One erratum: the review that goes into how HPMOR's science is bad was by "su3su2u1", not Dan Luu (who just archived it from the original Tumblr).
LaSota and those in her orbit alleged that CFAR and its leadership were laced with anti-trans beliefs and practices. (“That's preposterous,” one member of the rationalist community, who is also trans, told me. “Rationalists have the most trans people of any group I've seen that isn't explicitly about being trans. You'd just show up at a math event or house party, and it would be 20 percent trans.”)
The leadership can't be transphobic because 20% of the membership is trans. In related news, the United States government cannot be sexist because [breaks down into bleak and bitter laughter]
whomst among us has'nt err'd?
Spoken like a man who jerks it to tradwife Midjourney pics. Can't get it up unless the fingers look wrong, can you?
i lost my cushy tech job because of twitter. the one i worked so hard for in my youth. the one i was going to pull my family out of poverty with. but instead i am a martyr in the culture wars of based capital versus woke capital. i am gaza.
"Honest, babe, I'd only dump you for a ten-out-of-ten smokeshow as evaluated on my personal scale!"
If I were inclined to be charitable, I'd wonder who he was talking to that honestly thought in terms of "elan vital" and "game balance". Like, take the question "Why is flesh soft and diamond hard?", and ask somebody without a science background. I'd guess that the typical response would go something like, "I'unno, it just is." Or, "I've never thought about it, why?" Or, "Heh heh heh, you said hard". I suspect that Yud is making up a layperson of his own invention, a mythical audience upon whom his Educate spell is perfectly effective. He refuses to admit any challenge to his mental model of how the process of explanation works.
For example, the inaugural Substack post defining effective accelerationisms’s “principles and tenets” name-drops the “Jarzynski-Crooks fluctuation dissipation theorem”
To echo a comment from old!SneerClub: That's not a thing. There are three separate but related ideas (the Crooks fluctuation theorem, the Jarzynski equality and the fluctuation-dissipation theorem) which the author doesn't know are separate, because he hasn't a clue what he's talking about.
Men will literally use an LLM instead of ~~going to therapy~~ writing documentation
I think it was Walter Lewin of MIT, not Harvard
I read War and Peace but have only vague memories of it, because I read it in eighth grade. We had an "accelerated reader" program, you see, in which we were supposed to read books and then take quizzes on them to accumulate points. The longer books counted for more. Nearly all of the list we could pick from looked incredibly boring, so I decided to get a year's worth of points in one go.
Well, not all of the comments there are horrible. Though there is a guy calling himself "richardfeynman" saying some pretty silly stuff. His prior comment history is full of promptfondling.
There could be other "into the locker now" signals that are as strong as calling yourself "richardfeynman" on Hacker News, but I cannot think of a stronger one.