BC LIFE

Saved by @jacobhtml

Simon DeDeo
@SimonDeDeo 6 years, 7 months ago 4058 views

Save to PDF Share See On Twitter

"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."

As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi
— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018

We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.

Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)

It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.

Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".

I'm always shocked when I go back to my alma mater. If you select for cocktail-party skills you by necessity select against excellence. Conversely, since we know very well that discrimination against minorities and women is real, any lab with any sense has pro-inclusion policies.

If you look for the best, you do better science. Meanwhile, if you're in a humanities department, you do better scholarship: the humanities are fundamentally about the human experience, but the selection for East-coast SLACs and Ivys is even stronger there.

More from Simon DeDeo

Simon DeDeo
@SimonDeDeo

One thing that goes unremarked about Wikipedia: the vast majority of the content was written over 12 years ago—which means (given turnover) that the editors dominant today were not directly involved in that creation.

Put another way, the editors who built the dominant nodes in this network...

...have little overlap with the ones who made this much more recent managerial flowchart.

Internet time runs at hundred-fold speed—the difference between the people who painted what's in the Uffizi, and the people in charge of keeping those paintings from deteriorating. Very different tasks, and (one presumes) very personalities as well. @PaulSkallas?

Simon DeDeo
@SimonDeDeo

Donna Strickland, one of this year's Nobel Laureates, was not considered "notable enough" for Wikipedia as late as this May—reported by a number of sites, including the Independent. I dug into this a little. Here's the data—

This is the first deletion, back in 2014. A bit hard to read between the lines, but the basic story that an admin had Stickland's page "speedy deleted"—i.e., deleted without debate. The method was something called Copyright Jujitsu.

In particular, the admin had the page deleted not because of notability, but because it included a photograph of Strickland that had ambiguous copyright status. This is a method that people developed to get rid of content they didn't want, but also didn't want to debate.

"Copyright Jujitsu" because it is usually used against spam from companies; a PR officer uploads promotional material to Wikipedia. Instead of debating whether it's neutral, the admin can say "we'd love to have it, but the material appears to violate your company's copyright".

Usually the PR office and the IP office are separate in a company, and the idea of releasing promotional material under public domain is such a legal nightmare that the PR person goes away.

Advertisement

Simon DeDeo
@SimonDeDeo

On Bayesianism, the Many Worlds Interpretation, and personal identity.

Some thoughts worked out in a letter to a friend, which is the kind of thing you do when off Twitter for a glorious week. (🧵)

“Chance is ignorance”—the Bayesian story; all probabilities represent states of mind, not states of the world. One *could* put (some) chances “in the world”, but let’s take Occam’s Razor seriously...

That the probability of a fair coin coming up heads is 50% simply means that marginalizing (tracing, as the physicists say) over the hidden facts leaves you, nearly, maximally ignorant of the outcome.

Quantum uncertainty (access below!) poses an apparent challenge to this story. There seems to be nothing to be ignorant about when it comes to (say) electron spin—there is nothing “inside” the

The electron is a simple object, in other words. So where does the uncertainty come from? One could follow David Wallace’s wonderful interpretation in terms of chaotic dynamics and decoherence, but let’s see if we can take another route...

Simon DeDeo
@SimonDeDeo

Someone tosses a coin ten times; it comes up heads every time. What's the probability it comes up heads on the next toss? (Pretty darn high—part of @nntaleb's work is unprogramming you from your high-school rules of thumb.) Now consider the (related) Gambler's fallacy...

In this case, it's a theory about compensation: the worse one's luck is, the more likely it is to see a reversal. On the surface, it's irrational. The more bad luck you have, the more you accumulate evidence that the system is rigged.

But there's also an anthropic component. If the luck is bad enough, it starts to become inconsistent with your survival. You've accumulated evidence for correlations in the environment, but these correlations (may be) inconsistent with (people like you) being in this environment.

An example. You're in a city where everyone takes public transport. You encounter a string of bad delays. It's reasonable to conclude they'll end—otherwise people wouldn't take public transport. It's unlikely that you happened to show up right when the network collapses.

Of course, that's a bad heuristic in a casino, which relies on a constant influx of losers. But in other environments, particularly with persistent populations and no evidence for sudden changes in the underlying laws, it makes sense.

Simon DeDeo
@SimonDeDeo

So—probability. Do we really need it? This has been on my mind since 2017, when I finally sat down to think through quantum theory. (/n)

One thing that’s always struck me is how *late* probability theory came in intellectual history. We had integral calculus before we had probability. And probability is insanely simple, mathematically!

I’m tempted to say that probability theory is not, in fact, Lindy. Frequentist probability is (for all the usual reasons) best understood as a heuristic. Bayesian interpretations, by contrast, take the remarkable step of tying it to mental states.

You have to work very hard to convince yourself that beliefs really are “degrees of belief in sets of events” (or whatever). It’s not natural—and I won’t rehearse the whole story about rational choice and decision theory...

So with those critiques in the back of my mind, when I read David Wallace’s decision-theoretic account of the Born Rule I was rather primed to say, hey, so what? Meaning...

More from Life

Simon Wilson
@simonwilson2304

I'm married to an Australian. I returned to Australia from the UK in October.

This is my experience of what happened to me when I arrived in the country during COVID.

I think it will help people understand how criminally bad our government's response has been. (a thread).

On arrival, passengers were escorted from the plane by armed police.

We were allocated a government-mandated hotel, and told to wait in a holding area.

Once processed we were led to a coach. Members of the Australian army lined the route to make sure no one tried to escape.

Once at the hotel we were taken off the coach one by one

An Australian police officer escorted me to my room, telling me in no uncertain terms that if I left it in any unauthorised circumstances for the next two weeks, I would be spending up to two years in an Australian prison.

During the next two weeks I was fed three times a day in polystyrene and with plastic cutlery. Below are some examples of the food. It was fine, but there was no control or choice.

After about eight days I was tested for COVID.

This was mandatory, and the first time I’d seen another human since the quarantine started.

Even though I was negative, I was told I could leave only once my 14 days of isolation were over.

Pat Walls
@thepatwalls

If you have less revenue/growth/success than you wish you had, then the best thing you can do is OWN IT.

Write a tweet, tell your friends, and move on.

Once you own it, you fix it.

99% of people on Twitter/social media/internet won't do this.

Being radically transparent and honest is a competitive (and life) advantage.

From @RayDalio's Principles:

My new product has 14 users and <$400 monthly revenue. I've spent the last 4 months on it.

I'm going through a lot of pain to validate and grow it.

But if anyone asks me how it's going I will tell them exactly that.

If I asked them, I would hope they would give me the raw truth as well. Truth builds trust.

I think that goes for your internet audience as well. Authenticity is attractive.

I see this with @starter_story all the time - people don't want to share their revenue yet because they don't have any, or it's not high enough (not all cases but often).

I wish I could tell them that getting the cat out of the bag would actually fix the problem itself!!

Advertisement

Naval
@naval

How to Get Rich (without getting lucky):

Seek wealth, not money or status. Wealth is having assets that earn while you sleep. Money is how we transfer time and wealth. Status is your place in the social hierarchy.

Understand that ethical wealth creation is possible. If you secretly despise wealth, it will elude you.

Ignore people playing status games. They gain status by attacking people playing wealth creation games.

You’re not going to get rich renting out your time. You must own equity - a piece of a business - to gain your financial freedom.

Anshul Pandey
@Anshulspiritual

MEANING, EXPLANATION & INTERPRETATION OF YOUR DREAMS, ALSO ITS EFFECTS IN COMING DAYS

Sigmund Freud had explained the interpretation of dreams in the last century, but our scriptures explained this thousands of years back. What is the significance and meaning of our dreams.

These are explained in Kanv shakha of our scriptures.
Dreams in the first quarter(पहर) of the day give result in one year, if the dreams are in the second quarter(प्रहर) the results are in eight months, for third the dreams are fulfilled in three months,

the fourth one takes one fortnight, the dreams of dawn take ten days, morning dreams after you awaken after dream are fulfilled forthright.

If you dream during your tense and worrisome period those are never realized. People with Negative traits never get their dreams fulfilled.

Also your dreams will never be realized after you get up from a dream and then go to sleep again. Never narrate your dreams to others.

You will gain wealth if you see the following things in your dream- cow,elephant, horse, palace, climbing mountains or trees,

eating and crying or injured.

You will attain more land if you see someone
singing with veena in his hands.

You will attain amrit if you see yourself entering a red sea or entering into narak.

Dan listens to the lon...
@danlistensto

The reason to try a new approach to things is because you have demonstrated proof that existing approaches are not working.

let's unpack:

1. what counts as proof?

2. what counts as failure?

3. not working for whom?

4. not working towards what end?

what counts as proof? and what counts as failure?

in order to answer this one needs to understand a thing well enough to know what success looks like and to know what failure modes exist.

A thing can fail by succumbing to a known failure mode, or failing in a new way. New failure modes commonly emerge from new contexts. Or they may be due to new developments in an existing context.

proof of failure means you have observed (rather than concluded via hearsay or via abstract reasoning) failure in a known mode or new mode. in order to obtain this proof, a relatively close distance or even insider perspective is usually necessary.

failure modes are specific to the thing being examined but there are some very common patterns. here's a couple of the most common patterns:

You May Also Like

Brian Armstrong
@brian_armstrong

1/ Productivity tip: when I keep procrastinating on something I often trick myself by saying, "ok just work on it for the next 20 minutes" or some short period of time, "and then you can chill/relax guilt free" and give myself some treat (sugar, netflix, etc)

2/ Usually at the 20 minute mark (sometimes I set a timer) I'm so engrossed in what I'm doing that I don't want want to stop and end up working on it for the next hour or two. But getting started seems to be the hardest part.

3/ Key to this: you have to actually be ok with stopping after 20 minutes and being guilt free if that's how you feel. So it's not a trick, i have the option every time, I just often don't want to use it once i'm in the zone.

Patrick McKenzie
@patio11

Some people really benefit from hearing advice that everyone knows, for the same reason we keep schools open despite every subject in them having been taught before.

In that spirit, here's some quick Things Many People Find Too Obvious To Have Told You Already.

Your idea is not valuable, at all. All value is in the execution. You think you are an exception; you are not. You should not insist on an NDA to talk about it; nobody serious will engage in contract review over an idea, and this will mark you as clueless.

Technologists tend to severely underestimate the difficulty and expense of creating software, especially at companies which do not have fully staffed industry leading engineering teams ("because software is so easy there, amirite guys?")

Charge more. Charge more still. Go on.

The press is a lossy and biased compression of events in the actual world, and is singularly consumed with its own rituals, status games, and incentives. The news necessarily fails to capture almost everything which happened yesterday. What it says is important usually isn't.

Companies find it incredibly hard to reliably staff positions with hard-working generalists who operate autonomously and have high risk tolerances. This is not the modal employee, including at places which are justifiably proud of the skill/diligence/etc of their employees.

Advertisement

Noah Smith
@Noahpinion

Remember: Just because an idea is old doesn't mean it's good.

Knowing whether old ideas are more likely to be good requires understanding whether conditions have changed in important ways.

Horse archery was an amazing method of warfare for over a thousand years...then people invented guns, and suddenly this great idea that had stood the test of time became obsolete.

Then again, when underlying conditions don't change much, tried-and-true approaches are probably better.

"Learning the lessons of history" usually just means assuming ergodicity and stationarity in an informal time-series model...

(end)

Kentaur Wolf2
@fragma_dia2

Хајде да направимо мали осврт на случај Мика Алексић .

Алексић је жртва енглеске освете преко Оливере Иванчић .
Мика је одбио да снима филм о блаћењу Срба и мењању историје Срба , иза целокупног пројекта стоји дипломатски кор Британаца у Београду и Оливера Иванчић

Оливера Илинчић је иначе мајка једне од његових ученица .
Која је претила да ће се осветити .

Мика се налази у притвору због наводних оптужби глумице Милене Радуловић да ју је наводно силовао човек од 70 година , са три бајпаса и извађеном простатом пре пет година

Иста персона је и обезбедила финансије за филм преко Беча а филм је требао да се бави животом Десанке Максимовић .
А сетите се и ко је иницирао да се Десанка Максимовић избаци из уџбеника и школства у Србији .

И тако уместо романсиране верзије Десанке Максимовић утицај Британаца

У Србији стави на пиједестал и да се Британци у Србији позитивно афирмишу како би се на тај начин усмерила будућност али и мењао ток историје .
Зато Мика са гнушањем и поносно одбија да снима такав филм тада и почиње хајка и претње која потиче из британских дипломатских кругова

Најгоре од свега што је то Мика Алексић изговорио у присуству високих дипломатских представника , а одговор је био да се све неће на томе завршити и да ће га то скупо коштати .
Нашта им је Мика рекао да је он свој живот проживео и да могу да му раде шта хоће и силно их извређао

$Anu Satheesh \U0001f1ee\U0001f1f3$

Anu Satheesh 🇮🇳...
@AnuSatheesh5

Cherthala Karthyayani Kshetram
#Alappuzha, Kerala
#KeralaTemples 🚩

Cherthala Karthyayani Temple Prathishta was done by Vilwamangalam Swamy. Chertala Pooram is very famous. Devi is Mangalya Dayini here removes obstacles relating to marriages. Sthala Puranam says that, once 👇

Vilwamangalam Swamiyar was passing this area after Prathista of Padmananbhaswamy Temple, he felt Devi chaitanyam and recognized as Karthyayani Devi. But Devi seeing Vilwamangalam went inside the pond. Swamy searched for Devi continously for 6 days and on 7th day Vilwamangalam

got hold of Devi's hair. Thus only Devi's head is Prathishta here. Devotees do Kozhi parathal ( offering cock) here as an offering to Karthyayani Devi.

Karthyayaniamme Sharanam
🙏🕉🙏