Coxon: oh shit don't give away how deep in I am with the rationalistsCoxon: I'm totally not a rationalist, I just hung out with them for a decade because I admire their huge swole brains and how right they are about everythingCoxon: nailed it
-
@davidgerard @Dangerous_beans I actually assume it's because he's distinguishing himself from the "dangerous rationalists" like the Zizians, who are vegan and polyamorous IIRC, and not the "good rationalists" like the fascists who believe that Christian Nationalists in the US are correct about everything practically, they just have the wrong god that they're worshiping
@Jer @Dangerous_beans ah didn't click he meant the zizians
-
@NewtonMark @davidgerard "I am intuitively opposed to polyamory, veganism, and consequentialist intuitions."
-
Coxon: oh shit don't give away how deep in I am with the rationalists
Coxon: I'm totally not a rationalist, I just hung out with them for a decade because I admire their huge swole brains and how right they are about everything
Coxon: nailed itfound by https://bsky.app/profile/cabernet.bsky.social/post/3mvlmmzpkas2v
@davidgerard can’t imagine why a dweeby 20-something is hanging out with Silicon Valley’s premier weird sex cult. Completely a surprise, who could ever have seen that one coming.
-
Coxon: oh shit don't give away how deep in I am with the rationalists
Coxon: I'm totally not a rationalist, I just hung out with them for a decade because I admire their huge swole brains and how right they are about everything
Coxon: nailed itfound by https://bsky.app/profile/cabernet.bsky.social/post/3mvlmmzpkas2v
@davidgerard@circumstances.rununiquely able to be correct about topics removed from daily experience
I wonder if they are uniquely able to be correct about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.I certainly trust them to be correct about factual questions
Factual questions, like those that are enmeshed with daily experience, which is what we tend to mean when we refer to "facts". Is he really trying to say "I trust them to be correct about questions concerning daily experience because they have specialized minds that are uniquely able to be correct about topics removed from daily experience."
He thinks we're all living in a giant sudoku puzzle, where we can "be correct" or "be incorrect" and we can know the difference and it's all tidy and easy (if you have a uniquely specialized mind). I suppose that sums up rationalists generally.
-
Coxon: oh shit don't give away how deep in I am with the rationalists
Coxon: I'm totally not a rationalist, I just hung out with them for a decade because I admire their huge swole brains and how right they are about everything
Coxon: nailed itfound by https://bsky.app/profile/cabernet.bsky.social/post/3mvlmmzpkas2v
@davidgerard Why am I not surprised that Harry Frotter believes in this whole scene? It would also be interesting to know how much he was paid to spout this nonsense to a craven and credulous press.
I suspect the talk about a mutual cessation treaty is entirely down to the people funding this tripe demanding the promised returns on "investment" *right now*, meaning they need another way to say "look over there!" in financial jargon.
-
Coxon: oh shit don't give away how deep in I am with the rationalists
Coxon: I'm totally not a rationalist, I just hung out with them for a decade because I admire their huge swole brains and how right they are about everything
Coxon: nailed itfound by https://bsky.app/profile/cabernet.bsky.social/post/3mvlmmzpkas2v
@davidgerard "Look, I don't know if you can call giving truckers handies through a glory hole at the rest stop "sex" per se..."
-
@davidgerard "Look, I don't know if you can call giving truckers handies through a glory hole at the rest stop "sex" per se..."
@AnarchoNinaWrites @davidgerard
“Im too rational to be controlled”
-
Coxon: oh shit don't give away how deep in I am with the rationalists
Coxon: I'm totally not a rationalist, I just hung out with them for a decade because I admire their huge swole brains and how right they are about everything
Coxon: nailed itfound by https://bsky.app/profile/cabernet.bsky.social/post/3mvlmmzpkas2v
@davidgerard
this for some reason reminded me of sloppy thinking as a qualifier. it sure reads as slop (which was probably the connect my brain drew), but the qualifier is too mild. that shit there is in no way a form of thinking, at all -
@davidgerard I’m doing what I can to hasten the Quornpocalypse!
-
Coxon: oh shit don't give away how deep in I am with the rationalists
Coxon: I'm totally not a rationalist, I just hung out with them for a decade because I admire their huge swole brains and how right they are about everything
Coxon: nailed itfound by https://bsky.app/profile/cabernet.bsky.social/post/3mvlmmzpkas2v
@davidgerard I felt like I was having a stroke trying to read his part
-
@davidgerard @Dangerous_beans I actually assume it's because he's distinguishing himself from the "dangerous rationalists" like the Zizians, who are vegan and polyamorous IIRC, and not the "good rationalists" like the fascists who believe that Christian Nationalists in the US are correct about everything practically, they just have the wrong god that they're worshiping
@Jer why does the representation that polyamorous folks get have to be *checks notes* Zizians and SBF
-
Coxon: oh shit don't give away how deep in I am with the rationalists
Coxon: I'm totally not a rationalist, I just hung out with them for a decade because I admire their huge swole brains and how right they are about everything
Coxon: nailed itfound by https://bsky.app/profile/cabernet.bsky.social/post/3mvlmmzpkas2v
I consider myself a rationalist. I've even used the term "hyper-rationalist" for myself, at times.
But almost nothing he says there makes the slightest bit of sense to me.
Like, I wouldn't want to judge anyone for their polyamory or veganism, but I just don't see how those things are relevant.
…
[Looking up who "Jacob Coxon" is …]
Oh; he's *that* guy.
Why does anyone think this guy has anything remotely interesting (or rational) to say?
-
I consider myself a rationalist. I've even used the term "hyper-rationalist" for myself, at times.
But almost nothing he says there makes the slightest bit of sense to me.
Like, I wouldn't want to judge anyone for their polyamory or veganism, but I just don't see how those things are relevant.
…
[Looking up who "Jacob Coxon" is …]
Oh; he's *that* guy.
Why does anyone think this guy has anything remotely interesting (or rational) to say?
@JeffGrigg the Rationalists are a different sort of creature! Look up LessWrong and Yudkowsky.
-
Coxon: oh shit don't give away how deep in I am with the rationalists
Coxon: I'm totally not a rationalist, I just hung out with them for a decade because I admire their huge swole brains and how right they are about everything
Coxon: nailed itfound by https://bsky.app/profile/cabernet.bsky.social/post/3mvlmmzpkas2v
"Correct about topics removed from daily experience"
Like the utility or viability of WorldCoin?
-
@davidgerard@circumstances.run
uniquely able to be correct about topics removed from daily experience
I wonder if they are uniquely able to be correct about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.I certainly trust them to be correct about factual questions
Factual questions, like those that are enmeshed with daily experience, which is what we tend to mean when we refer to "facts". Is he really trying to say "I trust them to be correct about questions concerning daily experience because they have specialized minds that are uniquely able to be correct about topics removed from daily experience."
He thinks we're all living in a giant sudoku puzzle, where we can "be correct" or "be incorrect" and we can know the difference and it's all tidy and easy (if you have a uniquely specialized mind). I suppose that sums up rationalists generally.@abucci the other thing rationalists mean by "factual questions" is race science and eugenics
-
J jwcph@helvede.net shared this topic
