DoomPosting
Which is more true
Biggest unstated question here IMO,
— Does non-interactively learning from books, where the communication is overwhelmingly only in one direction, count as “people”?
IMO clearly no, not at all — especially since ~100% of the “people” in abnormally smart people’s lives are often extremely AGAINST them seeking out those books, spending all so much time learning from those books, and also because the book writers could literally be dead since long ago
Learning from books = self-taught
IMO confusion here is probably that many MASSIVELY underestimate how much more the smartest people learn from mass-produced writings, written by someone else far away,
Whereas the dumber people rely MUCH MORE on interactive hand-holding instruction, where some teacher is interactively telling them exactly what they got wrong etc
Much like “a word to the wise is sufficient”
= The smartest much more often need ZERO individualized iteractive guidance
BTW, using “interactive” and “non-interactive” e.g. like in the sense of interactive proofs.
Making this more concrete —
DISTINCTION 1: INTERACTIVE TEACHING -VS- NON-INTERACTIVE NON-TEACHING:
(A) INTERACTIVE TEACHING = teacher individually tailors their teachings to what you’ve said so far = NON-SELF-TAUGHT, as e.g. the teacher could not even be alive anymore and this still works
(B) NON-INTERACTIVE NON-TEACHING = a “teacher” produces a mass message that they could send to billions of people, communication in the other direction from the students and subsequent tailored communication = SELF-TAUGHT, e.g. it requires the teacher to actually be alive
So by this simple definition….you’d see that the VAST majority of brilliant people were overwhelmingly self-taught, overwhelmingly seeking out mass-published materials
BUT, what about e.g. when colleagues interactively write back and forth, or chat with each other in the office?
I’d say there’s a distinction to be made there,
DISTINCTION 2: UNILATERAL NON-TRADE TEACHING -VS- BILATERAL TRADE NON-TEACHING:
(C) UNILATERAL NON-TRADE TEACHING: Learning of new things only going in one direction, from teacher to student, student teaching the teacher nothing for the topic at hand = teaching, education = NON-SELF-TAUGHT
(D) BILATERAL TRADE NON-TEACHING, which is often the real nature of such interactions between top-tier-peers, as they will often refuse to answer many more individualized questions, if they’re not learning something in return = STILL SELF-TAUGHT, because you basically have to end up figuring out something hard enough to impress some smart person with something they haven’t heard before, which virtually always involves self-teaching unless you’re some kind of spy = virtually always SELF-TAUGHT
Alright, so with those basic and kinda-obviously-right definitions out of the way,
+ SMARTEST PEOPLE overwhelmingly use: (B) NON-INTERACTIVE NON-TEACHING and (D) BILATERAL TRADE NON-TEACHING = SELF-TAUGHT
+ DUMBER PEOPLE overwhelmingly use (A) INTERACTIVE TEACHING and (C) UNILATERAL NON-TRADE TEACHING = NON-SELF-TAUGHT
=
YES, the smartest people truly are overwhelmingly SELF-TAUGHT, at least for anything you could learn via writing or video, by any reasonable definitions, while dumber people may not be
Saying the smartest people got there through education is practically commie cope excuses as for why they’re not as smart as the smartest people
Reality is innate extreme laziness, innate low NFC, innately worse learning ability.
Smartest truly are overhwelmingly truly self-taught
(BUT, upcoming modern AI runs into trouble with these definitions, because now it IS much more interactive… but it’s not a person — So just add that the teacher must be a human and not a tool, to still count as self-taught? Thinking about this.)
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🄾🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
— Does non-interactively learning from books, where the communication is overwhelmingly only in one direction, count as “people”?
IMO clearly no, not at all — especially since ~100% of the “people” in abnormally smart people’s lives are often extremely AGAINST them seeking out those books, spending all so much time learning from those books, and also because the book writers could literally be dead since long ago
Learning from books = self-taught
IMO confusion here is probably that many MASSIVELY underestimate how much more the smartest people learn from mass-produced writings, written by someone else far away,
Whereas the dumber people rely MUCH MORE on interactive hand-holding instruction, where some teacher is interactively telling them exactly what they got wrong etc
Much like “a word to the wise is sufficient”
= The smartest much more often need ZERO individualized iteractive guidance
BTW, using “interactive” and “non-interactive” e.g. like in the sense of interactive proofs.
Making this more concrete —
DISTINCTION 1: INTERACTIVE TEACHING -VS- NON-INTERACTIVE NON-TEACHING:
(A) INTERACTIVE TEACHING = teacher individually tailors their teachings to what you’ve said so far = NON-SELF-TAUGHT, as e.g. the teacher could not even be alive anymore and this still works
(B) NON-INTERACTIVE NON-TEACHING = a “teacher” produces a mass message that they could send to billions of people, communication in the other direction from the students and subsequent tailored communication = SELF-TAUGHT, e.g. it requires the teacher to actually be alive
So by this simple definition….you’d see that the VAST majority of brilliant people were overwhelmingly self-taught, overwhelmingly seeking out mass-published materials
BUT, what about e.g. when colleagues interactively write back and forth, or chat with each other in the office?
I’d say there’s a distinction to be made there,
DISTINCTION 2: UNILATERAL NON-TRADE TEACHING -VS- BILATERAL TRADE NON-TEACHING:
(C) UNILATERAL NON-TRADE TEACHING: Learning of new things only going in one direction, from teacher to student, student teaching the teacher nothing for the topic at hand = teaching, education = NON-SELF-TAUGHT
(D) BILATERAL TRADE NON-TEACHING, which is often the real nature of such interactions between top-tier-peers, as they will often refuse to answer many more individualized questions, if they’re not learning something in return = STILL SELF-TAUGHT, because you basically have to end up figuring out something hard enough to impress some smart person with something they haven’t heard before, which virtually always involves self-teaching unless you’re some kind of spy = virtually always SELF-TAUGHT
Alright, so with those basic and kinda-obviously-right definitions out of the way,
+ SMARTEST PEOPLE overwhelmingly use: (B) NON-INTERACTIVE NON-TEACHING and (D) BILATERAL TRADE NON-TEACHING = SELF-TAUGHT
+ DUMBER PEOPLE overwhelmingly use (A) INTERACTIVE TEACHING and (C) UNILATERAL NON-TRADE TEACHING = NON-SELF-TAUGHT
=
YES, the smartest people truly are overwhelmingly SELF-TAUGHT, at least for anything you could learn via writing or video, by any reasonable definitions, while dumber people may not be
Saying the smartest people got there through education is practically commie cope excuses as for why they’re not as smart as the smartest people
Reality is innate extreme laziness, innate low NFC, innately worse learning ability.
Smartest truly are overhwelmingly truly self-taught
(BUT, upcoming modern AI runs into trouble with these definitions, because now it IS much more interactive… but it’s not a person — So just add that the teacher must be a human and not a tool, to still count as self-taught? Thinking about this.)
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🄾🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
💯4❤🔥1👀1
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
Ethereum has always been more than just a token.
But the price of $ETH matters, for so many reasons.
Builders and ETH holders are demanding accountability from the Ethereum Foundation.
Cointelegraph explores this conflict in its upcoming documentary - coming soon on YouTube.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
But the price of $ETH matters, for so many reasons.
Builders and ETH holders are demanding accountability from the Ethereum Foundation.
Cointelegraph explores this conflict in its upcoming documentary - coming soon on YouTube.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
DoomPosting
Biggest unstated question here IMO, — Does non-interactively learning from books, where the communication is overwhelmingly only in one direction, count as “people”? IMO clearly no, not at all — especially since ~100% of the “people” in abnormally smart…
FWIW, there are some analogous student & teacher concepts in AI,
in “knowledge distillation”, where,
(1) a huge model first self-teaches, on massive amounts of mostly or entirely raw data — figuring out all kinds of things on its own from raw data = SELF-TAUGHT
(2) then the huge model creates the training data to train a vastly smaller model — passing to that smaller model the much tinier amount of learnings the huge model arrived at, and ofc throwing away much of the insights that lead to it figuring out those things = smaller student model is NON-SELF-TAUGHT
The tradeoff for self-taught vs non-self taught?
+ Larger self-taught teacher model often ends up with vastly higher liquid IQ, in part due to not throwing away all the insights it gained while arriving at the final conclusions it shared witht he student — at the expense of the huge model being much more expensive to run
+ Smaller taught student model often being much cheaper to run, and having surprisingly high crystalized / memorized IQ just under the teachers — But having relatively horrible liquid / thinking IQ once you wander outside of the stuff it memorized
Can see this tradeoff pretty clearly e.g. in OpenAI’s collection of much faster and cheaper models, that were created exactly through this self-taught-teacher vs taught-student process.
Again, self-taught competely dominates being taught by a teacher — at least in the above sense
= 1000x better insights which you can then use to figure out the answers to other new problems — when you’re self-taught
= And that’s probably exactly why being self-taught makes people so much better at solving unsolved new problems
Self-teaching makes you build up a database of useful intuitions and insights that can then be readily repurposed for solving other problems, rather than just being stuck with what you’d memorized from a teacher
— And yes, smart teachers still can help guide in the direction of the right answer
— But what if, only by going off down some of those WRONG paths, can the learner learn why those wrong directions are wrong, and reuse some of those insights learned on the wrong paths when searching for solutions to future unsolved problems? Hm
Self-taught dominates, when it comes to raw IQ, despite the much lower efficiency
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🄾🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
in “knowledge distillation”, where,
(1) a huge model first self-teaches, on massive amounts of mostly or entirely raw data — figuring out all kinds of things on its own from raw data = SELF-TAUGHT
(2) then the huge model creates the training data to train a vastly smaller model — passing to that smaller model the much tinier amount of learnings the huge model arrived at, and ofc throwing away much of the insights that lead to it figuring out those things = smaller student model is NON-SELF-TAUGHT
The tradeoff for self-taught vs non-self taught?
+ Larger self-taught teacher model often ends up with vastly higher liquid IQ, in part due to not throwing away all the insights it gained while arriving at the final conclusions it shared witht he student — at the expense of the huge model being much more expensive to run
+ Smaller taught student model often being much cheaper to run, and having surprisingly high crystalized / memorized IQ just under the teachers — But having relatively horrible liquid / thinking IQ once you wander outside of the stuff it memorized
Can see this tradeoff pretty clearly e.g. in OpenAI’s collection of much faster and cheaper models, that were created exactly through this self-taught-teacher vs taught-student process.
Again, self-taught competely dominates being taught by a teacher — at least in the above sense
= 1000x better insights which you can then use to figure out the answers to other new problems — when you’re self-taught
= And that’s probably exactly why being self-taught makes people so much better at solving unsolved new problems
Self-teaching makes you build up a database of useful intuitions and insights that can then be readily repurposed for solving other problems, rather than just being stuck with what you’d memorized from a teacher
— And yes, smart teachers still can help guide in the direction of the right answer
— But what if, only by going off down some of those WRONG paths, can the learner learn why those wrong directions are wrong, and reuse some of those insights learned on the wrong paths when searching for solutions to future unsolved problems? Hm
Self-taught dominates, when it comes to raw IQ, despite the much lower efficiency
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🄾🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
❤🔥4🔥2💯2
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
TRUMP ON TARIFFS: "August 1st is a very big day for this country because money is going to pour into the United States like we've never seen before."
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
👀4❤🔥1
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
BREAKING: Nancy Pelosi just had an absolute MELTDOWN when Jake Tapper brought up her insider trading
This is incredible
“Why do you have to read that?! That’s not what I agreed to come and talk about!”
What are you hiding, Nancy?!
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
This is incredible
“Why do you have to read that?! That’s not what I agreed to come and talk about!”
What are you hiding, Nancy?!
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
😁6👀3
Now that the police state is taking over, Europeans are failing to identify it as such because it doesn’t look cartoonishly evil like in the movies.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
🌚5🤬3🗿2🫡1
This media is not supported in your browser
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
JUST IN: Nancy Pelosi says she does not engage in insider trading and has 'no concerns' about her past investments.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
😁4🖕4👀2
BREAKING: One of James Clapper’s cronies threatened to WITHHOLD a promotion of a senior intelligence official if that official did not go along with Obama’s Russia Collusion Hoax, per docs viewed by ProfMJCleveland
Obama and his henchmen were BLACKMAILING OFFICIALS to push their fake “intelligence”
“I need you to say you agree with these judgements, so that DIA will go along with them,” Clapper’s crony said
He told the official he “would need to demonstrate his ability to ‘outgrow’” his refusal to sign off on assessments he did NOT believe in, in order to be recommended for a promotion.
UNBELIEVABLE amounts of corruption continue to be uncovered in this scandal.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
Obama and his henchmen were BLACKMAILING OFFICIALS to push their fake “intelligence”
“I need you to say you agree with these judgements, so that DIA will go along with them,” Clapper’s crony said
He told the official he “would need to demonstrate his ability to ‘outgrow’” his refusal to sign off on assessments he did NOT believe in, in order to be recommended for a promotion.
UNBELIEVABLE amounts of corruption continue to be uncovered in this scandal.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
😡4👀2
BREAKING Chile has evacuated over 1 million people from coast over tsunami risk, emergency services say
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
NEW - F.02 humanoid robot is doing laundry, not teleoperated, but by using an AI neural network.
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶
🄳🄾🄾🄼🄿🤖🅂🅃🄸🄽🄶