niplav @niplav@schelling.pt

"Research published in 2007[^78] has shown that cigarette smokers suffering damage to the insular cortex, from a stroke for instance, have their addiction to cigarettes practically eliminated. These individuals were found to be up to 136 times more likely to undergo a disruption of smoking addiction than smokers with damage in other areas."

"In 2021, two meta-analyses on preference measurement in experimental economics find strong evidence for greater male variability for cooperation (variance ratio: 1.30, 95% CI [1.22, 1.38]), time preferences (1.15 [1.08, 1.22]), risk preferences (1.25 [1.13, 1.37]), dictator game offers (1.18 [1.12, 1.25]) and transfers in the trust game (1.28 [1.18, 1.38])."

Wireheading is the generalization of a goal where the policy is extremely similar across all goals

Hm this felt more insighty when I noted it down

is the foot fetish common because feet are next to genitals in the somatosensory cortex?

I think the existence on a Dustin Moskovitz/Cari Tuna and 100 billionaires who do random stuff with their money outweighs no billionaires and the government has the money.

(By a very very wide margin)

Possibly the most valuable thing I have ever done.

Simulacra and Simulation (Jean Baudrillard, 1981)

"I like the Altman schizo arc"

100 wikipedia edits, bitches

All stable processes we shall predict. All unstable processes we shall control. All externalities we shall internalise. All cognition we shall direct.

Let's say you have a programming language C, and a programming language C+.

Every valid C program is a valid C+ program, but not the other way around.

There can be at least two ways in which this happens:

1. C+ is "stricter" than C, but the strictness is optional: you can e.g. add type signatures that don't exist in C.

2. C+ is more "featureful" than C. E.g. it adds generics or whatever.

Is there a way to distinguish those two rigorously? Or is there no underlying deep difference?

If you press the button, the top 10% earners in the world (who hold 85% of the world's wealth) will be forced to forfeit their earnings and be given a fixed allowance equal to 5% their prior income.

Their money'll be distributed to everyone else, proportionally according to need.

Do you press the button?

treat as if the first character was lowercase

it would've made kabbalistic sense if hitler was a furry: noble wolf (adolf) one who lives in a hut (hitler)

NIMBYism is good bc cities are IQ shredders

i need to get my tubes tied and my pupils filed