bobson381

In TFA which includes a foreword by Anthropic - just under "On investor expectations"

>Scientists write for other scientists who already know why they use the language they use. Compromising that language to try to cater to fools who couldn't care less about the truth would just make the scientist a greater fool for trying.

This is a better version of the point I was trying to make, thanks. The framing / who is the audience makes the biggest difference. Had fun watching Digger.

And because of this, many will starve as a result of oil shocks from the disruption and chaos in the gulf region. We solved the trolley problem by throwing a magic lever that puts five descendants of the original person a ways down the tracks.

This technically useful skepticism can be weaponized against you by a rhetorical opponent by just pointing out that you "refuse to say for certain". All you have to do is say "some scientists believe there is some uncertainty" and you can convince a crowd to stop listening. Scientific communication works very poorly as mass communication.

How would you go about this given that it's the current WorldOS?

It's the same process that has been running - creation of complexity as a dissipative structure - but now with even less friction. Some say we'll transcend, I think we're spiraling into the language-navel of cartesian dualist logical positivist insanity.

As far as I can tell he was fairly ecumenical being UU - his spirituality is probably close-ish to Alan Watts or Joanna Macy.

How about Adam McKay, then?

I tuned out when it switched, also. How to move on when job is in front of screen?

Thanks for posting this. Very GEB

If you're watching through VLC, you can set the mix to stereo in the audio settings - perhaps there's a similar setting you can find? Not sure if you've got the tv's optical going straight into an amp. Some stereo receivers also have a "night mode" that can do this, you might find an older cheaper one with pre-outs or similar.