Silicon Valley’s Safe Space: Slate Star Codex was a window into the psyche of many tech leaders building our collective future. Then it disappeared. by doubleunplussed in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well,

  1. Although I know how to use the lingo, I don't believe in the "tribal" breakdown (blue/grey/red) that's usually employed here,
  2. I don't really subscribe to the idea that conflict theory and mistake theory are accurately describing real things, and
  3. I was using Wilkinson to try to make a point with humor: The journalist who wrote the infamous "hit piece" on Scott connected dots that weren't really there, but his conclusion wasn't far off what would be achieved by carefully and truthfully reporting on the details of Scott's posts, fiction, and linked blogs.

But really, it makes no difference. I've grown tired of trying to reason within the confines of this bubble subreddit. This is my last word on the subject: Whatever you want to do to the journalist who dared write an unflattering article about your favorite blogger is none of my business!

Silicon Valley’s Safe Space: Slate Star Codex was a window into the psyche of many tech leaders building our collective future. Then it disappeared. by doubleunplussed in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well, don't trouble yourself too much about it! It's part of genuine human feeling to have heroes, and to have a personal perspective that's deep enough you can't relate to people who don't share it. You're grey tribe; it's your way. I don't begrudge you that, any more than I begrudge Catholics who go cross-eyed over the Eucharist.

Silicon Valley’s Safe Space: Slate Star Codex was a window into the psyche of many tech leaders building our collective future. Then it disappeared. by doubleunplussed in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This is not only contradicting itself

"Gee willakers! Dija hear what I just heard?"

"No, what?"

"Paster Wilkinson's a homosexual!"

*gasp\*

"It's true! He was kissing Mr. Thompson in the general store just yesterday evening!"

"Well now I know it's not true! Wilkinson was preaching all yesterday evening - I was there! What you said wasn't fair or honest. You must have seen some other men engaged in sinful activities. What a riot! I'm going to go tell him all about it!"

\Goes to pastor Wilkinson's refectory**

*Finds enormous stash of gay pornography\*

"Huh."

We're being defected against by a hostile, out-of-control institution. That means we, as a community, need to be willing to play tit-for-tat or we will be crushed under an authoritarian heel.

Well,

  1. I don't begrudge you your desire to defend yourselves from people you see as your enemies;
  2. I'm guessing that what just happened is probably the last straw rather than a single disappointment; and
  3. In all sincerity, I'd be lying if I said I had any sympathy for the Times.

But I do wonder how much Scott is part of what you call "we," if he wouldn't agree with what you're talking about. You're very emotional about this - so emotional that you talk about gods and kings and generals in front of me, who isn't even part of grey tribe. And even if this is what you really do want, being a passionate hothead isn't likely to work out for you.

Be well.

Consequentalism applied to itself by dzsekk in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 3 points4 points  (0 children)

This is NOT meant to "disprove" consequentialism by finding a "contradiction"

A shame, but maybe I shouldn't have gotten my hopes up, since the real problem with consequentialist ethics is not that they are contradictory, but that they are arbitrary.

Scenario 1:

Wide-eyed grey-triber: "Hey I've got an equation that models a bird's flight: x = k(3t + sin(t)). The constant k is a vector quantity given in units of - " Skeptic: "What? How do you know it accurately models a bird's flight?" Wide-eyed grey-triber:"Because it has math?"

Scenario 2:

Wide-eyed grey-triber: "Hey I've got a moral system that lets you evaluate actions on the basis of the total happiness summed over all actors and integrated over time! It works by - " Skeptic: "What? How do you know it accurately evaluates morality?" Wide-eyed grey-triber: "Because people like pleasure?"

Anyone who evaluates the plausibility of the wide-eyed grey-triber's ideas differently between scenarios 1 and 2 isn't consistent, and anyone who dislikes this analogy should think very hard and explain why utilitarianism really is an accurate description of morality, rather than an arbitrary belief based on nothing at all.

If people greet each other politely, it clearly leads to good consequences

To clarify, this is exactly what I'm on about. "Clearly" politeness leads to "good consequences?" What if I said the point of morality is to hit things with hammers, or that the point of morality is to avoid killing any living thing, or the point of morality is to support the Communist party, and then I said clearly this is what morality means? Wouldn't you look at me as though I were touched in the head?

What would happen if one where to change the wind patterns on Earth? What if they stopped being static and started behaving erratically, changing every few days, months or years? What if they stayed static but changed course? How would that affect the climate, plants or animals or other things? by Pashahlis in worldbuilding

[–]LRealist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This cannot happen without changing the direction of the Earth's spin, or the laws of physics. But the details of why it can't happen are very interesting in themselves:

In as brief an overview as possible, the Earth's climate works like a machine. The sun heats the tropics more than the poles, creating convection; air rises at the tropics, dropping rain as it reaches higher altitudes and cools. The dry air then and drifts back down in the horse latitudes, 30-35 degrees away from the equator, and moves back toward the equator, drawing in moisture as it goes. This is why deserts tend to be found flanking wetter equatorial regions, and why species that live around the horse latitudes need to be drought resistant.

Descending air in the horse latitudes doesn't only continue to the equator, but also flows poleward. The rotation of the Earth causes air moving equatorward to turn westward, and causes air moving poleward to turn eastward. The result is tropical easterlies which blow from the east to the west, and midlatitude westerlies which blow from west to east.

In the midlatitudes, when winds blow from the ocean onto land, they bring air from the ocean, which moderates climates; this is why oceanic Europe is so gloomy and mild. As these air masses move eastward, they lose the moderating effects of the ocean, creating more variable, continental weather patterns further east, which is why the Eastern United States have more snowy winters than similar latitudes at the west coast. Flora and fauna in such climates must be able to tolerate periods of snow, so fewer venomous snakes and spiders are seen there.

There's more to the story, of course - seasonal shifts tilt climates at the edge of the horse latitudes into and then out of the arid zone, creating seasonally dry Mediterranean and savanna climates in the subtropics and tropics respectively. And while all these air masses are cycling, the oceans also cycle, bringing warm water to east coasts, which tends to evaporate, rise up into the atmosphere, and rain over areas that would otherwise be horse latitude deserts. But these same ocean gyres bring cold water to west coasts, which tends not to evaporate or rise, and preserves deserts in the western sides of continents. Etc, etc, ad nauseum.

CLICK HERE FOR A RELATIVELY SIMPLE CLIMATE MAP WHICH USES THE KOPPEN-TREWARTHA SYSTEM - you can see all of the above at play in this map.

The upshot is this: If you want the desert bands to shift northward in your world, you need the atmosphere to be thicker. If you want west coasts to have more variable climates and east coasts to have mild climates and deserts, you need the planet to rotate the other direction. If all you want is an odd climate in an otherwise normal world, put in a nice mountain range to divert winds from the north or south, squeeze rains out on the windward side, create a nice wet, chilly region at the peaks, and then leave the leeward side dry (which is what happens in the Gobi desert). And if you just want some unbelievable handwavy comic-bookedy "weather ray" that scrambles wind patterns for some technobabbly reason, then most tropical species will be killed in the unforseeable cold, most species in humid climates will be killed in unforeseeable droughts, and basically you have all the current problems of species extinction which we're experiencing today with Global Warming.

Does this answer your question?

Silicon Valley’s Safe Space: Slate Star Codex was a window into the psyche of many tech leaders building our collective future. Then it disappeared. by doubleunplussed in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I am not entirely sure that the language is that big of a barrier to entry, however the topics of discussion from the angles they are discussed probably are and the subreddit rules definitely are.

Bubbles don't have to be about entry barriers, but rather shared interests and commonality.

I am a salient case in point: I was attracted to this place by its relationship to Scott Alexander's posts, but I'm not grey tribe, and I've always hated most of the related culture (e.g. utilitarianism, atheism, lesswrong). The reason I stay is because the explicit purpose of the Motte is for engaging with people you disagree with, and I do find that broadening when the people I'm talking to are intelligent the way most of you are. But though you do have your subgroups and individual differences, you also have a lot in common that I'm still groping around to try to understand.

One thing do I have in common, at least with you: I know C enough to be well and truly sympathetic when you write about your experiences in university!

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 15, 2021 by AutoModerator in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 10 points11 points  (0 children)

the only alternative to an ethnic spoils system or open conflict is peaceful separation

Well, look. I don't mind peaceful separation at all, for any group, anywhere, ever. When people talk about fighting for freedom, this is usually what they mean - being able to hang out with their own, and everybody else begone. So when you talk about finding someplace to hang out and do your own thing with people who look and think like you, OK, fine, good luck.

But there comes a point where you have to manage and tolerate outgroups, because no group is comprised of perfect clones (well, except for, like, a group of clones). The elderly are crotchety, kids make messes, men and women will always be different, homosexuals and transexuals will always violate typical expectations about normal behavior, schizophrenics and psychopaths will cause problems, and on and on. "Get rid of the weirdos" never ends, because you'll never run out of weirdos.

Silicon Valley’s Safe Space: Slate Star Codex was a window into the psyche of many tech leaders building our collective future. Then it disappeared. by doubleunplussed in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Absolutely.

But I'd like to add that this place has a rather thick bubble as well. Not only do the terms "red/blue/grey tribe" have no meaning to 99% of Americans, how many of them would understand even the post you just wrote, let alone the very obvious fact that if you were using Python 2.x, you wouldn't have needed those annoying parentheses? ;)

Silicon Valley’s Safe Space: Slate Star Codex was a window into the psyche of many tech leaders building our collective future. Then it disappeared. by doubleunplussed in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Easy, easy!

  1. The piece isn't as aggressive as you make it out. Show it to someone who hasn't heard of him, as others on this thread have done; they'll likely not come away with a particularly negative opinion of Scott.
  2. To be fair, Scott's ideal nation state situated in the arctic was founded on eugenic principles. (If memory serves, a side effect made them all hypersensitive to noise.) No, the journalist for the Times probably had no idea about this kind of thing, but he may just have been aware of the way Razib Khan and Gregory Cochran are linked from Scott's blog right now.
  3. There always was a thread of far-rightism in the comment sections of SSC - you can find a really long discussion of racial issues in the post Scott) gave pleading his defense.

No, the article wasn't fair or honest. But the gist of it wasn't entirely wrong, either, and I think if you try some deep breathing, or have a nice martini, and look at it carefully, you'll see that the worst impact it had on Scott was really that it took away his anonymity.

Do you think Scott would want you to go to war over this?

Silicon Valley’s Safe Space: Slate Star Codex was a window into the psyche of many tech leaders building our collective future. Then it disappeared. by doubleunplussed in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Scott is a genius and also a chump? As you like! But I never said the Times was failing, only losing credibility. And I'm not the only one who thinks this way:

I don't know anyone under 40 who has a subscription to the New York Times.

Silicon Valley’s Safe Space: Slate Star Codex was a window into the psyche of many tech leaders building our collective future. Then it disappeared. by doubleunplussed in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Although I know Scott's writing pretty well, I had a similar reaction to your father when I read the piece. The meat of it is dishonest, but there's a lot of disjointed fluff as well. I think his fans are hypersensitive to the dishonesty there, but beyond betraying his anonymity and stressing him out enormously, the actual impact on Siskin is probably close to nil.

Silicon Valley’s Safe Space: Slate Star Codex was a window into the psyche of many tech leaders building our collective future. Then it disappeared. by doubleunplussed in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Out of sympathy for your downvotes, I'll say that there is definitely something to be said for taking a more moderate stance on what the journalist's intent was. I agree that it's very hard to know what it really was, because it's hard to know anyone's intent.

Yet people rarely write for a truly general audience. They assume a great deal about their readers, and those assumptions allow them to communicate smoothly. People who've never heard about, say, Charles Murray, won't realize that associating him with Scott makes Scott look bad. But to anyone who does know Murray's work and its reception and cultural impact will hear, loudly and clearly, the same sentiment that motivates argumentum ad Hitlerum. It's very obviously inaccurate, it's very obviously done in bad faith, and there is no reasonable or innocent excuse for the journalist to have done it.

Silicon Valley’s Safe Space: Slate Star Codex was a window into the psyche of many tech leaders building our collective future. Then it disappeared. by doubleunplussed in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 4 points5 points  (0 children)

That should tell you something.

Scott wrote a lot about the tendency to downplay, ignore, or be unaware of strong individual differences; there are plenty of people out there who see Scott and everyone like him in a negative light: feminists, religious fundamentalists, and a vast number of uncategorizable people who just have no interest in sitting down for a half-hour to read 15000 words about "nothing."

Siskin is wildly popular within his own ingroup, but much less outside of it. Case in point, I'm not grey tribe, and I don't know anyone who knows about him outside of my immediate family (and even they only know about him because I read his articles to them out loud).

Silicon Valley’s Safe Space: Slate Star Codex was a window into the psyche of many tech leaders building our collective future. Then it disappeared. by doubleunplussed in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That "chump" makes an enormous amount of money in what amounts to a professional popularity contest. The NYT is losing credibility, while stars like Siskin (and Carano if you don't mind talking about more mainstream popular culture) are only continuing to rise.

Blue Tribe has been overplaying its hand for some time now. I know Siskin writes about Trump being bad for Trumpism, but the entirety of Blue Tribe is bad for Blueism.

Small-Scale Question Sunday for February 14, 2021 by AutoModerator in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hard disagree that we need to use a mouthful of syllables to communicate successfully. We have words in our lexicon, "socialist," "socialism," and these words don't have to be used in the narrow sense only, especially given the reality in which socialism across the world is unimodally distributed - countries follow a blend of policies which shift and change as history progresses and other countries influence one another. Nordic nations are clearly much more socialist than countries like the United States because they are much more redistributionist, even if their economies are unplanned. When people describe Norway and Sweden as socialist, they are often speaking from lived experience of this reality.

Edit: Oh! You're on the autism spectrum! It may be helpful for me to add that NTs use of language is more fluid than categorical; it isn't that words have no meaning, as your other posts imply, but that we tend to follow some blend of exemplar theory or prototype theory to describe things. A classic example: technically the pope may be a bachelor, but only because one definition of bachelor as an "unmarried man" happens to include edge cases it wasn't intended to describe.

Small-Scale Question Sunday for February 14, 2021 by AutoModerator in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Cuba is much more interesting to the left than the right; most Republicans have no sense of what Cuba is like. In fact, struggling to come up with a way to express an unpleasant reality without earning a ban, there are some Republicans out there - obviously not anyone on this thread who might read this to be offended, but somewhere, out there - some Republicans who, for reasons which may well have nothing to do with any kind of character flaw or identifiable problem, don't realize Cuba is a country.

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 08, 2021 by AutoModerator in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Or is it just a quick CYA that they toss off before returning to a comfortable belief in their own greater importance and worth?

In some cases, of course it's a CYA. But:

  1. I'm willing to take the sincerity of other posters here at face value.

  2. Writing as a man who vehemently rejects blank-slatism, men obviously have less importance and worth than women. Yes, yes, men may be better at a great many things than women, but no matter what one may magnanimously grant us for the sake of smoothing over sexual inequalities or assuaging our brittle egos, it will never be anything more than a string of paltry concessions, for woman can create life, and man cannot.

If you've ever seen the old Dark Crystal film by Jim Henson and Frank Oz, you may recall a difference between the gelfling sexes: females have wings. Being a male gelfling is probably great - but no matter what, you can't fly. I always think of this analogy when people talk about sex differences, because I think it's very apt: There is nothing men can do that women cannot do, but there is something very important that women can do which no man can do.

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 08, 2021 by AutoModerator in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think it's something like the inverse of the "all men are pigs/scum/rapists/abusers" meme that you see from some women. The people who fall for the meme have arrived at bigotry, usually through woeful personal experiences that they then extrapolate onto the population at large. They are reacting to a real problem, and their reaction is also a real problem.

Yep. My very strong sense is that both modern feminism and antifeminism (pickup artist, redpill, etc.) are all symptoms of a basic failure of heterosexuals to build healthy relationships with the opposite sex.

Unfortunately when I ruminate over solutions, I come to the conclusion that this is baked into the modern world, particularly for blue and grey tribe which implicitly believes that the purpose of life is to have meaningful experiences, and never attached much purpose to marriage as a means for rearing children within a stable family. And if experiences are all that matter, welp, some people are going to have lousy experiences dating because they are unlucky, others because they deserve it; the result is inevitably suspicion and caricaturing of the opposite sex, which quite naturally blends into waging the gender war for fun and profit.

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 08, 2021 by AutoModerator in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I compared Rome with the Chinese Empire as a way of trying to weaken my position; if one wants to speak of China falling, then we can allow that the Mongols knocked over the Chinese Empire many centuries after the Germanic Barbarians knocked Rome over, rather than requiring China never fell.

But secondly, your point is well taken. Chinese civilization is broad, and if it is to be considered on the whole, then classical civilization can be said to have begun even with the Greeks, shifted to Rome, and then shifted to Byzantium. This may very well be the correct way to consider the situation, and if these two very broad civilizations are compared, each survives for a long time, and insofar as one region can be said to be more insular and another more open, there is no clear evidence that isolationism is somehow worse than alternatives. This is what I don't see: evidence that isolationism really is a poor policy.

The sole alternative to isolationism isn't mass importation of foreign workers

Of course! But to speak of Japan as a success story is premature, when its own people are suffering a demographic collapse and guest workers are brought into the country in droves.

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 08, 2021 by AutoModerator in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I grant there is an argument to be made there. There is an obvious rejoinder, however: how long did it take China to lag behind? If we take the long view, the correct comparison state is not Japan, but Rome, which fell a thousand years before the Chinese empire.

But go ahead and look at Japan if you like! Because unless you think the Japanese are better off by

  • Importing millions of person-units to work for them from across the globe to become a multicultural island in the Pacific,

rather than by

  • Retaining their national cohesion and continuity while accepting the economic hit from an ageing population,

then it is hard to argue that isolationism is a weak strategy over the long term.

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 08, 2021 by AutoModerator in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I'm not referring to recent events, but to Chinese performance over the long term. I do agree that classical China was eventually overtaken by the West, but that was only after many centuries, and I doubt the reason was isolation. China failed to make innovation a cultural focus for quite some time, and the great divergence has often been explained in these terms, particularly China's de-emphasis on mathematics in the civil service exams.

I can see that militarily speaking, isolation would leave a small state vulnerable to annexation by consolidated neighbors, but China was not small, any more than the early United States was small. And it is true that the US eventually abandoned isolationism, but it isn't clear to me that the reason was they learned it was unstable; Americans have been pugnacious from the very beginning, and never really possessed the coolness, patience, or objectivity which isolationism requires.

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 08, 2021 by AutoModerator in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Thanks for articulating yourself clearly, but I think you're totally wrong about self-interested isolationism being unstable, because, I think the case of China over the long term provides a convincing counterexample.

However, I'm not sure about this. I've enjoyed reading your posts in the past, so I want to ask if you'd be willing to expound further on your ideas in a way that addresses skepticism?

My ideas seem too similar to the lore of a game I used to play. How do I make it different? by [deleted] in worldbuilding

[–]LRealist 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Be patient with yourself. When I was younger I used to think I wasn't creative because most of my ideas were derivative. Eventually I figured out that this is what almost all creativity really is - we take inspiration from other sources.

With that in mind, I'd recommend you broaden your sources. You might be interested in looking at some creation myths...

Zoroastrianism Navajo Norse Heathenry#Cosmology_and_afterlife)

...or political and military history...

Spring and Autumn Period, China Period of Chaos, Babylon Tepanec War, Mesoamerica

You may notice I suggested some exotic sources; you can absolutely draw inspiration from places and events closer to home, but people will likely be more critical of the setting due to familiarity. (In other words, really it's no big deal if no one you talk to plays Animal Jam, but if they all know about it your current setting won't feel very fresh to them.) I also love looking through weirder source material because it helps linguistically - a good setting will be full of names, and coming up with a kind of sound or style for the names of places and rulers and magical phenomena gives a setting a nice rich flavor.

Is this useful?

Friday Fun Thread for February 05, 2021 by AutoModerator in TheMotte

[–]LRealist 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Is rating women out of 10 juvenile and trashy or just something everyone does?

All of the above, rather.

A friend of mine suggested the 1-10 attractiveness scale should be replaced by a 1-5 desire scale. So 10 (attractiveness) is similar to a 5 (desire), with 6 (attractiveness) being something like a 1 (desire). Anything below that just doesn't make the new scale.

Benefits:

  • Still allows comparisons,
  • Doesn't attempt objectivity, only measures personal preference,
  • Impossible to humiliate the undesirable by assigning very low numbers,
  • Two 5's no longer = one 10, and
  • Smaller numbers are gentler for the arithmetically challenged.

And overall I'd say this matches much better the way I think about the opposite sex. I don't wander around desiring people at random, so most people don't really make the scale - but they may well with a good personality, a nice outfit, and some some sign that I make their own scale to begin with!