Eliezer Yudkowsky being tired isn’t an unrelated accident though. Bayesian decision theory in general intrinsically causes fatigue by relying on people to use their own actions to move outcomes instead of getting leverage from destiny/higher powers, which matches what you say about him having sacrificed his present energy for this.
Similarly, “being Twitterized” is just about stewing in garbage and cursed information, such that one is forced to filter extremely aggressively, but blocking high-quality information sources accelerates the Twitterization by changing the ratio of blessed to garbage/cursed information.
On the contrary, I think raising salience of such discussions helps clear up the “informational food chain”, allowing us to map out where there are underused opportunities and toxic accumulation.
It seems likely to me that Eliezer blocked you because he has concluded that you are a low-quality information source, no longer worth the effort of engaging with.
I agree that this is likely Eliezer’s mental state. I think this belief is false, but for someone who thinks it’s true, there’s of course no problem here.
Working on writing stuff but it’s not developed enough yet. To begin with you can read my Linear Diffusion of Sparse Lognormals sequence, but it’s not really oriented towards practical applications.
I will look forward to that. I have read the LDSL posts, but I cannot say that I understand them, or guess what the connection might be with destiny and higher powers.
One of the big open questions that the LDSL sequence hasn’t addressed yet is, what starts all the lognormals and why are they so commensurate with each other. So far, the best answer I’ve been able to come up with is a thermodynamic approach (hence my various recent comments about thermodynamics). The lognormals all originate as emanations from the sun, which is obviously a higher power. They then split up and recombine in various complicated ways.
As for destiny: The sun throws in a lot of free energy, which can be developed in various ways, increasing entropy along the way. But some developments don’t work very well, e.g. self-sabotaging (fire), degenerating (parasitism leading to capabilities becoming vestigial), or otherwise getting “stuck”. But it’s not all developments that get stuck, some developments lead to continuous progress (sunlight → cells → eukaryotes → animals → mammals → humans → society → capitalism → ?).
This continuous progress is not just accidental, but rather an intrinsic part of the possibility landscape. For instance, eyes have evolved in parallel to very similar structures, and even modern cameras have a lot in common with eyes. There’s basically some developments that intrinsically unblock lots of derived developments while preferentially unblocking developments that defend themselves over developments that sabotage themselves. Thus as entropy increases, such developments will intrinsically be favored by the universe. That’s destiny.
Critically, getting people to change many small behaviors in accordance with long explanations contradicts destiny because it is all about homogenizing things and adding additional constraints whereas destiny is all about differentiating things and releasing constraints.
Eliezer Yudkowsky being tired isn’t an unrelated accident though. Bayesian decision theory in general intrinsically causes fatigue by relying on people to use their own actions to move outcomes instead of getting leverage from destiny/higher powers, which matches what you say about him having sacrificed his present energy for this.
Similarly, “being Twitterized” is just about stewing in garbage and cursed information, such that one is forced to filter extremely aggressively, but blocking high-quality information sources accelerates the Twitterization by changing the ratio of blessed to garbage/cursed information.
On the contrary, I think raising salience of such discussions helps clear up the “informational food chain”, allowing us to map out where there are underused opportunities and toxic accumulation.
It seems likely to me that Eliezer blocked you because he has concluded that you are a low-quality information source, no longer worth the effort of engaging with.
I agree that this is likely Eliezer’s mental state. I think this belief is false, but for someone who thinks it’s true, there’s of course no problem here.
Please say more about this. Where can I get some?
Working on writing stuff but it’s not developed enough yet. To begin with you can read my Linear Diffusion of Sparse Lognormals sequence, but it’s not really oriented towards practical applications.
I will look forward to that. I have read the LDSL posts, but I cannot say that I understand them, or guess what the connection might be with destiny and higher powers.
One of the big open questions that the LDSL sequence hasn’t addressed yet is, what starts all the lognormals and why are they so commensurate with each other. So far, the best answer I’ve been able to come up with is a thermodynamic approach (hence my various recent comments about thermodynamics). The lognormals all originate as emanations from the sun, which is obviously a higher power. They then split up and recombine in various complicated ways.
As for destiny: The sun throws in a lot of free energy, which can be developed in various ways, increasing entropy along the way. But some developments don’t work very well, e.g. self-sabotaging (fire), degenerating (parasitism leading to capabilities becoming vestigial), or otherwise getting “stuck”. But it’s not all developments that get stuck, some developments lead to continuous progress (sunlight → cells → eukaryotes → animals → mammals → humans → society → capitalism → ?).
This continuous progress is not just accidental, but rather an intrinsic part of the possibility landscape. For instance, eyes have evolved in parallel to very similar structures, and even modern cameras have a lot in common with eyes. There’s basically some developments that intrinsically unblock lots of derived developments while preferentially unblocking developments that defend themselves over developments that sabotage themselves. Thus as entropy increases, such developments will intrinsically be favored by the universe. That’s destiny.
Critically, getting people to change many small behaviors in accordance with long explanations contradicts destiny because it is all about homogenizing things and adding additional constraints whereas destiny is all about differentiating things and releasing constraints.