hot sneer from lizzy w:
Before my postmodern deconstruction and unlearning of the worship of Great Men, all I needed to know about feynman not being a good person to look up to was the calling women bitches thing. Miss me with that PUA shit
Just some thoughts about musk trying to be liked and doing whatever idiotic thing he can to become liked, specifically speaking at trump rallies:
- The maga turn as framed by this working theory makes sense, but it is also just what you’d expect of any idiot that got lucky under capitalism.
- I read a hypothesis somewhere that when he does the jumping jacks at the trump rallies, he’s trying to make the letter X with his body. I’m just hoping this somehow derails the fitness industry.
- it’s telling that he wears that occupy mars shirt, the thing that people liked him for before, well, pretty much everything after he became well known.
Also: I don’t think we’ll make it to mars!!! Fuck mars. The earth is our coffin and hope is a mistake.
NB: am not a US voter.
When [musk’s new] supercomputer gets to full capacity, the local utility says it’s going to need a million gallons of water per day and 150 megawatts of electricity — enough to power 100,000 homes per year.
I rewrote the ad so they can lean into their marketing strategy.
Hard book have hard word and make head hurt, AI make book easy! More book read for you. No hard word. This good idea!
What the fucking fuck?
heredity influences environment
smugly "well actually environmental factors are genetic too"
aaaaaaaaaAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Scott is saying essentially that "one data point doesn't influence the data as a whole that much" (usually true)... "so therefore you don't need to change your opinions when something happens" which is just so profoundly stupid. Just so wrong on so many levels. It's not even correct Bayesianism!
(if it happens twice in a row, yeah, that’s weird, I would update some stuff)
???????? Motherfucker have you heard of the paradox of the heap? What about all that other shit you just said?
What is this really about, Scott???
Do I sound defensive about this? I’m not. This next one is defensive. [line break] I’m part of the effective altruist movement.
OH ok. I see now. I mean I've always seen, really, that you and your friends work really hard to come up with ad hoc mental models to excuse every bit of wrongdoing that pops up in any of the communities you're in.
You definitely don’t get this virtue by updating maximally hard in response to a single case of things going wrong. [...] The solution is not to update much on single events, even if those events are really big deals.
Again, this isn't correct Bayesian updating. The formula is the formula. Biasing against recency is not in it. And that's just within Bayesian reasoning!
In a perfect world, people would predict distributions beforehand, update a few percent on a dramatic event, but otherwise continue pursuing the policy they had agreed upon long before.
YEAH BECAUSE IT'S A PERFECT WORLD YOU DINGUS.
“[ignoring all other scary prospects like irreversible climate change or a third world war etc.] consider this scarier prospect: An AI” - AI doomers in a nutshell
Going off the idea that the seniors are quitting in protest of the firing: imagine meeting Sam Altman and thinking: this is my king. I will follow him into the breach. I will fall onto my sword for this doomsday-prepping weasel.
swlabr
joined 2 years ago