Here is a list of all my public writings and videos (from before February 2025).
lsusr
Karma: 18,375
If you’re interested in an example of how to write a well-received post that deviates from a established narrative (in this case, “primordial soup”), you may enjoy my book review of The Vital Question.
In case you’re more interested in the philosophical dialogue angle, here’s an example of a well-received dialogue.. This one in particular goes against the dogma of this website. (It’s anti-Bayesian.)
Does this make sense? Could a fundamental principle – alongside the genetic principle – have existed from the very beginning of life, one that later became embodied in the brain?
There’s no such thing as a “fundamental principle”. Principles, by definition, are not fundamental. There are fundamental laws, but those are physical laws, not biological laws. Moreover, “the genetic principle” isn’t a standard concept in biology, so it’s unclear to me what you’re referring to here.
“The #1 career of people on this website is Computers.”
“What’s #2?”
“More computers.”
I didn’t like The Great Gatsby (the book) either when I was forced to read it, not great at all, do not recommend.
When I was in high school, we were required to read The Great Gatsby and The Scarlet Letter.
The Great Gatsby is about wasting your life chasing status because you molded yourself into exactly what other people treat as high status.
The Scarlet Letter was about being persecuted for violating social norms.
Then the class voted about which one they liked better. I preferred[1] The Scarlet Letter. My (normal) class overwhelming preferred The Great Gatsby.
- ↩︎
This does not imply that I liked The Scarlet Letter.
I love the title “Trojan Sky” and the word “screensnake”.
Panksepp was battling a behaviorist establishment that believed animals did not have feelings.
The history of psychology is as ideological as the history of economics. After Freud, which barely qualifies as science, the reactionary behaviorist establishment effectively suppressed anything which conflicted with their ideology, including common sense. Affective Neuroscience—which should be uncontroverial science—must instead explain basic concepts of the philosophy of science. The book plays so defensive against behaviorist ideology I got bored and never got deep into the book.
The behaviorists made improvements to the field of psychology, but they also dealt damage that echoes to this day. I met someone a few years ago who worked in a (presumably behaviorist) laboratory who insisted that literally all behavior was produced by reinforcement learning.
Lex Luthor or Lex Fridman?
Once I had several positive things to say to a very good CEO. When I was done, he just waited. He was so used to receiving compliment sandwiches that he just assumed my compliment would be followed by a criticism.
I think we’re in agreement that dense 4-story buildings tend to be usually more efficient than skyscrapers. I’m mostly referring to the cities like Paris which are shorter than free market economics would build—and especially cities (and even more, suburbs) of the USA where land use restrictions are even more restrictive.
Another option is to go full Victorian, with coattails and a top hat.
you can just do things
I’m glad we’re on the same page. :)
Personal moderation decision: I’m cutting off the Trump discussion here. Any further comments will be removed, on the grounds that their political mindkillery effects trump their relevance to this discussion.
This policy applies only to this post and does not generalize to my other posts.
I solve this problem by telling jokes and expressing opinions so far outside the Overton Window they’d get me stoned to death by the general public. After setting the honesty baseline that high, it would be bizarre for my friends to fudge their food preferences.
It is indeed rude to ask your hosts to make you something special to accommodate your diet. That’s why I don’t do it. This is part of how I try to not be a problem for other people. If I’m not expecting vegetarian options, I just eat in advance and then nibble on the bread or something. I did this around Anglos even back when I ate a normal diet, because Anglos often serve so little food.
My East Asian family doesn’t see it as an affront (though I can’t speak for everyone—especially not anyone under the age of 18). To the contrary, it’s a source of common ground between me and my vegetarian Pure Land Buddhist Taiwanese great aunt. It’s just about getting the right framing. East Asians understand that Buddhists often eat a vegan diet.
I guess I should qualify my statement, since this post is about surplusses based on value-added business like manufacturing and technology. A trade surplus based on resource extraction is not necessarily a source of long-term wealth.
I agree with the statement “The notion that bilateral trade deficits are per se detrimental to the respective national economies is overwhelmingly rejected by trade experts and economists.”, by the way. The key word is “bilateral”. Consider the China-Australia example I used in my original post. China has a bilateral trade deficit with Australia, but that’s misleading because China imports raw material from Australia and exports manufactured goods to many other nations. In this way, China’s bilateral trade deficit with Australia is one component of a net trade surplus. once you account for all the other countries China trade with.
That sounds like it would be interesting to visit.
Yes. This is sufficiently well-established and uncontroversial, that I don’t feel the need to dig through the specific examples.
Bullet trains are nice, but I feel they make more sense for connecting cities. Generally-speaking, the best direction to expand cities is to build upward and downward.
When can we start reserving spacetime slots to give talks?