CinnasVerses

joined 5 months ago
[–] CinnasVerses@awful.systems 1 points 3 hours ago

patio11's sometimes bosses at Stripe are such ambitious capitalists that they sometimes scare him. Maybe his racist friends told him that the Japanese are honorary Aryans?

I like this reply on Reddit:

I do my PhD in fair evaluation of ML algorithms, and I literally have enough work to go through until I die. So much mess, non-reproducible results, overfitting benchmarks, and worst of all this has become a norm. Lately, it took our team MONTHS to reproduce (or even just run) a bunch of methods to just embed inputs, not even train or finetune.

I see maybe a solution, or at least help, in closer research-business collaboration. Companies don't care about papers really, just to get methods that work and make money. Maxing out drug design benchmark is useless if the algorithm fails to produce anything usable in real-world lab. Anecdotally, I've seen much better and more fair results from PhDs and PhD students that work part-time in the industry as ML engineers or applied researchers.

This can go a good way (most of the field becomes a closed circle like parapsychology) or a bad way (people assume the results are true and apply them, like the social priming or Reinhart and Rogoff's economic paper with the Excel error).

I like the quote by John Swartzwelder in chapter 1.

[–] CinnasVerses@awful.systems 10 points 2 days ago (3 children)

A 2025 UBC master's thesis on our friends' ideas and their literary antecedents https://dx.doi.org/10.14288/1.0449985 The supervisor was born around the time that Elron Hubbard, Jack Parsons, RAH, and their wives and lovers were having a chaotic transition to the postwar world.

[–] CinnasVerses@awful.systems 7 points 3 days ago

Outside academic psychiatry papers, distinguishing pedophilia from ephebophilia is a setup to arguing that it should be socially and legally acceptable for mature adults to have sex with anyone who has completed puberty (or at least that desire to do this is natural- naturalistic fallacy).

Anyone familiar with trials of sex abusers has heard "I was just educating them with my penis! As Plato explains in the Symposium ..."

[–] CinnasVerses@awful.systems 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (4 children)

One more quote. Three years ago, Charlotte Alter investigated sexual harassment in the Effective Altruism movement (a movent which formed around Yudkowsky's mailing lists and blogs) for Time magazine.

This story is based on interviews with more than 30 current and former effective altruists and people who live among them. Many of the women spoke on condition of anonymity to avoid personal or professional reprisals, ... Their accounts were corroborated by other parties to the incidents, by people to whom the women spoke shortly afterward, and by contemporaneous documents and screenshots. While a few women have raised these issues on online forums, many spoke to TIME about their experiences with sexual misconduct in EA communities for the first time.

One recalled being “groomed” by a powerful man nearly twice her age who argued that “pedophilic relationships” were both perfectly natural and highly educational. Another told TIME a much older EA recruited her to join his polyamorous relationship while she was still in college. A third described an unsettling experience with an influential figure in EA whose role included picking out promising students and funneling them towards highly coveted jobs. After that leader arranged for her to be flown to the U.K. for a job interview, she recalls being surprised to discover that she was expected to stay in his home, not a hotel. When she arrived, she says, “he told me he needed to masturbate before seeing me.”

A necessary but not sufficient response to stories like that is to make it utterly clear that this kind of behavior is not tolerated in your community and that you will take complaints of sexual harassment very seriously. Three years later, Yudkowsky is still blathering about how statutory rape is not always wrong and its important not to move too quickly to judgement.

Edit: See also this response by a professor who was asked why he had asked Epstein to fund a 2016 conference on sexual consent and campus rape.

I was not then and am not now aware of any evidence that Jeffrey Epstein was a ‘pedophile’ in the technical sense; his sexual preference appears to have been for young women aged 16-22, which would at most reflect partial ephebophilia. Although most of the women who were involved with him at that age retrospectively regret it, I am unaware of any evidence that the contacts were non-consensual at the time. (it goes on. I do not advise reading further but I note that Epstein's known victims were as young as 14)

The professor left Austin TX on retirement and now lives in California.

[–] CinnasVerses@awful.systems 7 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago)

Yes, I think the people who should have opinions beyond "the state government found some fraud and is investigating further cases" are people who live in Minnesota and have connections to daycare or immigrant communities. Its notorious that the NYT repackages stories by reporters in smaller orgs (or randos on social media) and puts its own spin on them! They don't have a specific editorial line on social services in the Midwest, just instincts.

[–] CinnasVerses@awful.systems 6 points 5 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (5 children)

I miss when Patrick McKenzie was just sharing an American's view on Japanese culture and reminding devs that names are not always Firstname Lastname in the Latin alphabet and 'just' paying yourself twice the average local income from your business is not a failure. The following is deep twitter pundit brain for a rich white man in Chicago who has lived most of his adult life in Japan and SoCal referring to social programs for poor brown people in Minnesota:

I think journalism and civil society should do some genuine soul-searching on how we knew—knew—the state of that pond, but didn’t consider it particularly important or newsworthy until someone started fishing on camera.

Edit. I also like the HN response which explains that private companies have few responses to fraud except refusing service, but the State of Minnesota can arrest fraudsters, command third parties to provide evidence about them, and send them to prison, so the People of Minnesota require strong evidence before it uses those powers.

[–] CinnasVerses@awful.systems 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)

They could easily afford to hire a good admin assistant to sort out their organizational structure and bookkeeping. Why they chose nor to hire and listen to her or him I leave as an exercise for the reader.

[–] CinnasVerses@awful.systems 4 points 6 days ago

In another thread, I have posted about Form 990 for SIAI in 2009: was a Ben Goertzel an employee, and was the $50k donation from Jeffrey Epstein passed on to another organization such as OpenCog or kept in house? Form 990 says "not an employee" and "kept in house" but people who were staffers at the time tell different stories.

[–] CinnasVerses@awful.systems 7 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

Over on Reddit, somewhatmorenumerous has been looking into Form 990 for the 2009 Epstein donation. Yudkowsky says:

In 2009, MIRI (then SIAI) was a fiscal sponsor for an open-source project (that is, we extended our nonprofit status to the project, so they could accept donations on a tax-exempt basis, having determined ourselves that their purpose was a charitable one related to our mission) and they got $50K from Epstein. Nobody at SIAI noticed the name, and since it wasn't a donation aimed at SIAI itself, we did not run major-donor relations about it.

The Epstein files say the recipient was someone called Ben Goertzel with a project named OpenCog or something like that. somewhatmorenumerous has doubts:

MatriceJacobine, if SIAI paid out a grant of more than $5k to Goertzel, it should show up in their tax records. It doesn't.

If Goertzel was an official Director of Research at SIAI in 2009, he would need to have been listed in Part VII. Compensation of Officers, Directors, Trustees, Key Employees, Highest Compensated Employees, and Independent Contractors (he wasn't).

I'm not disputing that Goertzel got money from SIAI, or that he and SIAI called him Director of Research: I'm pointing out that SIAI's official tax records don't reflect what Eliezer and Goertzel say happened. That's not good: you're supposed to file accurate tax records.

But maybe there's documentation that proves me wrong! SIAI is, after all, a 501(c)3, a public charity, and Eliezer is here in this chat trying to be transparent. I assure you I would be the most delighted person in this chat if such documentation were provided. ...

Also, "sponsorship" isn't a thing that costs money: it is a nonprofit funding structure in which organizations that DO have 501(c)3 status can provide a path to tax-deductible donation for entities that DO NOT have 501(c)3 status. People donate to the parent 501(c)3, which then passes the donation to the sponsored project.

SIAI's 2009 Accomplishments lists Ben Goertzel as an employee.

I don't think this is as serious as telling the Internet you would cover up a mature adult in your organization having sex with multiple minors, but inaccurate tax paperwork can cost you your nonprofit status.

Edit to escape (c) (renders as (c) )

[–] CinnasVerses@awful.systems 4 points 1 week ago

The power company wants money to power your datacenter. The refinery wants money to deliver five 40-foot containers of germanium to nvidia in Taiwan. OpenAI staff want money to buy houses in California. If you are really rich, banks will lend you money against OpenAI or nvidia equity, but then stock prices falling can trigger a chain reaction where the bank calls the loan, you need to sell equity to give them the cash they want, driving down the stock price, others get scared it will drop further and sell ...

 

Does anyone know what this June 2019 text from Epstein is about? I have added some links to RationalWiki and Wikipedia ~~but not corrected spelling~~ and corrected OCR errors. Was it at one of the institutions he sponsored like MIT Media Lab? Or more like his conference in the Virgin Islands? It seems to mix mainstream figures and people in the Libertarian/LessWrong network.

Another correspondent in 2016 suggested inviting Scott Alexander Siskind to speak at a different event Epstein was involved in. The correspondent has a Substack which cites Siskind in 2025.

Obviously just because Epstein had heard of a public figure does not mean that they knew him.

Epstein's words begin below:

  • List for summer talks. David Pizarro. Professor of Psychology and Philosopher at Cornell Univcrsit
  • Eric Weinstein, Mathematician
  • Matthew Putman, Scientist
  • Paul Saffo, Technology Forecaster, and Professor of Engineering
  • Lori Santos, Professor ofPsychology and Cognitive Science
  • Janna Levin, Theoretical Cosmologist
  • Ev Williams, Internet Entrepreneur
  • Phoebe Waller-Bridge, Author
  • Heiner Gocbbels, Composer, and Director
  • Martine Rothblatt, Lawyer and Entrepreneur
  • Peter Thiel, Venture Capitalist, and Entrepreneur
  • Richard Thaler, Behavioral Economics
  • Barbara Tversky, Professor of Psychology
  • Michael Vassar, Futurist, Activist
  • Bret Weinstein, Biologist, and Evolutionary Theorist
  • Susan Hockfield, MIT President, Professor of Neuroscience
  • David Deutsch, Physicist
  • Eliezer Yudkowsky, Al Researcher
  • N. Jeremy Kasdin, Astrophysicist
  • Carl Zimmer, Science Writer
  • Douglas Rushkoff, Media Theorist
  • Eric Topol, Cardiologist
  • Dustin Yellin, Artist
  • Sherry Turkic, Professor of Social Studies
  • Taylor Mac, Actor
  • Stephen Johnson, Author
  • Martin Hagglund, Swedish Philosopher and Scholar of Modernist Literature
  • Thomas Metzinger, Philosopher, and Professor of Theoretical Philosophy
  • Bjarke Ingels, Danish Architect, Founder of BIG, currently working on Floating Cities/Sustainable Habitats project
  • Kai-Fu Lee, Venture Capitalist, Technology Executive, and Al Expert, developed the world's first speaker-independent continuous speech recognition system
  • Poppy Crum, Neuroscientist, and Technologist, Chief Scientist at Dolby Laboratories, Adjunct Professor at Stanford University (Computer Research in Music)
  • Neil Burgess, Researcher, and Professor of Cognitive Neuroscience, investigating the role of the hippocampus in spatial navigation
  • Paul Sloom, Psychologist, and Researcher exploring how children and adults understand the physical and secin' world, with a special focus on language, religion and morality
  • Brian Cox, Physicist, and Professor of Particle Physics, Presenter of Science Programs
  • Eythor Bender. CEO of Berkeley Bionics, Innovator and Business Leader in human augmentation (bionics and robotics)
  • Gwynne Shotwell President. and COO at SpaceX, Engineer. listed in 2018 as the 59th most powerful woman in the world by Forbes
  • Jaap de Roodc. Associate Professor of Evolution (of parasites) and Ecology, focusing on how parasites attack monarch butterflies and in return how butterflies have the ability to self-medicate
  • Jim Holt, American Philosopher, and Contributor to the New York Times writing on string theory, time, the universe, and philosophy
  • Vijay Komar, Indian Roboticist and UPS Foundation Professor in School of Engineering & Applied Science:. became Dean of Penn Engineering, studies flying and cooperative robots
  • Hugh Herr, Biophysicist, Engineer, and Rock Climber, builds prosthetic knees, legs, and ankles that fuse biomechanics with microprocessors at MIT
  • Gabriel Zucman, French Economist at UC Berkeley. best known for his research on tax havens, inequalities, and global wealth
  • Fci-Fei Li, Professor of Computer Science, Director of Stanford's Human-Ccntered Al, works as Chief Scientist of Al/ML of Google Cloud
  • Dennis Hong, Korean American Mechanical Engineer, Professor and Founding Director of RoMeLa (Robotics & Mechanisms Laboratory) of the Mechanical & Aerospace Engineering Department at UCLA
  • Misha (Mikhail) Leonidovich Gromov, American
 

Its almost the end of the year so most US nonprofits which want to remain nonprofits have filed Form 990 for 2024 including some run by our dear friends. This is a mandatory financial report.

  • Lightcone Infrastructure is here. They operate LessWrong and the Lighthaven campus in Berkeley but list no physical assets; someone on Reddit says that they let fellow travelers like Scott Alexander use their old rented office for free. "We are a registered 501(c)3 and are IMO the best bet you have for converting money into good futures for humanity." They also published a book and website with common-sense, data-based advice for Democratic Party leaders called Deciding to Win which I am sure fills a gap in the literature. Edit: their November 2024 call for donationswhich talks how they spend $16.5m on real estate and $6m on renovations then saw donations collapse is here, an analysis is here
  • CFAR is here. They seem to own the campus in Berkeley but it is encumbered with a mortgage ("Land, buildings, and equipment ... less depreciation; $22,026,042 ... Secured mortgages and notes payable, $20,848,988"). I don't know what else they do since they stopped teaching rationality workshops in 2016 or so and pivoted to worrying about building Colossus. They have nine employees with salaries from $112k to $340k plus a president paid $23k/year
  • MIRI is here. They pay Yud ($599,970 in 2024!) and after failing to publish much research on how to build Friend Computer they pivoted to arguing that Friend Computer might not be our friend. Edit: they had about $16 million in mostly financial assets (cash, investments, etc.) at end of year but spent $6.5m against $1.5m of revenue in 2024. They received $25 million in 2021 and ever since they have been consuming those funds rather than investing them and living off the interest.
  • BEMC Foundation is here. This husband-and-wife organization gives about $2 million/year each to Vox Future Perfect and GiveWell from an initial $38m in capital (so they can keep giving for decades without adding more capital). Edit: The size of the donations to Future Perfect and GiveWell swing from year to year so neither can count on the money, and they gave out $6.4m in 2024 which is not sustainable.
  • The Clear Fund (GiveWell) is here. They have the biggest wad of cash and the highest cashflow.
  • Edit: Open Philanthropy (now Coefficient Giving) is here (they have two sister organizations). David Gerard says they are mainly a way for Dustin Moskevitz the co-founder of Facebook to organize donations, like the Gates, Carnegie, and Rockefeller foundations. They used to fund Lightcone.
  • Edit: Animal Charity Evaluators is here. They have funded Vox Future Perfect (in 2020-2021) and the longtermist kind of animal welfare ("if humans eating pigs is bad, isn't whales eating krill worse?")
  • Edit: Survival and Flourishing Fund does not seem to be a charity. Whereas a Lightcone staffer says that SFF funds Lightcone, SFF say that they just connect applicants to donors and evaluate grant applications. So who exactly is providing the money? Sometimes its Jaan Tallinn of Skype and Kazaa.
  • Centre for Effective Altruism is mostly British but has a US wing since March 2025 https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/333737390
  • Edit: Giving What We Can seems like a mainstream "bednets and deworming pills" type of charity
  • Edit: Givedirectly Inc is an excellent idea in principle (give money to poor people overseas and let them figure out how best to use it) but their auditor flagged them for Material noncompliance and Material weakness in internal controls. The mistakes don't seem sinister (they classified $39 million of donations as conditional rather than unconditional- ie. with more restrictions than they actually had). GiveDirectly, Give What We Can, and GiveWell are all much better funded than the core LessWrong organizations.

Since CFAR seem to own Lighthaven, its curious that Lightcone head Oliver Habryka threatens to sell it if Lightcone shut down. One might almost imagine that boundaries between all these organizations are not as clear as the org charts make it seem. SFGate says that it cost $16.5 million plus renovations:

Who are these owners? The property belongs to a limited liability company called Lightcone Rose Garden, which appears to be a stand-in for the nonprofit Center for Applied Rationality and its project, Lightcone Infrastructure. Both of these organizations list the address, 2740 Telegraph Ave., as their home on public filings. They’ve renovated the inn, named it Lighthaven, and now use it to host events, often related to the organizations’ work in cognitive science, artificial intelligence safety and “longtermism.”

Habryka was boasting about the campus in 2024 and said that Lightcone budgeted $6.25 million on renovating the campus that year. It also seems odd for a nonprofit to spend money renovating a property that belongs to another nonprofit.

On LessWrong Habryka also mentions "a property we (Lightcone) own right next to Lighthaven, which is worth around $1M" and which they could use as collateral for a loan. Lightcone's 2024 paperwork listed the only assets as cash and accounts receivable. So either they are passing around assets like the last plastic cup at a frat party, or they bought this recently while the dispute with the trustees was ongoing, or Habryka does not know what his organization actually owns.

The California end seems to be burning money, as many movements with apocalyptic messages and inexperienced managers do. Revenue was significantly less than expenses and assets of CFAR are close to liabilities. CFAR/Lightcone do not have the $4.9 million liquid assets which the FTX trustees want back and claim their escrow company lost another $1 million of FTX's money.

 

People connected to LessWrong and the Bay Area surveillance industry often cite David Chapman's "Geeks, Mops, and Sociopaths in Subculture Evolution" to understand why their subcultures keep getting taken over by jerks. Chapman is a Buddhist mystic who seems rationalist-curious. Some people use the term postrationalist.

Have you noticed that Chapman presents the founders of nerdy subcultures as innocent nerds being pushed around by the mean suits? But today we know that the founders of Longtermism and LessWrong all had ulterior motives: Scott Alexander and Nick Bostrom were into race pseudoscience, and Yudkowsky had his kinks (and was also into eugenics and Libertarianism). HPMOR teaches that intelligence is the measure of human worth, and the use of intelligence is to manipulate people. Mollie Gleiberman makes a strong argument that "bednet" effective altruism with short-term measurable goals was always meant as an outer doctrine to prepare people to hear the inner doctrine about how building God and expanding across the Universe would be the most effective altruism of all. And there were all the issues within LessWrong and Effective Altruism around substance use, abuse of underpaid employees, and bosses who felt entitled to hit on subordinates. A '60s rocker might have been cheated by his record label, but that does not get him off the hook for crashing a car while high on nose candy and deep inside a groupie.

I don't know whether Chapman was naive or creating a smokescreen. Had he ever met the thinkers he admired in person?

 

Form 990 for these organizations mentions many names I am not familiar with such as Tyler Emerson. Many people in these spaces have romantic or housing partnerships with each other, and many attend meetups and cons together. A MIRI staffer claims that Peter Thiel funded them from 2005 to 2009, we now know when Jeffrey Epstein donated. Publishing such a thing is not very nice since these are living persons frequently accused of questionable behavior which never goes to court (and some may have left the movement), but does a concise list of dates, places, and known connections exist?

Maybe that social graph would be more of a dot. So many of these people date each other and serve on each other's boards and live in the SF Bay Area, Austin TX, the NYC area, or Oxford, England. On the enshittified site people talk about their Twitter and Tumblr connections.

 

We often mix up two bloggers named Scott. One of Jeffrey Epstein's victims says that she was abused by a white-haired psychology professor or Harvard professor named Stephen. In 2020, Vice observed that two Harvard faculty members with known ties to Epstein fit that description (a Steven and a Stephen). The older of the two taught the younger. The younger denies that he met or had sex with the victim. What kind of workplace has two people who can be reasonably suspected of an act like that?

I am being very careful about talking about this.

 

An opposition between altruism and selfishness seems important to Yud. 23-year-old Yud said "I was pretty much entirely altruistic in terms of raw motivations" and his Pathfinder fic has a whole theology of selfishness. His protagonists have a deep longing to be world-historical figures and be admired by the world. Dreams of controlling and manipulating people to get what you want are woven into his community like mould spores in a condemned building.

Has anyone unpicked this? Is talking about selfishness and altrusm common in LessWrong like pretending to use Bayesian statistics?

 

I used to think that psychiatry-blogging was Scott Alexander's most useful/least harmful writing, because its his profession and an underserved topic. But he has his agenda to preach race pseudoscience and 1920s-type eugenics, and he has written in some ethical grey areas like stating a named friend's diagnosis and desired course of treatment. He is in a community where many people tell themselves that their substance use is medicinal and want proscriptions. Someone on SneerClub thinks he mixed up psychosis and schizophrenia in a recent post.

If you are in a registered profession like psychiatry, it can be dangerous to casually comment on your colleagues. Regardless, has anyone with relevant qualifications ever commented on his psychiatry blogging and whether it is a good representation of the state of knowledge?

31
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by CinnasVerses@awful.systems to c/sneerclub@awful.systems
 

Bad people who spend too long on social media call normies NPCs as in video-game NPCs who follow a closed behavioural loop. Wikipedia says this slur was popular with the Twitter far right in October 2018. Two years before that, Maciej Ceglowski warned:

I've even seen people in the so-called rationalist community refer to people who they don't think are effective as ‘Non Player Characters’, or NPCs, a term borrowed from video games. This is a horrible way to look at the world.

Sometime in 2016, an anonymous coward on 4Chan wrote:

I have a theory that there are only a fixed quantity of souls on planet Earth that cycle continuously through reincarnation. However, since the human growth rate is so severe, the soulless extra walking flesh piles around us are NPC’s (sic), or ultimate normalfags, who autonomously follow group think and social trends in order to appear convincingly human.

Kotaku says that this post was rediscovered by the far right in 2018.

Scott Alexander's novel Unsong has an angel tell a human character that there was a shortage of divine light for creating souls so "I THOUGHT I WOULD SOLVE THE MORAL CRISIS AND THE RESOURCE ALLOCATION PROBLEM SIMULTANEOUSLY BY REMOVING THE SOULS FROM PEOPLE IN NORTHEAST AFRICA SO THEY STOPPED HAVING CONSCIOUS EXPERIENCES." He posted that chapter in August 2016 (unsongbook.com). Was he reading or posting on 4chan?

Did any posts on LessWrong use this insult before August 2016?

Edit: In HPMOR by Eliezer Yudkowsky (written in 2009 and 2010), rationalist Harry Potter calls people who don't do what he tells them NPCs. I don't think Yud's Harry says they have no souls but he has contempt for them.

view more: next ›