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
-_ 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
-_ 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
+time-sensitive globals TODOs—
+✓ address red team objections to pt. 3
+✓ schedule Friendship Day at Valinor
+✓ apply pro edits to pt. 3
+✓ address auto edit tier to pt. 3
+- rephrase "everyone-yelling operation" in pt. 5
+_ consult Anna
+_ clear with Steven
+_ finish and ship "Reply to Scott on Autogenderphilia"
+_ finish and ship "Hrunkner Unnerby"
+_ clear with Michael/Ben/Jessica
+_ consult Said?
+_ clear with Alicorn
+_ clear with Kelsey
+_ clear with Ray
+_ clear with Ruby
+_ SHIP PT. 3!!
+------------
+- address auto edit tier to pt. 4
+_ solicit red team pt. 4
+_ solicit pro edit pt. 4
+_ apply red team pt. 4
+_ apply pro edit pt. 4
+
+_ address auto edit tier to pt. 5
+_ solicit red team pt. 5
+_ solicit pro edit pt. 5
+_ apply red team pt. 5
+_ apply pro edit pt. 5
+
+_ consult lc
+_ psychiatric disaster private doc
+
+
+pt. 3 edit tier (auto edition)—
+✓ FTX aside footnote version
+✓ revert alphabet names (from 17638259f20)
+✓ narcissistic delusions
+✓ clarify that cheerful price history is with Anna specifically
+✓ screenshot "pleading, snarky reply"
+✓ GreaterWrong over Less Wrong for comment links
+✓ return on cognitive investment
+✓ establish usage of "coordination group" vs. "posse" (posse)
+✓ do I have a better identifier than "Vassarite"
+✓ log2 with an 'o'
+✓ yank note about LW comment policy to top-level
+✓ "Common Interest of Many Causes" and "Kolmogorov Complicity" offer directly contradictory strategies
+_ re-check wording of trans-kids-on-the-margin section
+_ briefly speculate on causes of brain damage in footnote?
+----
+_ Ruby fight included ban threat, "forces of blandness want me gone ... stand my ground" remark
+_ breakup song
+_ being friends with dogs (it's good, but do I have the wordcount budget?)
_ 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
-_ "Density in Thingspace" comment (maybe a footnote in the § explaining the background to "Unnatural Categories")
-_ Ruby fight: "forces of blandness want me gone ... stand my ground" remark
-_ Motta-Mena and Puts probability-of-gynephilia-by-intersex-condition graph, re trans kids on the margin
_ 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?
-_ quote Yudkowsky's LW moderation policy
-_ Said on Yudkowsky's retreat to Facebook being bad for him
_ 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
+_ 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 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?)
pt. 4 edit tier—
-_ 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
+✓ "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
+✓ rephrase "gamete size" discussion to make it clearer that Yudkowsky's proposal also implicitly requires people to be agree about the clustering thing
+✓ honesty and humility, HEXACO
+✓ GreaterWrong over Less Wrong for comment links
+
+- ending qualifications on "fraud" and whether it might be a good idea
+
_ 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
+_ body odors comment
_ 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
-_ "tossed in a bucket" is ignoring advice from Sept. 2022 clarification to be clear about the type distinction
+
+_ selective argumentation that's clearly labeled as such would be fine
+---
+_ emphasize that 2018 thread was policing TERF-like pronoun usage, not just disapproving of gender-based pronouns
+_ https://cognition.cafe/p/on-lies-and-liars
+_ cite more sneers; use a footnote to pack in as many as possible
+
+
+
pt. 5 edit tier—
_ sucking Scott's dick is helpful because he's now the main gateway instead of HPMOR
_ 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
_ 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
+_ consult 93 about Jessica's dramapost §
_ 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
_ 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)
+_ Jessica brought up race & IQ (she skimmed the previous draft, so I should highlight), or calling Ruby a MOP
+_ Ben publish "Discursive Warfare and Faction Formation" doc?
+_ footnote about FTX
+_ revision of "yelling" description
_ Michael's SLAPP against REACH (new)
_ Michael on creepy and crazy men (new)
_ elided Sasha disaster (new)
+_ what should I say to Iceman?
+
+
pt. 3–5 prereaders—
_ Iceman
-_ Scott? (cursory notification)
+_ Anna
+_ Said
+_ Joel
_ Kelsey (what was that 1 year statute of limitations about??)
_ Steven Kaas
_ David Xu
Men aren't women! Men aren't women tho!
-It's only _after_ people pretended to disagree with _that_, that I started recusively digging into the details—why adult human males on hormone replacement therapy still aren't adult human females, why 'adult human male' and 'adult human female' are natural categories that it makes sense for Meghan McCarthy to want short codewords to point to, how words can be used in different ways depending on context (such that we can understand Meghan McCarthy's claim as it was meant, even if the words _woman_ and _man_ can also be used in other senses), what it means for something to be a natural cateogry, what it means to say that _X_'s aren't _Y_'s ...
+It's only _after_ people pretended to disagree with _that_, that I started recusively digging into the details—why adult human males on hormone replacement therapy still aren't adult human females, why 'adult human male' and 'adult human female' are natural categories that it makes sense for Meghan Murphy to want short codewords to point to, how words can be used in different ways depending on context (such that we can understand Meghan Murphy's claim as it was meant, even if the words _woman_ and _man_ can also be used in other senses), what it means for something to be a natural cateogry, what it means to say that _X_'s aren't _Y_'s ...
It is more than a little insulting to be told, after all this, that the problem is that _I_ don't know how to come to a point, rather than everyone in Berkeley not knowing how to accept a point that contradicts their religion. It's such a stupidly simple stonewalling strategy: when the critic makes their point simply (men aren't women! men aren't women tho!), sneer at them for being ontologically confused, and then when they spend years of their life writing up the exhaustively detailed rigorous version, sneer at them for not being able to come to a point.
------
-14 November conversation, he put a checkmark emoji on my explanation of why giving up on persuading people via methods that discriminate true or false amounts to giving up on the concept of intellectual honesty and choosing instead to become a propaganda AI, which made me feel much less ragey https://discord.com/channels/401181628015050773/458419017602826260/1041836374556426350
+14 November 2022 conversation, he put a checkmark emoji on my explanation of why giving up on persuading people via methods that discriminate true or false amounts to giving up on the concept of intellectual honesty and choosing instead to become a propaganda AI, which made me feel much less ragey https://discord.com/channels/401181628015050773/458419017602826260/1041836374556426350
The problem isn't just the smugness and condescension; it's the smugness and condescension when he's in the wrong and betraying the principles he laid out in the Sequences and knows it; I don't want to be lumped in with anti-arrogance that's not sensitive to whether the arrogance is in the right
https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1404697716689489921
> I have never in my own life tried to persuade anyone to go trans (or not go trans)—I don't imagine myself to understand others that much.
-If you think it "sometimes personally prudent and not community-harmful" to go out of your way to say positive things about Republican candidates and never, ever say positive things about Democratic candidates (because you "don't see what the alternative is besides getting shot"), you can see why people might regard you as a _Republican shill_—even if all the things you said were true, and even if you never told any specific individual, "You should vote Republican."
+If you think it "sometimes personally prudent and not community-harmful" to go out of your way to say positive things about Republican candidates and never, ever say positive things about Democratic candidates (because you "don't see what the alternative is besides getting shot"), you can see why people might regard you as a Republican shill—even if all the things you said were true, and even if you never told any specific individual, "You should vote Republican."
https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10154110278349228
> Just checked my filtered messages on Facebook and saw, "Your post last night was kind of the final thing I needed to realize that I'm a girl."
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_.
But if he's _then_ going to take a shit on c3 of my chessboard (["important things [...] would be all the things I've read [...] from human beings who are people—describing reasons someone does not like to be tossed into a Male Bucket or Female Bucket, as it would be assigned by their birth certificate", "the simplest and best protocol is, '"He" refers to the set of people who have asked us to use "he"'"](https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10159421750419228)), the "playing on a different chessboard, no harm intended" excuse loses its credibility. The turd on c3 is a pretty big likelihood ratio! (That is, I'm more likely to observe a turd on c3 in worlds where Yudkowsky _is_ playing my chessboard and wants me to lose, than in world where he's playing on a different chessboard and just _happened_ to take a shit there, by coincidence.)
-(The authors of the [HEXACO personality model](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HEXACO_model_of_personality_structure) may have gotten something importantly right in [grouping "honesty" and "humility" as a single factor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honesty-humility_factor_of_the_HEXACO_model_of_personality).)
+
------
-------
-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.")
\ No newline at end of file
+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.")
+
+The problem is with selective argumentation that falsely claims to be complete.
+
+
+-----
+
+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