= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Also, you misspelled my name - it's Quirinus, not Quirinius.
I sometimes feel like there is a shadowy half-underground group of LWers that is intelligent enough to stay away from bad signalling and has altruistic intentions, but has to deal every now and then with a slight twitch, reading something knowing they can't really state a proper response. It feels like there is almost a court nod when we read and comment each other's posts and hope inferential distance keeps disturbances away. It so tempting some times, it is almost like I just have to say out loud the unspeakable and a few will contact me and I'll be sure.
Other times I'm just afraid I'm sitting in a room having tea with the socoioeconomic Eldrich abominations teasing me with a wicked grin as everyone else moves obliviously to them, asking me if I'm certain that I haven't lost it.
Suppose this is a test, anyone who knows what I'm talking about please PM the right answer.
I sometimes feel like there is a shadowy half-underground group of LWers that is intelligent enough to stay away from bad signalling and has altruistic intentions, but has to deal every now and then with a slight twitch, reading something knowing they can't really state a proper response.
(linked comment) Delusions that are truly widely held and not merely believed to be widely held are far too dangerous to attack. There are sociopolitical Eldritch Abominations that it would serve LW well to stay well clear of and perhaps even pretend they don't exist for the time being.
The next time you feel that way, make yourself another identity, and use it to say the things you wouldn't otherwise. It really is quite liberating. It's very rare for a delusion to really be too strong to attack, especially here; it is only that you fear backlash.
As for the discussion this appeared in, let me get the unpleasant truths out of the way so we can stay meta: Intelligence is mostly heritable! Knowing someone's race conveys nonzero information about their their social status, suitability for jobs, wealth, and criminality! The gender imbalances in many professions are the result of innate differences, not discrimination! When groups with bad values and lower intelligence breed too much, it harms the future! These are all truths that any sufficiently advanced rationalist will recognize. And if you disagree with any of these, please direct your complaints to no one in particular.
What's your private key?
[Clippy] What's your private key?
It's 4,096 paperclips on a ring, each bent in one of two ways to indicate either a 0 or a 1. Neither the 0s nor the 1s could hold paper together in their current shape.
In response to
"High Value" Karma vs "Regular" (i.e. Quirrell Points)
I see that you have edited the title of this post to mention Quirrell points. I appreciate the gesture. However, you've misspelled my name; it should have two 'l's.
Wait, to clarify, IS this something people can actually do? I don't know what a PGP public key is or how I would use it. I was assuming you were just being funny.
The PGP thing is a cryptographic signature which proves that the comment was written by me. What I did was, I made a PGP key, which has two halves: a public key, which is now on my user page of the Less Wrong wiki, and a private key, which is stored safely on a computer I control. I input my private key and a message into GnuPG, and it outputs a signature (what you saw in the earlier comment). Anyone else can take that message with its signature, and my public key, and confirm that I must have had the private key in order to sign it that way.
This means that Quirrell points can't be taken back - if I deleted or edited the comment, as long as you saved a copy you'd still be able to prove that it was there. It also means that Quirrell points can't be forged, even by Less Wrong administrators, which is important because otherwise Eliezer Yudkowsky might decide to give them to people I don't like.
The only thing necessary for one to issue valuable points is to convince other people they're valuable, and my other copy has done most of that work already.
Was your idea that anybody can get their own signature and issue Quirrel points or just you?
Only I can issue Quirrell points (hence the name and the signature), but you can issue Normal_Anomaly points if you want.
Is your PGP public key published anywhere?
I put it on the wiki just now.
In response to
"High Value" Karma vs "Regular" (i.e. Quirrell Points)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Raemon received one Quirrell point on 16/4/2011, for his post
<http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/59x/high_value_karma_vs_regular/>
having inspired the idea of issuing Quirrell points on Less Wrong.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG of some sort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=Upbv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
In response to
How would you respond to the Philpapers "What are your Philosophical Positions" Survey?
- A priori knowledge: yes or no? Yes
- Abstract objects: Platonism or nominalism? Either, depending whether the second vowel has rising or falling intonation
- Aesthetic value: objective or subjective? Subjective
- Analytic-synthetic distinction: yes or no? Yes
- Epistemic justification: internalism or externalism? Internalism
- External world: idealism, skepticism, or non-skeptical realism? Skepticism. I haven't been able to take realism seriously since I left Hogwarts.
- Free will: compatibilism, libertarianism, or no free will? No free will
- God: theism or atheism? Atheism
- Knowledge: empiricism or rationalism? Empiricism
- Knowledge claims: contextualism, relativism, or invariantism? Can be any of these, or something else entirely, depending on the specific knowledge and how it interacts with the relevant interdicts
- Laws of nature: Humean or non-Humean? Non-Humean
- Logic: classical or non-classical? Classical
- Mental content: internalism or externalism? Internalism
- Meta-ethics: moral realism or moral anti-realism? Moral anti-realism
- Metaphilosophy: naturalism or non-naturalism? Naturalism
- Mind: physicalism or non-physicalism? Depends whose mind we're talking about
- Moral judgment: cognitivism or non-cognitivism? Non-cognitivism
- Moral motivation: internalism or externalism? Externalism
- Newcomb's problem: one box or two boxes? The first box twice
- Normative ethics: deontology, consequentialism, or virtue ethics? Consequentialism
- Perceptual experience: disjunctivism, qualia theory, representationalism, or sense-datum theory? Sense-datum theory
- Personal identity: biological view, psychological view, or further-fact view? Further-fact view
- Politics: communitarianism, egalitarianism, or libertarianism? Snicker
- Proper names: Fregean or Millian? It's more complicated than that (some names are pointers, some are independent entities, and some can even communicate in binary by agreeing or disagreeing with a sequence of pronouns)
- Science: scientific realism or scientific anti-realism? Realism with some caveats
- Teletransporter (new matter): survival or death? Survival
- Time: A-theory or B-theory? Neither. These both claim the past and future are disjoint. What the fuck?
- Trolley problem (five straight ahead, one on side track, turn requires switching, what ought one do?): switch or don't switch? Varies depending on mood
- Truth: correspondence, deflationary, or epistemic? Correspondence
- Zombies: inconceivable, conceivable but not metaphysically possible, or metaphysically possible? Actual
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
DO NOT USE YOUR REGULAR IDENTITY TO SAY ANYTHING TRULY INTERESTING ON THIS THREAD, OR ON THIS TOPIC, UNLESS YOU HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT IT FOR FIVE MINUTES.