nhaliday + moloch   46

Contingent, Not Arbitrary | Truth is contingent on what is, not on what we wish to be true.
A vital attribute of a value system of any kind is that it works. I consider this a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for goodness. A value system, when followed, should contribute to human flourishing and not produce results that violate its core ideals. This is a pragmatic, I-know-it-when-I-see-it definition. I may refine it further if the need arises.

I think that the prevailing Western values fail by this standard. I will not spend much time arguing this; many others have already. If you reject this premise, this blog may not be for you.

I consider old traditions an important source of wisdom: they have proven their worth over centuries of use. Where they agree, we should listen. Where they disagree, we should figure out why. Where modernity departs from tradition, we should be wary of the new.

Tradition has one nagging problem: it was abandoned by the West. How and why did that happen? I consider this a central question. I expect the reasons to be varied and complex. Understanding them seems necessary if we are to fix what may have been broken.

In short, I want to answer these questions:

1. How do values spread and persist? An ideology does no good if no one holds it.
2. Which values do good? Sounding good is worse than useless if it leads to ruin.

The ultimate hope would be to find a way to combine the two. Many have tried and failed. I don’t expect to succeed either, but I hope I’ll manage to clarify the questions.

Christianity Is The Schelling Point: https://contingentnotarbitrary.com/2018/02/22/christianity-is-the-schelling-point/
Restoring true Christianity is both necessary and sufficient for restoring civilization. The task is neither easy nor simple but that’s what it takes. It is also our best chance of weathering the collapse if that’s too late to avoid.

Christianity is the ultimate coordination mechanism: it unites us with a higher purpose, aligns us with the laws of reality and works on all scales, from individuals to entire civilizations. Christendom took over the world and then lost it when its faith faltered. Historically and culturally, Christianity is the unique Schelling point for the West – or it would be if we could agree on which church (if any) was the true one.

Here are my arguments for true Christianity as the Schelling point. I hope to demonstrate these points in subsequent posts; for now I’ll just list them.

- A society of saints is the most powerful human arrangement possible. It is united in purpose, ideologically stable and operates in harmony with natural law. This is true independent of scale and organization: from military hierarchy to total decentralization, from persecuted minority to total hegemony. Even democracy works among saints – that’s why it took so long to fail.
- There is such a thing as true Christianity. I don’t know how to pinpoint it but it does exist; that holds from both secular and religious perspectives. Our task is to converge on it the best we can.
- Don’t worry too much about the existence of God. I’m proof that you don’t need that assumption in order to believe – it helps but isn’t mandatory.

Pascal’s Wager never sat right with me. Now I know why: it’s a sucker bet. Let’s update it.

If God exists, we must believe because our souls and civilization depend on it. If He doesn’t exist, we must believe because civilization depends on it.

Morality Should Be Adaptive: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2012/04/morals-should-be-adaptive.html
I agree with this
gnon  todo  blog  stream  religion  christianity  theos  morality  ethics  formal-values  philosophy  truth  is-ought  coordination  cooperate-defect  alignment  tribalism  cohesion  nascent-state  counter-revolution  epistemic  civilization  rot  fertility  intervention  europe  the-great-west-whale  occident  telos-atelos  multi  ratty  hanson  big-picture  society  culture  evolution  competition  🤖  rationality  rhetoric  contrarianism  values  water  embedded-cognition  ideology  deep-materialism  moloch  new-religion  patho-altruism  darwinian  existence  good-evil  memetics  direct-indirect  endogenous-exogenous  tradition  anthropology  cultural-dynamics  farmers-and-foragers  egalitarianism-hierarchy  organizing  institutions  protestant-catholic  enlightenment-renaissance-restoration-reformation  realness  science  empirical  modernity  revolution  inference  parallax  axioms  pragmatic  zeitgeist  schelling  prioritizing  ends-means  degrees-of-freedom  logic  reason  interdisciplinary  exegesis-hermeneutics  o 
april 2018 by nhaliday
Harnessing Evolution - with Bret Weinstein | Virtual Futures Salon - YouTube
- ways to get out of Malthusian conditions: expansion to new frontiers, new technology, redistribution/theft
- some discussion of existential risk
- wants to change humanity's "purpose" to one that would be safe in the long run; important thing is it has to be ESS (maybe he wants a singleton?)
- not too impressed by transhumanism (wouldn't identify with a brain emulation)
video  interview  thiel  expert-experience  evolution  deep-materialism  new-religion  sapiens  cultural-dynamics  anthropology  evopsych  sociality  ecology  flexibility  biodet  behavioral-gen  self-interest  interests  moloch  arms  competition  coordination  cooperate-defect  frontier  expansionism  technology  efficiency  thinking  redistribution  open-closed  zero-positive-sum  peace-violence  war  dominant-minority  hypocrisy  dignity  sanctity-degradation  futurism  environment  climate-change  time-preference  long-short-run  population  scale  earth  hidden-motives  game-theory  GT-101  free-riding  innovation  leviathan  malthus  network-structure  risk  existence  civil-liberty  authoritarianism  tribalism  us-them  identity-politics  externalities  unintended-consequences  internet  social  media  pessimism  universalism-particularism  energy-resources  biophysical-econ  politics  coalitions  incentives  attention  epistemic  biases  blowhards  teaching  education  emotion  impetus  comedy  expression-survival  economics  farmers-and-foragers  ca 
april 2018 by nhaliday
The Hanson-Yudkowsky AI-Foom Debate - Machine Intelligence Research Institute
How Deviant Recent AI Progress Lumpiness?: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2018/03/how-deviant-recent-ai-progress-lumpiness.html
I seem to disagree with most people working on artificial intelligence (AI) risk. While with them I expect rapid change once AI is powerful enough to replace most all human workers, I expect this change to be spread across the world, not concentrated in one main localized AI system. The efforts of AI risk folks to design AI systems whose values won’t drift might stop global AI value drift if there is just one main AI system. But doing so in a world of many AI systems at similar abilities levels requires strong global governance of AI systems, which is a tall order anytime soon. Their continued focus on preventing single system drift suggests that they expect a single main AI system.

The main reason that I understand to expect relatively local AI progress is if AI progress is unusually lumpy, i.e., arriving in unusually fewer larger packages rather than in the usual many smaller packages. If one AI team finds a big lump, it might jump way ahead of the other teams.

However, we have a vast literature on the lumpiness of research and innovation more generally, which clearly says that usually most of the value in innovation is found in many small innovations. We have also so far seen this in computer science (CS) and AI. Even if there have been historical examples where much value was found in particular big innovations, such as nuclear weapons or the origin of humans.

Apparently many people associated with AI risk, including the star machine learning (ML) researchers that they often idolize, find it intuitively plausible that AI and ML progress is exceptionally lumpy. Such researchers often say, “My project is ‘huge’, and will soon do it all!” A decade ago my ex-co-blogger Eliezer Yudkowsky and I argued here on this blog about our differing estimates of AI progress lumpiness. He recently offered Alpha Go Zero as evidence of AI lumpiness:

...

In this post, let me give another example (beyond two big lumps in a row) of what could change my mind. I offer a clear observable indicator, for which data should have available now: deviant citation lumpiness in recent ML research. One standard measure of research impact is citations; bigger lumpier developments gain more citations that smaller ones. And it turns out that the lumpiness of citations is remarkably constant across research fields! See this March 3 paper in Science:

I Still Don’t Get Foom: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2014/07/30855.html
All of which makes it look like I’m the one with the problem; everyone else gets it. Even so, I’m gonna try to explain my problem again, in the hope that someone can explain where I’m going wrong. Here goes.

“Intelligence” just means an ability to do mental/calculation tasks, averaged over many tasks. I’ve always found it plausible that machines will continue to do more kinds of mental tasks better, and eventually be better at pretty much all of them. But what I’ve found it hard to accept is a “local explosion.” This is where a single machine, built by a single project using only a tiny fraction of world resources, goes in a short time (e.g., weeks) from being so weak that it is usually beat by a single human with the usual tools, to so powerful that it easily takes over the entire world. Yes, smarter machines may greatly increase overall economic growth rates, and yes such growth may be uneven. But this degree of unevenness seems implausibly extreme. Let me explain.

If we count by economic value, humans now do most of the mental tasks worth doing. Evolution has given us a brain chock-full of useful well-honed modules. And the fact that most mental tasks require the use of many modules is enough to explain why some of us are smarter than others. (There’d be a common “g” factor in task performance even with independent module variation.) Our modules aren’t that different from those of other primates, but because ours are different enough to allow lots of cultural transmission of innovation, we’ve out-competed other primates handily.

We’ve had computers for over seventy years, and have slowly build up libraries of software modules for them. Like brains, computers do mental tasks by combining modules. An important mental task is software innovation: improving these modules, adding new ones, and finding new ways to combine them. Ideas for new modules are sometimes inspired by the modules we see in our brains. When an innovation team finds an improvement, they usually sell access to it, which gives them resources for new projects, and lets others take advantage of their innovation.

...

In Bostrom’s graph above the line for an initially small project and system has a much higher slope, which means that it becomes in a short time vastly better at software innovation. Better than the entire rest of the world put together. And my key question is: how could it plausibly do that? Since the rest of the world is already trying the best it can to usefully innovate, and to abstract to promote such innovation, what exactly gives one small project such a huge advantage to let it innovate so much faster?

...

In fact, most software innovation seems to be driven by hardware advances, instead of innovator creativity. Apparently, good ideas are available but must usually wait until hardware is cheap enough to support them.

Yes, sometimes architectural choices have wider impacts. But I was an artificial intelligence researcher for nine years, ending twenty years ago, and I never saw an architecture choice make a huge difference, relative to other reasonable architecture choices. For most big systems, overall architecture matters a lot less than getting lots of detail right. Researchers have long wandered the space of architectures, mostly rediscovering variations on what others found before.

Some hope that a small project could be much better at innovation because it specializes in that topic, and much better understands new theoretical insights into the basic nature of innovation or intelligence. But I don’t think those are actually topics where one can usefully specialize much, or where we’ll find much useful new theory. To be much better at learning, the project would instead have to be much better at hundreds of specific kinds of learning. Which is very hard to do in a small project.

What does Bostrom say? Alas, not much. He distinguishes several advantages of digital over human minds, but all software shares those advantages. Bostrom also distinguishes five paths: better software, brain emulation (i.e., ems), biological enhancement of humans, brain-computer interfaces, and better human organizations. He doesn’t think interfaces would work, and sees organizations and better biology as only playing supporting roles.

...

Similarly, while you might imagine someday standing in awe in front of a super intelligence that embodies all the power of a new age, superintelligence just isn’t the sort of thing that one project could invent. As “intelligence” is just the name we give to being better at many mental tasks by using many good mental modules, there’s no one place to improve it. So I can’t see a plausible way one project could increase its intelligence vastly faster than could the rest of the world.

Takeoff speeds: https://sideways-view.com/2018/02/24/takeoff-speeds/
Futurists have argued for years about whether the development of AGI will look more like a breakthrough within a small group (“fast takeoff”), or a continuous acceleration distributed across the broader economy or a large firm (“slow takeoff”).

I currently think a slow takeoff is significantly more likely. This post explains some of my reasoning and why I think it matters. Mostly the post lists arguments I often hear for a fast takeoff and explains why I don’t find them compelling.

(Note: this is not a post about whether an intelligence explosion will occur. That seems very likely to me. Quantitatively I expect it to go along these lines. So e.g. while I disagree with many of the claims and assumptions in Intelligence Explosion Microeconomics, I don’t disagree with the central thesis or with most of the arguments.)
ratty  lesswrong  subculture  miri-cfar  ai  risk  ai-control  futurism  books  debate  hanson  big-yud  prediction  contrarianism  singularity  local-global  speed  speedometer  time  frontier  distribution  smoothness  shift  pdf  economics  track-record  abstraction  analogy  links  wiki  list  evolution  mutation  selection  optimization  search  iteration-recursion  intelligence  metameta  chart  analysis  number  ems  coordination  cooperate-defect  death  values  formal-values  flux-stasis  philosophy  farmers-and-foragers  malthus  scale  studying  innovation  insight  conceptual-vocab  growth-econ  egalitarianism-hierarchy  inequality  authoritarianism  wealth  near-far  rationality  epistemic  biases  cycles  competition  arms  zero-positive-sum  deterrence  war  peace-violence  winner-take-all  technology  moloch  multi  plots  research  science  publishing  humanity  labor  marginal  urban-rural  structure  composition-decomposition  complex-systems  gregory-clark  decentralized  heavy-industry  magnitude  multiplicative  endogenous-exogenous  models  uncertainty  decision-theory  time-prefer 
april 2018 by nhaliday
The Coming Technological Singularity
Within thirty years, we will have the technological
means to create superhuman intelligence. Shortly after,
the human era will be ended.

Is such progress avoidable? If not to be avoided, can
events be guided so that we may survive? These questions
are investigated. Some possible answers (and some further
dangers) are presented.

_What is The Singularity?_

The acceleration of technological progress has been the central
feature of this century. I argue in this paper that we are on the edge
of change comparable to the rise of human life on Earth. The precise
cause of this change is the imminent creation by technology of
entities with greater than human intelligence. There are several means
by which science may achieve this breakthrough (and this is another
reason for having confidence that the event will occur):
o The development of computers that are "awake" and
superhumanly intelligent. (To date, most controversy in the
area of AI relates to whether we can create human equivalence
in a machine. But if the answer is "yes, we can", then there
is little doubt that beings more intelligent can be constructed
shortly thereafter.
o Large computer networks (and their associated users) may "wake
up" as a superhumanly intelligent entity.
o Computer/human interfaces may become so intimate that users
may reasonably be considered superhumanly intelligent.
o Biological science may find ways to improve upon the natural
human intellect.

The first three possibilities depend in large part on
improvements in computer hardware. Progress in computer hardware has
followed an amazingly steady curve in the last few decades [16]. Based
largely on this trend, I believe that the creation of greater than
human intelligence will occur during the next thirty years. (Charles
Platt [19] has pointed out the AI enthusiasts have been making claims
like this for the last thirty years. Just so I'm not guilty of a
relative-time ambiguity, let me more specific: I'll be surprised if
this event occurs before 2005 or after 2030.)

What are the consequences of this event? When greater-than-human
intelligence drives progress, that progress will be much more rapid.
In fact, there seems no reason why progress itself would not involve
the creation of still more intelligent entities -- on a still-shorter
time scale. The best analogy that I see is with the evolutionary past:
Animals can adapt to problems and make inventions, but often no faster
than natural selection can do its work -- the world acts as its own
simulator in the case of natural selection. We humans have the ability
to internalize the world and conduct "what if's" in our heads; we can
solve many problems thousands of times faster than natural selection.
Now, by creating the means to execute those simulations at much higher
speeds, we are entering a regime as radically different from our human
past as we humans are from the lower animals.
org:junk  humanity  accelerationism  futurism  prediction  classic  technology  frontier  speedometer  ai  risk  internet  time  essay  rhetoric  network-structure  ai-control  morality  ethics  volo-avolo  egalitarianism-hierarchy  intelligence  scale  giants  scifi-fantasy  speculation  quotes  religion  theos  singularity  flux-stasis  phase-transition  cybernetics  coordination  cooperate-defect  moloch  communication  bits  speed  efficiency  eden-heaven  ecology  benevolence  end-times  good-evil  identity  the-self  whole-partial-many  density 
march 2018 by nhaliday
Existential Risks: Analyzing Human Extinction Scenarios
https://twitter.com/robinhanson/status/981291048965087232
https://archive.is/dUTD5
Would you endorse choosing policy to max the expected duration of civilization, at least as a good first approximation?
Can anyone suggest a different first approximation that would get more votes?

https://twitter.com/robinhanson/status/981335898502545408
https://archive.is/RpygO
How useful would it be to agree on a relatively-simple first-approximation observable-after-the-fact metric for what we want from the future universe, such as total life years experienced, or civilization duration?

We're Underestimating the Risk of Human Extinction: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/03/were-underestimating-the-risk-of-human-extinction/253821/
An Oxford philosopher argues that we are not adequately accounting for technology's risks—but his solution to the problem is not for Luddites.

Anderson: You have argued that we underrate existential risks because of a particular kind of bias called observation selection effect. Can you explain a bit more about that?

Bostrom: The idea of an observation selection effect is maybe best explained by first considering the simpler concept of a selection effect. Let's say you're trying to estimate how large the largest fish in a given pond is, and you use a net to catch a hundred fish and the biggest fish you find is three inches long. You might be tempted to infer that the biggest fish in this pond is not much bigger than three inches, because you've caught a hundred of them and none of them are bigger than three inches. But if it turns out that your net could only catch fish up to a certain length, then the measuring instrument that you used would introduce a selection effect: it would only select from a subset of the domain you were trying to sample.

Now that's a kind of standard fact of statistics, and there are methods for trying to correct for it and you obviously have to take that into account when considering the fish distribution in your pond. An observation selection effect is a selection effect introduced not by limitations in our measurement instrument, but rather by the fact that all observations require the existence of an observer. This becomes important, for instance, in evolutionary biology. For instance, we know that intelligent life evolved on Earth. Naively, one might think that this piece of evidence suggests that life is likely to evolve on most Earth-like planets. But that would be to overlook an observation selection effect. For no matter how small the proportion of all Earth-like planets that evolve intelligent life, we will find ourselves on a planet that did. Our data point-that intelligent life arose on our planet-is predicted equally well by the hypothesis that intelligent life is very improbable even on Earth-like planets as by the hypothesis that intelligent life is highly probable on Earth-like planets. When it comes to human extinction and existential risk, there are certain controversial ways that observation selection effects might be relevant.
bostrom  ratty  miri-cfar  skunkworks  philosophy  org:junk  list  top-n  frontier  speedometer  risk  futurism  local-global  scale  death  nihil  technology  simulation  anthropic  nuclear  deterrence  environment  climate-change  arms  competition  ai  ai-control  genetics  genomics  biotech  parasites-microbiome  disease  offense-defense  physics  tails  network-structure  epidemiology  space  geoengineering  dysgenics  ems  authoritarianism  government  values  formal-values  moloch  enhancement  property-rights  coordination  cooperate-defect  flux-stasis  ideas  prediction  speculation  humanity  singularity  existence  cybernetics  study  article  letters  eden-heaven  gedanken  multi  twitter  social  discussion  backup  hanson  metrics  optimization  time  long-short-run  janus  telos-atelos  poll  forms-instances  threat-modeling  selection  interview  expert-experience  malthus  volo-avolo  intel  leviathan  drugs  pharma  data  estimate  nature  longevity  expansionism  homo-hetero  utopia-dystopia 
march 2018 by nhaliday
In Defense of Individualist Culture | Otium
The salient feature of an individualist environment is that nobody directly tries to make you do anything.

...

I see a lot of writers these days raising problems with modern individualist culture, and it may be an especially timely topic. The Internet is a novel superstimulus, and it changes more rapidly, and affords people more options, than ever before. We need to think about the actual consequences of a world where many people are in practice being left alone to do what they want, and clearly not all the consequences are positive.

But I do want to suggest some considerations in favor of individualist culture — that often-derided “atomized modern world” that most of us live in.

We Aren’t Clay

interesting: https://slatestarscratchpad.tumblr.com/post/162329749236/httpssrconstantinwordpresscom20170627in-de

bleck:
Patriarchy is the Problem: https://srconstantin.wordpress.com/2017/09/12/patriarchy-is-the-problem/
ratty  core-rats  rhetoric  values  social-norms  society  anthropology  individualism-collectivism  higher-ed  labor  incentives  habit  internet  regularizer  behavioral-gen  biodet  ego-depletion  psychology  social-psych  thinking  rationality  tradition  egalitarianism-hierarchy  murray  putnam-like  coming-apart  cohesion  modernity  migration  essay  n-factor  multi  tumblr  social  yvain  ssc  critique  commentary  debate  moloch  community  civil-liberty  truth  cooperate-defect  enlightenment-renaissance-restoration-reformation  markets  open-closed  gender  farmers-and-foragers  religion  christianity  judaism  theos  social-structure  authoritarianism 
june 2017 by nhaliday
Overcoming Bias : A Tangled Task Future
So we may often retain systems that inherit the structure of the human brain, and the structures of the social teams and organizations by which humans have worked together. All of which is another way to say: descendants of humans may have a long future as workers. We may have another future besides being retirees or iron-fisted peons ruling over gods. Even in a competitive future with no friendly singleton to ensure preferential treatment, something recognizably like us may continue. And even win.
ratty  hanson  speculation  automation  labor  economics  ems  futurism  prediction  complex-systems  network-structure  intricacy  thinking  engineering  management  law  compensation  psychology  cog-psych  ideas  structure  gray-econ  competition  moloch  coordination  cooperate-defect  risk  ai  ai-control  singularity  number  humanity  complement-substitute  cybernetics  detail-architecture  legacy  threat-modeling  degrees-of-freedom  composition-decomposition  order-disorder  analogy  parsimony  institutions  software  coupling-cohesion 
june 2017 by nhaliday
Information Processing: Everything Under the Heavens and China's Conceptualization of Power
These guys are not very quantitative, so let me clarify a part of their discussion that was left rather ambiguous. It is true that demographic trends are working against China, which has a rapidly aging population. French and Schell talk about a 10-15 year window during which China has to grow rich before it grows old (a well-traveled meme). From the standpoint of geopolitics this is probably not the correct or relevant analysis. China's population is ~4x that of the US. If, say, demographic trends limit this to only an effective 3x or 3.5x advantage in working age individuals, China still only has to reach ~1/3 of US per capita income in order to have a larger overall economy. It seems unlikely that there is any hard cutoff preventing China from reaching, say, 1/2 the US per capita GDP in a few decades. (Obviously a lot of this growth is still "catch-up" growth.) At that point its economy would be the largest in the world by far, and its scientific-technological workforce and infrastructure would be far larger than that of any other country.

- interesting point: China went from servile toward Japan to callous as soon as it surpassed Japan economically (I would bet this will apply to the US)
- conventional Chinese narrative for WW2: China won the Pacific Theater not the US
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/06/world/asia/chinas-textbooks-twist-and-omit-history.html
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/06/a-story-about-world-war-ii-that-china-would-like-you-to-hear/259084/
- serious Chinese superiority complex overall
- "patriotic education", the fucking opposite of our god-awful ideology
- in Chinese history: each dynasty judges the last, unimpeachable
- ceding control of South China Sea would damage relations with neighboring countries (not enforcing their legitimate claims) and damage international norms (rule of law, etc.)
- next 10-15 years dangerous (Thucydides); of course Hsu criticizes
- suggestions: cultivate local alliances, prevent arms races, welcome Chinese international initiatives
I'm highly skeptical of all but the alliances
- ethnic melting in Chinese history, population structure (not actually as much as he thinks AFAIK), "age of nationalism", Tibet, etc.

Gideon Rachman writes for the FT, so it's not surprising that his instincts seem a bit stronger when it comes to economics. He makes a number of incisive observations during this interview.

---

At 16min, he mentions that
I was in Beijing about I guess a month before the vote [US election], in fact when the first debates were going on, and the Chinese, I thought that official Chinese [i.e. Government Officials] in our meeting and the sort of semi-official academics were clearly pulling for Trump.

---

I wonder if the standard of comparison shouldn't be with the West as a whole, not just the United States?

It depends on what happens to the EU, whether western powers other than the US want to play the role of global hegemon, etc.

The situation today is that the US is focused on preserving its primacy, wants to deny Russia and China any local sphere of influence, etc., whereas Europe has little appetite for any of it. They can barely allocate enough resources for their own defense.

Europe and the US have their own demographic problems to deal with in the coming decades. An aging population may turn out to be less challenging than the consequences of mass immigration (note population trends in Africa, so close to Europe).

If China behaved as an aggressive hegemon like the US or former USSR, it would probably elicit a collective back reaction from the West. But I think its first step is simply to consolidate influence over Asia.

---

interesting somewhat contrarian take on China's girth here: https://gnxp.nofe.me/2017/08/03/manufacturing-chinese-history-cheaply/

China Does Not Want Your Rules Based Order: http://scholars-stage.blogspot.com/2016/06/china-does-not-want-your-rules-based.html
There is much that is good in this narrative. McCain proclaims that "no nation has done as much to contribute to what China calls its “peaceful rise” as the United States of America." He is right to do so. No nation has done more to enable China's rise than America has. No country's citizens have done more for the general prosperity of the Chinese people than the Americans have. This is true in ways that are not widely known or immediately obvious. For example, the role American financiers and investment banks played in creating the architecture of modern Chinese financial markets and corporate structures is little realized, despite the size and importance of their interventions. Behind every great titan of Chinese industry--China Mobile, the world's largest mobile phone operator, China State Construction Engineering, whose IPO was valued at $7.3 billion, PetroChina, the most profitable company in Asia (well, before last year), to name a few of hundreds--lies an American investment banker. I do not exaggerate when I say Goldman Sachs created modern China. [2] China has much to thank America for.

...

In simpler terms, the Chinese equate “rising within a rules based order” with “halting China’s rise to power.” To live by Washington’s rules is to live under its power, and the Chinese have been telling themselves for three decades now that—after two centuries of hardship—they will not live by the dictates of outsiders ever again.

The Chinese will never choose our rules based order. That does not necessarily mean they want to dethrone America and throw down all that she has built. The Chinese do not have global ambitions. What they want is a seat at the table—and they want this seat to be recognized, not earned. That’s the gist of it. Beijing is not willing to accept an order it did not have a hand in creating. Thus all that G-2 talk we heard a few years back. The Chinese would love to found a new order balancing their honor and their interests with the Americans. It is a flattering idea. What they do not want is for the Americans to give them a list of hoops to jump through to gain entry into some pre-determined good-boys club. They feel like their power, wealth, and heritage should be more than enough to qualify for automatic entrance to any club.

https://twitter.com/Aelkus/status/928754578794958848
https://archive.is/NpLpR

Greer is even more pessimistic as of late:
https://scholars-stage.blogspot.com/2019/05/are-we-ready-for-what-comes-next.html
That is the political reality of the present moment. We will ride through this conflict not with the people we want, but with the people we have. But that people can be prepared. This is not the first time Americans have stood indifferent to the maneuvers of rising tyrannies. Indifference can be changed. It has been changed many times before.

But not by accident.

We do not face war. But we do face something like unto it. Economic weapons will be drawn and used. We will face a rough time. Before us lies an escalating circle of punishment and counter-punishment. The Chinese people will hurt dearly.

But so will ours.

Victory won will be worth its price. But that price will be paid. The Chinese understand this. They prepare their people for the contest that is coming.

We would be wise to follow their example.

https://scholars-stage.blogspot.com/2019/10/chinas-vision-of-victory.html
This book will not be pleasant reading for some. It is built on a hard foundation of official PRC and CPC statements, white papers, laws, and pronouncements—together these documents suggest that China's ambitions are far less limited than many Americans hope:
> China’s Vision of Victory is a useful antidote to the popular delusion that Chinese leaders seek nothing more than to roll back U.S. hegemony in the Western Pacific—or that they will be sated by becoming the dominant East Asian power. Despite presenting modest and peaceful ambitions to foreigners, the Chinese Communist Party leadership transparently communicates its desire for primacy to internal audiences. By guiding readers through a barrage of official documents, excerpted liberally throughout the book, Ward shows just how wide-ranging these ambitions are.
> To start with, the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) already defines its maritime forces as a “two-ocean navy.” Chinese energy demands have led the PLA to extend its reach to Pakistan, Africa, and the disputed waters of the South China Sea. White papers spell out Chinese ambitions to be the primary strategic presence not just on the East Asian periphery but in Africa, the Indian Ocean, and the Southern Pacific. China’s leadership claims that it has core economic interests as far abroad as Europe, Latin America, the Arctic, and outer space. With these economic interests come road maps for securing Chinese relationships or presence in each region.
> By 2050, the Chinese aim to have a military “second to none,” to become the global center for technology innovation, and to serve as the economic anchor of a truly global trade and infrastructure regime—an economic bloc that would be unprecedented in human history. In their speeches and documents, Chinese leaders call this vision of a China-centered future—a future where a U.S.-led system has been broken apart and discarded—a “community of common destiny for mankind.” That ambition debunks the myth of a multipolar future: China seeks dominance, not just a share of the pie.[1]
hsu  scitariat  commentary  video  presentation  critique  china  asia  sinosphere  orient  foreign-policy  realpolitik  geopolitics  zeitgeist  demographics  scale  contrarianism  the-bones  economics  econ-metrics  wealth  population  2016-election  trump  interview  roots  history  nationalism-globalism  stereotypes  usa  civilization  japan  developing-world  world  ethnography  lived-experience  instinct  mostly-modern  world-war  cynicism-idealism  narrative  journos-pundits  ideology  communism  truth  government  leviathan  cohesion  oceans  great-powers  social-norms  law  war  cooperate-defect  moloch  demographic-transition  descriptive  values  patho-altruism  kumbaya-kult  race  ethnocentrism  pop-structure  antidemos  poast  conquest-empire  assimilation  migration  migrant-crisis  africa  europe  thucydides  expansionism  multi  news  org:rec  education  propaganda  org:mag  gnxp  unaffiliated  broad-econ  wonkish  justice  universalism-particularism  authoritarianism  twitter  social  discussion  backup  benevolence  books  review  summary  pessim 
june 2017 by nhaliday
The Toxoplasma Of Rage | Slate Star Codex
The idea of liberal strategists sitting down and choosing “a flagship case for the campaign against police brutality” is poppycock. Moloch – the abstracted spirit of discoordination and flailing response to incentives – will publicize whatever he feels like publicizing. And if they want viewers and ad money, the media will go along with him.

Which means that it’s not a coincidence that the worst possible flagship case for fighting police brutality and racism is the flagship case that we in fact got. It’s not a coincidence that the worst possible flagship cases for believing rape victims are the ones that end up going viral. It’s not a coincidence that the only time we ever hear about factory farming is when somebody’s doing something that makes us almost sympathetic to it. It’s not coincidence, it’s not even happenstance, it’s enemy action. Under Moloch, activists are irresistably incentivized to dig their own graves. And the media is irresistably incentivized to help them.
ratty  yvain  ssc  culture-war  toxoplasmosis  tribalism  politics  rationality  info-dynamics  toxo-gondii  identity-politics  essay  metabuch  emotion  2014  🤖  moloch  polarization  internet 
june 2017 by nhaliday
Why China Cannot Rise Peacefully - YouTube
- unexpected accent/tone lol
- principles: states as unit of action/global anarchy, uncertainty (fog-of-war), states as rational, selfish actors
- consequences: need to become as powerful as possible, regional hegemon, prevent peer competitors (no other regional hegemon in world, eg, China)
- future: China as giant Hong Kong
- future coalition: India, Japan, Russia, Vietnam, Singapore, South Korea, and the USA
- does he actually think Brazil coulda gotten as powerful as the US? lol.
- his summary of American grand strategy (lol):
1. Europe (great powers)
2. NE Asia (great powers)
3. Persian Gulf (oil)
- "Europe will become distant 3rd, Europe is a museum, lotta old people." lol
- "not gonna help us with Asia, got their own problems, bankrupting themselves"
- counterarguments: "not gonna grow, China's a Confucian culture (don't pay attention to those), economic interdependence." doesn't buy the last either.
- best counterarguments: nuclear deterrence, economic interdependence, "age of nationalism"
- mass-murder usually strategic (eg, maintaining power) not ideological

debate: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kd-1LymXXX0

interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yXSkY4QKDlA
- Clinton's a realist
- plenty of economic independence prior to world wars
- nukes makes WW3 unlikely, but do not rule out limited war (eg, over East/South China Sea)
- Confucian pacifism argument is ahistorical
rhetoric  video  presentation  foreign-policy  realpolitik  usa  china  asia  sinosphere  expansionism  war  great-powers  defense  statesmen  world  prediction  contrarianism  org:edu  org:davos  trends  martial  politics  polisci  nihil  nationalism-globalism  tetlock  kumbaya-kult  meta:war  intel  strategy  history  mostly-modern  russia  communism  cold-war  signal-noise  meta:prediction  🎩  civilization  rationality  realness  thinking  systematic-ad-hoc  uncertainty  outcome-risk  nyc  geopolitics  speaking  order-disorder  GT-101  chart  canada  latin-america  early-modern  world-war  japan  power  india  coalitions  zero-positive-sum  winner-take-all  germanic  europe  mediterranean  zeitgeist  the-bones  developing-world  korea  obama  MENA  pre-2013  energy-resources  economics  top-n  big-picture  trade  stylized-facts  debate  water  business  confucian  nuclear  deterrence  iraq-syria  africa  iran  oceans  climate-change  leviathan  death  cynicism-idealism  multi  interview  clinton  peace-violence  legibility  orient  flux-stasis  conquest-empire  c 
may 2017 by nhaliday
The paradox of declining female happiness - Journalist's Resource
The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness: https://www.nber.org/papers/w14969
- Betsey Stevenson, Justin Wolfers

https://twitter.com/toad_spotted/status/1173955574347771904
https://archive.is/xYGoi
https://archive.is/jOC6z
The recent wild increase in teenage girl depression+anxiety has implication that damage feminism does has little to do w:working or promiscuity (now absent among teenagers)but that in absence of male status identity collapses into sterile hysterical competition+self-directed rage
news  org:ngo  media  trends  gender  meaningness  emotion  labor  age-generation  malaise  education  social-capital  moloch  stress  public-health  nihil  gender-diff  multi  study  economics  contrarianism  zeitgeist  chart  happy-sad  twitter  social  backup  ratty  unaffiliated  speculation  roots  explanans  sex  sexuality  social-norms  disease  psychiatry  culture  society  usa  symmetry 
march 2017 by nhaliday
Destined for War: Can China and the United States Escape Thucydides’s Trap? - The Atlantic
The defining question about global order for this generation is whether China and the United States can escape Thucydides’s Trap. The Greek historian’s metaphor reminds us of the attendant dangers when a rising power rivals a ruling power—as Athens challenged Sparta in ancient Greece, or as Germany did Britain a century ago. Most such contests have ended badly, often for both nations, a team of mine at the Harvard Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs has concluded after analyzing the historical record. In 12 of 16 cases over the past 500 years, the result was war. When the parties avoided war, it required huge, painful adjustments in attitudes and actions on the part not just of the challenger but also the challenged.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/06/09/the-thucydides-trap/
http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2017/06/no-thucydides-trap.html
news  org:mag  foreign-policy  realpolitik  the-classics  china  asia  usa  prediction  war  world  expansionism  current-events  history  early-modern  mostly-modern  track-record  iron-age  mediterranean  europe  competition  lee-kuan-yew  polis  sinosphere  polisci  wonkish  economics  longform  let-me-see  scale  definite-planning  chart  evidence-based  defense  nihil  the-bones  zeitgeist  great-powers  statesmen  ranking  kumbaya-kult  peace-violence  pre-ww2  multi  org:foreign  nuclear  deterrence  strategy  whiggish-hegelian  econotariat  marginal-rev  commentary  moloch  thucydides 
march 2017 by nhaliday
Thucydides - Wikipedia
Allison coined the phrase "Thucydides Trap" to refer to when a rising power causes fear in an established power which escalates toward war. Thucydides wrote: "What made war inevitable was the growth of Athenian power and the fear which this caused in Sparta."[3]
the-classics  history  iron-age  mediterranean  war  meta:war  wiki  people  big-peeps  aristos  peace-violence  straussian  moloch  thucydides  great-powers 
march 2017 by nhaliday
The Second Coming - Yeats
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

https://www.theparisreview.org/blog/2015/04/07/no-slouch/
poetry  literature  classic  quotes  britain  anglo  big-peeps  old-anglo  nihil  pre-ww2  org:junk  multi  news  org:mag  letters  moloch 
november 2016 by nhaliday
Outside in - Involvements with reality » Blog Archive » Hell-Baked
The logical consequence of Social Darwinism is that everything of value has been built in Hell.

It is only due to a predominance of influences that are not only entirely morally indifferent, but indeed — from a human perspective — indescribably cruel, that nature has been capable of constructive action. Specifically, it is solely by way of the relentless, brutal culling of populations that any complex or adaptive traits have been sieved — with torturous inefficiency — from the chaos of natural existence. All health, beauty, intelligence, and social grace has been teased from a vast butcher’s yard of unbounded carnage, requiring incalculable eons of massacre to draw forth even the subtlest of advantages. This is not only a matter of the bloody grinding mills of selection, either, but also of the innumerable mutational abominations thrown up by the madness of chance, as it pursues its directionless path to some negligible preservable trait, and then — still further — of the unavowable horrors that ‘fitness’ (or sheer survival) itself predominantly entails. We are a minuscule sample of agonized matter, comprising genetic survival monsters, fished from a cosmic ocean of vile mutants, by a pitiless killing machine of infinite appetite. (This is still, perhaps, to put an irresponsibly positive spin on the story, but it should suffice for our purposes here.)

Crucially, any attempt to escape this fatality — or, more realistically, any mere accidental and temporary reprieve from it — leads inexorably to the undoing of its work. Malthusian relaxation is the whole of mercy, and it is the greatest engine of destruction our universe is able to bring about. To the precise extent that we are spared, even for a moment, we degenerate — and this Iron Law applies to every dimension and scale of existence: phylogenetic and ontogenetic, individual, social, and institutional, genomic, cellular, organic, and cultural. There is no machinery extant, or even rigorously imaginable, that can sustain a single iota of attained value outside the forges of Hell.
essay  land  horror  nature  gnon  moloch  new-religion  🌞  malthus  ideology  deep-materialism  nihil  darwinian  selection  evolution  death 
october 2016 by nhaliday
The Future of Genetic Enhancement is Not in the West | Quillette
https://qz.com/750908/the-future-of-genetic-enhancement-is-in-china-and-india/

If it becomes possible to safely genetically increase babies’ IQ, it will become inevitable: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/07/14/if-it-becomes-possible-to-safely-genetically-increase-babies-iq-it-will-become-inevitable/

Baby Genome Sequencing for Sale in China: https://www.technologyreview.com/s/608086/baby-genome-sequencing-for-sale-in-china/
Chinese parents can now decode the genomes of their healthy newborns, revealing disease risks as well as the likelihood of physical traits like male-pattern baldness.
https://gnxp.nofe.me/2017/06/16/the-cultural-revolution-that-will-happen-in-china/
https://gnxp.nofe.me/2017/07/26/the-future-will-be-genetically-engineered/
http://www.nature.com/news/china-s-embrace-of-embryo-selection-raises-thorny-questions-1.22468
http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2017/08/embryo-selection-in-china-nature.html

China launches massive genome research initiative: https://news.cgtn.com/news/7767544e34637a6333566d54/share_p.html

research ethics:
First results of CRISPR gene editing of normal embryos released: https://www.newscientist.com/article/2123973-first-results-of-crispr-gene-editing-of-normal-embryos-released/
http://www.bbc.com/news/health-32530334
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/608350/first-human-embryos-edited-in-us/
http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2017/07/first-human-embryos-edited-in-us-mit.html
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14912382
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature23305.html
caveats: https://ipscell.com/2017/08/4-reasons-mitalipov-paper-doesnt-herald-safe-crispr-human-genetic-modification/

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/first-crispr-human-clinical-trial-gets-a-green-light-from-the-u-s/
http://www.nature.com/news/crispr-gene-editing-tested-in-a-person-for-the-first-time-1.20988
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12960844
So this title is a bit misleading; something like, "cells edited with CRISPR injected into a person for the first time" would be better. While CRISPR is promising for topological treatments, that's not what happened here.
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/chinese-scientists-to-pioneer-first-human-crispr-trial/
China sprints ahead in CRISPR therapy race: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/358/6359/20
China, Unhampered by Rules, Races Ahead in Gene-Editing Trials: https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-unhampered-by-rules-races-ahead-in-gene-editing-trials-1516562360
U.S. scientists helped devise the Crispr biotechnology tool. First to test it in humans are Chinese doctors
https://twitter.com/mr_scientism/status/955207026333929472
https://archive.is/lJ761

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2018/01/24/579925801/chinese-scientists-clone-monkeys-using-method-that-created-dolly-the-sheep
https://twitter.com/0xa59a2d/status/956344998626242560
https://archive.is/azH4S
https://twitter.com/AngloRemnant/status/956348983303114753
https://archive.is/RclJG
https://twitter.com/AngloRemnant/status/956352891287228416
https://archive.is/BfHuV

http://www.acsh.org/news/2017/03/07/did-gene-therapy-cure-sickle-cell-disease-10950

lol: http://www.theonion.com/infographic/pros-and-cons-gene-editing-56740

Japan set to allow gene editing in human embryos [ed.: (for research)]: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-06847-7
Draft guidelines permit gene-editing tools for research into early human development.
futurism  prediction  enhancement  biotech  essay  china  asia  culture  poll  len:short  new-religion  accelerationism  letters  news  org:mag  org:popup  🌞  sinosphere  🔬  sanctity-degradation  morality  values  democracy  authoritarianism  genetics  CRISPR  scaling-up  orient  multi  org:lite  india  competition  speedometer  org:rec  right-wing  rhetoric  slippery-slope  iq  usa  incentives  technology  org:nat  org:sci  org:biz  trends  current-events  genomics  gnxp  scitariat  commentary  hsu  org:foreign  volo-avolo  regulation  coordination  cooperate-defect  moloch  popsci  announcement  politics  government  policy  science  ethics  :/  org:anglo  cancer  medicine  hn  tech  immune  sapiens  study  summary  bio  disease  critique  regularizer  accuracy  lol  comedy  hard-tech  skunkworks  twitter  social  backup  gnon  🐸  randy-ayndy  civil-liberty  FDA  duplication  left-wing  chart  abortion-contraception-embryo 
august 2016 by nhaliday

bundles : patternsvague

related tags

2016-election  :/  abortion-contraception-embryo  abstraction  accelerationism  accuracy  acmtariat  adversarial  aesthetics  africa  age-generation  agriculture  ai  ai-control  algorithms  alien-character  alignment  allodium  altruism  analogy  analysis  analytical-holistic  anglo  anglosphere  announcement  anomie  anthropic  anthropology  antidemos  antiquity  apollonian-dionysian  applicability-prereqs  applications  aristos  arms  art  article  ascetic  asia  assimilation  atoms  attention  authoritarianism  automation  average-case  axelrod  axioms  backup  barons  behavioral-gen  benevolence  biases  big-peeps  big-picture  big-yud  bio  biodet  biophysical-econ  biotech  bits  blockchain  blog  blowhards  books  bostrom  branches  britain  broad-econ  business  canada  cancer  canon  capitalism  characterization  chart  china  christianity  civil-liberty  civilization  class  classic  clever-rats  climate-change  clinton  coalitions  coding-theory  cog-psych  cohesion  cold-war  comedy  coming-apart  commentary  communication  communism  community  comparison  compensation  competition  complement-substitute  complex-systems  composition-decomposition  concentration-of-measure  concept  conceptual-vocab  confucian  conquest-empire  contradiction  contrarianism  convexity-curvature  cooperate-defect  coordination  core-rats  corporation  corruption  cost-benefit  counter-revolution  coupling-cohesion  cracker-econ  CRISPR  critique  crux  crypto  cryptocurrency  cultural-dynamics  culture  culture-war  current-events  cybernetics  cycles  cynicism-idealism  darwinian  data  death  debate  decentralized  decision-making  decision-theory  deep-learning  deep-materialism  deepgoog  defense  definite-planning  definition  degrees-of-freedom  democracy  demographic-transition  demographics  dennett  density  descriptive  detail-architecture  deterrence  developing-world  dignity  dimensionality  diogenes  direct-indirect  direction  discrimination  discussion  disease  distribution  dominant-minority  douthatish  drugs  duplication  duty  dysgenics  early-modern  earth  ecology  econ-metrics  economics  econotariat  eden  eden-heaven  education  EEA  efficiency  egalitarianism-hierarchy  ego-depletion  EGT  elections  elite  embedded-cognition  emergent  emotion  empirical  ems  end-times  endogenous-exogenous  ends-means  energy-resources  engineering  enhancement  enlightenment-renaissance-restoration-reformation  environment  epidemiology  epistemic  equilibrium  error  essay  estimate  ethics  ethnocentrism  ethnography  EU  europe  evidence-based  evolution  evopsych  exegesis-hermeneutics  existence  exit-voice  expansionism  expectancy  expert-experience  explanans  explore-exploit  expression-survival  externalities  extrema  farmers-and-foragers  fashun  FDA  fertility  fiction  flexibility  flux-stasis  foreign-policy  formal-values  forms-instances  free-riding  frisson  frontier  futurism  gallic  game-theory  gedanken  gender  gender-diff  generalization  genetics  genomics  geoengineering  geopolitics  germanic  giants  gibbon  gnon  gnxp  good-evil  google  gotchas  government  gradient-descent  gray-econ  great-powers  gregory-clark  growth-econ  GT-101  gwern  habit  hacker  hanson  happy-sad  hard-tech  hardware  hari-seldon  healthcare  heavy-industry  heterodox  heuristic  hi-order-bits  hidden-motives  high-dimension  higher-ed  history  hive-mind  hmm  hn  homo-hetero  horror  hsu  human-capital  humanity  humility  hypocrisy  ideas  identity  identity-politics  ideology  iidness  illusion  immune  impetus  impro  incentives  india  individualism-collectivism  inequality  inference  info-dynamics  info-econ  infrastructure  innovation  insight  instinct  institutions  intel  intelligence  interdisciplinary  interests  internet  intervention  interview  intricacy  intuition  iq  iran  iraq-syria  iron-age  is-ought  islam  iteration-recursion  janus  japan  journos-pundits  judaism  justice  korea  kumbaya-kult  labor  land  large-factor  latin-america  law  leadership  learning  lee-kuan-yew  left-wing  legacy  legibility  len:long  len:short  lens  lesswrong  let-me-see  letters  leviathan  limits  links  list  literature  lived-experience  local-global  logic  lol  long-short-run  longevity  longform  lovecraft  machine-learning  magnitude  malaise  malthus  management  manifolds  marginal  marginal-rev  markets  martial  maxim-gun  meaningness  media  medicine  medieval  mediterranean  memes(ew)  memetics  MENA  meta:medicine  meta:prediction  meta:rhetoric  meta:war  metabuch  metameta  methodology  metrics  migrant-crisis  migration  military  miri-cfar  model-class  model-organism  models  modernity  moloch  moments  monetary-fiscal  money  morality  mostly-modern  multi  multiplicative  murray  musk  mutation  mystic  myth  n-factor  narrative  nascent-state  nationalism-globalism  nature  near-far  network-structure  neuro  neuro-nitgrit  neurons  new-religion  news  nihil  nitty-gritty  noble-lie  nonlinearity  northeast  novelty  nuclear  number  nyc  obama  occident  oceans  offense-defense  old-anglo  open-closed  optimate  optimism  optimization  order-disorder  org:anglo  org:biz  org:davos  org:edu  org:foreign  org:junk  org:lite  org:mag  org:med  org:nat  org:ngo  org:popup  org:rec  org:sci  org:theos  organizing  orient  other-xtian  outcome-risk  paradox  parallax  parasites-microbiome  parenting  parsimony  patho-altruism  pdf  peace-violence  pennsylvania  people  performance  pessimism  pharma  phase-transition  philosophy  physics  pic  play  plots  poast  poetry  polarization  policy  polis  polisci  politics  poll  pop-structure  popsci  population  postrat  power  pragmatic  pre-2013  pre-ww2  prediction  prediction-markets  presentation  primitivism  prioritizing  privacy  propaganda  property-rights  protestant-catholic  psychiatry  psychology  psychometrics  public-goodish  public-health  publishing  putnam-like  q-n-a  quotes  race  random  randy-ayndy  ranking  rationality  ratty  realness  realpolitik  reason  red-queen  reddit  redistribution  reduction  reference  reflection  regularizer  regulation  reinforcement  religion  research  retention  review  revolution  rhetoric  right-wing  rigor  risk  ritual  roots  rot  russia  s:***  saas  sanctity-degradation  sapiens  scale  scaling-up  schelling  science  science-anxiety  scifi-fantasy  scitariat  search  security  selection  self-interest  sex  sexuality  shift  signal-noise  signaling  similarity  simulation  singularity  sinosphere  skunkworks  slides  slippery-slope  smoothness  social  social-capital  social-choice  social-norms  social-psych  social-science  social-structure  sociality  society  sociology  software  space  spatial  speaking  speculation  speed  speedometer  spreading  ssc  statesmen  status  stereotypes  strategy  straussian  stream  stress  structure  study  studying  stylized-facts  subculture  summary  survey  symmetry  systematic-ad-hoc  systems  tails  taxes  teaching  tech  technocracy  technology  telos-atelos  temperance  terrorism  tetlock  texas  the-basilisk  the-bones  the-classics  the-great-west-whale  the-monster  the-self  the-south  theory-of-mind  theory-practice  theos  thiel  thinking  threat-modeling  thucydides  time  time-preference  tip-of-tongue  todo  top-n  toxo-gondii  toxoplasmosis  track-record  trade  tradeoffs  tradition  trends  tribalism  trump  trust  truth  tumblr  turing  tv  twitter  unaffiliated  uncertainty  unintended-consequences  uniqueness  universalism-particularism  unsupervised  urban  urban-rural  us-them  usa  utopia-dystopia  values  video  vitality  volo-avolo  vr  vulgar  walls  war  water  wealth  weird  weird-sun  whiggish-hegelian  whole-partial-many  wiki  winner-take-all  wisdom  within-without  wonkish  world  world-war  wtf  X-not-about-Y  yvain  zeitgeist  zero-positive-sum  🌞  🎩  🐸  🔬  🤖 

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: