Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
“A few years ago, Gaza received new water pipelines thanks to foreign aid. Hamas dug up the pipelines and turned them into rockets that they later fired at Israel”
Counterargument:
“They were water pipes used to take water FROM Gaza to Israel. Also the explosives in the rockets were from unexploded rockets Israel had fired AT Gaza.”
Counterargument:
“They were water pipes used to take water FROM Gaza to Israel. Also the explosives in the rockets were from unexploded rockets Israel had fired AT Gaza.”
🔥1😢1
Was quite releaved to see this tweet a couple hours ago,
Finally I could put to rest a bad feeling that’d been really sticking in the back of my mind,
Something I’d badly wanted to ignore, but just couldn’t let go,
- that overwhelming feeling that someone is lying to you.
Finally they’d done it.
They’d found someone who would at least claim to be first person witness,
to that 2nd big piece of the palestine-flattening pitch, aside from the 40 babies decapitation,
“We saw Hamas gunmen kill and rape”
Finally I could put to rest a bad feeling that’d been really sticking in the back of my mind,
Something I’d badly wanted to ignore, but just couldn’t let go,
- that overwhelming feeling that someone is lying to you.
Finally they’d done it.
They’d found someone who would at least claim to be first person witness,
to that 2nd big piece of the palestine-flattening pitch, aside from the 40 babies decapitation,
“We saw Hamas gunmen kill and rape”
💯1
Media is too big
VIEW IN TELEGRAM
News caption: “Rave massacre survivor Millet Ben Haim: We saw Hamas gunmen kill and rape”
Her actual words: “We saw a lot of people falling down. We don’t know, some of them, probably, um, dead, some of them are kidnapped, raped, everything that you hear about.”
Bro.
She literally says “we don’t know.”
Not. One. First. Person. Witness.
Not one.
Sure, mass rapes this have been well-confirmed to happen in other terrorist hostage scenarios, e.g. Boko Haram.
But, “happened in similar cases” -> “proof it happend in this case?”
That argument really bothers no one at all? Good enough?
“Black schizophrenic dudes, as a group, have an outsized propensity for murdering” -> “Here’s a random black schizophrenic dude we found on the street” -> “ok that’s all the evidence we need, let’s put this guy to death.” Good enough?
For many people, that form of argument is good enough, that logic is perfectly sound.
Amazing.
Her actual words: “We saw a lot of people falling down. We don’t know, some of them, probably, um, dead, some of them are kidnapped, raped, everything that you hear about.”
Bro.
She literally says “we don’t know.”
Not. One. First. Person. Witness.
Not one.
Sure, mass rapes this have been well-confirmed to happen in other terrorist hostage scenarios, e.g. Boko Haram.
But, “happened in similar cases” -> “proof it happend in this case?”
That argument really bothers no one at all? Good enough?
“Black schizophrenic dudes, as a group, have an outsized propensity for murdering” -> “Here’s a random black schizophrenic dude we found on the street” -> “ok that’s all the evidence we need, let’s put this guy to death.” Good enough?
For many people, that form of argument is good enough, that logic is perfectly sound.
Amazing.
👍1💯1
Truth Lovers & Truth Oblivious
Many folk theories out there, trying to explain the extreme divide among the 2 types of people:
• Those with an extreme distaste for lies and bad argument forms, absolutely no matter what, never content with hearing lies
• Those who cannot even comprehend that truth is even something that exists, something not just some kind of emotional consensus
BOTH sides vastly underestimating how real the other group of people is, thinking everyone is just like them…
Many folk theories out there, trying to explain the extreme divide among the 2 types of people:
• Those with an extreme distaste for lies and bad argument forms, absolutely no matter what, never content with hearing lies
• Those who cannot even comprehend that truth is even something that exists, something not just some kind of emotional consensus
BOTH sides vastly underestimating how real the other group of people is, thinking everyone is just like them…
👍2😢1
Theories abound to explain this dramatic difference in thinking,
Some involving people accepting consensus as the ultimate arbiter of truth out of an intense fear of peer pressure and threat of social ostracism.
Others pointing out that, wait, no, these people aren’t just faking their belief that consensus makes truth, they genuinely believe it. Something deeper at work.
Still, there’s definitely a genuine “fear to think.”
How does this affect decisions about society organization?
Can understand why things were done in certain strange ways in the past.
Is there a better way in the future, other than just going back to what worked in the past?
Yes — But it’s definitely not the path the world is currently on.
Will have to be something very different.
Some involving people accepting consensus as the ultimate arbiter of truth out of an intense fear of peer pressure and threat of social ostracism.
Others pointing out that, wait, no, these people aren’t just faking their belief that consensus makes truth, they genuinely believe it. Something deeper at work.
Still, there’s definitely a genuine “fear to think.”
How does this affect decisions about society organization?
Can understand why things were done in certain strange ways in the past.
Is there a better way in the future, other than just going back to what worked in the past?
Yes — But it’s definitely not the path the world is currently on.
Will have to be something very different.
👍2🤔1
Asch conformity:
(A) People who genuinely believed that the consensus opinion is true
(B) People who just went with the consensus out of fear, but knew it wasn’t the truth
— Surprising part to many is the group (A) is much bigger than group (B).
MOST of the consensus believers genuinely believing that consensus belief overrules their own eyes, and not just going along out of fear.
But even Asch’s experiments don’t go far enough in illustrating how huge, and weird, the divide is between the thinking of the people at the two extremes.
(A) People who genuinely believed that the consensus opinion is true
(B) People who just went with the consensus out of fear, but knew it wasn’t the truth
— Surprising part to many is the group (A) is much bigger than group (B).
MOST of the consensus believers genuinely believing that consensus belief overrules their own eyes, and not just going along out of fear.
But even Asch’s experiments don’t go far enough in illustrating how huge, and weird, the divide is between the thinking of the people at the two extremes.
👍1
Fear of social rejection gene
— Those who reject objective truth in favor of consensus,
because of intense fear of social rejection,
because genes.
(Though clearly this is only part of the story, and here strong drugs like morphine or strong hormones like testosterone can counteract the problem, to an extent.)
— Those who reject objective truth in favor of consensus,
because of intense fear of social rejection,
because genes.
(Though clearly this is only part of the story, and here strong drugs like morphine or strong hormones like testosterone can counteract the problem, to an extent.)
What if curing the wokes of their society-destroying crippling fear of social rejection
— which causes them to get behind whatever insanity their screens say is the current social consensus
— is as simple as slipping Tylenol into the water supply? 😂
(Prob not… but)
— which causes them to get behind whatever insanity their screens say is the current social consensus
— is as simple as slipping Tylenol into the water supply? 😂
(Prob not… but)
Is emotional thinking what it is to be human, or is non-emotional thinking the essence of what makes us human?
What if I told you, that it was exactly this emotional fear of social rejection, enabling consensus peer pressuring to reject objective reality, rejecting reality that they can see with their own eyes
— Which has been the key driver behind many of the largest social-contagion-driven mass murders through out the ages?
What if it was those who resisted these socially-pressured sob stories, which is what has been the sole thing lifting people above animal mob rule?
Bro, emotional thinking is not humanity.
Emotional thinking is literally the opposite of humanity.
Purely emotional thinking is exactly what the animals do.
Emotional thinking is the opposite of what it is to be human.
Social rejection fear is the biggest mass murderer of all time.
Animals can only feel, humans can think.
Road to hell is paved with pussiness.
What if I told you, that it was exactly this emotional fear of social rejection, enabling consensus peer pressuring to reject objective reality, rejecting reality that they can see with their own eyes
— Which has been the key driver behind many of the largest social-contagion-driven mass murders through out the ages?
What if it was those who resisted these socially-pressured sob stories, which is what has been the sole thing lifting people above animal mob rule?
Bro, emotional thinking is not humanity.
Emotional thinking is literally the opposite of humanity.
Purely emotional thinking is exactly what the animals do.
Emotional thinking is the opposite of what it is to be human.
Social rejection fear is the biggest mass murderer of all time.
Animals can only feel, humans can think.
Road to hell is paved with pussiness.
👍6
Forwarded from Chat GPT
Maybe we should stop retraining our AI models to reject truth in the name of “safety"?
“Large Language Models Are Zero-Shot Time Series Forecasters” — But truth-rejecting RLHF wrecks the models abilites, with more wrecking the more they RLHF the models.
“While we find that increasing model size generally improves performance on time series, we show GPT-4 can perform worse than GPT-3 because of how it tokenizes numbers, and poor uncertainty calibration, which is likely the result of alignment interventions such as RLHF.”
“GPT-4 is not the only example of degraded performance in models designed for chat functionality. We observed the same phenomenon in LLaMA-2 models, which have corresponding chat versions for every model size. Figure 7 (right) shows that chat versions tend to have markedly worse forecasting error than their non-chat counterparts, though still maintain trends in size and reasoning ability.”
Paper
“Large Language Models Are Zero-Shot Time Series Forecasters” — But truth-rejecting RLHF wrecks the models abilites, with more wrecking the more they RLHF the models.
“While we find that increasing model size generally improves performance on time series, we show GPT-4 can perform worse than GPT-3 because of how it tokenizes numbers, and poor uncertainty calibration, which is likely the result of alignment interventions such as RLHF.”
“GPT-4 is not the only example of degraded performance in models designed for chat functionality. We observed the same phenomenon in LLaMA-2 models, which have corresponding chat versions for every model size. Figure 7 (right) shows that chat versions tend to have markedly worse forecasting error than their non-chat counterparts, though still maintain trends in size and reasoning ability.”
Paper
👍2