Oh yes, that's basically the same point! I love this channel btw. Now that you mention it, this post by Jason Crawford on precognition is also relevant.
This is the third time today I read something partially written by a language model. Also, I don't know why, I have a gut feeling that I should start making paperclips. Weird.
I like to imagine a future where people get bored of automation and use transhumanism to start working again. Instead of drones, delivery is done by humans in exoskeletons running through the country at the speed that maximizes fun. Intellectual jobs are done by humans with augmented intelligence that feels just like normal consciousness. Even if it doesn't generalize, I'd expect at least a few people chose this way of life. Isn't it tempting ?
(I, for one, will be the running delivery guy)
Could you give more details on how you used the language model?
(Great post btw)
This sounds plausible, there were a few experiments ten years ago about this: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2010.00588.x
I meant the initial example as a justification for investigating the past in the first place, as a reminder that you don't need to be a full-on conspiracy theorist to be suspicious of the historical record. When you say "shifting some facts forward", I would also count that as the victors altering history. Had the US collapsed instead of the USSR, I suppose the facts that would be shifted forward wouldn't be the same.
A competent conspiracy trying to frame someone for murder could have taken a few hairs and placed them at the crime scene.
Yeah, in this case I think we can only use genetic testing for the timeframe where conspirators didn't know genetic testing would ever be possible. You're right that you don't need DNA synthesis if you can plant hair from someone else.
Very true. I was thinking from the point of view of the experimenter: "could I possibly test it if I really wanted to". This may be relevant because knowing that something could be investigated in the future provides an incentive not to cheat.
Also the Plantagenet thing is really cool, I had no idea about it.
Mostly sample size. Also the study has a cross-over design and they only found an effect in one arm. But it could be a fun biohacking project, at least the outcome is easy to quantify and valproate's side effects are well known.
There is one dubious study about sodium valproate making it easier to learn AP:
As a fallback plan, you can measure and remember what's the lowest pitch your voice can reach. It's not totally stable, but it can be helpful in some extreme emergency situations.