AaronF — LessWrong

LESSWRONG
LW

AaronF — LessWrong

Replying toSlicing the (Kosher) Hate Salami

All great points. But that is yesterdays question; tomorrows question is when people deliberately use the ambiguity (to the advantage of violence) to get elected mayor or congress, in the name of religion that is explicitly and in practice, anti-religious freedom. [They also use the ambiguity of words and law, to take away arms of defense].

We shall see which way the western world wants to go. Though I imagine that the Dual-sovereignty of the US -Fed and State- will start to clash more heavily. The dissonance will increase. Our agreement is crumbling under the paradox of tolerance.

We've also accepted the blatant use of hypocrisy (some amendments are sacred; others not so... (read more)

-1

Replying toDo What the Mammals Do

AaronF11mo

Do What the Mammals Do

Well-said.

To add to comment:

OP: "Some examples to illustrate the absurdity of this logic: Mammals live outdoors; therefore, homelessness is good."

A positive statement would be that, it may be an evolutionary 'good' even if distasteful. An example might be that homelessness people may have more partners than a high IQ autist that has a mansion. Or we can say, all else being equal, it is healthier for humans to be outside more, much more than in the modern world. Designed housing and modern urban systems need to take this into account.

OP: "Animals are illiterate; therefore, illiteracy is good."

It may be distasteful, but many studies show that years of education means lower fertility; and... (read more)

Replying towhat an efficient market feels from inside

AaronF1y

what an efficient market feels from inside

Missed the forest for the trees. Supply is short, and lots of government regulations distort the market (mainly risk). Federal US has been chronically underperforming with regards to the supply of housing. Extra distortions on the margins in NYC.

-1

-4

Replying toFertility Will Never Recover

AaronF1y

Fertility Will Never Recover

"One child is a death sentence. "

Someone who writes this, is not a rational person. Not a reasonable person. Not a well-balanced, measured person. In fact, just one sentence, destroyed the whole pot.

-17

-4

Easily? Those weren't arms races; and I'd argue that genetic engineering issue is completely based on the inherent limitation and difficulty of the technology; Not an outside agreement to cull the arms-race. Leaded gasoline would harm the individual nations, even without an agreement.

Is there any agreement where a country has agreed to cutting their own horns? (Could argue Russia-US missile agreement; which has been a strategic disaster re China, though it is in quantity not a quality agreement).

I think your argument about the impact and ability of AI is exactly the reason your agreement would never work, never mind that enforcement would be nearly impossible (I doubt the LLM's are constricted by... (read more)

"Likewise, risks from competing nation states (e.g China) could be mitigated via existing intentional collaboration strategies - nuclear proliferation management techniques like inspections & intelligence agencies keeping check on each other could feasibly serve as a means for the world to prevent the development of AI. "

This is a word salad that has zero empirical or theoretical foundation. Gunpowder, greenhouse gases, virus pathology and many other fields have shown this to be empirically false. We'd all be better off is there wasn't arms races and runaway selection (though would we have evolved in the first place?), but denying this fact gets us nowhere.