dashdsrdash

joined 2 years ago
[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

It's not that verbing nouns weirds language so much as the regreekification.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Genetically altering IQ is more or less about flipping a sufficient number of IQ-decreasing variants to their IQ-increasing counterparts. This sounds overly simplified, but it’s surprisingly accurate; most of the variance in the genome is linear in nature, by which I mean the effect of a gene doesn’t usually depend on which other genes are present

Contradicted by previous text in the same article (diabetes), not to mention have you even opened a college-level genetics text in the last decade?

Anyway, I would encourage these people to flip their own genome a lot, except that they probably won't take the minimum necessary precautions of doing so under observation in isolation. "Science is whatever people in white coats say it is, and I bought a nice white coat off Amazon!"

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The thing about rationalists is that they are fully invested in irrational beliefs, which they prefer not to examine. In other words, just like most people, but with a specific terminology that, if they use it properly, identifies them as one of the elect.

I suggest that whenever your relative talks about EA, you talk about kindness. When they bring up longtermism, point out that you have to survive in the short term to reach the long term, so working on better policies now is rather important. If they start in on life extension, note that until quite recently, all the major advances in improving average human lifespan come from improving infant mortality, and be prepared to explain the demographic transition.

When they go extropian, say that it's a nice vision of the future but your kids are unlikely to see it unless we fix the world we're currently in.

But most of all, point out that multiplying infinitesimals by infinities to justify any course of action (a) is Pascal's Wager and (b) justifies every course of action -- so it can't justify any.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 years ago

That's the downside of the XKCD unlucky ten thousand.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 years ago

If you are in a 60 Hz electrical area (i.e. the Americas, mostly), and the power is rock-steady, and you have cheap fluorescent lighting -- then anything other than 60 Hz refresh rates might improve your screen, but much more so on old CRTs than on modern LCDs and OLEDs.

These days, like most smartphone 'features', it is mostly but not entirely about a checkmark to induce you to feel that you are missing out on something.

view more: ‹ prev next ›