Fuckers betraying the basic principles of a science education....
On a bulletin board in a grad-student lounge, I once saw a saying thumbtacked up: "One electron is physics. Two electrons is perturbation theory. Three or more electrons, that's chemistry."
Some thoughts of what might be helpful in that vein:
-
What is a Turing machine? (Described in enough detail that one could, you know, prove theorems.)
-
What is the halting problem?
-
Why is Kolmogorov complexity/algorithmic information content uncomputable?
-
Pursuant to the above, what's up with Solomonoff induction?
-
Why is the lambda calculus not magically super-Turing?
Well, Timeless Decision Theory was, like the rest of their ideological package, an excuse to keep on believing what they wanted to believe. So how does one even tell if they stopped "taking it seriously"?
"Diamondoid bacteria" is just a way to say "nanobots" while edging
Part 6 quotes a Motte'r as saying,
This distrust of experts dates back at least to Eliezer Yudkowsky and LessWrong. Eliezer pointed out, rather convincingly, that mainstream philosophy is a total mess, and that taking a philosophy course is not a great way to improve your thinking. Most likely you’ll waste your time learning about Pythagoras or something.
The thudding lack of intellectual curiosity is giving me a headache. Why study Pythagoras? Hmm, how about learning how to talk about a semi-legendary person of whom we have no direct written evidence, only stories written centuries after the fact?
And thus Poker Face joins Sandman in the "no longer interested in Season 2" pile, but for different reasons.
The plot of Uncanny Valley centers on “a teenage girl who becomes unmoored by a hugely popular AR video game in a parallel present.”
So, Tron again, then. But with goggles this time.
"Kicked out of a ... group chat" is a peculiar definition of "offline consequences".
One thing I've been missing is takedowns of Rationalist ideology about theoretical computer science. The physics, I can do, along with assorted other topics.
(thinks)
(thinks)
I get it!
In commenting, we did not disclose that an AI was used to write comments, as this would have rendered the study unfeasible.
If you can't do your study ethically, don't do your study at all.
The under-acknowledged Rule Zero for all this is that the Sequences were always cult shit. They were not intended to explain Solomonoff induction in the way that a textbook would, so that the reader might learn to reason about the concept. Instead, the ploy was to rig the game: Present the desired conclusion as the "simplest", pretend that "simplicity" is quantifiable, assert that scientists are insufficiently Rational(TM) because they reject the quantifiably "simplest" answer... School bad, blog posts good, tithe to MIRI.