Everyone has big gaps in their knowledge in part because most of us
are afraid to ask questions that could make us look stupid. Placing
curiosity above pride is a key rationalist trait.
Like, I respect this argument. Everyone has a few weird holes in their knowledge. No one can be completely prepared all the time. It's embarrassing, but for most people it doesn't seem to happen that often. When it does, though, the best thing for everyone is for you to swallow your pride and ask the stupid question. We ought not judge others too harshly for doing what we hope we would do in their shoes.
But have enough self respect not to need to ask the exact same stupid question _twice_.
If you can live-Tweet *Fox & Friends* every day, you can use Google. That is, unless your whole brand is being an ~~ignorant, oblivious boor~~ Rational Skeptical 5D Chessmaster.
Both this top level comment and the one you posted yesterday are
fairly low-effort “boo out-group”. Here, I can’t even tell if you are
making your statement in good faith. Let’s not make this a reoccurring
pattern.
Why is it so hard to use normal words like “don’t do that again”?
The cult would have never taken off if they couldn't repackage basic ideas, or just communication in general, into overly complicated jargon. Now go cash your utilons in for some warm fuzzies, do 5 de-biasing sessions, update, and then telecommunicate with my substrate-independent mind-self at 0900 hours tomorrow. Beep boop!
None -- my undergrad had a transhumanist prof so that's where I first ran into the stuff. I got into it a little bit as I was in a psych department with a computationalist bent, into philosophy of mind stuff, etc. But that also pulled me out of it before I could get in too deep because I realized how much of it was just repackaged Kahneman and Tversky and how they never really dealt with objections to strong AI without handwaving. Basically, both of us got redpilled by Hofstadter but I must have had a better reading of GEB because he's always complaining about his tech/engineering fanbase and his reply to his transhumanist fanboys is essentially "Fucking nerds!"
Charitably (to the mods), because then there would have been a funny half-obtuse-half-malicious slap fight about precisely what "that" means, why some large fraction of the bad behavior in question shouldn't technically qualify, and how vague and open ended moderation guidelines are just like dystopian thought policing.
I think he just wanted to keep his ban hammer holstered until he actually needs to use it. "Don't do that again" would sound a bit harsh, here. And "make this a recurring pattern" is a bit more specific than "do that again."
eh symptomatic of our generation, the easy button. Aspire to be a rationalist (whatever the fuck that is), and you can skip all the hard work of introspection, self development and critical analysis that makes someone poignant, level headed and, if we can use the Old Tongue, wise.
No, just take our buzzwords and sit in the echo chamber feeding off our insecurities, with prayers to Bayesian Reasoning and these guys who sound like they know what they're talking about.
Look who’s being ideological now.
Why is it so hard to use normal words like “don’t do that again”?
Scott Adams fanboy detected. The Rational Community is totally open to blatant ideological hustlers as long as they’re pretentious and right-wing.
god lmao