r/SneerClub archives
newest
bestest
longest
Someone needs to give this nerd a swirlie (https://twitter.com/ESYudkowsky/status/1267879888402300928)
39

I’m going genetically engineer a version of covid-19 which kills people who are pedantic.

of course, technically that would be called covid-20 then and not be a version of covid-1COUGH OW NO

E: to be fair to Yud, compared to ssc, hanson, gwern, etc at least he seems to be somewhat supportive of the protests, the others seem to be either very silent about it, or pro cop. E2 i only did a quick look btw, so do check for yourself.

E2: Scott aaronson also seems to be on the side of the protests at least. So I’m happy about that. (yes my standards are low, but I dont care, I like it that way).

>gwent You take that back! [Gwent is a quite enjoyable card game](http://gwent-cards.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/witcher-3-gwent-dialogue-care-for-a-round-of-gwent-e1436642154871.jpg) and does not belong on a list with the others in your post. Gwern, on the other hand, is a different story.
Ahhh name blindness strikes again, im sorry. Fixed. (It is an annoying condition, as I forgot Scott Aaronsons name also today, after somebody here asked about it, took me forever to find the name again).
pedandemic
Gwern doesn’t support the protests? That’s surprising, tbh
One of the silence people. Which doesnt suprise me, taking a stance would take a bite out the patreon donations.

Yudkowsky does appear to support the protests though in the comments, and he pre-empts the “well ACTUALLY black people aren’t the victims of police brutality disproportionately” line of argument that some self-proclaimed rationalists will pull out in response. Which is nice to see!

[deleted]
I mean the strikes and shit we see here are morphing into a general anti system and anti capitalist thing.

He states his opinions like they are critically important.

You see being humble is actually anti rationalist, as some forms of being humble are not actually humble but being modest, and being modest ... euh sorry I don't know why they think this is bad, so I'm going to make stuff up ... being modest makes you less effective and it delays the coming of the godai. E: looked it up, they just think all modesty is false modesty done to avoid accusations of arrogance...
ah., all modesty is virtue signalling
Also, why would you listen to someone that acknowledges they themselves could be wrong.
being a Bayesian means all your priors are 100% certain, apparently
Your posteriors are because you've integrated out your uncertainty
it's an irregular noun *He* is toxoplasmotic SJW filth *You* have cognitive biases *I* have correct Bayesian priors
He suffers from one of the most common online issues whereby he thinks by having an opinion it is automatically correct.

A cop in riot gear might point a gun at a baker for messing up the nutritional facts on some cookies. But that’s because cops suck, not because local cops enforce FDA regulations. Learn 2 federalism u clown

I…

The police don’t generally enforce FDA regulations. What?

That’s mostly done through the courts and similar bodies and things like fines thereby imposed.

Yud come the fuck on man do some basic research for once in your life.

Yes, FDA regulations are enforced by... [the FDA](https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/resources-you/types-fda-enforcement-actions). I bet their inspectors don't even carry guns, the pansies.
\*ATF sneaking up behind you Waco style*
I mean if you're violating FDA regs hard enough you might also tangle with the DEA, and those guys don't fuck around. [They're even helping crack down on protesters rn](https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jasonleopold/george-floyd-police-brutality-protests-government)
Oh isn’t this all such fun? The answer is no, but it’s nice to pretend
At the end though police with guns enforce all of that I think is what Yud is getting at. I do question how effective abolishing the FDA would be as opposed to just radically reforming it
Yeah but that isn’t true though is it? It’s a libertarian canard that if you hypothesise down and down the chain of consequences you end up with the police with their guns Here in reality we don’t need to hypothesise like that, and instead discover that society is a network of people that, unfortunately, often *but not always* results in the state having a monopoly on violence Look, I believe in the ultimate abolition of most if not all of the institutions which characterise modern Western “liberal democracy”, police included, so those are my cards on the table And still I see no way in which more than a handful of those institutions are in any way ultimately maintained by the hypothetical and eventual threat of punitive force
I guess we just remove the police force and arm the citizens instead and do all sorts of non state ways to do justice, or something huh.
I guess we just remove the police force and arm the citizens instead and do all sorts of non state ways to do justice, or something huh.
You don’t even need to go that far (although it might be nice), courts and so on exist *independent of the police*

If this was 1820, Yud/Pinker would be the guys at the abolitionist meeting going “Ohohoho, you want to abolish slavery? Ohohoho! Well! Who will pick the cotton? Have you considered that the majority of American exports are cash crops? Ohoho! Hohoho! The damage to the economy will be irreparable! I’m all for abolishing slavery, but have you thought about that! Hohoho!”

> Also to be clear about a thing: In terms of my general politics, I support the request of any faction, group, or just plain people whose request is only "Please stop killing us." > Also to be clear, if there's a reply "But we aren't actually killing most of you", I support their further request "Please kill us even less often" or "Please kill us so infrequently that we no longer feel scared." If this requires extremely infrequent killing, so be it!
The rare "libertarian" who is actually a libertarian, at least on this issue.
“I support anyone whose general plea is ‘please give us freedom,’ but have these enslaved people thought about who would build and maintain Southern infrastructure? When they say ‘abolish slavery,’ do they mean ‘stop every building crew south of the Mason-Dixon who happens to have an enslaved person working on site?’ I support human freedom but we need to be clear on what these abolitionists mean!”
There is no agreed-upon meaning of the word "abolitionism", and nowadays you should not trust anyone who uses the *word itself*; they are not trying to help you think clearly. Knowledgeable helpful people will talk about "positive good of being a slave" or use other words that mean things.
I mean there were varying forms of abolitionism, ranging from "contain that shit to a certain area and don't let them dominate our government" to Join Brown style "fuck it free the slaves and kill the masters"

Well yes, we need a Marxist police force that will properly enforce communist redistribution of the means of production.

You won’t be able to flush his if you don’t get yours out of the toilet first.