first edit pass bookmark: "I got a chance to talk to"
-pt. 3 edit tier—
-_ 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
+pt. 3 edit tier (red team edition)—
+—
+
+pt. 3 edit tier (auto edition)—
+✓ footnote on the bad-faith condition on "My Price for Joining"
+✓ footnote explaining quibbles on clarification
+✓ quote Yudkowsky's LW moderation policy
+✓ hint at "Yes Requires" objector being trans
+✓ quote Jack on timelines anxiety
+✓ clarify "A Lesson is Learned"
+- nuance and FTX epilogue
+_ clarify that cheerful price history is with Anna specifically
+_ briefly speculate on causes of brain damage (tie in to moderation policy?)
+----
+_ being friends with dogs (it's good, but do I have the wordcount budget?)
+_ Ruby fight: "forces of blandness want me gone ... stand my ground" remark
+_ mention that I was miffed about "Boundaries?" not getting Curated, while one of Euk's animal posts did
+_ explicitly mention http://benjaminrosshoffman.com/bad-faith-behavior-not-feeling/
+_ meeting with Ray (maybe?)
+_ mention Said rigor check somewhere, nervousness about Michael's gang being a mini-egregore
+_ I should respond to Ziz's charges that my criticism of concept-policing was a form of concept-policing
+_ Anna's claim that Scott was a target specifically because he was good, my counterclaim that payment can't be impunity
_ 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
+_ the "reducing negativity" post does obliquely hint at the regression point being general
_ 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?)
+_ establish usage of "coordination group" vs. "posse"? (editor might catch?)
+_ "it was the same thing here"—most readers are not going to see an obvious analogy (editor might catch?)
+_ better explanation of MOPs in "Social Reality" scuffle (editor might catch?)
+_ better context on "scam" &c. earlier (editor might catch?)
+_ cut words from descriptions of other posts! (editor might catch?)
_ 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
-_ "Density in Thingspace" comment (maybe a footnote in the § explaining the background to "Unnatural Categories")
+_ screenshot "pleading, snarky reply"
+_ GreaterWrong over Less Wrong for comment links
pt. 4 edit tier—
+✓ "Ideology Is Not the Movement" mentions not misgendering
+✓ mention Nick Bostrom email scandal (and his not appearing on the one-sentence CAIS statement)
+✓ explain why he could think of some relevant differences
_ body odors comment
-_ mention Nick Bostrom email scandal (and his not appearing on the one-sentence CAIS statement)
-_ 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
+_ selective argumentation that's clearly labeled as such would be fine
_ 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
+_ when EY put a checkmark on my Discord message characterizing his strategy as giving up on intellectual honesty
_ honesty and humility, HEXACO
+_ rephrase "gamete size" discussion to make it clearer that Yudkowsky's proposal also implicitly requires people to be agree about the clustering thing
+_ "Common Interest of Many Causes" and "Kolmogorov Complicity" offer directly contradictory strategies
+_ GreaterWrong over Less Wrong for comment links
pt. 5 edit tier—
+_ sucking Scott's dick is helpful because he's now the main gateway instead of HPMOR
_ Previously-on summary
_ graf about Christiano could use a rewrite
_ Dolphin War: after "never been published", insert "still citing it" graf
_ Dolphin War: simplify sentence structure around "by cherry-picking the features"
+_ "Density in Thingspace" comment in Dolphin War https://www.greaterwrong.com/posts/d5NyJ2Lf6N22AD9PB/where-to-draw-the-boundary
_ quote specific exchange where I mentioned 10,000 words of philosophy that Scott was wrong—obviously the wrong play
_ Meghan Murphy got it down to four words
_ Dolphin War needs more Twitter links: "as Soares pointed out" needs link, "threw an eleven-Tweet tantrum" (probably screenshot), tussling
+_ replace anti-black joke with misogynist joke?
_ end of voting conversation needs links
_ can I rewrite to not bury the lede on "intent doesn't matter"?
_ also reference "No such thing as a tree" in Dolphin War section
_ 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
_ work in the "some clever gambit to play trans activists and gender-critical feminists against each other"
+_ finale: mention that I'm not doing the dumb reversed-stupidity thing
+_ maybe current-year LW would be better if more marginal cases _had_ bounced off because of e.g. sexism
+_ explain the "if the world were at stake" Sword of Good reference better
+_ better explanation of Scott's jailbreaking accusation against Vassar
+_ "Riley" pointing out that it worked better because it was Oli
+_ mention Michael's influence and South Park recs in late 2016?
+_ GreaterWrong over Less Wrong for comment links
+
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)
+_ FTX and nuance epilogue (new)
_ 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)
+_ Anna
+_ Said
+_ Joel
_ Kelsey (what was that 1 year statute of limitations about??)
_ Steven Kaas
_ David Xu
_ examples of snarky comments about "the rationalists"
_ 13th century word meanings
_ weirdly hostile comments on "... Boundaries?"
-_ Anna's claim that Scott was a target specifically because he was good, my counterclaim that payment can't be impunity
-_ 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
_ worry about hyperbole/jumps-to-evaluation; it destroys credibility
-_ Christmas with Scott: mention the destruction of "voluntary"?
-_ Christmas with Scott: mention the grid of points?
_ dath ilan as a whining-based community
_ footnote to explain that when I'm summarizing a long Discord conversation to taste, I might move things around into "logical" time rather than "real time"; e.g. Yudkowsky's "powerfully relevant" and "but Superman" comments were actually one right after the other; and, e.g., I'm filling in more details that didn't make it into the chat, like innate kung fu; and that the fact that I can "enhance" the summaries of my part, but the people I'm talking to don't have the same privilege, should be taken into account—actually, this covers a lot of the memoir; maybe I should mention this earlier (and again in a footnote??)
_ 93's alternate theory of eliezera taste for deception
-_ Ruby fight: "forces of blandness want me gone ... stand my ground" remark
-_ "Even our pollution is beneficial" [pt. 6]
-_ Scott Aaronson on the blockchain of science [pt. 6]
+_ "Even our pollution is beneficial"
+_ Scott Aaronson on the blockchain of science
_ "EA" brand ate the "rationalism" brand—even visible in MIRI dialogues
_ Anna's heel–face turn
_ not talking about pivotal acts, downstream of not believing in Speech?
_ Alyssa lying about me [pt. 4]
-_ Brian Skyrms??
_ 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
-
_ squeeze "Darkness and Light" into the Eliezerfic account
_ 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
_ fold in observations from "trapped priors—at home"
_ Yudkowsky's "Is someone trolling?" comment as counterevidence to narcissim
-_ "typographical attack surface" isn't clear
-_ voting reputation section is weak, needs revision
-_ incoprorate "downvote Eliezer in their head" remark from Jessica's memoir
-_ explain the "if the world were at stake" Sword of Good reference better
-_ D. also acknowledged AGP
-_ "no one else would have spoken" should have been a call-to-action to read more widely
-_ mention Will MacAskill's gimped "longtermism" somehow
+_ incoprorate "downvote Eliezer in their head" remark from Jessica's memoir
_ re-read a DALL-E explanation and decide if I think it's less scary now
_ Scott Aaronson on the blockchain of science https://scottaaronson.blog/?p=6821
_ footnote previous race-IQ baiting on "why do I keep bringing this up"
_ acknowledge that
_ pull "agreeing with Stalin" quote earlier in ms. to argue that Yudkowsky apparently doesn't disagree with my "deliberately ambiguous"
_ is the title of pt. 4 OK? (agreeing with Stalin _is_ correct when Stalin is right; the problem is that Stalin isn't right about gender)
-_ illustrate "student dysphoria is worse" with anecdote about leaving physics class and going to the counselor to see if I could graduate earlier?
-_ hate for secrecy probably correlates with autogynephilia blogging
-_ mention Said rigor check somewhere, nervousness about Michael's gang being a mini-egregore
-_ at some point, speculate on causes of brain damage
-_ the "reducing negativity" post does obliquely hint at the regression point being general ("Let's say that the true level of negativity"), does that seriously undermine my thesis, or does it only merit a footnote?
_ 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
-_ make sure to quote Yudkowsky's LW moderation policy before calling back to it
_ tie off Anna's plot arc?
-_ explain earlier that my practice of "throw money at things" also applied to my friendship with Anna
-_ mention my robot cult history (I've been here since the late 'aughts)
_ quote one more "Hill of Meaning" Tweet emphasizing fact/policy distinction
-_ explains that the "cut my dick off rhetoric" came from conversation with Ben
_ being friends with Anna desipite being political enemies (~May 2019)
-_ rephrase "gamete size" discussion to make it clearer that Yudkowsky's proposal also implicitly requires people to be agree about the clustering thing
_ smoother transition between "deliberately ambiguous" and "was playing dumb"; I'm not being paranoid for attributing political motives to him, because he told us that he's doing it
_ when I'm too close to verbatim-quoting someone's email, actually use a verbatim quote and put it in quotes
_ 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
-_ 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
-_ explain Rob
_ edit the child transition section in a way that Kay Brown would be OK with, have a few sentences about Clever Hans before the wrap-up
_ ask Jessica where Scott clarified his position on antipsychotics?
_ why doesn't he apply his anti-optimism to his gender statements?!
_ notice the symmetry where _both_ E and I want to partition the discussion with "That's a policy question" ... I just think it's unfair to partition after "words don't have intrinsic defn's" rather than 37 ways
_ contract-drafting em, SSC blogroll is most of my traffic
-_ "Common Interest of Many Causes" and "Kolmogorov Complicity" offer directly contradictory strategies
_ Vassar's about-face on gender
_ better introduction of S.K.
-_ risk of people bouncing off progressivism
_ an AGP teen boy could at least consent to transition, and make plans based on knowing what the thing is (you'd actually want to go through a little bit of male puberty)
-_ better explanation of Scott's jailbreaking accusation against Vassar
_ archive.is karma history for Jessica's post
-_ "tossed in a bucket" is ignoring advice from Sept. 2022 clarification to be clear about the type distinction
_ figure out full timeline of which of my Less Wrong posts to mention
-_ update "80,000 words" refs with the near-final wordcount
-_ the "outright bad faith" clause in "Your Price for Joining"
-_ "Riley" pointing out that it worked better because it was Oli
-_ I should respond to Ziz's charges that my criticism of concept-policing was a form of concept-policing
-_ mention "special simulator attention" in cxn with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideas_of_reference_and_delusions_of_reference
_ born five years too early
_ you didn't do a good job explaining to me why someone would think that being bullied into selective silence doesn't constitute a conflict strategy
_ "counterfactual boyfriend"/It's California in the year 2016??
-_ mention Michael's influence and South Park recs in late 2016?
+
_ footnote to explain why I always include the year with the month even though it could be inferred from context
_ update "karma at press time"
_ better explain "lie inflation" ambiguity
_ Facing Reality
-_ backlink condemning Emperor Norton Conspiracy
-_ 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
-_ backlink "(again) whether he accepted the Cheerful Price"
-_ backlink "alter the beacon"
-_ backlink only seen an escort once before (#confided-to-)
-_ backlink Yudkowsky's implicit political concession
-_ backlink "again grateful" for doctor's notes
people to consult before publishing, for feedback or right of objection—
_ Iceman
In October 2016,
-
if [...] wrote her own 10,600 draft Document explaining why she thought [...] is actually a girl, that would be really interesting!—but rather that no one else seemed _interested in having a theory_, as opposed to leaping to institute a social convention that, when challenged, is claimed to have no particular consequences and no particular objective truth conditions, even though it's not clear why there would be moral urgency to implement this convention if it weren't for its consequences.
-https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1634338145016909824 re "malinformation"
-> If we don't have the concept of an attack performed by selectively reporting true information—or, less pleasantly, an attack on the predictable misinferences of people we think less rational than ourselves—the only socially acceptable counter is to say the info is false.
-
I said that I couldn't help but be reminded of a really great short story that I remembered reading back in—it must have been 'aught-nine. I thought it was called "Darkness and Light", or something like that. It was about a guy who gets transported to a fantasy world where he has a magic axe that yells at him sometimes, and he's prophecied to defeat the bad guy, and he and his allies have to defeat these ogres to reach the bad guy's lair. And when they get there, the bad guy _accuses them of murder_ for killing the ogres on the way there.
(The story was actually Yudkowsky's ["The Sword of Good"](https://www.yudkowsky.net/other/fiction/the-sword-of-good), but I was still enjoying the "Robin Hanson's blog" æsthetic.)
Everyone believed this in 2005! Everyone _still_ believes this!
-
> Dear Totally Excellent Rationalist Friends:
> As a transhumanist and someone with a long, long history of fantasizing about having the property, I am of course strongly in favor of there being social norms and institutions that are carefully designed to help people achieve their lifelong dream of acquiring the property, or rather, the best approximation thereof that is achievable given the marked limitations of existing technology.
> However, it's also kind of important to notice that fantasizing about having the property without having yet sought out interventions to acquire the property, is not the same thing as somehow already literally having the property in some unspecified metaphysical sense! The process of attempting to acquire the property does not propagate backwards in time!
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.
-
-------
I like to imagine that they have a saying out of dath ilan: once is happenstance; twice is coincidence; _three times is hostile optimization_.
I'm not, overall, satisfied with the political impact of my writing on this blog. One could imagine someone who shared Yudkowsky's apparent disbelief in public reason advising me that my practice of carefully explaining at length what I believe and why, has been an ineffective strategy—that I should instead clarify to myself what policy goal I'm trying to acheive, and try to figure out some clever gambit to play trans activists and gender-critical feminists against each other in a way that advances my agenda.
From my perspective, such advice would be missing the point. [I'm not trying to force though some particular policy.](/2021/Sep/i-dont-do-policy/) Rather, I think I know some things about the world, things I wish I had someone had told me earlier. So I'm trying to tell others, to help them live in a world that makes sense.
+
+-------
+
+I don't, actually, expect people to spontaneously blurt out everything they believe to be true, that Stalin would find offensive. "No comment" would be fine. Even selective argumentation that's clearly labeled as such would be fine. (There's no shame in being an honest specialist who says, "I've mostly thought about these issues though the lens of ideology _X_, and therefore can't claim to be comprehensive; if you want other perspectives, you'll have to read other authors and think it through for yourself.")
+
+
+-----
+
+
+Michael said that we didn't want to police Eliezer's behavior, but just note that something had seemingly changed and move on. "There are a lot of people who can be usefully informed about the change," Michael said. "Not him though."
+
+That was the part I couldn't understand, the part I couldn't accept.
+
+The man rewrote had rewritten my personality over the internet. Everything I do, I learned from him. He couldn't be so dense as to not even see the thing we'd been trying to point at. Like, even if he were ultimately to endorse his current strategy, he should do it on purpose rather than on accident!
+
+(Scott mostly saw it, and had [filed his honorable-discharge paperwork](https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/07/04/some-clarifications-on-rationalist-blogging/). Anna definitely saw it, and she was doing it on purpose.)
+
+-----
+
+https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/kuqgJDPF6nfscSZsZ/thread-for-discussing-bostrom-s-email-and-apology?commentId=Z7kyiPAfmtztueFFJ
projects / Ultimately_Untrue_Thought.git / blobdiff