BC SOCIETY
Saved by @Alex1Powell

I think because the reward structure of being a bio-ethicist rewards saying level-headed sounding, cautious-sounding, conventional wisdom?

Though I'm not sure why that is.

 @JeffLadish I guess if you want to radically improve the world, you mostly don't go into a field that is about opining on other people's work, you go into something like Engineering and do the work?
@JeffLadish I note that Nick Bostrom is what a Bioethicist should be: he thinks hard about tradeoffs and risks, and crystalizes concepts like the Unilateralist's curse and black ball technologies.

But this is starting from a place of "The world could be vastly better. How do we get there?"
@JeffLadish I don't know why bioethics doesn't look more like a field of (less smart) Bostroms.
@JeffLadish I guess because everyone's disgust reactions are triggered by the actually good proposals, and in order to make those proposals the consensus of the field a lot of people have to bite the bullet and stick their neck out saying "I know this sounds crazy / absurd / vaguely evil...
@JeffLadish ...to our intuitions / etc, but it is actually the right thing to do."

And there are not enough people who are up for that, to reach a consensus?
@JeffLadish But economics, as a field, _does_ have this property. Economists are famously fine with policies that are abhorrent to the untrained intuition, but that they are confident are actually better on net. That's a good chunk of what economics is.
@JeffLadish But maybe economics has a solid enough theoretical underpinning, that it can manage to be that kind of field, while, the state of consensus in philosophy, and ethics in particular is confused?
@JeffLadish Like, if you have people still fighting over deontology vs. utilitarianism, it is pretty hard to build to a field wide consensus that we should obviously do covid variolation, because it will save lives on net.
@JeffLadish In which case the problem traces back to "Philosophy has bad feedback loops: you don't get to clearly know that you got the right answer. Which means philosophers are incentivized to make interesting and counterintuitive arguments, instead of to steer towards the actual truth."
@JeffLadish Ok. I think this is the answer to the original question: by the standards of science and engineering, you can settle a question to a sufficient degree of precision, and then move on to higher level questions using your answer to the first question as a foundation.
@JeffLadish But by the standards of philosophy, you can practically never settle a question. There is always space for more counter argument. If you settled the question, you wouldn't be able to argue about it any more!
@JeffLadish Which means that you don't build a foundation of answers to basic questions that you can assume, in trying to answer more complicated questions.

To do it right, bioethics would have to, at least in many areas, _assume_ utilitarianism.
@JeffLadish But if you try to assume utilitarianism, a bunch of philosophers will jump on you with many counterarguments and paradoxes and bullets to bite, all of which erode the ability of a bioethics field, as a whole, to stick to its guns about ideas that are counter-intuitive.
@JeffLadish One thing to note here is that the philosophical standards also challenge the foundations of science and engineering. Philosophy as a whole holds that we don't have rock solid reasons to trust our "obvious" answers to questions of epistemology and metaphysics.
@JeffLadish (Like whether there is an external world or whether knowledge is possible.)
@JeffLadish But the scientist and engineers just ignore the philosophers and assume those things anyway, at least for the purposes of doing their science.

And this works. It isn't necessarily philosophically grounded, but it works.
@JeffLadish And the difference is, I think, that the goal of science is to actually land on our all things considered most-correct answer (in part, so that engineering can build cool things like spaceships), while the goal of philosophy is to have air-tight ARGUMENTATION for our answer.
@JeffLadish If you're mostly trying to build spaceships, you don't really care about gettier problems, unless they're fucking up your ability to build working spaceships.
@JeffLadish And if you you just want to know how the sun sines, you don't really care that epistemology isn't grounded, because while you might be confused about the finer points, the finer points of epistemology are not going to get in the way of your getting correct beliefs about the sun.
@JeffLadish It turns out that you can generally build spaceships, and (more controversially) end up with correct beliefs about the sun, without having a solid irrefutable proof about the nature of "beliefs."
@JeffLadish Now it does turn out that having correct beliefs about what beliefs are, is pretty useful for getting more correct beliefs.

But having correct beliefs about what beliefs are turns out to not be the same thing as having solid irrefutable arguments for your belief about beliefs.
@JeffLadish This, by the way, is my main answer to the objection that I am projecting onto some folks that I talked to about critical rationality, recently.

(To be clear, I DON'T think that I definitely understood the points they made, and I may be responding to a straw-man.)
@JeffLadish But, I said recently that I thought that Bayes is the foundation of epistemology.

https://t.co/TfCQgRqUtv
@JeffLadish Different people gave different objections to that, but one objection was (if I understand it correctly) "But, where do your probabilities come from? Either you're infinitely certain of them, or you have an infinite stack of probabilities about the probability below them."
@JeffLadish https://t.co/8joOxuxaPp
@JeffLadish I think I could give some more detailed arguments about how this works, but I also want to dispute frame of the point being argued (if I understand it) a bit.
@JeffLadish It is totally possible to have a functioning brain / epistemology, that actually works for producing knowledge and steering through the world, which does not justify itself on its own terms.
@JeffLadish Like the question of "Does a Bayesian learning mechanism, work, in practice" is a separate question from "How do we justify that it works?"
@JeffLadish In general, I think many questions of the "but how do we justify it?" stripe, just don't matter very much.

For many things, we can't prove that it works, but it does work, and it is more interesting to move on to more advanced problems by assuming some things we can't prove.
@JeffLadish That is not to say that ALL questions of justification are irrelevant. Most of the time, even, it is very practically important to ask "how do we / can we know this is true?"
@JeffLadish But my goal in asking that is to figure out what's true, to the best of my ability, and to my own satisfaction, not to have an airtight argument that something is true.
@JeffLadish ...
Getting back to the original question, I think my answer was incomplete, and part of what is happening here is some self-selection regarding who becomes a bio-ethicist that I don't understand in detail.

Basically, I imagine that they tend towards conventional-mindedness.
@JeffLadish @threadreaderapp unroll

More from Eli Tyre

Eli Tyre
Eli Tyre
@EpistemicHope
I know some people who seem (to me) more concerned with receiving VALIDATION for their mental health issues than solving them.

They seem to care most about other people BELIEVING their problems are real.

I'm curious about this.

Like, it's more important to them that people know how debilitating their anxiety is, than to overcome the anxiety.

Or it's important to them that others believe that they're actually depressed, not "just sad."

Or they want people buy into the narrative that they've been traumatized, and might be something like offended if someone minimizes that.

What do we make of this?

1. One possibility is that if solving the problems seems hopeless or even just really hard, you need external support to be able to cope.

If no one cuts you slack because of your mental health stuff, maybe you're in a really bad place, so you need people to believe you.
HEALTH
Eli Tyre
Eli Tyre
@EpistemicHope
CritRats!

I think AI risk is a real existential concern, and I claim that the CritRat counterarguments that I've heard so far (keywords: universality, person, moral knowledge, education, etc.) don't hold up.

Anyone want to hash this out with


For instance, while I heartily agree with lots of what is said in this video, I don't think that the conclusion about how to prevent (the bad kind of) human extinction, with regard to AGI, follows.

There are a number of reasons to think that AGI will be more dangerous than most people are, despite both people and AGIs being qualitatively the same sort of thing (explanatory knowledge-creating entities).

And, I maintain, that because of practical/quantitative (not fundamental/qualitative) differences, the development of AGI / TAI is very likely to destroy the world, by default.

(I'm not clear on exactly how much disagreement there is. In the video above, Deutsch says "Building an AGI with perverse emotions that lead it to immoral actions would be a crime."
SOCIETY
Advertisement
Eli Tyre
Eli Tyre
@EpistemicHope
There's a particular kind of romantic partnership, with a certain sort of person, that I've wanted since I became a self-aware, directed agent at around age 15.

Empirically, this kind of relationship has been hard to achieve. It hasn't worked out yet, at least.

And this sometimes leaves me wondering if my standards are unreasonable.

In years past that desire was often very alive.

These days, I'm rarely directly or viscerally in contact with it.

I sometimes contemplate aiming for some other kind of romantic and/or sexual relationship instead. In part because I might be more effective if I...I don't know, got laid more? But that's not really the thing. More like, if I had someone around whom I could regularly relax.

But mostly, I don't pursue those alternative relationship-setups out of a sense of something like loyalty to myself + a vague sense of wrongness and/or sadness about it. It often feels like giving up or giving in.

[I might elaborate on the wrongness sometime.]
FOR LATER READ
Eli Tyre
Eli Tyre
@EpistemicHope
I was reading something that suggested that trauma "tries" to spread itself. ie that the reason why intergenerational trauma is a thing is that the traumatized part in a parent will take action to recreate that trauma in the child.

This model puts the emphasis on the the parent's side: the trauma is actively "trying" to spread.

This is in contrast to my previous (hypothetical) model for IGT, which puts the emphasis on the child's side: kids are sponges that are absorbing huge amounts of info, including via very subtle channels. So they learn the unconscious reactions of the people around them.

(I say "hypothetical", because all while this sort of thing is in my hypothesis space, I haven't seen clear enough evidence that intergenerational trauma is a meaningful category that I solidly believe it is real.

More like, "here's a story for how this could work.")

On first glance, I was skeptical of this "active trauma" story.

Why on earth would trauma be agenty, in that way? It sounds like too much to swallow.
CULTURE
Eli Tyre
Eli Tyre
@EpistemicHope
My catch all thread for this discussion of AI risk in relation to Critical Rationalism, to summarize what's happened so far and how to go forward, from here.

I started by simply stating that I thought that the arguments that I had heard so far don't hold up, and seeing if anyone was interested in going into it in depth with


So far, a few people have engaged pretty extensively with me, for instance, scheduling video calls to talk about some of the stuff, or long private chats.

(Links to some of those that are public at the bottom of the thread.)

But in addition to that, there has been a much more sprawling conversation happening on twitter, involving a much larger number of people.

Having talked to a number of people, I then offered a paraphrase of the basic counter that I was hearing from people of the Crit Rat persuasion.
POLITICS

More from Society

SocialCops
SocialCops
@Social_Cops
SocialCops’ 10 (base 10) Engineering Commandments — the values that drive everything for the #Engineering Team #InsideSocialCops 🙌

(Thread👇) Tell us if you can relate to any of these? Do you have your own values that guide your decisions? Share them with us! ⛳

0. Coder != engineer

Coders focus just on writing code to make something work. Engineers take a much wider view, focusing on both the problem and every aspect of the solution. 🤓

1. “Import lib”

It's not wise to waste time building tools or libraries if there’s already something that does the same job! Wherever possible, extend existing libraries and contribute back to the community. 💁‍♀️

2. With great power comes greater responsibility

Every choice we make on our platform and every feature we build stands up to a responsibility — helping people make more data-driven decisions and bring about real change for millions of people. 💪

3. Fail fast and keep learning

Failing fast is about doing lots of fast iterations and learning from each, rather than getting stuck on one solution or decision. 👊
SOCIETY
Noah Smith
Noah Smith
@Noahpinion
Krugman is, of course, right about this. BUT, note that universities can do a lot to revitalize declining and rural regions.


See this thing that @lymanstoneky wrote:

And see this thing that I wrote:

And see this book that @JamesFallows wrote:

And see this other thing that I wrote:
SOCIETY
Advertisement
Matthew
Matthew
@Matthew94091812
COVID Masks: Mechanistic View: Part 2: Fine Aerosol Emissions:

Masks may increase fine aerosol emissions from: 1) nebulization of large droplets into fine aerosols, or 2) friability of certain mask materials creating "aerosolized fomites."

Please share:

Here are the studies:

The question is whether facemasks are actually a source for viral aerosols by:

1) Masks get saturated by large "respiratory droplets" containing viral molecules. Air turbulence against trapped droplets may create aerosols that eventually diffuse around edges. Continued...

Trapped droplets potentially get pushed through the filter media of the mask, getting nebulized into aerosols.

Particles don't always stay in the mask:

Study: Ha'eri 1980

Title: The efficacy of standard surgical face masks: an investigation using "tracer particles"

Albumin tracer particles put inside a surgical mask were dispersed into the room by breathing.

Viral molecules can get airborne from air turbulence.

Study: Liu 2020
Title: Aerodynamic analysis of SARS-CoV-2 in two Wuhan hospitals.
SARS-2-COV sub-micrometer aerosols not tightly bound to surfaces, get airborne when PPE is taken off.
SOCIETY
@AdamSmithWorks
@AdamSmithWorks
@adamsmithworks
It's been a whole day since we tweeted Part 2 of this chapter, so let us remind you: #AdamSmith just said that the colonies got nothing that helped them succeed from the mother country. (IV.vii.c) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets

So these two opening sentences are pretty heckin’ sarcastic:
Now we've seen the great advantages the colonies got (they got nothing!) (IV.vii.c.1)
So what have been the great advantages to Europe! (IV.vii.c.2)

Seems like there’s a...tone there. #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets


Europeans buy goods from America, and Americans buy European goods as well. Even countries that don’t trade directly with America have benefited. (IV.vii.c.3–8) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets

The mother countries restrict colonial trade (esp the exclusive right to buy from or sell to their colonies). That's a dead weight on the increase of the wealth of nations. Everything is more expensive, everyone enjoys less of it. (IV.vii.c.9) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets

Maybe European countries get added security? In ancient times, empires expected military support and revenue from their colonies, and they got it.
18thC colonies? Not so much. (IV.vii.c.11–13) #WealthOfTweets #SmithTweets
SOCIETY
Dr Soumitra Pathare
Dr Soumitra Pathare
@netshrink
Thread: This is a long thread about my wife's grand-father: Vinayak Apte.
Born, brought up & lived in Pune. Aptewada, Sadashiv Peth. Qualified as an engineer in 1920s or so. Married around same time.
I promise you this is worth reading, so settle down with your cup of tea....1/n

Around 1921, young Vinayak writes to Mahatma Gandhi expressing his desire to join Bapu & work for freedom struggle.
Bapu writes back saying sending money for the ticket (₹5) & get your backside up here (not exactly these words, but you know what I mean!).
Bapu adds a PS...2/n

"If you change your mind, please return the ₹5 by money order to Sabarmati Ashram" Typical Bapu, you might say! Careful with money.
Vinayak quits his job & decides to go to Sabarmati. Entire extended Apte clan is horrified. Joining that fakir? Giving up your job? Ostracised.

Vinayak goes to Sabarmati with young wife & 2-3 yr old daughter. Wifey not impressed at all, bcoz on arriving there they are assigned to separate living quarters (men & women), celibacy & every1 (incl her, a Brahmin woman) was expected to clean toilets! Horror of horrors..3/n

Wife never forgave Vinayak & Bapu. She had married a engineer & was looking forward to a prosperous life. Life on other hand, was full of austerity. Everyone had to work & was paid a pittance. 5 am wake up.Cook. Clean. Khadi sarees (which btw weigh a ton!) & evening prayers...4/n
SOCIETY

You May Also Like

Jig's Patel
Jig's Patel
@jigspatel1988
Thread on
"Intraday Banknifty Strangle based on OI data"

(System already shared, today just share few examples)
(1/n)

-Trade timing after 9:45

-Check Banknifty change in OI data at 9:45, and identify the highest OI built up in call side and put side

-We will sell both strikes with combined premium as SL on both legs.
(2/n)

28th June 2021

BN open-35440
At 9:45 trading at 35350
Highest OI in call side at 35500 CE and 35000 at put side
Strike selection 35500 CE- 35000 PE
(3/n)


29th June 2021

BN open-35323

At 9:45 trading at 35112

Highest OI in call side at 35300 CE and 35000 at put side

Strike selection 35300 CE (232) - 35000 PE (150) Combined premium 382 , Both legs SL 382
(4/n)


30th June 2021

BN open-35030

At 9:45 trading at 35002

Highest OI in call side at 35000 CE and 35000 at put side

Strike selection 35000 CE(176)- 35000 PE(213) Combined premium 389 , Both legs SL 389
(5/n)
OPTIONSLEARNINGS , OPTION SELLING , ALL
Anu Satheesh \U0001f1ee\U0001f1f3
Anu Satheesh 🇮🇳...
@AnuSatheesh5
Yoga Ramar Temple
#Nedungunam
#TamilNaduTemples 🚩

Yoga Ramar Temple is located near Thiruvannamalai. Shri Rama is seated with eyes closed, without any weapons. Mata Sita  pointing to the feet of Rama telling that  everyone is safe at his feet. Lakshmana standing near Shri Rama


Hanuman is seen chanting Vedas obediently sitting before Shri Rama.

Sthala Puranam says that, Sukabrahma Maharishi had been doing Tapasya here, for the darshan of Sri Rama. Prabhu Shri Ram, pleased with his tapasya, came here after Rama Ravana yudham. Since Rama was returning


after the war, he did not have any weapons with him.

Another gopuram called Kili Gopuram is there for Sukabrahma Maharishi. There is a hill nearby called Dheergachala. According to Sthala puranam, Sri Padham of Prabhu Rama are found on the top of the hill


It is said that this is the place where Shri Rama gave darshan to Suka Maharishi. Nedumgunam means which shows all qualities of Shri Rama who is Maryadha purushottam. Shri Ramanavami is very famous here.

Jai Sri Ram
🙏🕉🙏
ALL
Advertisement
\U0001f1ee\U0001f1f3Sonal \U0001f1ee\U0001f1f3
🇮🇳Sonal 🇮🇳...
@Dharma_Vaarta
Bharat: Advancement of earth’s earliest civilization

Glorious Vedic Architecture and Temple

Architecture in India was an extremely rich form of expression and highly developed science, with a deep heritage of spirituality in it. #FreeHinduTemple


The centre of all architectural development was the temple and temple or Mandir was the earthly home of God, and like the launching pad for the devotee’s consciousness to soar toward the Divine and the spiritual world.


The murti or deity of the Divine would be placed in the temple sanctum, around which all temple activity would revolve.

Such buildings were often elaborately decorated with stone, wood, plaster, etc. and carved or cut to depict the stories from the Puranas or other sacred texts


Temples were always the centre of religious, social and educational activities, practically more so in
ancient times than today.

During a span of more than two thousand years, various dynasties were known for constructing glorious temples,


some of which include the Mauryan, Ashoka, Gupta, Satavahana, Chedi, Chandella, Chalukya, Solanki, Pallava, Shola, Hoysala, Vijayanagar, and others.

Many of these temples remain beautiful architectural wonders today.
ALL , HISTORY
Jim O'Shaughnessy
Jim O'Shaughnessy
@jposhaughnessy
I’m torn on how to approach the idea of luck. I’m the first to admit that I am one of the luckiest people on the planet. To be born into a prosperous American family in 1960 with smart parents is to start life on third base. The odds against my very existence are astronomical.


I’ve always felt that the luckiest people I know had a talent for recognizing circumstances, not of their own making, that were conducive to a favorable outcome and their ability to quickly take advantage of them.

In other words, dumb luck was just that, it required no awareness on the person’s part, whereas “smart” luck involved awareness followed by action before the circumstances changed.

So, was I “lucky” to be born when I was—nothing I had any control over—and that I came of age just as huge databases and computers were advancing to the point where I could use those tools to write “What Works on Wall Street?” Absolutely.

Was I lucky to start my stock market investments near the peak of interest rates which allowed me to spend the majority of my adult life in a falling rate environment? Yup.
ALL
\u2745\u1710\u170b\u1713\u170e
❅ᜐᜋᜓᜎ...
@uglyluhan
First thread of the year because I have time during MCO. As requested, a thread on the gods and spirits of Malay folk religion. Some are indigenous, some are of Indian origin, some have Islamic


Before I begin, it might be worth explaining the Malay conception of the spirit world. At its deepest level, Malay religious belief is animist. All living beings and even certain objects are said to have a soul. Natural phenomena are either controlled by or personified as spirits

Although these beings had to be respected, not all of them were powerful enough to be considered gods. Offerings would be made to the spirits that had greater influence on human life. Spells and incantations would invoke their


Two known examples of such elemental spirits that had god-like status are Raja Angin (king of the wind) and Mambang Tali Arus (spirit of river currents). There were undoubtedly many more which have been lost to time

Contact with ancient India brought the influence of Hinduism and Buddhism to SEA. What we now call Hinduism similarly developed in India out of native animism and the more formal Vedic tradition. This can be seen in the multitude of sacred animals and location-specific Hindu gods
RELIGION