lyssa17
Joined 10 years ago
Karma
22
Submissions
15
Member since
Oct 8
Recent submissions
Comment · 5 years ago
Comment · 5 years ago
Yep. Recent debunking (once again) of their canon by Kevin Bird in an article titled "No support for the hereditarian hypothesis of the Black–White achievement gap using polygenic scores and tests for divergent selection"
Comment · 5 years ago
Imagine writing all these words when 14 would do.
Comment · 6 years ago
Comment · 6 years ago
hello! friendly invite to say hi on reddit if you like :)
/u/foobanana
Comment · 6 years ago
hey, are you on reddit memexy? i'm /u/foobanana, ping me if you are.
admire your attempts at reasoning with the unreasonable here.
Comment · 6 years ago
Yes, actually. It's a theme that Scott is annoyingly fond of, in his fiction and non-fiction. Unsong is entirely about kabbalistic puzzles as you know. Scott and others before him were enamored with the ideas of Leo Strauss. You can read more about Strauss' ideology of hidden truths that only the brilliant and/or worthy can perceive at the link below.
Scott Alexander uses the Kolmogorov post to have plausible deniability for his discussion of "race science". There's a reason writing "HBD" was banned in the comments section and it's that it was giving the game away to too many people. (discussion of HBD is not banned, it's simply not permitted for that string to appear - i wonder why that might be)
http://bactra.org/weblog/algae-2014-06.html#drury-on-strauss
Have you missed this post?
http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/10/23/kolmogorov-complicity-a...
Comment · 6 years ago
Let me get this straight, you contend that we should believe that Shalizi is an unreliable source and your justification is a post on a "human bio-diversity" blog run by white supremacist and anti-semite John Fuerst amongst others.
It would be bad enough if you were linking to a rebuttal of the post on heritability linked to by the parent, but this is a blog post attacking a different post by Shalizi.
How is this in any way relevant? More importantly, why would this convince anyone that Shalizi gets heritability wrong?
Comment · 6 years ago
The pre-natal environment is shared, and depending on the adoption process there could be a great deal of correlation in a range of environmental factors. It's not like these kids are grown in a vat and distributed randomly in the population is it?
Comment · 10 years ago
Ah I see. Didn't realize you were referring to a private one.
Comment · 10 years ago
Wait, which is that?
Comment · 10 years ago
"Folks with ADHD"
ADHD symptoms are a matter of degree in most individuals so presenting it as a binary is a fallacy. The vast majority of people can experience some benefits from some dose of stimulants (see the widespread use of coffee which has different effects but is analogous). I believe the reason the idea that people with ADHD respond differently is popularized is to legitimize ADHD in the eyes of people who would be judgmental regarding medication that causes cognitive enhancement in "healthy" individuals as well. (Because using performance enhancing drugs is cheating or some such nonsense)
Edit: See http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v456/n7223/full/456702a... http://www.nature.com/news/2008/080409/full/452674a.html
Comment · 10 years ago
It effects people without ADHD the same way it effects people with it. The only difference is that people with ADHD have a lot more to gain from taking them then someone without it. (Keep in mind that stimulants can have negative effects to performance such as focusing excessively on specific tasks, or as someone else in the thread mentioned - causing you to lack discretion in choosing what to spend your time on.)
What you're saying regarding neurotransmitters is speculation since we don't really know how levels of neurotransmitters affect performance in concrete ways.
Edit: punctuation
Venkatesh Rao is generally contentless and writes long winded tracts that don't actually make any kind of coherent argument for what they're saying.
Do you really think Stallman's long history of sexual harassment is because he was too gosh-darned oblivious to realize he shouldn't be doing that? This isn't exactly "Oh he maintained eye-contact for half a second too long and the thought police are after him" territory jfc.