-slotted TODO blocks—
-✓ psychiatric disaster
-✓ "Agreeing With Stalin" intro recap
-✓ recap of crimes, cont'd
-✓ Dolphin War finish
-✓ lead-in to Sept. 2021 Twitter altercation
-✓ out of patience email
-✓ Michael Vassar and the Theory of Optimal Gossip
-_ plan to reach out to Rick / Michael on creepy men/crazy men
-_ State of Steven
-_ reaction to Ziz
-_ complicity and friendship
-_ repair pt. 5 dath ilan transition
-- Eliezerfic fight conclusion
-
-blocks to fit somewhere—
-_ the hill he wants to die on (insert somewhere in "Standing")
-_ Tail vs. Bailey / Davis vs. Yudkowsky analogy (new block somewhere)
-_ mention that "Not Man for the Categories" keeps getting cited
-
+first edit pass bookmark: (top of pt. 5)
pt. 3 edit tier—
-_ fullname Taylor and Hoffman at start of pt. 3
-_ footnote clarifying that "Riley" and Sarah weren't core members of the group, despite being included on some emails?
-_ be more specific about Ben's anti-EA and Jessica's anti-MIRI things, perhaps in footnotes
-_ Ben on "locally coherent coordination": use direct quotes for Ben's language—maybe rewrite in my own language (footnote?) as an understanding test
-_ set context for "EA Has a Lying Problem" (written by Sarah, likely with Michael's influence—maybe ask Sarah)
-_ clarify schism (me and Vassar bros leaving the EA/rat borg?)
-_ set context for Anna on first mention in the post
-_ more specific on "mostly pretty horrifying" and group conversation with the whole house
-_ paragraph to explain the cheerful price bit
-_ cut words from the "Yes Requires" slapfight?
-_ better introduction of Steven Kaas
-_ "Not the Incentives"—rewrite given that I'm not shielding Ray
-_ cut many words from "Social Reality" scuffle
-_ is "long May 2020" link still good?
-_ better context on "scam" &c. earlier
-_ meeting with Ray
-_ Ben's "financial fraud don't inquire as to the conscious motives of the perp" claim may be false
-_ later thoughts on jump to evaluation, translating between different groups' language
-_ mention that I was miffed about "Boundaries?" not getting Curated, while one of Euk's animal posts did
-_ examples of "bitter and insulting" comments about rationalists
-_ cut words from descriptions of other posts! (if people want to read them, they can click through)
-_ explicitly mention http://benjaminrosshoffman.com/bad-faith-behavior-not-feeling/
-_ cut words from NRx denouncement Jessica discussion
-_ "I" statements
-_ we can go stronger than "I definitely don't think Yudkowsky _thinks of himself_ as having given up on Speech _in those words_"
-_ try to clarify Abram's categories view (Michael didn't get it)
-_ cut lots of words from December 2019 blogging spree
-_ in a footnote, defend the "cutting my dick off" rhetorical flourish
-_ choice quotes in "end of the Category War" thank you note
+_ footnote on the bad-faith condition on "My Price for Joining"
+_ "it might matter timelessly" → there are people with AI chops who are PC (/2017/Jan/from-what-ive-tasted-of-desire/)
+_ confusing people and ourselves about what the exact crime is
+_ footnote explaining quibbles on clarification
+_ FTX validated Ben's view of EA!! ("systematically conflating corruption, accumulation of dominance, and theft, with getting things done")
+_ "your failure to model social reality is believing people when they claim noble motives"
+_ hint at Vanessa being trans
+_ quote Jack on timelines anxiety
_ do I have a better identifier than "Vassarite"?
_ maybe I do want to fill in a few more details about the Sasha disaster, conditional on what I end up writing regarding Scott's prosecution?—and conditional on my separate retro email—also the Zolpidem thing
-_ mention "Darkest Timeline" and Skyrms somewhere
-_ footnote explaining quibbles? (the first time I tried to write this, I hesitated, not sure if necessary)
+_ link to protest flyer
_ "it was the same thing here"—most readers are not going to understand what I see as the obvious analogy
+_ better explanation of MOPs in "Social Reality" scuffle
+_ better context on "scam" &c. earlier
+_ mention that I was miffed about "Boundaries?" not getting Curated, while one of Euk's animal posts did
+_ establish usage of "coordination group" vs. "posse"?
+_ LessWrong vs. GreaterWrong for comment links?
+_ cut words from descriptions of other posts! (if people want to read them, they can click through ... but on review, these descriptions seem pretty reasonable?)
+_ try to clarify Abram's categories view (Michael didn't get it) (but it still seems clear to me on re-read?)
+_ explicitly mention http://benjaminrosshoffman.com/bad-faith-behavior-not-feeling/
+_ meeting with Ray (maybe?)
+_ friends with someone on an animal level, like with a dog
pt. 4 edit tier—
+_ body odors comment
_ mention Nick Bostrom email scandal (and his not appearing on the one-sentence CAIS statement)
-_ revise and cut words from "bad faith" section since can link to "Assume Bad Faith"
-_ cut words from January 2020 Twitter exchange (after war criminal defenses)
-_ revise reply to Xu
-
+_ if he wanted to, I'm sure Eliezer Yudkowsky could think of some relevant differences (I should explain)
+_ emphasize that 2018 thread was policing TERF-like pronoun usage, not just disapproving of gender-based pronouns
+_ if you only say good things about Republican candidates
+_ to-be-continued ending about how being a fraud might be a good idea
+_ cite more sneers; use a footnote to pack in as many as possible
+_ Litany Against Gurus, not sure humans can think and trust at the same time; High Status and Stupidity
pt. 5 edit tier—
+_ Previously-on summary
_ quote specific exchange where I mentioned 10,000 words of philosophy that Scott was wrong—obviously the wrong play
_ "as Soares pointed out" needs link
_ can I rewrite to not bury the lede on "intent doesn't matter"?
_ it's a relevant detail whether the optimization is coming from Nate
_ probably cut the vaccine polarization paragraphs? (overheard at a party is not great sourcing, even if technically admissible)
_ elaborate on how 2007!Yudkowsky and 2021!Xu are saying the opposite things if you just take a plain-language reading and consider, not whether individual sentences can be interpreted as "true", but what kind of _optimization_ the text is doing to the behavior of receptive readers
-_ Scott got comas right in the same year as "Categories"
+_ revise reply to Xu
_ cite Earthling/postrat sneers
_ cite postYud Tweet
_ when EY put a checkmark on my Discord message characterizing his strategy as giving up on intellectual honesty
_ cut lots of words from Scotts comments on Jessica's MIRI post (keep: "attempting to erase the agency", Scott blaming my troubles on Michael being absurd)
+_ sucking Scott's dick is helpful because he's now the main gateway instead of HPMOR
+_ Sarah's point that Scott gets a lot of undeserved deference, too: https://twitter.com/s_r_constantin/status/1435609950303162370
+_ clarify that Keltham infers there are no mascochists, vs. Word of God
+_ "Doublethink" ref in Xu discussion should mention that Word of God Eliezerfic clarification that it's not about telling others
+_ https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/vvc2MiZvWgMFaSbhx/book-review-the-bell-curve-by-charles-murray/comment/git7xaE2aHfSZyLzL
+_ cut words from January 2020 Twitter exchange (after war criminal defenses)
+_ "Not Man for the Categories" keeps getting cited
+_ the hill he wants to die on
+_ humans have honor instead of TDT. "That's right! I'm appealing to your honor!"
+_ Leeroy Jenkins Option
+_ historical non-robot-cult rationality wisdom
+_ Meghan Murphy got it down to four words
+
+things to discuss with Michael/Ben/Jessica—
+_ Anna on Paul Graham
+_ Yudkowsky thinking reasoning wasn't useful
+_ Jessica brought up race & IQ (she skimmed the previous draft, so I should highlight this)
+_ Michael's SLAPP against REACH (new)
+_ Michael on creepy and crazy men (new)
+_ elided Sasha disaster (new)
+
+pt. 3–5 prereaders—
+_ paid hostile prereader (first choice: April)
+_ Iceman
+_ Scott? (cursory notification)
+_ Kelsey (what was that 1 year statute of limitations about??)
+_ Steven Kaas
+_ David Xu
+_ Ray
+_ Ruby
+_ Alicorner #drama ("Is anyone interested in offering political advice or 'hostile advice'")
+
+
+-------
+
+later prereaders—
+_ afford various medical procedures
+
+slotted TODO blocks for pt. 6 and dath ilan ancillary—
+- Eliezerfic fight conclusion
+_ Keltham's section in dath ilan ancillary
+_ objections and replies in dath ilan ancillary
+_ kitchen knife section in dath ilan ancillary
+
+pt. 6 edit tier—
+_ coach suggests, "Arguably this doesn't count as punishment for the same reason we don't say we're "punishing" a rabid animal by euthanizing it: it's not about disincentivizing the behaviour."
dath ilan ancillary tier—
_ Who are the 9 most important legislators called?
+_ collect Earth people sneers
+_ what kind of person wants to delete history? History would tell you
+_ psyops don't require people taking them seriously, only that they make people think the govenment is doing psyops
+_ the reason "truth is better than lies; knowledge is better than ignorance" is general; can assert by authorial fiat whatever details are needed to make it all turn out for the greater good, but _that's not how anything works in real life_.
+_ "telling people things would be meddling" moral needs work; obvious objection is that different rules apply to Keepers
+_ "obligate" is only Word of God, right?—I should probably cite this
-things to discuss with Michael/Ben/Jessica—
-_ Anna on Paul Graham
-_ compression of Yudkowsky thinking reasoning wasn't useful
-_ Michael's SLAPP against REACH
-
------
_ lc on elves and Sparashki
_ Michael Bailey's new AGP in women study
_ footnote "said that he wishes he'd never published"
-_ replace "Oh man oh jeez" Rick & Morty link
-_ Nevada bona fides
_ Parfit's Hitchhiker
_ double-check correctness of Keltham-on-paternalism link
_ Arbital TDT explanation
_ find Sequences cite "if you don't know how your AI works, that's bad"
_ cover reply to my initial conspiracy complaint about dath ilan?
-_ "not hard to find": link to more /r/itsafetish-like anecdotes
-_ compile ancillary KP doctor's notes page and linky
_ acknowledging Wei Dai and Vladimir Nesov's decision theory contributions
_ go back and read all the masochism tags: https://www.glowfic.com/replies/search?board_id=&author_id=366&template_id=&character_id=&subj_content=masochism&sort=created_old&condensed=on&commit=Search
-_ stats of SIAI vs. SingInst hits (for ^siai footnote)
_ quote other Eliezer Yudkowsky facts
_ footnote about Scott writing six times faster than me
_ include Eric Weinstein in archive.is spree
_ Yudkowsky's LW moderation policy
far editing tier—
+_ You cannot comprehend it, I cannot comprehend it
_ screenshot key Tweet threads (now that Twitter requires you to log in)
_ Caliphate / craft and the community
_ colony ship happiness lie in https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/AWaJvBMb9HGBwtNqd/qualitative-strategies-of-friendliness
_ re being fair to abusers: thinking about what behavior pattern you would like to see, generally, by people in your situation, instead of privileging the perspective and feelings of people who've made themselves vulnerable to you by transgressing against you
-_ body odors comment
_ worry about hyperbole/jumps-to-evaluation; it destroys credibility
_ "Density in Thingspace" comment
_ Christmas with Scott: mention the destruction of "voluntary"?
_ mr-hire and pre-emptive steelmanning (before meeting LW mods)
_ is the Glowfic author "Lintamande ... they" or "Lintamande ... she"?
_ explain plot of _Planecrash_ better
+_ everyone *who matters* prefers to stay on the good side
_ CfAR's AI pivot??
_ example of "steelman before criticize" norm
_ explain mods protect-feelings
_ explain MOPs better
_ Motta-Mena and Puts probability-of-gynephilia-by-intersex-condition graph, re trans kids on the margin
-_ probably give Amelia as pseudonym?
+
_ squeeze "Darkness and Light" into the Eliezerfic account
-_ clarify Sarah dropping out of the coordination group
_ somewhere in dath ilan discussion: putting a wrapper on graphic porn is fine, de-listing Wikipedia articles is not
_ maybe current-year LW would be better if more marginal cases _had_ bounced off because of e.g. sexism
_ re "EY is a fraud": it's a _conditional_ that he can modus tollens if he wants
_ NRx point about HBD being more than IQ, ties in with how I think the focus on IQ is distasteful, but I have political incentives to bring it up
_ "arguing for a duty to self-censorship"—contrast to my "closing thoughts" email
-_ explain Amelia Davis Ford ref
-_ New York NRx conversation, flesh out "mostly guys"; I was acknowleding diversity as unrealistic and hypocritical; he outright doesn't believe in "people" as opposed to men/women
_ fold in observations from "trapped priors—at home"
-_ earlier reference the children's books?! "And the Methods of Pre-Rationality"
_ Yudkowsky's "Is someone trolling?" comment as counterevidence to narcissim
_ "typographical attack surface" isn't clear
_ voting reputation section is weak, needs revision
_ I'm sure Eliezer Yudkowsky could think of some relevant differences
_ 2019 Discord discourse with Alicorner
_ edit discussion of "anti-trans" side given that I later emphasize that "sides" shouldn't be a thing
-_ maybe quote Michael's Nov 2018 texts?
_ Said on Yudkowsky's retreat to Facebook being bad for him
_ erasing agency of Michael's friends, construed as a pawn
_ when to use first _vs. last names
_ backlink Yudkowsky's implicit political concession
_ backlink "again grateful" for doctor's notes
-pt. 1½ posterity tier (probably not getting published)—
-_ "People": say something about the awkward racial/political dynamics of three of my four anecdotes being about black people? Salient because rare? Salient because of my NRx-pilling?
-_ Re: on legitimacy and the entrepreneur; or, continuing the attempt to spread my sociopathic awakening onto Scott [pt. 2 somewhere]
-_ include Wilhelm "Gender Czar" conversation? [pt. 2]
-_ emailing Blanchard/Bailey/Hsu/Lawrence [pt. 2]
-
-
-
-terms to explain on first mention—
-_ inpatient/outpatient
-_ NRx
-_ TERF?
-_ Civilization (context of dath ilan)
-_ Valinor (probably don't name it, actually)
-_ "Caliphate"
-_ "rationalist"
-_ Center for Applied Rationality
-_ MIRI
-_ "egregore"
-_ eliezera
-
-
-
-
people to consult before publishing, for feedback or right of objection—
_ Iceman
_ Scott
_ hostile prereader (April—if not, J. Beshir, Swimmer, someone else from Alicorner #drama)
_ Kelsey (what was that 1 year statute of limitations about??)
_ NRx Twitter bro
-_ maybe SK (briefly about his name)? (the memoir might have the opposite problem (too long) from my hostile-shorthand Twitter snipes)
-_ Megan (that poem could easily be about some other entomologist named Megan) ... I'm probably going to cut that §, though
+_ Steven Kaas (briefly about his name)? (the memoir might have the opposite problem (too long) from my hostile-shorthand Twitter snipes)
_ David Xu? (Is it OK to name him in his LW account?)
_ afford various medical procedures
_ Buck? (get the story about Michael being escorted from events)
-------
+2011
+> I've informed a number of male college students that they have large, clearly detectable body odors. In every single case so far, they say nobody has ever told them that before.
+https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/kLR5H4pbaBjzZxLv6/polyhacking/comment/rYKwptdgLgD2dBnHY
+
The thing about our crowd is that we have a lamentably low proportion of women (13.3% cis women in the last community survey) and—I don't know when this happened; it certainly didn't feel like this back in 'aught-nine—an enormous number of trans women relative to population base rates (2.7%, for a cis-to-trans ratio of 4.9!!), the vast majority of whom I expect to be AGP
Becuase of the conflict, and because all the prominent high-status people are running a Kolmogorov Option strategy, and because we happen to have to a _wildly_ disproportionate number of _people like me_ around, I think being "pro-trans" ended up being part of the community's "shield" against external political pressure, of the sort that perked up after [the February 2021 _New York Times_ hit piece about Alexander's blog](https://archive.is/0Ghdl). (The _magnitude_ of heat brought on by the recent _Times_ piece and its aftermath was new, but the underlying dynamics had been present for years.)
-
Given these political realities, you'd think that I _should_ be sympathetic to the Kolmogorov Option argument, which makes a lot of sense. _Of course_ all the high-status people with a public-facing mission (like building a movement to prevent the coming robot apocalypse) are going to be motivatedly dumb about trans stuff in public: look at all the damage [the _other_ Harry Potter author did to her legacy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politics_of_J._K._Rowling#Transgender_people).
And, historically, it would have been harder for the robot cult to recruit _me_ (or those like me) back in the 'aughts, if they had been less politically correct. Recall that I was already somewhat turned off, then, by what I thought of as _sexism_; I stayed because the philosophy-of-science blogging was _way too good_. But what that means on the margin is that someone otherwise like me except more orthodox or less philosophical, _would_ have bounced. If [Cthulhu has swum left](https://www.unqualified-reservations.org/2009/01/gentle-introduction-to-unqualified/) over the intervening thirteen years, then maintaining the same map-revealing/not-alienating-orthodox-recruits tradeoff _relative_ to the general population, necessitates relinquishing parts of the shared map that have fallen of general favor.
Or at least—even if there are things we can't talk about in public for consequentialist reasons and there's nothing to be done about it, you would hope that the censorship wouldn't distort our beliefs about the things we _can_ talk about—like, say, the role of Bayesian reasoning in the philosophy of language. Yudkowsky had written about the [dark side epistemology](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/XTWkjCJScy2GFAgDt/dark-side-epistemology) of [contagious lies](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/wyyfFfaRar2jEdeQK/entangled-truths-contagious-lies): trying to protect a false belief doesn't just mean being wrong about that one thing, it also gives you, on the object level, an incentive to be wrong about anything that would _imply_ the falsity of the protected belief—and, on the meta level, an incentive to be wrong _about epistemology itself_, about how "implying" and "falsity" work.
-
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/ASpGaS3HGEQCbJbjS/eliezer-s-sequences-and-mainstream-academia?commentId=6GD86zE5ucqigErXX
> The actual real-world consequences of a post like this when people actually read it are what bothers me, and it does feel frustrating because those consequences seem very predictable
(!!)
-
> Makes sense... just don't be shocked if the next frontier is grudging concessions that get compartmentalized
> Stopping reading your Tweets is the correct move for them IF you construe them as only optimizing for their personal hedonics
the second generation doesn't "get the joke"; young people don't understand physical strength differences anymore
-> I've informed a number of male college students that they have large, clearly detectable body odors. In every single case so far, they say nobody has ever told them that before.
-https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/kLR5H4pbaBjzZxLv6/polyhacking/comment/rYKwptdgLgD2dBnHY
-
It would have been better if someone without a dog in the object-level fight could have loudly but disinterestedly said, "What? I don't have a dog in the object-level fight, but we had a whole Sequence about this", but people mostly don't talk if they don't have a dog.
But if someone without a dog spoke, then they'd get pattern-matched as a partisan; it _had_ to be me
When I protested that I wasn't expecting a science fictional Utopia of pure reason, but just for people to continue to be right about things they already got right in 2008, he said, "Doesn't matter—doesn't _fucking_ matter."
-humans have honor instead of TDT. "That's right! I'm appealing to your honor!"
-
The boundary must be drawn here! This far, and no further!
> just the thought that there are people out there who wanted to be rationalists and then their experience of the rationalist community was relentlessly being told that trans women are actually men, and that this is obvious if you are rational, and a hidden truth most people are too cowardly to speak, until you retreat in misery and are traumatized by the entire experience of interacting with us....
If you _don't_ have intent-to-inform, but make sure to never, ever say false things (because you know that "lying" is wrong, and think that as long as you haven't "lied", you're in the clear), but you don't feel like you have an obligation to acknowledge criticisms (for example, because you think you and your flunkies are the only real people in the world, and anyone who doesn't want to become one of your flunkies can be disdained as a "post-rat"), that's potentially a much worse situation, because the errors don't cancel.
-----
-
-bitter comments about rationalists—
-https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/qXwmMkEBLL59NkvYR/the-lesswrong-2018-review-posts-need-at-least-2-nominations/comment/d4RrEizzH85BdCPhE
-https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/qaYeQnSYotCHQcPh8/drowning-children-are-rare?commentId=Nhv9KPte7d5jbtLBv
-https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/tkuknrjYCbaDoZEh5/could-we-solve-this-email-mess-if-we-all-moved-to-paid/comment/ZkreTspP599RBKsi7
-
------
https://trevorklee.substack.com/p/the-ftx-future-fund-needs-to-slow
Was he subtweeting me?? (Because I was defending criticism against tone policing, and this is saying tone is a valid cue.) If it was a subtweet, I take that as vindication that my reply was a good use of bandwidth.
-----
+
+In particular, I think the conspiracy theory "Yudkowsky sometimes avoids nuanced arguments that he doesn't trust people to understand" is true, because ... you've said so (e.g., "without getting into any weirdness that I don't expect Earthlings to think about validly"). https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/2NncxDQ3KBDCxiJiP/cosmopolitan-values-don-t-come-free/comment/dMHdWcxgSpcdyG4hb
+
+----
+
+(He responded to me in this interaction, which is interesting.)
+
+https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1708587781424046242
+> Zack, you missed this point presumably because you're losing your grasp of basic theory in favor of conspiracy theory.
+
+https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/qbcuk8WwFnTZcXTd6/thomas-kwa-s-miri-research-experience
+> The model was something like: Nate and Eliezer have a mindset that's good for both capabilities and alignment, and so if we talk to other alignment researchers about our work, the mindset will diffuse into the alignment community, and thence to OpenAI, where it would speed up capabilities.
+
+27 January 2020—
+> I'm also afraid of the failure mode where I get frame-controlled by the Michael/Ben/Jessica mini-egregore (while we tell ourselves a story that we're the real rationalist coordination group and not an egregore at all). Michael says that the worldview he's articulating would be the one that would be obvious to me if I felt that I was in danger. Insofar as I trust that my friends' mini-egregore is seeing something but I don't trust the details, the obvious path forward is to try to do original seeing while leaning into fear—trusting Michael's meta level advice, but not his detailed story.
+
+Weird tribalist praise for Scott: https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/GMCs73dCPTL8dWYGq/use-normal-predictions/comment/ez8xrquaXmmvbsYPi
+
+https://hpmor.com/chapter/97
+> "Or tricks," Harry said evenly. "Statements which are technically true but which deceive the listener into forming further beliefs which are false. I think it's worth making that distinction.
+
+https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/pQGFeKvjydztpgnsY/occupational-infohazards/comment/TcsXh44pB9xRziGgt
+> A bunch of people we respected and worked with had decided the world was going to end, very soon, uncomfortably soon, and they were making it extremely difficult for us to check their work.
projects / Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git / blobdiff