Its key feature is that it's ~mechanically and third-party testable.

The best way to get someone to adopt a moral standard is expediency (can currently be used to say some enemy is doing/did something wrong). Beware of such moral trojan horses though.

Does anybody else feel weird about the concept of 'goals'? It somehow simultaneously feels too self-centred and nowhere near self-centred enough.

Young people generally like to travel, people with families less so, yet most work travel is done by the latter. Another suboptimal allocation of experiences by the universe.

Back-propagation is more of a black box than the models it produces.

Most that do this don’t really feel like they have a choice.

Curiosity is an act of faith.

Most narratives about cultural change frame themselves as commentary or analysis but really they are often campaigns aimed at brining that cultural change about.

Story I find useful for this: each of these ideologies is a map. Every map contains something interesting not on any of the others. That's what gives it value. But it also means there's a lot missing on every map. And there is stuff in the territory not on any map.

I will admit I find something pretty hypnotic about the way Bill Ackman talks and writes. First noticed this when I somehow ended up watching his 3 hour Herbalife presentation multiple times. Not a lot of three hour movies I have watched multiple times.

Philosophy papers that meet such rigorous standards are, after all, notorious for being widely read, easily comprehensible, clear in their ideas and deeply charismatic.

🤦 Seriously it's not difficult to win the influence game when competition is this clueless.

I have this theory that men have a lower capacity for disgust than women.

It's like that puzzle, 1 town, 2 hairdressers, one with a good haircut, one with a bad one, who's the better hairdresser? (A: 2nd)

Similarly women sleep with men, men with women. Who's more disgusting?