yes. but they were subtle. 

Oh I totally forgot to mention control theory, add that.

• ctrl theory: brian douglas on yt
• 3d sketching: just draw things from models you'll get better QUICK
• optics, signal processing: I learned from youtube, choice MIT lectures, implementing sims, etc but there are probably good textbooks
• abstract algebra: An Infinitely Large Napkin (I stan this book so hard)

This may be a me thing but I draw stuff out when I ideate (esp w hardware) and more dimensions -> better physical models -> better, faster iteration speed mental models

side comment that I've been reminded of: epigenetics *exist(s?)*. I wonder if that could somehow be a more naturally integrate-able approach

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4251063/
 

• I like the premise. I'm glad this is getting researched. But:
• Lots of things in the space are understudied and the startup-vibe approach of "we'll figure this all out on the way because previous papers don't exist" seems way less likely to work with bio than tech because of the length of iteration cycles. But props if it does?
  • Black swan effects of polygenic edits
    • cellular stress if on a large scale?
    • might be an exception where pleiotropy does actually matter, which would suck. the table in another comment showing correlations between illnesses is pretty convincing however it's possible there are effects that aren't quantified there (doesn't present as diagnosable disease)
  • ???? not sufficiently enmeshed in the bio space but this entire post gives off the vibe of "most of the components are bleeding edge and there aren't many papers, esp not large scale/long term ones" and I imagine that'll cause more issues than you expect and streeeetch timescales
  • given black box bio and difficulty of studying the brain, it's really hard to tell what's being left out in studies that measure only change in intelligence/what other things are being affected
• We have gotten nowhere near as much as we could out of behavioral interventions (on long timescales) and nootropics, and both of those seem like better areas to put research time into. I don't actually think a research project of this scale will be faster (for AI safety research etc) than either of those.
  • counterpoint: this will just make it easier/lower 'energy' to apply interventions and is hence worthwhile?? but it's still so risky that I maintain the above approaches are more worthwhile in the short term

Do the people who contract things out because their time is worth $n/hr or whatever actually keep track of how many “extra” hours they work on top of their basic expenses such that they know how much work they can practically expense out? Or is this a thing that people just say and don’t stop to actually think through. Very much has the vibes of a family with 300k+ takehome or whatever living paycheck to paycheck cuz they’re too good for certain things

There is no such thing as the present, and you are experiencing everything that can possibly be experienced

Deja vu is actually the only time you’re not repeating things infinitely

no creative, original thought exists. everything has been thought, and you've just forgotten. you know everything, you just don’t know that you know everything 

I would be interested in dialoguing about:
- why the "imagine AI as a psychopath" analogy for possible doom is or isn't appropriate (I brought this up a couple months ago and someone on LW told me Eliezer argued it was bad, but I couldn't find the source and am curious about reasons)

- how to maintain meaning in life if it seems that everything you value doing is replaceable by AI (and mere pleasure doesn't feel sustainable)