Hi Deborah what’s up wait so what the fuck, am I getting this right: this person found a new ficus, potentially, and is in contact with a ficus expert who’ll get back to them in a few weeks. The person can’t accept this insignificant delay because??? (is there a lot of pressing demand for advances in ficus taxonomy?) so they write this bizarre screed about … about huh … how the invisible hand of the market should drive ficus research? You know, like bees, or Batman? For some reason? Because having to wait a few weeks is the same as being left to drown?

Someone’s on a lot of adderall.

you know you’re on a fascist blog when you see so many AI illustrations

my personal theory is he refused makeup because it’s an unnatural affectation that could have compromised his bioengineered skincare immortality routine

WHY DOES HE LOOK LIKE THAT

One particular safety concern is that venture capitalists might covertly pursue misaligned goals, hiding their true capabilities and objectives – also known as scheming. We study whether venture capitalists have the capability to scheme in pursuit of a goal that we provide in-context and instruct the capitalist to strongly follow. We evaluate frontier financiers on a suite of six agentic evaluations where capitalists are instructed to pursue goals and are placed in environments that incentivize scheming.

Remilia are still going??? Why??

God I’d feel sorry for fascists if they weren’t trying to make our world as ugly, boring and miserable as they are.

What’s Kudu exactly? The tech bullshit I’ve been able to find was impenetrable to me.

Do we agree that

When students have questions about course material, they’ll have the option of asking Kudu for help. But unlike ChatGPT and other public large-language models, Kudu will draw information only from the resources Stahuljak has uploaded.

is a straight up lie? That’s not how LLM chatbots work. It’s going to be a kitchen sink LLM with some stupid “you’re a very nice and very smart comp lit professor” prompt engineering, right?

The particular way they invoke Bayes’ theorem is fascinating. They don’t seem to ever actually use it in any sort of rigorous way, it’s merely used as a way to codify their own biases. It’s an alibi for putting a precise percentage point on your vibes. It’s kind of beautiful in a really stupid sort of way.

That’s a fair assumption, but as far as I know all his kids have been born through IVF or surrogates so there’s a possibility he doesn’t even fuck.

I thought the same thing too, but then I remembered. They don’t believe that environment matters. It’s all in the genes!

Something about this though, it’s interesting the way it stands in stark opposition to like, Elon Musk’s reproductive strategy of artificially inseminating every woman he interacts with. Would love to see them fight on the importance of eugenics vs spreading your seed far and wide.

The justice of the argument is clear to me. I have already made arrangements for my children to come to not be genetically mine. When the time comes, I will call upon their aid, presuming the sequencing does not tell us there are incompatibilities; and we will select embryos to maximize the quality of life for my child to come.

why are you talking like a necromancer

B-but homophobia is a social phenomenon. It’s not real (genetic)!

Or people could take away different things, especially since post-2014 (?) Scott approaches controversial issues much more cautiously and deliberately made known (Kolmogorov) that he was never going to fully honest around certain topics, inviting (deliberately or not, accurate or not) Straussian readings.

Ugh. These people seem sad and they make me sad.

Of course I ignore your warnings and proceed to read this shit from the beginning.

And before you say, as many people I’m sure will, that language changes or evolves and so forth: shall I presume many of you have no objection to being called ‘nazis’ in the standard twitter-left definition? Shall I treat all drunk sex as ‘rape’ because kidnapper-rape and frat-sex have the commonality of reduced consent? Shall I treat your remarks about this-or-that group as ‘hate speech’, or ‘violence’, in the form of speech? Clearly, we have some sense by which concept creep exists; by which definitions can be stretched dishonestly. That is what you’re doing, and you know what you’re doing.

Cool. Cool. This is fun.

lmao the paper has a comment section, this is next level science

Yeah I mean, TLP is a lot more perverse. His reactionary ideology pemeates everything he writes but he never comes out and actually affirms anything. The only rhetorical mode is critiquing the supposed psychological perception of theoretical persons. No statement of fact is ever made. Any opinion one could ascribe to the author is plausibly deniable. I find it despicable.

ideological overlap

Oh they absolutely are both infuriatingly coy reactionaries.

Here’s for instance a million words by TLP, and they all say “i hate women”.

I might actually hate TLP so much more, because he’s more seductive, better at that typical nietzschean flattery of the reader, and for some reason even people here tend to view him more positively.

It is really fucking maddening how people like Scott won’t think of morality, or politics, or economics, or really any kind of social or philosophical question, outside of the realm of the psychological. The history of the world can only be about overcoming bias.

I’ll be honest, Scott never gave me hives like a peremptory psychoanalytic reading of myths can.