nhaliday + accelerationism   38

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
Antinomia Imediata – experiments in a reaction from the left
So, what is the Left Reaction? First of all, it’s reaction: opposition to the modern rationalist establishment, the Cathedral. It opposes the universalist Jacobin program of global government, favoring a fractured geopolitics organized through long-evolved complex systems. It’s profoundly anti-socialist and anti-communist, favoring market economy and individualism. It abhors tribalism and seeks a realistic plan for dismantling it (primarily informed by HBD and HBE). It looks at modernity as a degenerative ratchet, whose only way out is intensification (hence clinging to crypto-marxist market-driven acceleration).

How come can any of this still be in the *Left*? It defends equality of power, i.e. freedom. This radical understanding of liberty is deeply rooted in leftist tradition and has been consistently abhored by the Right. LRx is not democrat, is not socialist, is not progressist and is not even liberal (in its current, American use). But it defends equality of power. It’s utopia is individual sovereignty. It’s method is paleo-agorism. The anti-hierarchy of hunter-gatherer nomads is its understanding of the only realistic objective of equality.


In more cosmic terms, it seeks only to fulfill the Revolution’s side in the left-right intelligence pump: mutation or creation of paths. Proudhon’s antinomy is essentially about this: the collective force of the socius, evinced in moral standards and social organization vs the creative force of the individuals, that constantly revolutionize and disrupt the social body. The interplay of these forces create reality (it’s a metaphysics indeed): the Absolute (socius) builds so that the (individualistic) Revolution can destroy so that the Absolute may adapt, and then repeat. The good old formula of ‘solve et coagula’.

Ultimately, if the Neoreaction promises eternal hell, the LRx sneers “but Satan is with us”.

Liberty is to be understood as the ability and right of all sentient beings to dispose of their persons and the fruits of their labor, and nothing else, as they see fit. This stems from their self-awareness and their ability to control and choose the content of their actions.


Equality is to be understood as the state of no imbalance of power, that is, of no subjection to another sentient being. This stems from their universal ability for empathy, and from their equal ability for reason.


It is important to notice that, contrary to usual statements of these two principles, my standpoint is that Liberty and Equality here are not merely compatible, meaning they could coexist in some possible universe, but rather they are two sides of the same coin, complementary and interdependent. There can be NO Liberty where there is no Equality, for the imbalance of power, the state of subjection, will render sentient beings unable to dispose of their persons and the fruits of their labor[1], and it will limit their ability to choose over their rightful jurisdiction. Likewise, there can be NO Equality without Liberty, for restraining sentient beings’ ability to choose and dispose of their persons and fruits of labor will render some more powerful than the rest, and establish a state of subjection.

equality is the founding principle (and ultimately indistinguishable from) freedom. of course, it’s only in one specific sense of “equality” that this sentence is true.

to try and eliminate the bullshit, let’s turn to networks again:

any nodes’ degrees of freedom is the number of nodes they are connected to in a network. freedom is maximum when the network is symmetrically connected, i. e., when all nodes are connected to each other and thus there is no topographical hierarchy (middlemen) – in other words, flatness.

in this understanding, the maximization of freedom is the maximization of entropy production, that is, of intelligence. As Land puts it:

gnon  blog  stream  politics  polisci  ideology  philosophy  land  accelerationism  left-wing  right-wing  paradox  egalitarianism-hierarchy  civil-liberty  power  hmm  revolution  analytical-holistic  mutation  selection  individualism-collectivism  tribalism  us-them  modernity  multi  tradeoffs  network-structure  complex-systems  cybernetics  randy-ayndy  insight  contrarianism  metameta  metabuch  characterization  cooperate-defect  n-factor  altruism  list  coordination  graphs  visual-understanding  cartoons  intelligence  entropy-like  thermo  information-theory  order-disorder  decentralized  distribution  degrees-of-freedom  analogy  graph-theory  extrema  evolution  interdisciplinary  bio  differential  geometry  anglosphere  optimate  nascent-state  deep-materialism  new-religion  cool  mystic  the-classics  self-interest  interests  reason  volo-avolo  flux-stasis  invariance  government  markets  paying-rent  cost-benefit  peace-violence  frontier  exit-voice  nl-and-so-can-you  war  track-record  usa  history  mostly-modern  world-war  military  justice  protestant-cathol 
march 2018 by nhaliday
Anisogamy - Wikipedia
Anisogamy is a fundamental concept of sexual dimorphism that helps explain phenotypic differences between sexes.[3] In most species a male and female sex exist, both of which are optimized for reproductive potential. Due to their differently sized and shaped gametes, both males and females have developed physiological and behavioral differences that optimize the individual’s fecundity.[3] Since most egg laying females typically must bear the offspring and have a more limited reproductive cycle, this typically makes females a limiting factor in the reproductive success rate of males in a species. This process is also true for females selecting males, and assuming that males and females are selecting for different traits in partners, would result in phenotypic differences between the sexes over many generations. This hypothesis, known as the Bateman’s Principle, is used to understand the evolutionary pressures put on males and females due to anisogamy.[4] Although this assumption has criticism, it is a generally accepted model for sexual selection within anisogamous species. The selection for different traits depending on sex within the same species is known as sex-specific selection, and accounts for the differing phenotypes found between the sexes of the same species. This sex-specific selection between sexes over time also lead to the development of secondary sex characteristics, which assist males and females in reproductive success.


Since this process is very energy-demanding and time consuming for the female, mate choice is often integrated into the female’s behavior.[3] Females will often be very selective of the males they choose to reproduce with, for the phenotype of the male can be indicative of the male’s physical health and heritable traits. Females employ mate choice to pressure males into displaying their desirable traits to females through courtship, and if successful, the male gets to reproduce. This encourages males and females of specific species to invest in courtship behaviors as well as traits that can display physical health to a potential mate. This process, known as sexual selection,[3] results in the development of traits to ease reproductive success rather than individual survival, such as the inflated size of a termite queen. It is also important for females to select against potential mates that may have a sexually transmitted infection, for the disease could not only hurt the female’s reproductive ability, but also damage the resulting offspring.[7]

Although not uncommon in males, females are more associated with parental care.[8] Since females are on a more limited reproductive schedule than males, a female often invests more in protecting the offspring to sexual maturity than the male. Like mate choice, the level of parental care varies greatly between species, and is often dependent on the number of offspring produced per sexual encounter.[8]


Since females are often the limiting factor in a species reproductive success, males are often expected by the females to search and compete for the female, known as intraspecific competition.[4] This can be seen in organisms such as bean beetles, as the male that searches for females more frequently is often more successful at finding mates and reproducing. In species undergoing this form of selection, a fit male would be one that is fast, has more refined sensory organs, and spatial awareness.[4]

Darwinian sex roles confirmed across the animal kingdom: http://advances.sciencemag.org/content/2/2/e1500983.full
Since Darwin’s conception of sexual selection theory, scientists have struggled to identify the evolutionary forces underlying the pervasive differences between male and female behavior, morphology, and physiology. The Darwin-Bateman paradigm predicts that anisogamy imposes stronger sexual selection on males, which, in turn, drives the evolution of conventional sex roles in terms of female-biased parental care and male-biased sexual dimorphism. Although this paradigm forms the cornerstone of modern sexual selection theory, it still remains untested across the animal tree of life. This lack of evidence has promoted the rise of alternative hypotheses arguing that sex differences are entirely driven by environmental factors or chance. We demonstrate that, across the animal kingdom, sexual selection, as captured by standard Bateman metrics, is indeed stronger in males than in females and that it is evolutionarily tied to sex biases in parental care and sexual dimorphism. Our findings provide the first comprehensive evidence that Darwin’s concept of conventional sex roles is accurate and refute recent criticism of sexual selection theory.

Coevolution of parental investment and sexually selected traits drives sex-role divergence: https://www.nature.com/articles/ncomms12517
Sex-role evolution theory attempts to explain the origin and direction of male–female differences. A fundamental question is why anisogamy, the difference in gamete size that defines the sexes, has repeatedly led to large differences in subsequent parental care. Here we construct models to confirm predictions that individuals benefit less from caring when they face stronger sexual selection and/or lower certainty of parentage. However, we overturn the widely cited claim that a negative feedback between the operational sex ratio and the opportunity cost of care selects for egalitarian sex roles. We further argue that our model does not predict any effect of the adult sex ratio (ASR) that is independent of the source of ASR variation. Finally, to increase realism and unify earlier models, we allow for coevolution between parental investment and investment in sexually selected traits. Our model confirms that small initial differences in parental investment tend to increase due to positive evolutionary feedback, formally supporting long-standing, but unsubstantiated, verbal arguments.

Parental investment, sexual selection and sex ratios: http://www.kokkonuts.org/wp-content/uploads/Parental_investment_review.pdf
The second argument takes the reasonable premise that anisogamy produces a male-biased operational sex ratio (OSR) leading to males competing for mates. Male care is then predicted to be less likely to evolve as it consumes resources that could otherwise be used to increase competitiveness. However, given each offspring has precisely two genetic parents (the Fisher condition), a biased OSR generates frequency-dependent selection, analogous to Fisherian sex ratio selection, that favours increased parental investment by whichever sex faces more intense competition. Sex role divergence is therefore still an evolutionary conundrum. Here we review some possible solutions. Factors that promote conventional sex roles are sexual selection on males (but non-random variance in male mating success must be high to override the Fisher condition), loss of paternity because of female multiple mating or group spawning and patterns of mortality that generate female-biased adult sex ratios (ASR). We present an integrative model that shows how these factors interact to generate sex roles. We emphasize the need to distinguish between the ASR and the operational sex ratio (OSR). If mortality is higher when caring than competing this diminishes the likelihood of sex role divergence because this strongly limits the mating success of the earlier deserting sex. We illustrate this in a model where a change in relative mortality rates while caring and competing generates a shift from a mammalian type breeding system (female-only care, male-biased OSR and female-biased ASR) to an avian type system (biparental care and a male-biased OSR and ASR).

LATE FEMINISM: https://jacobitemag.com/2017/08/01/late-feminism/
Woman has had a good run. For 200,000 years humankind’s anisogamous better (and bigger) half has enjoyed a position of desirability and safety befitting a scarce commodity. She has also piloted the evolutionary destiny of our species, both as a sexual selector and an agitator during man’s Promethean journey. In terms of comfort and agency, the human female is uniquely privileged within the annals of terrestrial biology.

But the era of female privilege is ending, in a steady decline that began around 1572. Woman’s biological niche is being crowded out by capital.


Strictly speaking, the breadth of the coming changes extend beyond even civilizational dynamics. They will affect things that are prior. One of the oldest and most practical definitions for a biological species defines its boundary as the largest group of organisms where two individuals, via sexual reproduction, can produce fertile offspring together. The imminent arrival of new reproductive technologies will render the sexual reproduction criteria either irrelevant or massively expanded, depending upon one’s perspective. Fertility of the offspring is similarly of limited relevance, since the modification of gametes will be de rigueur in any case. What this looming technology heralds is less a social revolution than it is a full sympatric speciation event.

Accepting the inevitability of the coming bespoke reproductive revolution, consider a few questions & probable answers regarding our external-womb-grown ubermenschen:

Q: What traits will be selected for?

A: Ability to thrive in a global market economy (i.e. ability to generate value for capital.)

Q: What material substrate will generate the new genomes?

A: Capital equipment.

Q: Who will be making the selection?

A: People, at least initially, (and who coincidentally will be making decisions that map 1-to-1 to the interests of capital.)

_Replace any of the above instances of the word capital with women, and you would have accurate answers for most of our species’ history._


In terms of pure informational content, the supernova seen from earth can be represented in a singularly compressed way: a flash of light on a black field where there previously was none. A single photon in the cone of the eye, at the limit. Whether … [more]
biodet  deep-materialism  new-religion  evolution  eden  gender  gender-diff  concept  jargon  wiki  reference  bio  roots  explanans  🌞  ideas  EGT  sex  analysis  things  phalanges  matching  parenting  water  competition  egalitarianism-hierarchy  ranking  multi  study  org:nat  nature  meta-analysis  survey  solid-study  male-variability  darwinian  empirical  realness  sapiens  models  evopsych  legacy  investing  uncertainty  outcome-risk  decision-theory  pdf  life-history  chart  accelerationism  horror  capital  capitalism  similarity  analogy  land  gnon  🐸  europe  the-great-west-whale  industrial-revolution  science  kinship  n-factor  speculation  personality  creative  pop-diff  curiosity  altruism  cooperate-defect  anthropology  cultural-dynamics  civil-liberty  recent-selection  technocracy  frontier  futurism  prediction  quotes  aphorism  religion  theos  enhancement  biotech  revolution  insight  history  early-modern  gallic  philosophy  enlightenment-renaissance-restoration-reformation  ci 
january 2018 by nhaliday
Virtual revenge is sweet in Bangladesh | 1843
A bloodthirsty video game set during the war of independence – and sponsored by the government – is proving popular with young Bangladeshis
news  org:mag  org:anglo  org:biz  india  asia  MENA  politics  tribalism  war  internet  accelerationism  simulation  current-events  populism 
march 2017 by nhaliday
Why Nothing Works Anymore - The Atlantic
But why would new technology reduce rather than increase the feeling of precarity? The more technology multiplies, the more it amplifies instability. Things already don’t quite do what they claim. The fixes just make things worse. And so, ordinary devices aren’t likely to feel more workable and functional as technology marches forward. If anything, they are likely to become even less so.
news  org:mag  rhetoric  contrarianism  technology  accelerationism  primitivism  eden-heaven  unintended-consequences  robust 
february 2017 by nhaliday
The Membrane – spottedtoad
All of which is to say that the Internet, which shares many qualities in common with an assemblage of living things except for those clear boundaries and defenses, might well not trend toward increased usability or easier exchange of information over the longer term, even if that is what we have experienced heretofore. The history of evolution is every bit as much a history of parasitism and counterparasitism as it is any kind of story of upward movement toward greater complexity or order. There is no reason to think that we (and still less national or political entities) will necessarily experience technology as a means of enablement and Cool Stuff We Can Do rather than a perpetual set of defenses against scammers of our money and attention. There’s the respect that makes Fake News the news that matters forever more.

THE MADCOM FUTURE: http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/images/publications/The_MADCOM_Future_RW_0926.pdf

ai robocalls/phonetrees/Indian Ocean call centers~biologicalization of corporations thru automation&global com tech

fly-by-night scams double mitotically,covered by outer membrane slime&peptidoglycan

trillion $ corps w/nonspecific skin/neutrophils/specific B/T cells against YOU

ratty  unaffiliated  contrarianism  walls  internet  hacker  risk  futurism  speculation  wonkish  chart  red-queen  parasites-microbiome  analogy  prediction  unintended-consequences  security  open-closed  multi  pdf  white-paper  propaganda  ai  offense-defense  ecology  cybernetics  pessimism  twitter  social  discussion  backup  bio  automation  cooperate-defect  coordination  attention  crypto  money  corporation  accelerationism  threat-modeling  alignment  cost-benefit  interface  interface-compatibility 
december 2016 by nhaliday
Sore Losers - Urbanomic
The main story of recent times has been ‘the liberation of liberalism’—the freeing of capitalism—Badiou insists. (His preferred identity lies in insisting this.)

This Thing—the Great Foe—is not devoid of identity, however embarrassing it may be to explicitly acknowledge that fact (i.e. its factuality as such). To succumb to excitement about the empiricity of ‘Capitalist globalization’, in its scandalous singularity, is to thrill to its vast annoyance, rather than its universal disaster. Yet it is, as everyone clearly recognizes, an Anglophone global affliction that disturbs ‘us’, and an Anglophone ideological negligence that has ‘counted for nothing’ those without any productive part to play in its expansion. The major enemy is Anglophone, Anglo-Saxon, Anglo-American—‘Anglo-Jewish’, it will inevitably be said, if not by Badiou then by innumerable others, including especially the Islamic ‘fascists’ whose sensitivities refuse to be dulled on the point. It is, in any case, the positive ethnic constituency primarily identified with ‘the liberation of liberalism’ when this is acknowledged with coarse realism. No one gets to see how peculiar this thing is from nowhere. Its critics, we can confidently—if indelicately—speculate, have been concretely offended. They have been ‘wounded’—and not only so very recently.

Of course, there could be nothing more gauche than to articulate ideological criticism in the voice of national resentment. From the perspective of philosophy, to speak in the name of any positive identity—even one far more fashionable than the nation and its associated ethnic categories—is a simple disgrace. Selected identities might be exalted from a distance, in approximate proportion to their transgressive or victimological status, but every elite intellectual understands profoundly—if often only implicitly—that ontic definition is dirt.
land  essay  horror  accelerationism  europe  anglosphere  islam  terrorism  world  current-events 
november 2016 by nhaliday
The Future of Genetic Enhancement is Not in the West | Quillette

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.

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/
caveats: https://ipscell.com/2017/08/4-reasons-mitalipov-paper-doesnt-herald-safe-crispr-human-genetic-modification/

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.
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



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 : mystic

related tags

-_-  :/  abortion-contraception-embryo  academia  accelerationism  accuracy  acmtariat  advertising  aesthetics  africa  aggregator  ai  ai-control  alignment  altruism  analogy  analysis  analytical-holistic  anglo  anglosphere  announcement  anomie  anthropology  antidemos  aphorism  apollonian-dionysian  archaics  arms  art  asia  attention  authoritarianism  automation  axioms  backup  barons  beauty  benevolence  bio  biodet  biophysical-econ  biotech  bits  blog  books  bots  business  cancer  capital  capitalism  cartoons  censorship  chan  characterization  chart  china  christianity  civil-liberty  civilization  classic  clever-rats  climate-change  clown-world  cohesion  comedy  comics  commentary  communication  comparison  competition  complement-substitute  complex-systems  concept  consumerism  contrarianism  cool  cooperate-defect  coordination  corporation  cost-benefit  counter-revolution  cracker-econ  creative  CRISPR  critique  crypto  cultural-dynamics  culture  culture-war  curiosity  current-events  cybernetics  cycles  cynicism-idealism  darwinian  data  death  decentralized  decision-theory  deep-materialism  degrees-of-freedom  democracy  demographic-transition  demographics  density  deterrence  developing-world  differential  discussion  disease  distribution  documentary  drama  duality  duplication  duty  dysgenics  early-modern  ecology  eden  eden-heaven  efficiency  egalitarianism-hierarchy  EGT  eh  elegance  embodied  emergent  empirical  end-times  enhancement  enlightenment-renaissance-restoration-reformation  entropy-like  environment  eric-kaufmann  essay  ethanol  ethics  europe  evidence  evolution  evopsych  existence  exit-voice  expansionism  explanans  expression-survival  externalities  extrema  facebook  farmers-and-foragers  fashun  FDA  fertility  film  flux-stasis  food  formal-values  frisson  frontier  futurism  gallic  games  gender  gender-diff  genetics  genomics  geometry  giants  gnon  gnxp  good-evil  government  graph-theory  graphs  great-powers  hacker  hanson  hard-tech  heterodox  history  hmm  hn  horror  hsu  humanity  ideas  identity  ideology  immune  incentives  india  individualism-collectivism  industrial-revolution  inequality  information-theory  insight  intelligence  interdisciplinary  interests  interface  interface-compatibility  internet  invariance  investigative-journo  investing  iq  iraq-syria  islam  janus  jargon  justice  kinship  land  law  left-wing  legacy  len:long  len:short  letters  life-history  links  list  literature  lmao  local-global  lol  long-short-run  longform  male-variability  managerial-state  markets  matching  medicine  MENA  mena4  meta-analysis  metabuch  metameta  military  minimalism  models  modernity  moloch  money  morality  mostly-modern  multi  music  mutation  mystic  n-factor  nascent-state  nationalism-globalism  nature  network-structure  new-religion  news  nibble  nihil  nl-and-so-can-you  northeast  nuclear  number  occident  oceans  offense-defense  open-closed  optimate  order-disorder  org:anglo  org:biz  org:bleg  org:bv  org:foreign  org:junk  org:lite  org:local  org:mag  org:med  org:nat  org:popup  org:rec  org:sci  orient  oscillation  outcome-risk  outdoors  paradox  parallax  parasites-microbiome  parenting  paying-rent  pdf  peace-violence  pennsylvania  people  personality  pessimism  phalanges  phase-transition  philosophy  pic  policy  polis  polisci  politics  poll  pop-diff  popsci  populism  postrat  power  pragmatic  prediction  primitivism  propaganda  protestant-catholic  quotes  randy-ayndy  ranking  ratty  realness  reason  recent-selection  red-queen  redistribution  reference  reflection  regularizer  regulation  religion  responsibility  revolution  rhetoric  right-wing  risk  robotics  robust  rock  roots  sanctity-degradation  sapiens  scale  scaling-up  science  science-anxiety  scifi-fantasy  scitariat  security  selection  self-control  self-interest  sex  similarity  simulation  singularity  sinosphere  skunkworks  sky  slippery-slope  social  social-capital  social-norms  sociality  society  socs-and-mops  solid-study  space  speculation  speed  speedometer  ssc  strategy  stream  study  subculture  summary  survey  sv  tech  technocracy  technology  techtariat  terrorism  the-basilisk  the-bones  the-classics  the-great-west-whale  the-self  the-trenches  theory-of-mind  theos  thermo  things  threat-modeling  time  top-n  toys  track-record  tradeoffs  tradition  transportation  trends  tribalism  twitter  unaffiliated  uncertainty  unintended-consequences  urban  urban-rural  us-them  usa  values  venture  video  visual-understanding  volo-avolo  vulgar  walls  war  water  white-paper  whole-partial-many  wiki  wonkish  world  world-war  yarvin  yvain  🌞  🐸  🔬  🤖 

Copy this bookmark: