Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[faust]

I do think (although I'm not sure about any of this because how could I) that among people who get to make large-scale military decisions, everyone knows that e.g. Islam is a uniquely dangerous doctrine, even while you're not allowed to say that in public.

What do you mean, Islam is a uniquely dangerous doctrine?

[silverspawn]

no I don't think that's worth debating

[silverspawn]

The big update from talking about consciousness on reddit is that people don't understand simplicity, like not even a little bit. If i ever have to make a presentation for an audience that is not exactly LW, I definitely have to start with a lecture on Solomonoff Induction.

if you don't understand how to measure simplicity, the entire consciousness problem becomes unsolvable because of course every theory has wrinkles that produce our observation set. Disputing physicalism, asserting several independent effects that determine the same thing, whatever. Without the proper understanding of simplicity, everything goes.

[silverspawn]

This would also explain why academic philosophy is so very awful

[silverspawn]

one of the worst feelings is if I talk to someone and I think I've explained it really well e.g. with a metaphor, and the other person goes on to misunderstand the metaphor in the most egregious way possible while also being smug about it

I'm beginning to think there is a level of reasonableness you need to have to make metaphors worth trying which lots of people don't meet, and if you don't, they'll just complicate the discussion

[silverspawn]

The total lack of an objective metric for how good someone is at making sense is just so damning

[silverspawn]

Andres from QRI talks about aesthetic a lot, which I think is key. Aesthetic here is generalized from imagery to things in general. In so many cases, people don't want to find out what's true, they want to argue for what fits their aesthetic.

Like one guy I'm still debating keeps saying that there are things that are in-principle impossible to grasp or something. There is no chance this is a belief that is rationally derived from the evidence.

The audience I want to convince has an aesthetic that doesn't like claiming that human brains are special. I know because I have an aesthetic that doesn't like this. Or at least I used to; I'd say I've gotten rid of it at this point and now find the idea emotionally pleasant.

I'd speculate that this is also the main reason why nature >> nurture. Aesthetic seems to be nature-based, and if people over time converge to whatever ideas they resonate with on an emotional level, the effect of their upbringing is just going to disappear over time in most cases, which is what the data shows

[silverspawn]

I wonder if this means I should do something completely different and not base my case entirely on logic, which is what I'm doing right now. But on the other hand, if there is one community where the logic approach ought to work, it's this one.

And I don't know how else to do it, either

[faust]

I'd speculate that this is also the main reason why nature >> nurture. Aesthetic seems to be nature-based, and if people over time converge to whatever ideas they resonate with on an emotional level, the effect of their upbringing is just going to disappear over time in most cases, which is what the data shows

I would be very curious to see that data you are referring to here.

[silverspawn]

as usual this is second-hand, I'm referring to experts I've heard talk about this. Though in this case I believe I've heard the same noises from lots of people. I'll dig some of them up

[silverspawn]

I'll dig some of them up

*tomorrow

on the plus side:

[silverspawn]

Damn, I really forgot how cool autostereograms are.



(tweak your eyes to make the two images come apart until they shift by one period, and it creates the illusion of a 3d image)

Usually you see something else on the image, but I think this version is more impressive

[silverspawn]

You flip a coin 30 times. After each flip (starting with flip 0, i.e., before the first flip), you compute the probability that the total number of heads are at most 17. This is the result after a real (though not at all randomly selected) run of this game:



I think the graph of P(computers cannot be conscious) on the y-axis with expertise on the x-axis looks about like this.

[silverspawn]

Hilariously bad graph poetry

[silverspawn]

I'd speculate that this is also the main reason why nature >> nurture. Aesthetic seems to be nature-based, and if people over time converge to whatever ideas they resonate with on an emotional level, the effect of their upbringing is just going to disappear over time in most cases, which is what the data shows

I would be very curious to see that data you are referring to here.

So the person who talks most consistently about this is Bryan Caplan, who among other books wrote "selfish reasons to have more kids"

Book review --  Podcast episode

I think this is one of the things that's taken as common knowledge in the rationalist sphere, and I have never decided to verify it personally

[silverspawn]

"large majorities of americans support a no-fly zone in Ukraine"

This is an unspeakably bad idea. It vastly increases the chances for WW3. Pretty sure Biden knows this. But man democracy sure is stupid if you have a country that thinks this

[silverspawn]

not saying there is anything less stupid but still

[faust]

I'd speculate that this is also the main reason why nature >> nurture. Aesthetic seems to be nature-based, and if people over time converge to whatever ideas they resonate with on an emotional level, the effect of their upbringing is just going to disappear over time in most cases, which is what the data shows

I would be very curious to see that data you are referring to here.

So the person who talks most consistently about this is Bryan Caplan, who among other books wrote "selfish reasons to have more kids"

Book review --  Podcast episode

I think this is one of the things that's taken as common knowledge in the rationalist sphere, and I have never decided to verify it personally

Summary

Adoption studies indicate that differences in parenting styles have mostly small impacts on long term life outcomes of children, such as happiness, income, intelligence, health, etc.. This means that parents can put less effort into parenting without hurting their children’s futures. If you think kids are neat, then you should consider having more.

Oh my god when I read this summary I could vomit.

I'm off to see whether there's anything substantive in the podcast episode.

[silverspawn]

*looks innocently* what's wrong with the summary? Are you disputing the premise or the reaosning? If you dispute the reasoning, I don't think the podcast will change much

[silverspawn]

Anyway I predict faust will not be convinced by the episode

[silverspawn]

how is it possible that mario is the most successful video game character of all time? there's like zero appeal to him

[silverspawn]

[Awaclus]

"large majorities of americans support a no-fly zone in Ukraine"

This is an unspeakably bad idea. It vastly increases the chances for WW3. Pretty sure Biden knows this. But man democracy sure is stupid if you have a country that thinks this

I am not sure if it increases or decreases the chances for WW3. While doing it would be technically joining a conflict NATO is not already in (which is bad), it is not really an escalation relative to what Russia is already doing to Ukraine, and it does signal a willingness to use strength in response to Russia's escalations (which is good, and a lack thereof could have disastrous consequences).

Also, from what I'm gathering, the Russian army seems to be in a weaker state than I had initially thought — the invading troops which are currently not doing super impressively against Ukraine, while few in number relative to the Ukrainian forces, nonetheless appear to be a very significant % of Russia's ground forces, almost certainly more than half of them. There's e.g. evidence of troops from military bases near the Finnish border fighting in Ukraine. I didn't originally realize their ground forces were that small, but apparently that's how it is. They've already lost a bunch of expensive equipment and a substantial number of soldiers. I don't think Russia has the resources to attack any other country as long as the Ukraine war is ongoing, and they have never dared to attack NATO.

I have tentatively been leaning towards supporting the no-fly zone in Ukraine.

[faust]

*looks innocently* what's wrong with the summary? Are you disputing the premise or the reaosning? If you dispute the reasoning, I don't think the podcast will change much

It suggests that being a parent is easy and you don't need to think hard before you get a child, and that parenting doesn't matter. My partner struggles with severe depression because her parents got her when they weren't ready, and she grew up in an abusive environment. I call bullshit on anyone who claims that doesn't matter for wellbeing, and encourages more people to make that mistake.

I listened to the podcast some, but it's some economist talking about psychology and sociology without citing sources so it didn't give me much. I could go into more detail about my disagreements but I doubt that will be productive.

[silverspawn]

I have tentatively been leaning towards supporting the no-fly zone in Ukraine.

What do you suggest NATO does if Russia violates it?