Can it in some way describe itself? Something like "picture of DALL-E 2".
#2: My impression is that something like 2%-10% of Ukrainian population believed that a month ago (would you consider that worrying enough?). My evidence for that is very shacky and it is indeed quite possible that I am overestimating it by an order of magnitude (still kind of worrying, though I might be overestimating even more).First, my aunt is among them. Second, over last few years I've seen multiple (something like 5-10, concentrated around present date?) discussions on social media where friends of friends (all Russians) said that they believe in nazi-controlled Ukraine since their relatives in Ukraine in some or another way confirmed it (perhaps such relatives are predominantly from occupied territories?).
Third, a lot of Russian families have close relatives in Ukraine (I can't find any statistics, but by eyeballing families of my friends, I'd say something like 1/3 in Moscow). If a lot of such relatives believed in Russian propaganda, that would explain so many Russians believe it as well (there are rumors that some are choosing to believe tv over their relatives, but I haven't personally witnessed any of that). And this "a lot of such relatives" don't need to be implausibly big, since "Ukrainians believing in Russian propaganda" are likely overrepresented among close relatives of Russians.
On #3 I would very much expect the opposite. People at LW are very good vs. such tactics in general, and are high-information, and have access to Western sources, and this stuff is optimized to appeal to people in the former USSR.
I agree with all your points, but I don't think that it is opposite of what I meant to say. When I was talking about being at disadvantage, I didn't mean that western lesswrongers that will visit this site will be more affected by it then average Russians. I meant that western lesswronger will have not only obvious advantages (that you listed), but also some disadvantages, perhaps less obvious to westerners (is "disadvantage" a wrong word to use here?). That's why I was talking about "underestimating danger" (another part of that was an attempt to make people even more cautious).
Yes, sure, the danger is not that big, but I wouldn't be surprised if it'll noticeably negatively affect at least 0.1% of lesswrongers who visit such site (obviously conditioned on a lot of them visiting such site), and I absolutely won't risk something like that just for curiosity.
Strangely, this site seems like it's an attempt to be a sane Russian-slanted source
I am following my own advice and haven't read their articles since like 2013 when they lost their independence (and haven't been a regular reader before that). But my not very educated guess would be that if your observation is correct, then it is one of news sources that initially were independent, then became government-controlled, and are still posing as mostly-inependent, e.g. lie only when it is important. Kind of optimized for highly educated opposition-leaning people in the former USSR.
Yes, I think that it is the most likely scenario. Still, it bothered me enough that I mentioned it -- I consider such omission 2-3 times more likely in a world where there are other important (intentional) omissions that I haven't noticed than in a world where he is honest.
I still think that reading Galeev is worth it and that he is trustworthy enough source. But if for example he'll make a thread on modern Russian opposition that doesn't mention Navalny, it'll be a huge red flag for me.
To clarify: this site contains very effective propaganda that makes it a cognitohazard. You are likely underestimating its danger. It is not "just a bunch of fake statements". It is "a bunch of statements optimized for inflicting particular effects on its readers". Such "particular effects" are not limited to believing in what news says. In fact, news regularly contradict what they said a few months ago even in peace time, so believing what they are literally saying is probably not the point.Before reading propaganda consider that such materials:
1) Convinced a lot (a majority?) of Russians that Russian army is heroically fighting western nazis.
1.1) Not all such Russians are dumb -- some of them are rather smart, there are some scientists, etc.
2) Convinced some (a sizable minority?) of Ukrainians that they are living under nazi rule.
3) It is possible that you are at a disadvantage compared to all those people since you likely haven't encountered such propaganda before.For example, there are a lot of contrmemes to government propaganda in Russian culture. Some of them are exploited by modern propaganda (All other media are also lying!), but I suspect that their effect is net positive, especially in more educated people.
As a Russian I confirm that everything that Galeev says seems legit. I haven't been following our politics that much, but Gallev's model of Putin's fits my observations.The only thing that looked a little suspicious to me was the thread on Russian parliamentarism -- there was an opportunity to say something about Navalny's team there (e.g. as a central example of party that can't be registered or something about them organizing protests), and I expected that he would mention it, but he didn't. In fact, I don't think he ever mentioned Navalny in any of his threads. Why?
I think that if Lesswrong wants to be less wrong, then questions "why do you believe in that?" should not be downvoted.As for the question itself, I know next to nothing about the situation on this NPP, but just from priors I'd give 70% that if someone shelled it, it was Russian army.1) It is easier to shoot at NPP if you don't know what you re shooting at. Russian army is much more likely to mistake this target for something else.2) p(Russian government lies that it wasn't them | it was them) > p(Ukrainian government lies it wasn't them | it was them) (I believe in that since I believe that the left number is very very close to 1.)3) I am under impression that Russian army uses a lot more artillery. It is somewhat less important for such important target (Ukrainian army is probably incentivized to concentrate their limited resources here), but probably still important.I'd also like to hear an opinion of somebody who have more information about this.
Update: Prosecutor's General Office says that protest will be treated as "participation in radical group" which is up to 6 years. Probably won't be used too massively, at least initially.
Yeah, doesn't seem to be true. There is this law, and general attitude of treating posts on vk/facebook as a mass media -- but it is 'just' 3 years or a huge fine, and it is rarely enforced (yet). (There might be some other relevant laws that I don't know about, but I would be very surprised (and concerned) if they involved 10 year prison terms.) It might be wise to make some minimal precautions though -- like making all posts that are not meant to be read by tovaritch major "friends only".
Thank you for treating it as a "today's lucky 10,000" event. I am aware about quines (though not much more than just 'aware') and what I am worried about is whether people that created FairBot were careful enough.
"Definition" was probably a wrong word to use. Since we are talking in the context of provability, I meant "a short string of text that replaces a longer string of text for ease of human reader, but is parsed as a longer string of text when you actually work with it". Impredicative definitions are indeed quite common, but they go hand in hand with proofs of their consistency, like proof that a functional equation have a solution, or example of a group to prove that group axioms are consistent, or more generally a model of some axiom system.Sadly I am not familiar with Haskell, so your link is of limited use to me. But it seems to contain a lot of code and no proofs, so it is probably not what I am looking for anyway.What I am looking for probably looks like a proof of "GL⊢(∃f ∀g (f(g)=□ g(f)))". I am in many ways uncertain about whether this is the right formula (is GL a right system to use here (does it even support quantifiers over functional symbols? if not then there should be an extension that does support it); is "does f exist" the right question to be asking here; does "f(g)=□g(f)" correctly describe what we want rom FairBot). But some proof of that kind should exists, overwise why should we think that such FairBot exists/is consistent?