see also my eaforum at https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/users/dirk and my tumblr at https://d-i-r-k-s-t-r-i-d-e-r.tumblr.com/ .
dirk
Karma: 537
If I take a tree, and I create a computer simulation of that tree, the simulation will not be a way of running the original tree forward at all.
Another Grok prompt-injection, this time trying to make it push Musk’s preferred narrative of white genocide in South Africa: https://x.com/grok/status/1922702387711705247 https://x.com/MattBinder/status/1922713839566561313 https://x.com/AricToler/status/1922702822568513702 (latter two are screenshot compilations). Edit: also covered in Rolling Stone here. Not really notable in its own right aside from the amusement value, but gives the lie to earlier claims that manipulating Grok’s outputs goes against their company culture.
The content of the reddit post linked is missing; it was annoyingly hard to find a mirror, so here’s a link to save others the trouble.
There is indeed an audiobook version; the site links to https://www.audible.com/pd/If-Anyone-Builds-It-Everyone-Dies-Audiobook/B0F2B8J9H5 (where it says it’ll be available September 30) and https://libro.fm/audiobooks/9781668652657-if-anyone-builds-it-everyone-dies (available September 16).
As I was reading another post, I encountered this comment by gwern discussing an article about psychological risks of meditation; interestingly, one of the people interviewed, like you, found themself temporarily unable to feel for their children.
There were roughly 2000 respondents to the 2024 EA survey; if we assume that’s undercounting by a factor of 100, that would still only give us 200,000 EAs (and I expect that it’s really more like 10x, for 20,000).
This is with regards to specifically small donations, of under $100; taking $50 as the average small donation and assuming every EA makes political donations, 50 times 200,000 would equal $1 million of campaign contributions ($100,000 if we assume there are only 10x as many EAs as answered the survey).
That is enough to fully cover a small campaign or two, but it’s not clear to me whether, spread over many candidates as would happen in real life, even the higher number would make much of a difference to any of their races.
If you hover your cursor over the react, you should see a popup showing one vote by you; from there, just click again on the highlighted upvote to remove.
Maybe to some, their way of expressing things seems “boring” or “irrelevant.”
But who gets to decide that? Why you? Why me? Why anyone for that matter?
Each individual reader gets to decide that. (In fact, it’s impossible not for readers to experience some amount of boredom from ‘none’ to ‘maximal’, so they actually can’t help making a judgement). There’s not a singular gate you can pass to be heard; every reader must individually be convinced that what you have to say is worth their time, no two ways around it.
That said, I’m getting the vibe that you want friendship as well as audience, and on that front I’m actually somewhat more optimistic; while I lack the expertise to outline a strategy for you, people are often surprisingly amenable to interaction (due to their symmetric drive for social connection), and moreover such interactions can increase the interactee’s friendship in and of themselves. (Also, individual friends are more rewarding than individual audience members, so your efforts go further.)
Which brings me to something I actually consider a major weakness of the post; you write at length about the downsides of dismissing those who communicate in nonstandard fashion, but there’s no trace of what you might want to communicate. Insofar as that’s because you want to talk to people more than you want to talk about anything, relatable, but to potential conversers it’s quite short on affordances. To the extent that the post is itself supposed to invite conversation, I would definitely suggest including more discussion of what interests you. (Also, unsolicited advice, doing an intro post in an open thread might be a good way to start getting to know people.)
As a note, I actually found the additional personal details at the bottom of the post significantly more pleasant to read than the obviously-LLM-authored elements in the main text and your comments; IDK if it’s ultimately worth the tradeoff to you, but I’d encourage you to consider the possibility of shifting toward a higher proportion of self-authored text in future posts/comments.
(e.g. Community Notes).
Elon Musk was not responsible for Community Notes. It was released multiple years before he purchased Twitter. I’m unclear on whether he’s outright lied about being responsible or people are just making mistaken assumptions, but in any case I don’t think you should give him credit for something he didn’t do.
IMO summaries and reviews rarely capture all the content of a book; it would have to be an extraordinarily fluff-laden piece of nonfiction to be perfectly replaceable.
Per https://eightyonekilograms.tumblr.com/post/772774450949177344/i-work-at-google-yes-this-is-basically-correct , long LLM context windows are basically just short windows extended with imperfect hacks, so the loss of coherence is probably hard to avoid.
According to eukaryote herself, it is not the fact that his claims are outside the overton window are not the reason she dislikes them, but rather that they are racist. I don’t think I am being obtuse; I think you’re pretending the two are synonymous.
I think he means you should design a trustless system, a lá public key cryptography.
The claim cubefox made was that eukaryote disliked Cremieux for saying things outside the overton window. By clarifying that she instead disliked Cremieux for being racist (and just generally interpersonally unpleasant) eukaryote was not dodging the point but directly addressing it.
I think it’s counter to the spirit of rationalist discourse to ban the hypothesis that someone is racist. Rationalism is about following the evidence wherever it leads, not about keeping people’s feelings from being hurt.
Having clicked through to the link you posted, it looks like what happened is that she made a tumblr post claiming to be sincerely upset about mistreatment of immigrants, contrary to what she described as conservative assumptions that people are simply pretending to care in order to score points against Trump. The poster you linked ran a search for the terms “immigrant” and “borders” on Vox, did not find any articles from her (they seemed to be interested in specifically criticism of Biden, but there were no articles about Trump either), and decided this was proof that liberals were indeed, pretending to care in order to score points against Trump. The fact that you treat this as evidence against Kelsey’s character makes me think less of you, not her.
I assume young, naive, and optimistic. (There’s a humor element here, in that niplav is referencing a snowclone, afaik originating in this tweet which went “My neighbor told me coyotes keep eating his outdoor cats so I asked how many cats he has and he said he just goes to the shelter and gets a new cat afterwards so I said it sounds like he’s just feeding shelter cats to coyotes and then his daughter started crying.”, so it may have been added to make the cadence more similar to the original tweet’s).
Your grievance with your former employer seems to me to have little relevance to how would-be college students should plan to spend their time, and even if it had, you haven’t shared enough detail for people to judge your report as accurate (assuming this is in fact the case).
His lack of reply probably means he doesn’t want to engage with you, likely due to what he described as “your combative and sensationalistic attitude.”
Is there a reason to think this would be beneficial? I don’t see what’s supposed to be desirable about taking people’s degrees.