I bet he even has a black friend.
This is why you’re on ignore. You are massively mis-characterizing what I wrote.
So no, you’re full of shit. I said things to this effect several times. You can’t fucking claim a massively different strategy than the one used in the past is going to work just as well. For some reason, letting in 84% Europeans and another group involuntarily worked. Those are the facts. You’re a fucking racist yourself if you see no other explanation than “europeans are superior”.
And I don’t propose going back to the old strategy, which is a valid thing to do. Doing what worked before in the past has a higher probability of working than just picking a random strategy. I propose using our shiny new computers that can compute approximate probabilities from data and to pick the right citizens by a model that factors in their probability of success.
Does the detached head in his freezer count as a friend?
CMC fnord!
C’mon, don’t mis-characterize me. Everyone knows you can’t store human brains in a regular freezer, and you’d be frankly irresponsible to store one at home. You need to immerse them in liquid nitrogen in a cryostat and make sure they are guarded by serious security with backup and monitoring systems, you uncivilized heathen.
Burying that dead meat would be cheaper.
This only works if we also share the same goals. Just the difference of you liking chocolate ice cream, and me preferring vanilla means that that won’t work.
And if your solution to that is that we will DETERMINE which is better, and that we will all like chocolate from then on, what you are describing isn’t a post singularity society, it is a hive mind.
Isn’t it funny how all those who support the idea of “hive minds” automatically assume that theirs will be the mind the hive is based on? :rolleyes:
Hilarious. Do you not understand how to ignore someone?
That’s implicitly true, yes. However, in a large population pool, you most likely will be able to find fellow chocolate lovers, and you would then be able to share data and strategies for finding more chocolate. At the end of the sharing both of you would have agreed on the optimal strategy that finds the most chocolate.
Similarly, if you think of preferences as weights between 0 and 1, it’s clearly possible for someone with a different set of preference weights to look at your preference matrix and give you advice that would be verifiably correct as to how to maximize your preferences, even if they do not share them.
Yes, kill all the vanilla loving heathens.
Have you met people? People can’t quantify their own likes and desires. If you asked someone to make a list of their favorite foods, it would be different on a tuesday vs a saturday.
That’s because people are imprecise. There’s no output ports. Our neural networks have weights but they are inconsistent and float as different neurons temporarily glitch or run out of ATP or give the wrong output from noise.
But average weights do exist, we just can’t measure them with present day methods.
Yeah, it’s rather mystifying. Clearly Sam is still having trouble groking the whole Ignore concept.
I can think of at least one.
These are two wildly different things. There are “output ports.” I’m using one right now. (Two, actually, since I’m speaking to someone as I type.)
I guess what you mean to say is that there are no perfectly precise output methods…which itself is a quite data-rich statement, in that it begs a number of questions out of proportion to its brevity.
.
Also, would you mind sharing a link to your ongoing discussions at LessWrong/LesserWrong? And your SN there?
You know what. Sam deserves credit for trying so hard. If he ever gets this shit right, then applies this same tenacity to what he’s doing, he’ll go far.
You just have to get the shit right first Sam.
I see you missed his awesome description of his ignore procedure. He “ignores” people, but he doesn’t actually ignore them. He wants to read what they say and decide whether to respond to it. He keeps a list of people he’s ignored. I honestly can’t remember if this part is us or he stated it, but the going theory is that it is on post-its by his computer. JohnT holds the current record for being triple-ignored.
I will say this. Setting aside his poorly timed cancer comment, he shows the occasional glimmer of humor. He really needs to work on the arrogant, self-righteous asshole schtick though.
What I said was that you’re a fucking racist, and apparently not bright enough to possess the self-awareness to even realize it. We can look at the pertinent quotes from the cited immigration thread:
Post #73:
*The immigrants who our ancestors let in were not just anyone.
I won’t try to claim any particular racial or cultural group is better or worse, so I’m not branded a racist, but immigration policy in the past was selective, and America is highly successful. *
Note the first occurrence of the classic red-flag “I am not a racist”. Looking at the substance of this complete bullshit, the first statement is ignorantly flat-out wrong, since there were no meaningful limitations on immigration before the immigration acts of 1921 and 1924. So in fact “our ancestors” literally did let in “just anyone”, although that (fortunately for white supremacists everywhere) turned out to be mostly white northern Europeans.
And both before and after that – and to this very day – immigration policy continues to have heavily racist tones. Before the major immigration overhaul of 1924, there was the Chinese Exclusion Act in 1882, the 1907 agreement with Japan to prevent Japanese immigration, and the 1923 Supreme Court ruling classifying South Asians as non-white, allowing them to be stripped of their citizenship retroactively. The Immigration Act of 1924 was partly a response to the likes of the Asiatic Exclusion League which coined phrases like “turban tide”, “Hindoo invasion”, and “yellow peril”; it implemented for the first time a “national origins” formula and restricted the immigration of Southern Europeans and Eastern Europeans, especially Italians, Slavs and Eastern European Jews, severely restricted the immigration of Africans, and banned the immigration of Arabs and Asians altogether.
This is what our SamuelA regards as laudable “selective” immigration policy that made America successful: blatant racial and ethnic discrimination. I’m not “mischaracterizing” what the fucking racist wrote, I’m quoting it directly.
But it gets even better …
Post #75
*… most of the world’s population pre-1920 was too poor to come to America or there weren’t significant amounts of shipping running that way. Hence it was mostly just Europeans.
I am not going to claim that Europeans are better or worse than anyone else* …
No, of course you’re not, Sammy. Here we have the “I am not a racist” meme again. See, it’s not that white northern Europeans are better than everyone else, it’s just that white northern Europeans were the only ones able to come here, and things turned out real good, that’s all. Nothing more. One can almost imagine SamuelA putting on a white robe at this point and setting fire to a cross to emphasize the point, and that he’s not a racist.
But what would happen if the immigration mix changed, and it was not just white northern Europeans coming to America? Ah, SamuelA has that figured out, too, the way he has everything else figured out, like how our brains work. It comes in the continuation of Post #75:
*… the rational outcome would be a massive cultural change, with the new cultural being mainly weighted towards the culture of origin of the immigrants.
And if that culture is a “failure” creating a “shithole” : what do you reasonably think would happen.*
It’s clear what would happen if we let people in from shithole countries: the whole place would turn into a shithole.
So what we have here is not just an ignorant racist, but a racist of Trumpian proportions.
I responded to that last comment, with considerable restraint, in this post. Here, BTW, are some shitholian residents from a shithole country who are probably leaving voluntarily, but no doubt SamuelA will make sure they’re kicked out before the place becomes a shithole.
People also change their mind and their preferences over time, based on new experiences, knowledge or just whims.
And you still have not addressed how a model can deal with people with conflicting goals.
For instance, if I think that vanilla is the best, but vanilla production interferes with chocolate production. Say you can produce 3 units of vanilla, 3 units of chocolate, or 1 of each.
How do you maximize your chocolate production, without conflicting with the vanilla lover’s maximizing of theirs?