Chaos Patch (#85)

(Open thread + links)

On functioning nations and Urbit (also). Brain damage. Sin. Jews. The weekly round.

Dry-run for dictatorship. The multi-cultural defense against socialism (and the feminist one). White power. Asians in the age of microaggression (note). Revolution comes around (also, and also). “We cannot apologize enough.” The IRS @ work. What are British values? Idiocracy watch. Still closing. Correcting the Net. Who wants equality? Caplan being Caplan. Pagan revival (with a Girard twist). Ideology on the big screen.

“… rational people simply ignore their reports. […] This is a sad state of affairs, but it is, of course, the equality-theorists who are chiefly to blame for bringing it about. For they have created in recent years a climate of feeling in which many men are afraid to deny the equality-theory openly, and even ashamed to doubt it inwardly. Hence the phenomena which are now so observable, of hypocrisy, self-deception, and pious fraud: those invariable concomitants of a militant religion. … our contemporary equality-theorists are in fact (as I have hinted several times), religious rather than rational in their attitude to evidence.” Some data. A tale of two sisters.

Canada veers left. European hate maps. Sweden’s agony. Those awful Saudis on the road to bankruptcy (bonus). Decolonization continues. ‘Creepy‘ China and its problems.

“And, yes, I realize that by shining a light on this nonsense, I’m contributing to the very amplification I’m talking about here.” (It’s upsetting.)

A Carlota Perez walk-through. A unified theory of crime. A unified theory of social machine logic.

The quantum stack. Fermi paradox intensification in space and time. Cometary alcohol. The anatomy of intelligence and the Internet. The intractable brain. Contesting the gap. For all your periodic tables needs. “Ebola was a warning we have yet to heed.” Puppy-sized spiders. Paramecium video.

“… it became clear that like the environmental movement itself, climate change had been hijacked and turned into the usual revenge-against-the-more-competent agenda of the left, involving first-world nations limiting themselves so that more numerous third world nations could pollute.” Trustless climatology.

Tumbling paywalls.

Gottfried (on Mehring) on Schmitt. Roosh on Kaczynski (plus). Antinatalism. The BuzzFeed monster. Stoicism.

October 25, 2015admin 32 Comments »

TAGGED WITH : , , , , ,

32 Responses to this entry

  • OLF Says:

    Weiying Zhang is an… interesting person.


    Posted on October 25th, 2015 at 5:59 pm Reply | Quote
  • Chaos Patch (#85) | Neoreactive Says:

    […] By admin […]

    Posted on October 25th, 2015 at 6:10 pm Reply | Quote
  • AugustusPugin Says:

    That Urbit and the Impatience Principle piece makes a good point, but it’s one that Moldbug has already addressed himself in his “What’s wrong with CS research” post when he singles out Haskell as being frustratingly unintuitive to the point of sabotaging its own adoption, so it’s difficult to fully understand his reasons behind why Hoon’s syntax would be so intentionally alien if he grasps this – but then I don’t claim to fully understand his mind.


    Posted on October 25th, 2015 at 6:24 pm Reply | Quote
  • Aeschylus Says:

    Admin, I have to ask what your thoughts are on this:

    It certainly seems like a lucid explanation of your Numogram; however some of it makes me wonder how much I can trust the author. I’m thinking specifically about this person’s bizarre view of your character:

    “Personally, I don’t think anyone who could (re)discover, articulate, and explore such a perfected system of mysticism as the Numogram could be evil or hateful (and Land is certainly far beyond racism)…”

    and aims:

    “Nick lives in China and spends his time cultivating a racist hypernazi political movement on the internet called the Dark Enlightenment, by handing them advanced critical theory tools with a few racist quips thrown in so they promptly misinterpret and appropriate the tools to support their hateful racist ideology. This arming of the enemy acts as a dynamo, advancing the cultural clock towards apocalypse…”

    and of their characterization of NRx–the unintentionally funny “hypernazi” comment, for example. It’s not nearly as funny as his picture of you as a mystical Mr. Rogers, though.

    Is it an accurate analysis of the Numogram? Of anything?


    admin Reply:

    The Numogram is immanently self-validating (i.e. trustless hermeticism), so anything I might say about it from a position of assumed authority is bad juju.


    Posted on October 25th, 2015 at 7:11 pm Reply | Quote
  • Brett Stevens Says:

    Thank you for listing us among such esteemed company yet again. My two cents on the environmental movement is that it decided it had to be good to be popular, so picked up the liberal definition of “good,” and quickly became a vile sort of evil which could never accomplish its goals without violating the tenets of liberalism. Thus environmentalism has become as much the captive opposition party as American Republicans have: dedicated to fundraising, destined to be ineffectual, and yet perpetually popular as a symbol like motorcycles, heavy metal or blue jeans of the new, young and hip.


    Posted on October 25th, 2015 at 7:51 pm Reply | Quote
  • John Says:

    Microscopic horror:


    Posted on October 25th, 2015 at 8:05 pm Reply | Quote
  • Erebus Says:

    Am I missing something re: that “intergalactic spreading” paper?

    These guys talk about sending microscopic (or, at least, very small,) probes and replicators throughout the galaxy. Then they say that it’s troubling that these things do not exist. Here’s the thing: Probes like that could be all over the universe right now, and yet we have absolutely no way of detecting them! Unless large probes fly right up to Earth en masse and give us a shot across the bow, odds are that we’re not going to see a damn thing until our means of detection improve by more than a few orders of magnitude.

    Robin Hanson and those contemptible spergs at the Future of Humanity Institute are looking at this so-called paradox in precisely the wrong way. I would say, furthermore, that it is a biased and intellectually dishonest way. What they’re saying is: “Here’s what aliens MUST be doing. Why aren’t we seeing them do this? This strongly implies that there must be a filter!” But what they really mean is: “At projected near-future levels of human technological development, here’s how the human race may attempt to colonize the galaxy.” We cannot speculate as to the technological means that other civilizations have at their disposal, we can’t make any assumptions as to their motivations or how they might behave, and, in any case, we have no eyes. (Hell, didn’t last week’s Chaos Patch link to that article about a potential Dyson Sphere 1450 light years out? It’ll be a while until they figure out what that thing is, and 1450LY is right next door.)

    Hanson et al. are basically saying: “It’s our way or the highway. If we can’t see replicators, we need to take the idea of a Great Filter very seriously.” Which is, in a way, like that allegorical tale about the blind men and the elephant, but taken to new heights of cosmic absurdity. Hanson’s group of blind men already know exactly what extraterrestrial intelligence must be like, despite the fact that they have neither their senses, nor anything to compare an ETI against. All they have is a conception of extraterrestrial intelligence as a sort of Platonic ideal — and this is based entirely on what they expect near-future human technology to look like.

    ….We’ve just started to open up to the search for extraterrestrial intelligence. I’d say that Hanson ought to give it a few hundred years before he spergs out and starts talking about filters. There might be things out there beyond our powers of comprehension, to say nothing of the shoddy tools currently at our disposal.


    Aeroguy Reply:

    It does give us some information. They didn’t seem to push exclusively for a filter but rather the severity of a need for an explanation for the Fermi paradox, that our current theories which predict contact are incomplete or wrong. Given what we know, stars pumping out much of the universe’s energy into worthless heat would be incentive to push Dyson spheres on every star in reach (not just a few here and there, but entire galaxies). So either there’s a filter, there’s a hugely better source of energy than stars (wouldn’t that be an amazing discovery), or even the need for energy becomes irrelevant because of some unknown (including the simulation theory). So some unknown unknowns about the limitations of our existing theories have become known unknowns. It gives incentive to pursue the possibilities of these implications. The fact that our expectations are off tells us that somewhere our best theories are off/incomplete in a big way, it’s a nice kick in the ass.

    One of the things not mentioned in the paper is using the metal locked in stars for construction (which could be accessed by constructing electromagnetic pumps which is what planetary masses would be used to construct). The idea of von Neumann probes in this case wasn’t merely for data collection but to seed galaxies such as to put every star there inside a Dyson sphere. The question being, not why can’t we see them but why haven’t they turned all the stars in Dyson spheres, assuming finite useful energy (wouldn’t that be a nice assumption to prove wrong) and no obvious greater source for the stuff that impels life’s prerogative to expand, multiply and consume.

    You’re absolution correct about how we shouldn’t conclude anything with any sort of confidence, except the limitations of our existing theories. I can’t resist the urge to speculate though, even if it is only bad science fiction.

    One filter that could hit at the Von Neumon stage of development is competition between probes that turn the entirety of planetary mass immediately into probes rendering the system without enough mass to exploit the (enormous) locked away metal mass in the star. r/K selection on a galactic scale. The K selected would win in the long term, it would just take much longer, assuming they could move planetary masses across interstellar distances.


    Aeroguy Reply:

    Regarding my bit of speculative bad science fiction, it technically doesn’t work as a Fermi paradox filter explanation since the Earth would have been eaten by replication machines long ago.


    Erebus Reply:

    I know that we’ve been over this topic before. 😉
    …But the paper in question is unusually bad — unusually unimaginative. It predicts that ETIs are going to exhibit technology that we not only understand, but that we’re likely to possess ourselves before the century is out. It assumes, broadly speaking, that we are able to understand the motivations and predict the activity of these ETIs. Lastly, the smaller probes they’re talking about would go undetected even if they flew right into Robin Hanson’s office and alighted on his desk, which immediately invalidates much of their conjecture! So this seems to be less about “where are they?” and more about “here’s what we might soon be capable of”, which is why I accused the paper’s authors of being disingenuous.

    Would it be a surprise if our theories are off or incomplete in a big way? The way I see it, our efforts at finding ETIs are pre-Galilean — we have only the vaguest inkling of what we might want to look for, and we haven’t yet started experimenting in a serious way. Any attempt to entertain the possibility of a Great Filter should require almost infinitely more data than we have right now. The endless, repetitive discussion of the topic makes Hanson and the Future of Humanity Institute seem frivolous and unserious. That their work is unscientific should go without saying. I would also note that it is very likely that they are biased in favor of their pet theories, as “The Great Cosmic Filter” makes for a compelling TED Talk, and it’s an easy subject to write about. (Greg Bear already took a crack at it with The Forge of God, which predates Hanson’s work on the subject by almost a decade.)

    …Perhaps there already are Dyson spheres around galaxies. Or perhaps there are far more elegant solutions for energy capture which are unknown to us, and are beyond the wildest reckonings of a Dyson or a Von Neumann. It’s really quite impossible to say at this stage. It is interesting to speculate, of course, and ten minutes of quiet speculation should reveal to all of us that the number of potential solutions to the Fermi Paradox is only limited by one’s imagination… which of course means that it is no paradox.
    This is going to sound trite, but the truth could well be stranger than any fiction.

    I am confident that within the next few centuries all of the answers we seek will become apparent, and the Universe will open up to us like a book. All we need to do is to maintain the current pace of scientific innovation — particularly in physics and chemistry. (Which only means that we cannot allow ourselves to slip into a new Islamic Dark Age.)


    Posted on October 25th, 2015 at 8:18 pm Reply | Quote
  • 娘卖拜 Says:

    re: Creepy China


    Grotesque Body Reply:

    To be fair to China, it’s just a formal version of the same system that already exists in the West. If you commit thoughtcrime on social media you can lose your job or worse.


    admin Reply:

    But … but … formalization is just so damn creepy.


    Quint Essential Reply:

    Hmm… Perhaps the stereotypes of Asian hivemind and eusocial-ness are being lived up to? Seems like the Party are taking away another “useless” vector of human interaction. No need to guess your fellow comrade’s value any more. We’ll tell you which ones are worth hanging out with.

    Posted on October 25th, 2015 at 9:45 pm Reply | Quote
  • Chaos Patch (#85) | Reaction Times Says:

    […] Source: Outside In […]

    Posted on October 25th, 2015 at 9:47 pm Reply | Quote
  • Exfernal Says:

    Nice that someone else recognizes the importance of spindle neurons (regarding the ‘intractable brain’ link). I’ll wait for a trustworthy simulation of a single cell first.


    Alrenous Reply:

    Can’t simulate consciousness, since it manifests physically as a statistical pattern of decisions. Have to actually make it conscious.

    Also consciousness isn’t physical, so we’ll be waiting a while for even that much.


    Grotesque Body Reply:

    Eliminativism FTW. Can’t simulate what don’t real.


    Grotesque Body Reply:

    “As per Turing, the exact implementation of the cortex is not relevant: silicon, myelin, vacuum tubes, gears and levers, it doesn’t matter.”

    I’m prepared to accept this as dogmatically as Turingites (Turingians?) do when I see a mind implemented in something other than neurons.

    Exfernal Reply:

    For a less lofty goal, I would settle for simulating life (of a cell) first. Or is it also the same problem?


    Erebus Reply:

    How faithful do you want the simulation to be? It should be possible to simulate a cell right now, but only roughly. Truth is, there’s a hell of a lot we don’t know about cells. Membraneless organelles and intracellular protein-protein interactions are very poorly understood, and even large structures like the Golgi apparatus are imperfectly understood.

    …There’s a lot of good work in the field — including something on membraneless organelles that I just saw earlier today (PDF review) — but we’ll probably have genuine AI before we have a whole-cell simulation that’s true to life down to the very smallest details.

    Posted on October 25th, 2015 at 11:41 pm Reply | Quote
  • Grotesque Body Says:

    Stoicism is just watered-down Cynicism.


    Posted on October 25th, 2015 at 11:54 pm Reply | Quote
  • haishan Says:

    The actual UW-Milwaukee microaggressions web site has to be seen to be believed.

    Also worth noting re: that link: As I expected, the Left is moving on from policing the use of “illegals” as a noun to taking on the adjective form. We’ll see how long it takes the Times to get on board.


    Posted on October 26th, 2015 at 1:22 am Reply | Quote
  • Lord Auch Says:

    Thanks for the Gottfried article on Schmitt – his books on Schmitt and Strauss and others are quite readable. He comes off as something of a whining crybaby in podcasts and talks though.


    Posted on October 26th, 2015 at 8:43 am Reply | Quote
  • frank Says:

    Wow, I hadn’t noticed Caplan’s gone full progressive. What a shame.


    Posted on October 26th, 2015 at 1:15 pm Reply | Quote
  • Xoth Says:

    On the topic of the IRS, it was interesting to see that Lois Lerner, scourge of the tea party, in the end simply walked. A bit blatant, one might think, yet here we are.


    Posted on October 26th, 2015 at 10:00 pm Reply | Quote
  • Xoth Says:

    A glancing comment regarding the very interesting article on decolonisation of SA: I expect we will see a similar though probably gentler process in the USA, where the previous founders and foundational myths of the country will be disregarded, forgotten, replaced or suitably rewritten to fit what we might call the “post-white” agenda.


    Posted on October 26th, 2015 at 10:38 pm Reply | Quote
  • Skilluminati Says:

    “Ted Kaczynski’s Manifesto Predicted The Catastrophe From Technology And Liberalism”

    Aye, another victory for LSD. Stanford Research Institute was scoring all kinds of precognitive hits back in those glorious days.


    Posted on October 27th, 2015 at 8:41 pm Reply | Quote
  • Hurlock Says:

    Nick, if you haven’t yet read this new piece by Urbit, you definitely should:


    admin Reply:

    Yes, just been tweeting about it. Lots of impressive updating in the right direction.


    Posted on October 28th, 2015 at 3:41 pm Reply | Quote

Leave a comment