blakestacey

joined 2 years ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] blakestacey@awful.systems 5 points 6 months ago (4 children)

Today's news....

internally at Meta:

-trans and nonbinary themes stripped from Messenger

-enforcement policy now allows for the denial of trans people's existence

-tampons removed from men's restrooms

-DEI programs shuttered

-Kaplan briefed top conservative influencers the night before policy changes were announced

[–] blakestacey@awful.systems 10 points 6 months ago (4 children)

My favorite quote from flipping through LessWrong to find something passingly entertaining:

You only multiply the SAT z-score by 0.8 if you're selecting people on high SAT score and estimating the IQ of that subpopulation, making a correction for regressional Goodhart. Rationalists are more likely selected for high g which causes both SAT and IQ

(From the comments for "The average rationalist IQ is about 122".)

[–] blakestacey@awful.systems 9 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Saying that Excel is not and never was a good solution for any problem feels like a rather blinkered, programmer-brained technique.

[–] blakestacey@awful.systems 2 points 6 months ago

xcancel link, since nitter.net is kaput.

New diet villain just dropped. Believe or disbelieve this specific one, "fat" or even "polyunsaturated fat" increasingly looks like a failure as a natural category. Only finer-grained concepts like "linoleic acid" are useful for carving reality at the joints.

Reply:

This systematic review and meta-analysis doesn't seem to indicate that linoleic acid is unusually bad for all-cause mortality or cardiovascular disease events.

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD011094.pub4

Yud writes back:

And is there another meta-analysis showing the opposite? I kinda just don't trust those anymore, unless somebody I trust vouches for the meta-analysis.

Ah, yes, the argumentum ad other-sources-must-exist-somewhere-um.

[–] blakestacey@awful.systems 5 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

Yud is against seed oils, right? Or was that Siskind? I have a vague memory of the topic coming up but was unable to substantiate it in the 22 seconds of archive-searching that I was willing to do.

[–] blakestacey@awful.systems 8 points 6 months ago

"What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us?"

[–] blakestacey@awful.systems 3 points 6 months ago

su;dr

(saw URL; didn't read)

[–] blakestacey@awful.systems 6 points 6 months ago (1 children)

You don't even have to be well-known to get crank attention. Post anything with "quantum" in the title on the arXiv and they'll find your e-mail.

Source: this is one of the few times when I can say "trust me, bro" and be entirely sincere about it

[–] blakestacey@awful.systems 6 points 6 months ago

eyelid twitches

[–] blakestacey@awful.systems 6 points 6 months ago (4 children)

One thing that may not be visible from outside the profession is that there are a lot of steps in between air-hockey tables and the research frontier, especially for the part of the frontier that gets the most press — black holes, Large Hadron Collider stuff, quantum computing, etc. Wanting to understand any of those things at a level better than (bong rip) man, like, quantum mechanics, dude, requires systematic study. Doing that entirely on one's own might not be impossible, but it's damn hard.

view more: ‹ prev next ›