dog whistle

Ashkenazi IQ (and asian SAT scores) absolutely are the “but I have a black friend!” of race science, but further mythologizing Yud and Scoot on those grounds also happens.

Unwell in terms of opinions held or physically?

Nothing to see here, just a rationalist reinventing a well known 2000yo memory technique from first principles.

An r/ssc thread showed up in my feed the other day, it was about physics professors petitioning to bring back the SAT math requirement for STEM majors, and the top comment was about how it was originally axed to hide asiatic math supremacy because it was too in your face evidence for a racial intellectual hierarchy.

The latest ACX is a book review that amounts to siskind endlessly ratsplaining the Frankfurt school while re-framing the cultural marxism conspiracy theory for a rat audience as a running bit.

So yeah.

Sure it counts, getting out of indeterminate time pre-trial holding with a payout after the state has charged you with a felony is a hell of a dice roll, compared to the alternative of not exercising free speech in the first place.

Posting memes about the killing on facebook apparently: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/a-tennessee-man-was-jailed-over-his-charlie-kirk-social-media-comments-now-hes-won-a-835000-settlement

The Palestine Action stuff was in the UK, my bad.

It helps that most of their audience seems incapable of considering that non-market driven societal change could be possible, better spend a fuckton of philanthropy money to buy a castle in case it helps indoctrinate a John Galt type to argue AI safety on our behalf, that’ll solve everything.

While the Zizian ideology is extremist in nature,** a less extreme version of the same fears surrounding the cataclysmic potential of AI are a common concern among AI alignment experts, machine learning engineers, and even frontier AI companies**. Nonetheless, the Intelligence Bureau warns that “paranoid views regarding AI” may proliferate in the aftermath of the Zizians’ trial, thanks to their “attempt to reason the belief that a godlike incarnation of AI is imminent,” and belief that “humans must best use their time in the present to devote themselves to ensuring its compliance with human morality, or face existential consequences for failing to do so.”

And so on and so forth, a good part of the article is about how the feds are afraid that once the trial gets going basically people will think Ziz is making too much sense and anti-AI-infrastructure violence escalates.

Yud, despite his near-infinite IQ, will apparently be the last one to suspect that grassroots organized violence is an incredibly obvious short-term solution to the alleged problem he’s spent most of his life beating the drum about.

And let’s not forget that ridiculous AI2027 assertion that people who are faced with almost certain annihilation should not pursue extreme uncooperative actions.

They literally jailed a guy for making light of Charlie Kirk’s bullet related mishap in social media, and a group of pro-palestine protestors winning their case after months of trials is still fresh on the news.

So you most certainly can be prosecuted.

Siskind’s “chat vet local election candidates according to random pundits I like and also some other broad preferences” is both grossly misrepresenting the technology’s abilities as well as normalizing habits that would look obviously irresponsible in any other context, like voting by random online quiz as you describe.

Additionally, I would think most countries have various unofficial voter to party matching online services at this point, but they don’t have nearly the penetration or the cultural clout of the all knowing chatbot (voters skew old and have access to chatbots via social media, but good luck making them take an online test), and local online services are also much more sueable if a candidate thinks they are being misrepresented.

Maybe he thinks employing a weirdo facade makes people lower their guard, taking a page from Jimmy Saville.

Isn’t the ability to manipulate people a defining trait of intelligence according to rationalists?

Good find, this is never-take-me-seriously stupid, and also does the beige prose thing of trying to gradually work around an accepted definition in order to almost make a point at the last minute, here being that since (we have apparently concluded that) (because of uh hypothetical brain surgery and stuff) accountability = improvability + punishability and nothing else so of course software can be held “accountable” in all the ways that matter.

His big mistake is not doing it at novel length so it’s really obvious that he’s being willfully stupid about it.

CEV is what he would want if he were wiser and less confused

Isn’t that just steelmanning?

I gathered the “idealized version of myself” was because it’s supposed to be applied to a superintelligence, because of course it’s an alignment thing.

I checked it out because I was curious if CEV was some international relations initialism I’d never heard of, turns out its just My Guess About What He Wants in rationalese.

Luckily we should be getting trickle down free will, since all universes are (of course) able to develop technology to perfectly simulate universes of lesser complexity, which seems to imply the existence of a special universe of ultimate complexity where all others emanate from, possibly in line with ain soph or equivalent mystical concept.

I don’t know how that squares with that blabbing about the tegmarkian multiverse that supposedly posits that mathematically simple universes “exist ‘more’”, which siskind probably just included to reinforce his consciousness as a non-physical, mathematical object premise.

I didn’t say things I believed false

What a peculiar and lawyer-friendly way to say “I didn’t outright lie”.

Committing suicide to “force the coin toss” like in SOMA’s backstory is approaching transhumanist praxis.

I think this is a response to Yud’s teaching that a copy of you is really you

It’s not so much a response as it is just running with it until you hit the concepts of the soul and the godhead face first.

Christianity certainly runs the gamut wrt to free will, from it being strictly necessary to explain away the problem of evil to, well, Calvinism.

Zack from SMBC once called habitual AI users ‘clanker crankers’ in a comic and I’m still disappointed it didn’t catch on.

He definitely has a history of mocking rationalist mythology but I don’t know if he is aware how actually problematic they are as a subculture.

Meaning, I can see him giving the benefit of a doubt to a random rationalist event and going to promote his books (about how immigration is good and space colonization is bad lmao) as long as there are enough levels of abstraction between the event and the subculture’s rampant eugenicism and incelism, but I don’t know he knows that means that his mug appearing right next to siskind, yud, aela and hanson would be a really bad look.

TLP dropped off the face of the earth after he stopped his blog on an incelly note so who knows. Siskind did a huge review of Sadly, Porn when people started realizing it was probably the vaunted TLP book, I feel they’d love to co-opt him.