Sure, saying that about being in the wrong body was a dick move. You don't have to accept all the theory to see that many people are in bodies that feel wrong to them, and many people are expected to present in ways that feel wrong to them. The quote implies that they should just try harder to perform the gender they were assigned at birth.

People who get angry about trans people and trans theory remind me of Dawkins and friends, because what starts as a factual/philosophical concern (there are probably no gods / the idea that people have a true gender inside them sounds mystical) gets twisted in a reactionary direction. I don't have to understand why trans or nonbinary people feel the way they do to support them as they explore ways of being humans in the world.

I think that gender is a collection of roles in a specific society which people perform and have performed on them. Its not something which exists outside that context, any more than "being the king" exists outside of a legal system. Of the three statements on BlueSky, its the third (the statement about sterilizing children) which makes me think he has been consuming angry things about trans people online.

Grimes was married to Elon Musk and performs at events for 'heretical truth-tellers' sponsored by Peter Thiel

I think he is stating that people don't have an invisible eternal Gender like a Christian thinks people have an invisible eternal Soul. I am a materialist so I don't think either exists. Shazeer goes on to complain about "sterilizing children" which is a red flag of transphobia (ie. people who post a lot about that tend to have a screw loose).

signpost.news gives me error 500 but Ars Technica has an article on Woodard

Meanwhile he objects to people theorycrafting objections (Tessa's dialogue about the midwit trap and an article for the Cato Institute called "Is that your true rejection?") That is an issue in casual conversations, but professionals work through these possibilities in detail and make a case that they can be overcome. Those cases often include past experience completing similar projects as well as theory. A very important part of becoming a professional is learning to spot "that requires a perpetual motion machine," "that implies P = NP," "that requires assuming that the sources we have are a random sample of what once existed" and not getting lost in the details; another is becoming part of a community of practitioners who criticize each other.

The (Falun Gong mouthpiece) Epoch Times recently had a front-page story on Larry Sanger's criticisms of Wikipedia.

eugenics

Yes, the bit about John von Neumann sounds like he is stuck in the 1990s: "there must be a gene for everything!" not today "wow genomes are vast interconnected systems and individual genes get turned on and off by environmental factors and interventions often have the reverse effect we expect." Scott Alexander wrote an essay admiring the Hungarian physics geniuses and tutoring.

Sounds like the thing to do is to say yes boss, get Baldur Bjarnason's book on business risks and talk to legal, then discover some concerns that just need the boss' sign-off in writing.

"Provide an overview of local homeless services" sounds like a standard task for a volunteer or a search engine, but yes "you can use my address for mail and store some things in my garage and I will email some contacts about setting you up with contract work" would be a better answer than just handing out secondhand information! Many "amazing things AI can do" are things the Internet + search engines could do ten years ago.

I would also like to hear from the friend "was this actually helpful?"

I know that on the American right, every accusation is a confession, but I never thought I would read a scheming cartoon villain accusing his enemies of being the Antichrist! He is even queer-coded, would do great on TV in the 1990s.