim may not have been a "lie" _in the sense_ of Yudkowsky consciously harboring deliberative intent to deceive at the time he typed that sentence, but it _is_ a "lie" in the sense that the claim is _false_ and Yudkowsky _knows_ it's false (although its falsehood may not have been salient in the moment of typing the sentence). If Yudkowsky expects people to believe that he never lies, perhaps he could correct this accidental lie after it's been pointed out? _Reply!_
+
+-----
\ No newline at end of file
projects / Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git / blobdiff