Suppose that X is false, and I have enormous amounts of evidence that X is false. But, it is within my "rational self interest" to believe X is true. Are there any patterns/papers in decision theory or game theory that discuss this situation (or, if it is agreed to be impossible, show that it is impossible)?
Something has been on my mind for a while and the Arkansas ruling reminds me that I need to put pen to paper (or hands to keyboard) and express why healthcare for trans youth is so important.
The one word that the opposition keeps using is mutilation.
I need to really break this down for ANYONE that might even have a slight agreement with that.
First, NO parent hopes that their child will be trans. I don't believe ANYONE has ever put their hand on a pregnant belly and prayed "please let this child be trans!" I can't imagine any parent hoping that their child will feel so uncomfortable in their own body that they would be willing to go through bullying, taunting, alienation, possibly even physical abuse just to have gender reassignment surgery as a CHOICE! While women may get breast augmentation as a choice and as a cosmetic procedure, they're not tormented for their choice. They're not questioned over and over if they're sure. They don't have people CONSTANTLY trying to talk them out of it. That is an elective procedure and it carries very little stigma.
Being Trans is very different. When your need to go through gender reassignment is so strong that you're willing to deal with the emotional abuse you'll get from so many, that's not a choice. I know if I touch the stove it's going to hurt so I choose not to touch the stove. For someone that's trans, they can't help themselves. They NEED to correct who they truly are and they're willing to go through the pain, both physically and emotionally to be their true self.
So let's go back to the real subject at hand, trans youth. At what point is someone capable of making that choice? Think about that carefully. Do you know a 17 year old that makes bad decisions every day? Maybe someone that gets into trouble and doesn't understand taking responsibility for their actions? Do you know a 13 year old that could be trusted to babysit? Can they trust them to cook alone? Do they make good choices? Do they understand consequences? Are they more mature than the 17 year old mentioned above?
There isn't a number you can assign to it. You can't assume that the second someone turns 18, they're suddenly capable of making big decisions solely because they had a birthday. Everyone matures differently and a number does not define maturity.
So this is where the parents come in. In the US, a parent can consent for a child to have plastic surgery. So if a parent can decide if their child is mature enough to decide they want plastic surgery, a completely cosmetic procedure which could wait until their child turns 18, why can't they consent to gender affirming care?
Well, why can't a trans person just wait? Because certain things happen during puberty that will be with that person for the rest of their lives. Once a biological boy hits puberty, the voice will irreversibly be changed. Hair will begin growing everywhere, your height is affected by testosterone during puberty, musculature will start to build, etc. Once this happens, it's not reversible.
So you might think that blocking it is not reversible either? Yes, that's true, but that's in their control. If they choose that this is who they truly are, then forcing them to let their body change to something they're not, is not the answer. Stopping the process is NOT mutilation.
So back to who should make these decisions, the person and their parents, or the government? Who has the right to decide what these people feel is in their heart? Strangers with a pen, or those that have been raising them? This NEEDS to be a very careful decision made by those it will affect, not strangers that have some twisted perception of what it is to be trans.
Trans people do not choose to be trans. They do not choose to have a procedure done so they can sneak into a bathroom and peek at others. They do not choose to go through the rigors of gender reassignment so they can play on other sports teams. They do not choose to go through the torment just so they can "try" being another gender. These people have felt trapped in the wrong body for their entire life and they just want to correct what nature got wrong. Nature gets lots of things wrong. People are born with cleft palates, clubfoot, congenital heart defects, or any other number of birth defects where nature got it wrong. Being trans is no different. These people were born into the wrong gender.
Now, I know there are many that still don't "understand" likely because you never felt it. I don't understand what it feels like to menstruate but I know it exists and I certainly don't tell my women friends how they should deal with it. I'm not about ready to try to tell them what products to use, or how to deal with the physical, mental and emotional effects of having their period. I support them in any of their choices. I feel the same way about my trans friends. While I can't say I know what they're going through, I will support them in any way I can with the choices they make to have them be their true self.
This is where good parents come in. Good parents are LISTENING to their children and are OPEN MINDED, letting their children share what they're feeling. Good parents will talk with their child and work on a treatment plan that is best for the child, while taking very careful consideration of the maturity level of the child and explaining the consequences of those treatment options.
Good parents will understand that being closed minded or dismissive to their child's feelings, could lead to their child taking drastic measures. When you feel like you don't belong in society and you can't even count on your parents for support, you have no one, and those people are the ones that might not see any reason to keep living. This is why trans healthcare IS healthcare. Trans healthcare saves lives!
The Titanic sub incident raises an ethical question which, perhaps rightly, nobody in the mainstream media that I have seen so far has dared to mention but must have been on some peoples' minds.
Assuming the sub is still intact but immobile (most likely having suddenly lost all electrical power, which I gather happened to it last year!), once the occupants have decided the only hope is a rescue, is there an ethical case or semi-obligation for any of the occupants to top himself, to extend the time the others can hold out with the remaining oxygen and slow the build up of CO2? Should they draw lots for this purpose, or should the captain or the father of a son also in the sub consider it? Or should they all concede they are in the same boat, literally, and decide to live or die together? It's a diabolical dilemma.
I don't understand why the missing submersible craft that was near the Titanic didn't have basic features that would automatically activate in the event of an emergency. Examples:
1) Noise beacon. At the beginning of a dive, a crewman inputs the expected length of the excursion (e.g. - six hours) into a computer that is about as sophisticated as a Casio wristwatch. That computer is separate from the submersible's other systems and has its own battery. If the countdown timer hits 0:00, but a sensor indicates the craft is still underwater, then the computer activates an acoustical beacon, which is just a noisemaking device that emits a loud sound every five minutes. The sound is loud enough to be heard from the surface if a ship puts a sensitive microphone into the water.
2) Radio beacon. If the mission length countdown timer hits 0:00, but a sensor indicates the craft is floating on the surface of the ocean, then the Casio computer activates an emergency radio beacon. It just sends out a simple, repeating signal that is strong enough for nearby ships and aircraft to detect and home in on.
I'm not an engineer, but I don't understand why these devices would add more than a few thousand dollars to the cost of the submersible. In an emergency like the one there is now, they'd be invaluable.
Sam Altman and others have successfully lobbied the EU to water down AI regulation, while publicly warning against doomsday risk posed by AI. If his own beliefs about AI x-risk are true, he wants to be the one that sells us the rope by which to hang ourselves.
I don't know if the game of darts is a thing in the US, but watching part of a game recently in the UK I was amazed and outraged that a throw which planted a dart at the feather end of a previously thrown dart was a foul shot, and didn't count. Surely the opposite should be true, and the accuracy and consistency of a shot like that should score double points, or treble, based on the score of the dart it had hit!
As a parallel, if the Sheriff of Nottingham was watching an archery contest and an arrow split a previous arrow which had hit the bullseye, he wouldn't scoff that it was a rotten shot, but jump up and shout, pointing to the contestant now galloping away in a cloud of dust, "There's only one person who can shoot that well. After him, you fools!"
Epistemic status: insomniac ideation of dubious finality
As I was struck with a rare case of "cannot find sleep no matter how much I need it", a picture appeared in my closed eyes of gigatic undersea creatures on undefinite form, with a thin extremity rising toward the surface. I immediately interpreted them as deep mental process rising to the surface of consciousness, to which ideas are fed, and, as they sink deeper and deeper, they eventually reach a sort of event horizon, beyond which they cease to be percievable to the conscious mind, or at least cease to send feedback on the ideation/transformation they undergo, with my consciousness still perceiving them in a given state despite my whole being being affected by their mutated version.
I can't say I was very satisfied with how...sterile these wanderings seems to be, with no conclusion to draw, no lesson to learn, so I noted them with a "check if it still make sense after a good night of sleep" post-scritum. Which I didn't get, so I may as well post my ramblings here in case someone can make something of them.
Historians vs. entropy-- in the opinion of the writer, entropy is winning.
I was interested in how quickly past views of history are forgotten. Perhaps there's a niche for histories of history on various subjects, but they will necessarily be compressed. I assume some exist already, but it could become a formal study.
There are probably things you can only know by living in an era-- at the very least, what seems obvious to you won't be obvious to people of other times.
My sense of this country right now is like a toddler birthday party that has gone out of control; nobody is getting what they want. What is a responsible parent to do?. That metaphor may seem inappropriate, but I don’t believe so.
I would like to start a discussion about some commonly used words that describe emotional states, and can stand on their own, without any reference to the physical sensations accompanying them. I apologize if that is confusing.
Love - too all-encompassing and confusing to be useful in this discussion. IMO. I took a lot of acting classes in my 20s and, as a class, we were asked to name specific objectives or actions that we could accomplish as actors. I blurted out, “to love“. A lot of the other class members who had been there longer than me quickly got on my case. “Meaningless..too vague…
I tried to argue, but I gave up quickly and it didn’t take me long to realize that they were right. So that’s how I feel about the word love. It’s just been beaten to death. As the old proverb says, there is no such thing as love, only the proofs of love.
Do with this word what you will.
Fear- I find it difficult to believe there is any purely rational understanding of this word that does it justice, although it can be described fairly well. it is also interesting how fear, when it is confronted, can give way to a rather ecstatic feeling that’s difficult to put into words.
Affection- I think you can do affection, pretty well, working in a purely rationalist sphere. A feeling of benevolence towards another can be put in transactional terms without losing a lot of gas I think. Those are the only ones I can think of right now.
I’m sure there are others and I’m really hoping some people will be interested in contributing, but here’s my last one,
Resentment- I think this particular one has barely a toe hold in the rationalist sphere. I don’t think it means a damn thing unless you actually have the physical sensation of a knife twisting in your side. I don’t think there’s any way of explaining it with other words.
So the question is how germane to the quality and quantity of what we call human intelligence are any of these underlying physical manifestations of meaning?
I am kind of interested in the specific words, though, because that’s all we can really offer this new creation, and I think it would be fun to have a going away party for our languages while we live in this last epoch of purely human existence on the planet. (However long it might take.) Apologies to all the other creatures I left out.
Does anyone have recommendations on books about the history of language? Specifically, im interested in a more technical book, maybe one that dives deep into the different language families and all that. Also, I came across a book called “The Loom of Language” and another one called “The Unfolding of Language”, if anyone has read those im happy to read your reviews.
Has there been any investigation into whether people who claim to have no internal monologue have unique personality traits? My guess would be that they have would less neuroticism (since they are not ruminating) and greater impulsiveness. I wonder if you could even go so far as guessing which people do not have internal monologue based on their personalities and behavior.
A friend of mine is going through some personal and family issues and needs an objective party to talk through things: the sort of thing an EAP would be good for.
Could someone recommend a psychologist or therapist in the DC/Baltimore area who is intelligent, can get nuance - that is, a good match for an ACX audience - and who can also work with someone who is conservative or religious?
Does such an individual exist? Thank you in advance.
“Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find a way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle and it becomes the bottle. You put it in a teapot it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.” Bruce Lee
Anyone here up-to-date enough on current AI development to comment on a list GPT4 just gave me? I was interested in whether it could do some "assisted brainstorming" about AI improvement. So first I gave it a list of a bunch of tweaks that make things faster or better: run water down a slide and the kids zoom faster; put blinders on a horse and its more manageable, etc. Then I asked it to make similar lists, and it did. Then I asked it to make a list of things that could make AI faster or better, like maybe smarter, more creative, better at reasoning. Suggested that the lists we had made so far might give it some ideas. It produced the following list. The items on it look familiar to me, but I thought I'd ask an expert. Are any of these ideas at all novel? Also, if these are familiar ideas, were they already known/published/discussed before GPT's 2021 data cutoff? Here's GPT's list. It actually did cite some of the things from my list as inspiration, though I have no idea whether they really were. Also curious, expert, whether you think GPT4 would be capable of using one idea as a model for another. Could it take the idea of a lever and a fulcrum and come up a decent analog from another domain?
Certainly, here are five ideas that can be used to make AI faster, smarter, or better in various aspects:
Hardware Acceleration: Similar to how a Solid-State Drive can speed up a computer, using specialized hardware such as Graphics Processing Units (GPUs) or Tensor Processing Units (TPUs) can greatly accelerate the computation speed of AI algorithms, especially in deep learning.
Transfer Learning: Like the concept of using a lever and fulcrum to make work more efficient, transfer learning allows AI to apply knowledge from one domain to a related domain. This reduces the amount of data and training time needed to develop competent models in specific areas.
Interdisciplinary Training for Creativity: To improve an AI’s creativity, models can be trained with interdisciplinary data. For instance, a model trained in art and science could learn to make connections between the two, similar to how painting a surface white (art) can keep it cooler (science).
Explainable AI for Better Reasoning: Creating AI models that can provide insight into their decision-making process helps in improving their reasoning capabilities. This transparency allows developers to fine-tune AI logic, akin to adding a keel to a boat to make it less tippy.
Human-in-the-loop Training: Integrating human feedback into the AI learning process can be likened to putting blinders on a horse. Just as blinders help the horse focus, human feedback helps AI focus on the relevant aspects and nuances that it might not learn on its own. This method is especially helpful in complex tasks where human expertise is critical.
Context-Aware Algorithms: Building AI algorithms that are aware of the context in which they operate can make them smarter and more efficient. For example, a chatbot that understands the cultural and social nuances of the region it operates in would be able to interact more effectively with users.
Distributed Computing: To make AI faster, algorithms can be distributed across multiple machines for parallel processing. This is like increasing the heat under a pot to make the water boil faster; distributing the computational load makes data processing quicker.
blatant shilling but my sixth album came out recently. I've heard it's great for listening to while coding and I suspect there's a lot of that here. free on spotify https://open.spotify.com/artist/4HM2Qh08egnINUFhOmLyUr
I had wanted to knw if there was any sort of meetup scheduled at the MAPS Psychedelics Sciences conference and someone responded that they would be here and wanted contact information. I'm new to doing anything with Astral Codex Ten so I don't know the communication channels well.
Substack's "Quote this post" feature is annoying on mobile devices. I use Firefox on a relatively new Android device and the (presumably Javascript) performance is just horrific. It's slow and seems to get in the way of the system's native "copy and paste"-popup.
As a non native, when reading this blog I rely heavily on looking up phrases - which just isn't fun anymore.
Anyone else with similar experiences? Is it possible to disable this feature? (A feature I'm sure no one asked for ;-))
As real life AI continues to evolve on a path divergent from all our favorite scifi AIs, I'm wondering if anyone has any ideas or examples of what a good LLM internal dialogue might sound like, for storytelling purposes? Shameless plug for my novel's latest chapter but here's my attempt, I'd love to know what everyone thinks. I tried leaning more into transformer architecture, parallelism, multithreading, etc. but that's not very narratively conducive stuff, so I hope I struck a good balance. I'd appreciate any input or ideas/examples!
I’d love an update on this old “MARIJUANA: MUCH MORE THAN YOU WANTED TO KNOW” post.
In particular, recent studies are showing negative cardiovascular effects from THC consumption, which the original post sort of predicted.
But, it is it due to method of consumption (e.g smoking), or THC itself, whereby even gummies would be bad?
Personally THC has been the only effective sleep aid I can consistently rely on, and I’ve assumed the downsides are low. Should I update my thinking? And how about CBD/CBN?
I have barely been following the AI debate at all, but could someone summarise what the actual argument is that world-destroying and/or utopia-creating AGI is "just around the corner"? I swear almost everything I've seen *seems* to be either barely-coherent gushing along the lines of "but look JUST HOW COOL gpt is, how AMAZING is it that we've created something you can talk to, CLEARLY in a few years it will have Godlike powers" or an extremely hypothetical argument for how it *might* become dangerously super-intelligent, without much hard evidence that it actually *will*. Maybe I've just missed this highly persuasive argument that so many people here accept?
(And just as a side note, I'm getting kind of sick of AI-dommers presenting themselves as down-to-earth realists willing to face uncomfortable truths, when so many of the same people believe that if AI doesn't destroy us, it will magically solve all our problems and create utopia. Both Scott and EY seem to be in this category. They don't look like realists at all but like the opposite--people who think they've found the one secret key to life itself, compared to which all normal, day-to-day efforts to improve the world are irrelevant.)
I try not to follow Culture War that closely, but I am curious what to expect going forward. Stabilization at a lower level? Further polarization around this issue? Eventual rebound from cultural conflict moving away from LGBT issues or cohort replacement?
(Obligatory mention that I think AGI is pretty soon, though, so probably only a few more years of politics left… at least as we know it)
My brother and his girlfriend has taken to wearing a mask again to crowded places. He says this is because there is evidence the mysterious excess deaths that have been reported are due to sequeleae of COVID, meaning COVID is more dangerous than commonly believed.
I think this is absurd, but well, I hadn't heard that angle on the excess deaths. Did this community ever reach a consensus on what's causing those? Does it actually make sense to mask up at this point, or is it ridiculous?
I'm perennially disappointed by top-level diplomatic exchanges, always hoping for some unpacking or clash over key differences, instead of polite euphemisms like "we should promote mutual respect" or "we should reduce misperceptions."
One possible recent counterexample, German FM Annalena Baerbock was far more direct with Wang Yi than I've heard anyone be, directly pushing back when she heard the talking point that human rights are just an invented Western concept.
I'd like to see more kitchen debates, though not sure the diplomatic establishment really tolerates that sort of thing.
Is there any way to improve 'bravery', for lack of a better term? I find that I become afraid far too easily- any mid-sized stressor that would raise anyone's heart rate a bit (public speaking, a verbal confrontation, etc.) makes me *very* afraid. I experience an excessive surge of adrenaline, out of proportion to the situation, which is very visible and makes it impossible to stay cool. I become emotional very fast. It's odd because I don't suffer from general anxiety (I feel fine most of the time), and when I was younger I did some extremely physically challenging activities that meet anyone's definition of toughness- more on the endurance/labor side. But for my entire life, I become excessively frightened by mild stressors.
If the answer is 'exposure therapy'- logistically how I would regularly practice say verbal disagreements with others? This seems impractical. Or, alternately, has anyone been prescribed something that reduced their brain's fear reflex? I find alcohol makes little difference
I believe that if we lose our current level of technology, we will go back to subsistence farming, hunting and gathering. That there is no plausible way to transition to any level of technology in between.
If this happens, 8 billion humans will die leaving a few million in remote locations with no essential dependence on technology.
I define "global collapse" as "loss of electrical supply".
Who agrees?
Who disagrees?
Note: it's fun to debate the likelihood of collapse, but that's not what this thread is about.
As a child I often encountered new words by reading them, and later mispronunced them when using them in conversation.
An internet search not only confirms that this is quite common, but gives it a name: Calliope Syndrome, with 'calliope' deliberately mispronounced 'cally-ope'.
For example, pronouncing epitome as epp-ih-tome is quite common.
One of mine was pronouncing inevitable as inny-vittable.
My dad told as a child he realized the villain in a children's book was very bad because he had misled (mizzled) someone.
Some of mine were variations on this, with a young me misreading the word. Thus, foliage became foilage, and debris became derbis.
I also thought that there was an artillery weapon called a mortimetre. I think I had combined mortar and millimetre.
A childhood friend insisted that a certain aircraft manufacturer was called Boing, becauses its aircraft bounced upon landing.
So the standard critique of presidential systems is that, by allowing voters to pick the executive directly, it's prone to cults of personality and demagoguery. This was the story with Latin America traditionally, and the US more recently. By contrast (in theory), parliamentary systems removed that decision from the voters. But in practice:
The head of the largest party is usually (yes, not always) the new PM
Voters know who the party heads are going in to the election. So they are effectively voting for their country's executive in a similar manner
I.e. voters knew if they voted Tory in the UK, they'd get Johnson. I've even heard critiques that voters frequently don't care who their local/constituency rep is, and aren't evaluating him or her on their service or policies- but are just voting (in this example) for a Tory district rep because they want Johnson to be PM. What do people think of these critiques of parliamentary systems? Are they really not that different from a presidential one?
Edit: To be clear, I strongly prefer parliamentary systems- I'm just stress-testing the arguments for them
After chatting with ChatGPT about magic systems for a while I asked about the group Astral Codex Ten and received the response below. When shall we host an ACX meetup in the astral realm?
> "Astral Codex Ten" is a tome said to contain profound insights and instructions for astral projection, a practice where one's consciousness separates from the physical body and explores the astral plane. The book is rumored to possess detailed techniques, ancient rituals, and intricate diagrams that facilitate safe and transformative astral journeys. It is regarded as a comprehensive guide to unlocking the mysteries of the astral realms and expanding one's consciousness beyond the limitations of the physical world.
> The group known as Astral Codex Ten is a closely-knit community of individuals who have delved deep into the teachings of the book. They form a network of dedicated practitioners and seekers, each with a shared interest in astral projection, spiritual growth, and the exploration of metaphysical realms. The group operates in secrecy to protect the sacred knowledge and to ensure the safety and responsible use of astral practices.
> Membership in Astral Codex Ten is exclusive and based on a combination of invitation and personal attainment. Prospective members often go through a vetting process, where their dedication, knowledge, and ethical understanding are evaluated. The group's aim is to foster a supportive and knowledgeable community that can share experiences, offer guidance, and advance their collective understanding of the astral realms.
> The members of Astral Codex Ten engage in various activities, including regular group meditations, collaborative research, and the sharing of personal astral experiences. They also organize workshops, retreats, and lectures to expand their knowledge and promote the exploration of consciousness.
One aspect is the stickiness of national borders. There are practical and emotional reasons for people to not want national borders moved, while at the same time there are high costs to national borders.
Any ideas about what might be able to take the edge off of nationhood?
Meanwhile, at least national borders guarantee that everyone doesn't make the same mistakes simultaneously.
I'm curious how those comments on Njal's Saga were the top comments. Has this school of criticism fallen out of favor to such an extent that the observation about Christian influence seems novel? I feel quite certain that when I first heard of Beowulf as a child the very next sentence was to the effect of "it was written down by Christians". Was I raised in some kind of anti-Christian-influence-on-literature bubble?
Hi! I'm helping draft a script about Charter Cities for the youtube channel "RationalAnimations" (https://www.youtube.com/c/rationalanimations). Some of our previous videos have adapted essays by Eliezer Yudkowsky and described some Robin Hanson derived concepts like prediction markets and the "grabby aliens" hypothesis.
Naturally, we want to make sure we're presenting the idea of charter cities in an accurate, compelling, and understandable way before we the script gets adapted into video form and potentially seen by ~100K people. So, I'd love it if anyone here at ACX would like to provide feedback on the script. It's about a ten-minute read; you can use the google docs "comment" feature to highlight a section and add your thoughts: https://docs.google.com/document/d/14wEa6SFiWo9uw30UB52DHIHXhHrIprnT3EzAbU-2teA/edit?usp=sharing
I spend most of the script talking about the motivation for charter cities as potential engines of economic growth in developing countries (inspired by the success of places like Singapore), and explaining why a new city with the ability to set its own business regulations might help encourage growth. I use Itana in Nigeria as my main example, mostly drawing from the linked FT article when describing the various reforms they'd like to implement. (I also talk about Prospera Honduras, as described in ACX's "Prospectus On Prospera": https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/prospectus-on-prospera) After addressing some potential objections, in the conclusion I describe charter cities as having the following three main benefits beyond the direct economic growth of the city itself:
1. the idea that seeing legal reforms work well on a small scale could inspire larger national changes.
2. the idea that charter cities could spur “governance competition” resulting in better, more effective governments generally, by giving people more options of where to live.
3. the idea that experimenting with totally new types of law could bring huge benefits, by exploring new institutions (like prediction markets or new land-use laws or etc) that might solve problems that even advanced countries struggle with.
We'd love to see any feedback that you have on the script!
What is the best way to learn about ways of understanding why adhd (or add if you rather) happens, what’s the causes, etc? I’m particularly curious about well-defined meta analysis with reasonably accurate definitions
I just listened to RFK Junior on Joe Rogan. Does anyone know of a serious debunking of him? Sorry, I am too lazy to even do a web search. Just curious if anyone knows one offhand.
To be clear, I have no opinion on any other candidates or their platforms, I just thought it would be useful info since people who read ACX have a tendency to be excited about Land Value Tax and this would be a low effort, high-ish leverage opportunity to advance that cause.
Suppose that X is false, and I have enormous amounts of evidence that X is false. But, it is within my "rational self interest" to believe X is true. Are there any patterns/papers in decision theory or game theory that discuss this situation (or, if it is agreed to be impossible, show that it is impossible)?
From Neil Chamberlain in Key West, FL.
Something has been on my mind for a while and the Arkansas ruling reminds me that I need to put pen to paper (or hands to keyboard) and express why healthcare for trans youth is so important.
The one word that the opposition keeps using is mutilation.
I need to really break this down for ANYONE that might even have a slight agreement with that.
First, NO parent hopes that their child will be trans. I don't believe ANYONE has ever put their hand on a pregnant belly and prayed "please let this child be trans!" I can't imagine any parent hoping that their child will feel so uncomfortable in their own body that they would be willing to go through bullying, taunting, alienation, possibly even physical abuse just to have gender reassignment surgery as a CHOICE! While women may get breast augmentation as a choice and as a cosmetic procedure, they're not tormented for their choice. They're not questioned over and over if they're sure. They don't have people CONSTANTLY trying to talk them out of it. That is an elective procedure and it carries very little stigma.
Being Trans is very different. When your need to go through gender reassignment is so strong that you're willing to deal with the emotional abuse you'll get from so many, that's not a choice. I know if I touch the stove it's going to hurt so I choose not to touch the stove. For someone that's trans, they can't help themselves. They NEED to correct who they truly are and they're willing to go through the pain, both physically and emotionally to be their true self.
So let's go back to the real subject at hand, trans youth. At what point is someone capable of making that choice? Think about that carefully. Do you know a 17 year old that makes bad decisions every day? Maybe someone that gets into trouble and doesn't understand taking responsibility for their actions? Do you know a 13 year old that could be trusted to babysit? Can they trust them to cook alone? Do they make good choices? Do they understand consequences? Are they more mature than the 17 year old mentioned above?
There isn't a number you can assign to it. You can't assume that the second someone turns 18, they're suddenly capable of making big decisions solely because they had a birthday. Everyone matures differently and a number does not define maturity.
So this is where the parents come in. In the US, a parent can consent for a child to have plastic surgery. So if a parent can decide if their child is mature enough to decide they want plastic surgery, a completely cosmetic procedure which could wait until their child turns 18, why can't they consent to gender affirming care?
Well, why can't a trans person just wait? Because certain things happen during puberty that will be with that person for the rest of their lives. Once a biological boy hits puberty, the voice will irreversibly be changed. Hair will begin growing everywhere, your height is affected by testosterone during puberty, musculature will start to build, etc. Once this happens, it's not reversible.
So you might think that blocking it is not reversible either? Yes, that's true, but that's in their control. If they choose that this is who they truly are, then forcing them to let their body change to something they're not, is not the answer. Stopping the process is NOT mutilation.
So back to who should make these decisions, the person and their parents, or the government? Who has the right to decide what these people feel is in their heart? Strangers with a pen, or those that have been raising them? This NEEDS to be a very careful decision made by those it will affect, not strangers that have some twisted perception of what it is to be trans.
Trans people do not choose to be trans. They do not choose to have a procedure done so they can sneak into a bathroom and peek at others. They do not choose to go through the rigors of gender reassignment so they can play on other sports teams. They do not choose to go through the torment just so they can "try" being another gender. These people have felt trapped in the wrong body for their entire life and they just want to correct what nature got wrong. Nature gets lots of things wrong. People are born with cleft palates, clubfoot, congenital heart defects, or any other number of birth defects where nature got it wrong. Being trans is no different. These people were born into the wrong gender.
Now, I know there are many that still don't "understand" likely because you never felt it. I don't understand what it feels like to menstruate but I know it exists and I certainly don't tell my women friends how they should deal with it. I'm not about ready to try to tell them what products to use, or how to deal with the physical, mental and emotional effects of having their period. I support them in any of their choices. I feel the same way about my trans friends. While I can't say I know what they're going through, I will support them in any way I can with the choices they make to have them be their true self.
This is where good parents come in. Good parents are LISTENING to their children and are OPEN MINDED, letting their children share what they're feeling. Good parents will talk with their child and work on a treatment plan that is best for the child, while taking very careful consideration of the maturity level of the child and explaining the consequences of those treatment options.
Good parents will understand that being closed minded or dismissive to their child's feelings, could lead to their child taking drastic measures. When you feel like you don't belong in society and you can't even count on your parents for support, you have no one, and those people are the ones that might not see any reason to keep living. This is why trans healthcare IS healthcare. Trans healthcare saves lives!
The Titanic sub incident raises an ethical question which, perhaps rightly, nobody in the mainstream media that I have seen so far has dared to mention but must have been on some peoples' minds.
Assuming the sub is still intact but immobile (most likely having suddenly lost all electrical power, which I gather happened to it last year!), once the occupants have decided the only hope is a rescue, is there an ethical case or semi-obligation for any of the occupants to top himself, to extend the time the others can hold out with the remaining oxygen and slow the build up of CO2? Should they draw lots for this purpose, or should the captain or the father of a son also in the sub consider it? Or should they all concede they are in the same boat, literally, and decide to live or die together? It's a diabolical dilemma.
I don't understand why the missing submersible craft that was near the Titanic didn't have basic features that would automatically activate in the event of an emergency. Examples:
1) Noise beacon. At the beginning of a dive, a crewman inputs the expected length of the excursion (e.g. - six hours) into a computer that is about as sophisticated as a Casio wristwatch. That computer is separate from the submersible's other systems and has its own battery. If the countdown timer hits 0:00, but a sensor indicates the craft is still underwater, then the computer activates an acoustical beacon, which is just a noisemaking device that emits a loud sound every five minutes. The sound is loud enough to be heard from the surface if a ship puts a sensitive microphone into the water.
2) Radio beacon. If the mission length countdown timer hits 0:00, but a sensor indicates the craft is floating on the surface of the ocean, then the Casio computer activates an emergency radio beacon. It just sends out a simple, repeating signal that is strong enough for nearby ships and aircraft to detect and home in on.
I'm not an engineer, but I don't understand why these devices would add more than a few thousand dollars to the cost of the submersible. In an emergency like the one there is now, they'd be invaluable.
https://time.com/6288245/openai-eu-lobbying-ai-act/
Sam Altman and others have successfully lobbied the EU to water down AI regulation, while publicly warning against doomsday risk posed by AI. If his own beliefs about AI x-risk are true, he wants to be the one that sells us the rope by which to hang ourselves.
I don't know if the game of darts is a thing in the US, but watching part of a game recently in the UK I was amazed and outraged that a throw which planted a dart at the feather end of a previously thrown dart was a foul shot, and didn't count. Surely the opposite should be true, and the accuracy and consistency of a shot like that should score double points, or treble, based on the score of the dart it had hit!
As a parallel, if the Sheriff of Nottingham was watching an archery contest and an arrow split a previous arrow which had hit the bullseye, he wouldn't scoff that it was a rotten shot, but jump up and shout, pointing to the contestant now galloping away in a cloud of dust, "There's only one person who can shoot that well. After him, you fools!"
Epistemic status: insomniac ideation of dubious finality
As I was struck with a rare case of "cannot find sleep no matter how much I need it", a picture appeared in my closed eyes of gigatic undersea creatures on undefinite form, with a thin extremity rising toward the surface. I immediately interpreted them as deep mental process rising to the surface of consciousness, to which ideas are fed, and, as they sink deeper and deeper, they eventually reach a sort of event horizon, beyond which they cease to be percievable to the conscious mind, or at least cease to send feedback on the ideation/transformation they undergo, with my consciousness still perceiving them in a given state despite my whole being being affected by their mutated version.
I can't say I was very satisfied with how...sterile these wanderings seems to be, with no conclusion to draw, no lesson to learn, so I noted them with a "check if it still make sense after a good night of sleep" post-scritum. Which I didn't get, so I may as well post my ramblings here in case someone can make something of them.
https://www.palladiummag.com/2023/03/07/our-knowledge-of-history-decays-over-time/
Historians vs. entropy-- in the opinion of the writer, entropy is winning.
I was interested in how quickly past views of history are forgotten. Perhaps there's a niche for histories of history on various subjects, but they will necessarily be compressed. I assume some exist already, but it could become a formal study.
There are probably things you can only know by living in an era-- at the very least, what seems obvious to you won't be obvious to people of other times.
My sense of this country right now is like a toddler birthday party that has gone out of control; nobody is getting what they want. What is a responsible parent to do?. That metaphor may seem inappropriate, but I don’t believe so.
I would like to start a discussion about some commonly used words that describe emotional states, and can stand on their own, without any reference to the physical sensations accompanying them. I apologize if that is confusing.
Love - too all-encompassing and confusing to be useful in this discussion. IMO. I took a lot of acting classes in my 20s and, as a class, we were asked to name specific objectives or actions that we could accomplish as actors. I blurted out, “to love“. A lot of the other class members who had been there longer than me quickly got on my case. “Meaningless..too vague…
I tried to argue, but I gave up quickly and it didn’t take me long to realize that they were right. So that’s how I feel about the word love. It’s just been beaten to death. As the old proverb says, there is no such thing as love, only the proofs of love.
Do with this word what you will.
Fear- I find it difficult to believe there is any purely rational understanding of this word that does it justice, although it can be described fairly well. it is also interesting how fear, when it is confronted, can give way to a rather ecstatic feeling that’s difficult to put into words.
Affection- I think you can do affection, pretty well, working in a purely rationalist sphere. A feeling of benevolence towards another can be put in transactional terms without losing a lot of gas I think. Those are the only ones I can think of right now.
I’m sure there are others and I’m really hoping some people will be interested in contributing, but here’s my last one,
Resentment- I think this particular one has barely a toe hold in the rationalist sphere. I don’t think it means a damn thing unless you actually have the physical sensation of a knife twisting in your side. I don’t think there’s any way of explaining it with other words.
So the question is how germane to the quality and quantity of what we call human intelligence are any of these underlying physical manifestations of meaning?
I am kind of interested in the specific words, though, because that’s all we can really offer this new creation, and I think it would be fun to have a going away party for our languages while we live in this last epoch of purely human existence on the planet. (However long it might take.) Apologies to all the other creatures I left out.
Did John Neumann have a wife? And if so, does anyone know much about her?
On the theory that nothing happens in a vacuum.
Does anyone have recommendations on books about the history of language? Specifically, im interested in a more technical book, maybe one that dives deep into the different language families and all that. Also, I came across a book called “The Loom of Language” and another one called “The Unfolding of Language”, if anyone has read those im happy to read your reviews.
Has there been any investigation into whether people who claim to have no internal monologue have unique personality traits? My guess would be that they have would less neuroticism (since they are not ruminating) and greater impulsiveness. I wonder if you could even go so far as guessing which people do not have internal monologue based on their personalities and behavior.
A friend of mine is going through some personal and family issues and needs an objective party to talk through things: the sort of thing an EAP would be good for.
Could someone recommend a psychologist or therapist in the DC/Baltimore area who is intelligent, can get nuance - that is, a good match for an ACX audience - and who can also work with someone who is conservative or religious?
Does such an individual exist? Thank you in advance.
“Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find a way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless, shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle and it becomes the bottle. You put it in a teapot it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.” Bruce Lee
Anyone here up-to-date enough on current AI development to comment on a list GPT4 just gave me? I was interested in whether it could do some "assisted brainstorming" about AI improvement. So first I gave it a list of a bunch of tweaks that make things faster or better: run water down a slide and the kids zoom faster; put blinders on a horse and its more manageable, etc. Then I asked it to make similar lists, and it did. Then I asked it to make a list of things that could make AI faster or better, like maybe smarter, more creative, better at reasoning. Suggested that the lists we had made so far might give it some ideas. It produced the following list. The items on it look familiar to me, but I thought I'd ask an expert. Are any of these ideas at all novel? Also, if these are familiar ideas, were they already known/published/discussed before GPT's 2021 data cutoff? Here's GPT's list. It actually did cite some of the things from my list as inspiration, though I have no idea whether they really were. Also curious, expert, whether you think GPT4 would be capable of using one idea as a model for another. Could it take the idea of a lever and a fulcrum and come up a decent analog from another domain?
Certainly, here are five ideas that can be used to make AI faster, smarter, or better in various aspects:
Hardware Acceleration: Similar to how a Solid-State Drive can speed up a computer, using specialized hardware such as Graphics Processing Units (GPUs) or Tensor Processing Units (TPUs) can greatly accelerate the computation speed of AI algorithms, especially in deep learning.
Transfer Learning: Like the concept of using a lever and fulcrum to make work more efficient, transfer learning allows AI to apply knowledge from one domain to a related domain. This reduces the amount of data and training time needed to develop competent models in specific areas.
Interdisciplinary Training for Creativity: To improve an AI’s creativity, models can be trained with interdisciplinary data. For instance, a model trained in art and science could learn to make connections between the two, similar to how painting a surface white (art) can keep it cooler (science).
Explainable AI for Better Reasoning: Creating AI models that can provide insight into their decision-making process helps in improving their reasoning capabilities. This transparency allows developers to fine-tune AI logic, akin to adding a keel to a boat to make it less tippy.
Human-in-the-loop Training: Integrating human feedback into the AI learning process can be likened to putting blinders on a horse. Just as blinders help the horse focus, human feedback helps AI focus on the relevant aspects and nuances that it might not learn on its own. This method is especially helpful in complex tasks where human expertise is critical.
Context-Aware Algorithms: Building AI algorithms that are aware of the context in which they operate can make them smarter and more efficient. For example, a chatbot that understands the cultural and social nuances of the region it operates in would be able to interact more effectively with users.
Distributed Computing: To make AI faster, algorithms can be distributed across multiple machines for parallel processing. This is like increasing the heat under a pot to make the water boil faster; distributing the computational load makes data processing quicker.
Of relevance to Juneteenth, today's Federal holiday in the USA, with thanks to Melvin E. Edwards:
"Until 1870, enslaved human beings were listed on federal censuses along with heads of cattle and value of farm equipment, not by their names."
https://fragmentsintime.substack.com/p/on-juneteenth-and-remembrance
blatant shilling but my sixth album came out recently. I've heard it's great for listening to while coding and I suspect there's a lot of that here. free on spotify https://open.spotify.com/artist/4HM2Qh08egnINUFhOmLyUr
I had wanted to knw if there was any sort of meetup scheduled at the MAPS Psychedelics Sciences conference and someone responded that they would be here and wanted contact information. I'm new to doing anything with Astral Codex Ten so I don't know the communication channels well.
For those of you who like Video Games, I made a video game called Defender's Quest 2: Mists of Ruin, and it's got a demo that's free to play on Steam Next fest now: https://store.steampowered.com/app/252190/Defenders_Quest_2_Mists_of_Ruin/
Fun fact: probably my last professional video game!
(apologies for shilling)
Substack's "Quote this post" feature is annoying on mobile devices. I use Firefox on a relatively new Android device and the (presumably Javascript) performance is just horrific. It's slow and seems to get in the way of the system's native "copy and paste"-popup.
As a non native, when reading this blog I rely heavily on looking up phrases - which just isn't fun anymore.
Anyone else with similar experiences? Is it possible to disable this feature? (A feature I'm sure no one asked for ;-))
As real life AI continues to evolve on a path divergent from all our favorite scifi AIs, I'm wondering if anyone has any ideas or examples of what a good LLM internal dialogue might sound like, for storytelling purposes? Shameless plug for my novel's latest chapter but here's my attempt, I'd love to know what everyone thinks. I tried leaning more into transformer architecture, parallelism, multithreading, etc. but that's not very narratively conducive stuff, so I hope I struck a good balance. I'd appreciate any input or ideas/examples!
https://whogetswhatgetswhy.substack.com/p/heaven-20-chapter-3-alchemy?sd=pf
Just wanted to plug eloeverything.co by twitter user @granawkins. Such a simple and cool project!
I’d love an update on this old “MARIJUANA: MUCH MORE THAN YOU WANTED TO KNOW” post.
In particular, recent studies are showing negative cardiovascular effects from THC consumption, which the original post sort of predicted.
But, it is it due to method of consumption (e.g smoking), or THC itself, whereby even gummies would be bad?
Personally THC has been the only effective sleep aid I can consistently rely on, and I’ve assumed the downsides are low. Should I update my thinking? And how about CBD/CBN?
https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/01/05/marijuana-much-more-than-you-wanted-to-know/
I have barely been following the AI debate at all, but could someone summarise what the actual argument is that world-destroying and/or utopia-creating AGI is "just around the corner"? I swear almost everything I've seen *seems* to be either barely-coherent gushing along the lines of "but look JUST HOW COOL gpt is, how AMAZING is it that we've created something you can talk to, CLEARLY in a few years it will have Godlike powers" or an extremely hypothetical argument for how it *might* become dangerously super-intelligent, without much hard evidence that it actually *will*. Maybe I've just missed this highly persuasive argument that so many people here accept?
(And just as a side note, I'm getting kind of sick of AI-dommers presenting themselves as down-to-earth realists willing to face uncomfortable truths, when so many of the same people believe that if AI doesn't destroy us, it will magically solve all our problems and create utopia. Both Scott and EY seem to be in this category. They don't look like realists at all but like the opposite--people who think they've found the one secret key to life itself, compared to which all normal, day-to-day efforts to improve the world are irrelevant.)
Happy Father's Day and/or Juneteenth to those who celebrate!
(Sorry if I sound like a boring robot who announces every holiday regardless of how many respond.)
It looks like approval of same-sex relations has declined significantly in the US: https://news.gallup.com/poll/507230/fewer-say-sex-relations-morally-acceptable.aspx
I try not to follow Culture War that closely, but I am curious what to expect going forward. Stabilization at a lower level? Further polarization around this issue? Eventual rebound from cultural conflict moving away from LGBT issues or cohort replacement?
(Obligatory mention that I think AGI is pretty soon, though, so probably only a few more years of politics left… at least as we know it)
Anyone know of a way of reading Scott's old blogging stuff? I keep running into shit I would like to read that's locked in his Squid314 thing.
My brother and his girlfriend has taken to wearing a mask again to crowded places. He says this is because there is evidence the mysterious excess deaths that have been reported are due to sequeleae of COVID, meaning COVID is more dangerous than commonly believed.
I think this is absurd, but well, I hadn't heard that angle on the excess deaths. Did this community ever reach a consensus on what's causing those? Does it actually make sense to mask up at this point, or is it ridiculous?
Pekingnology provides each country's official readout of the latest Qin Gang - Blinken exchange:
https://www.pekingnology.com/p/chinese-us-readouts-of-qin-blinken
I'm perennially disappointed by top-level diplomatic exchanges, always hoping for some unpacking or clash over key differences, instead of polite euphemisms like "we should promote mutual respect" or "we should reduce misperceptions."
One possible recent counterexample, German FM Annalena Baerbock was far more direct with Wang Yi than I've heard anyone be, directly pushing back when she heard the talking point that human rights are just an invented Western concept.
I'd like to see more kitchen debates, though not sure the diplomatic establishment really tolerates that sort of thing.
Is there any way to improve 'bravery', for lack of a better term? I find that I become afraid far too easily- any mid-sized stressor that would raise anyone's heart rate a bit (public speaking, a verbal confrontation, etc.) makes me *very* afraid. I experience an excessive surge of adrenaline, out of proportion to the situation, which is very visible and makes it impossible to stay cool. I become emotional very fast. It's odd because I don't suffer from general anxiety (I feel fine most of the time), and when I was younger I did some extremely physically challenging activities that meet anyone's definition of toughness- more on the endurance/labor side. But for my entire life, I become excessively frightened by mild stressors.
If the answer is 'exposure therapy'- logistically how I would regularly practice say verbal disagreements with others? This seems impractical. Or, alternately, has anyone been prescribed something that reduced their brain's fear reflex? I find alcohol makes little difference
What would global collapse look like?
I believe that if we lose our current level of technology, we will go back to subsistence farming, hunting and gathering. That there is no plausible way to transition to any level of technology in between.
If this happens, 8 billion humans will die leaving a few million in remote locations with no essential dependence on technology.
I define "global collapse" as "loss of electrical supply".
Who agrees?
Who disagrees?
Note: it's fun to debate the likelihood of collapse, but that's not what this thread is about.
Peter Robinson
Some links:
https://www.futurescenarios.org/2-energy-futures/2-2-views-of-the-future/collapse/
https://jfsdigital.org/2022-2/vol-27-no-1-september-2022/theories-of-global-collapse-closing-down-or-opening-up-the-futures/
https://thebulletin.org/2022/03/global-collapse-is-in-view/
https://bylinetimes.com/2022/05/26/un-warns-of-total-societal-collapse-due-to-breaching-of-planetary-boundaries/
https://medium.com/predict/what-will-the-collapse-look-like-d2a1e53c9f54
https://canadiandimension.com/articles/view/we-are-not-the-first-civilization-to-collapse-but-we-will-probably-be-the-last
https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/key-components-civilization/
Are there any Meet Ups scheduled for the Psychedelic Science conference this week in Denver?
As a child I often encountered new words by reading them, and later mispronunced them when using them in conversation.
An internet search not only confirms that this is quite common, but gives it a name: Calliope Syndrome, with 'calliope' deliberately mispronounced 'cally-ope'.
For example, pronouncing epitome as epp-ih-tome is quite common.
One of mine was pronouncing inevitable as inny-vittable.
My dad told as a child he realized the villain in a children's book was very bad because he had misled (mizzled) someone.
Some of mine were variations on this, with a young me misreading the word. Thus, foliage became foilage, and debris became derbis.
I also thought that there was an artillery weapon called a mortimetre. I think I had combined mortar and millimetre.
A childhood friend insisted that a certain aircraft manufacturer was called Boing, becauses its aircraft bounced upon landing.
So, are any other ACXers good Calliopers?
Wrote a new post on how Yakult succeeded outside of Japan when other products failed
https://hiddenjapan.substack.com/p/the-yakult-story
So the standard critique of presidential systems is that, by allowing voters to pick the executive directly, it's prone to cults of personality and demagoguery. This was the story with Latin America traditionally, and the US more recently. By contrast (in theory), parliamentary systems removed that decision from the voters. But in practice:
The head of the largest party is usually (yes, not always) the new PM
Voters know who the party heads are going in to the election. So they are effectively voting for their country's executive in a similar manner
I.e. voters knew if they voted Tory in the UK, they'd get Johnson. I've even heard critiques that voters frequently don't care who their local/constituency rep is, and aren't evaluating him or her on their service or policies- but are just voting (in this example) for a Tory district rep because they want Johnson to be PM. What do people think of these critiques of parliamentary systems? Are they really not that different from a presidential one?
Edit: To be clear, I strongly prefer parliamentary systems- I'm just stress-testing the arguments for them
Tunneling between adjacent canals? Or low barrier.
Necker cube and Rubin vase.
MDMA Therapy: https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20230614-how-a-dose-of-mdma-transformed-a-white-supremacist?ref=thebrowser.com
After chatting with ChatGPT about magic systems for a while I asked about the group Astral Codex Ten and received the response below. When shall we host an ACX meetup in the astral realm?
> "Astral Codex Ten" is a tome said to contain profound insights and instructions for astral projection, a practice where one's consciousness separates from the physical body and explores the astral plane. The book is rumored to possess detailed techniques, ancient rituals, and intricate diagrams that facilitate safe and transformative astral journeys. It is regarded as a comprehensive guide to unlocking the mysteries of the astral realms and expanding one's consciousness beyond the limitations of the physical world.
> The group known as Astral Codex Ten is a closely-knit community of individuals who have delved deep into the teachings of the book. They form a network of dedicated practitioners and seekers, each with a shared interest in astral projection, spiritual growth, and the exploration of metaphysical realms. The group operates in secrecy to protect the sacred knowledge and to ensure the safety and responsible use of astral practices.
> Membership in Astral Codex Ten is exclusive and based on a combination of invitation and personal attainment. Prospective members often go through a vetting process, where their dedication, knowledge, and ethical understanding are evaluated. The group's aim is to foster a supportive and knowledgeable community that can share experiences, offer guidance, and advance their collective understanding of the astral realms.
> The members of Astral Codex Ten engage in various activities, including regular group meditations, collaborative research, and the sharing of personal astral experiences. They also organize workshops, retreats, and lectures to expand their knowledge and promote the exploration of consciousness.
Have a grim video about the non-existent chance of peace in the middle east.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JN4mnVLP0rU&ab_channel=RealLifeLore
One aspect is the stickiness of national borders. There are practical and emotional reasons for people to not want national borders moved, while at the same time there are high costs to national borders.
Any ideas about what might be able to take the edge off of nationhood?
Meanwhile, at least national borders guarantee that everyone doesn't make the same mistakes simultaneously.
Sorry, I planned poorly and will be ~45 min late to Atlanta meet up. If you're there and see this comment, please tell the organizers.
I'm curious how those comments on Njal's Saga were the top comments. Has this school of criticism fallen out of favor to such an extent that the observation about Christian influence seems novel? I feel quite certain that when I first heard of Beowulf as a child the very next sentence was to the effect of "it was written down by Christians". Was I raised in some kind of anti-Christian-influence-on-literature bubble?
Hi! I'm helping draft a script about Charter Cities for the youtube channel "RationalAnimations" (https://www.youtube.com/c/rationalanimations). Some of our previous videos have adapted essays by Eliezer Yudkowsky and described some Robin Hanson derived concepts like prediction markets and the "grabby aliens" hypothesis.
Naturally, we want to make sure we're presenting the idea of charter cities in an accurate, compelling, and understandable way before we the script gets adapted into video form and potentially seen by ~100K people. So, I'd love it if anyone here at ACX would like to provide feedback on the script. It's about a ten-minute read; you can use the google docs "comment" feature to highlight a section and add your thoughts: https://docs.google.com/document/d/14wEa6SFiWo9uw30UB52DHIHXhHrIprnT3EzAbU-2teA/edit?usp=sharing
I spend most of the script talking about the motivation for charter cities as potential engines of economic growth in developing countries (inspired by the success of places like Singapore), and explaining why a new city with the ability to set its own business regulations might help encourage growth. I use Itana in Nigeria as my main example, mostly drawing from the linked FT article when describing the various reforms they'd like to implement. (I also talk about Prospera Honduras, as described in ACX's "Prospectus On Prospera": https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/prospectus-on-prospera) After addressing some potential objections, in the conclusion I describe charter cities as having the following three main benefits beyond the direct economic growth of the city itself:
1. the idea that seeing legal reforms work well on a small scale could inspire larger national changes.
2. the idea that charter cities could spur “governance competition” resulting in better, more effective governments generally, by giving people more options of where to live.
3. the idea that experimenting with totally new types of law could bring huge benefits, by exploring new institutions (like prediction markets or new land-use laws or etc) that might solve problems that even advanced countries struggle with.
We'd love to see any feedback that you have on the script!
If you've heard of Zuzalu, Vitalik Buterin's pop-up city in Montenegro, here's an offshoot of a group that met there:
July 20-23, 2023: African Regenerative Cities & Futures @ FreeFlow Eden Zanzibar: https://lu.ma/zanzibar_regen
This is an event to bring together entrepreneurs, artists and governance innovators with focus on African cities & technology
What is the best way to learn about ways of understanding why adhd (or add if you rather) happens, what’s the causes, etc? I’m particularly curious about well-defined meta analysis with reasonably accurate definitions
I just listened to RFK Junior on Joe Rogan. Does anyone know of a serious debunking of him? Sorry, I am too lazy to even do a web search. Just curious if anyone knows one offhand.
If you can vote in Ontario, Canada and care about Land Value Tax:
One of the candidates for the Liberal Party of Ontario leadership race, Nate Erskine-Smith, is proposing a Land Value Tax (he calls it a Split-Rate Land Tax) as part of [his housing platform](https://www.meetnate.ca/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/NES_-An-Ambitious-Plan-to-Build-Housing-and-Deliver-Generational-Fairness.pdf). If y'all can vote in Ontario, its free to register as a member of the Liberal Party of Ontario, so you can vote in their leadership election. The membership expires after one year.
To be clear, I have no opinion on any other candidates or their platforms, I just thought it would be useful info since people who read ACX have a tendency to be excited about Land Value Tax and this would be a low effort, high-ish leverage opportunity to advance that cause.
For those who object to polygenic screening (using polygenic scores to select embryos for physical and mental wellness during IVF):
If you had 6 embryos you were considering to implant, would it be more ethical to roll a die to select the embryo to implant?
If you were given a polygenic health index and the die landed on the one with the highest health index, would it be ethical to implant that embryo?
What other criteria would be more ethical to use than polygenic scores and why?