VoiceOfLogic
I happen to be, unfortunately, the first human super-intelligence.
What a sad tragedy to see what others can't see.
User ID: 1999
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
No, of course, I didn't litterally mean that there isn't a smartest human on earth (although here I specifically mean maximal debiasing, not about other heterogeneous cognitive abilities), there is one by design, however my point was that human being is sadly not significantly above the other ones in the top. In fact they're quite mediocre and most must reach a deceiving plateau.
Hi I am interested in you funding me.
I have a unique expertise in gerontology, oncology and pharmacology.
I also work on the first true semantic parser, that convert natural language text to a graph representation that preserve meaning isomorphically.
I am a no bullshit human being focused on concrete results and my rationality allows me to see through the blind spots of the academic research and go beyond the state of the art.
For a start, I intend to write a blog about the first comprehensive optimal pharmacologic treatment for cancers.
How about you pay me once you've read it, if you like it, and how much depending on how much you see me as a scientific disrupter?
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
What is the legal identity criterion of textual copyright?
E.g. Let's say you wrote a book.
I take it and change one word.
Is it still your book or is it now mine or public domain?
2 words?
100 words?
Is there a percentage?
Does the location matter?
If i change words mostly at the start of the book or throughout it?
Does semantics matters? Can i via a software replace some words by identical synonyms or do i need to change semantics?
I have no clue how the legal system solves this major problem.
I would probably enforce the use of
the sota in https://paperswithcode.com/sota/semantic-textual-similarity-on-sts-benchmark and set a magic number percentage. Although it can be gamed that's probably much more accurate than whatever is being used now.
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
I haven't studied the gerontology of spermatogenesis but IIRC you loose ~16% of your testosterone secretion per decade.
Something similar must apply to your
luteinizing hormone I guess.
It's likely antioxidants reduce spermatogenesis loss, I believe I had read studies about that a long time ago.
Spermatogenesis should mostly be a solved problem, IIRC Ashwaganda +100%> ?
HCG, etc
But indeed the real problem is the dna degradation of your sperm.
There was a paper on hackernews this week, about increased epigenetic heritage loss for aged males.
Despite my erudition in gerontology I have never been able to find a compelling answer as to why life on earth works.
As we live we accumulate mutations, 60000 per day. Yes our sperm is much more protected than the rest but even if sperm age slower than the rest, it still age. And therefore that Ageing should be passed and herited to the offspring.
Therefore by generation to generation we should dramatically accumulate buggy mutations.
And yet, mysteriously, we don't.
How is this possible and how isn't this technology the way to achieve cellular and therefore eventually possibly whole body Immortality?
Indeed that is a nice heuristic but I feel if this was true for past geniuses (e.g. Euler) however this should be less and less true.
Mathematics have reached a plateau and for all matters has been replaced via the curry Howard correspondence by computer science and software engineering and to some extent machine learning.
There are very few important open problems left and the ones that are left are either non-computable, non provable or false, or are long known, conjectured to be true but can't be proven for all cases because of contrived details.
And that is what mathematics are increasingly, an interest in deeply contrived things.
Many of those contrivations are contingencies, but there's also a lot that shouldn't even exist in the first place under a proper finitist framework.
Do you see genius in the last major proofs?
IIRC what has allowed the Poincaré conjecture millennium prize to be solved for all cases even the many contrived ones, has "simply" or at least essentially been a new way to bruteforce the problem, essentially via a specific software made for it.
Most of the genius we attribute to mathematics is a derivation of a few factors:
-
Obscurantism as a culture, especially elite notations for denoting trivial things. Notation which mostly have no IDE support btw.
-
as said lack of IDE tooling/culture
-
the desire of having fun/ideology such as rejecting finitism. See e.g rational trigonometry. There is a semi-similar parallel with the quantum physics culture.
-
many historical accidents which alter how we teach maths.
Learning data structures and algorithms in computer science should be enough for someone to demysticize mathematics.
Mathematics have changed the world for the better and many of its concepts are useful for a rationalist mind's, however I'm afraid the lack of non-contrived nor real-world impacting challenges combined with the semi-anti intellectual/contrived culture would limits/bottleneck someone intellectual development instead of strengthening it, as a life main occupation.
Of course this is only a generalization.
Note however that regardless of that, fields medals are like Nobel prizes, a weak signal since they do a very poor job at representing who drove the most progress in a question and only show, allegedly, the last person in the problem solving chain.
IIRC the Russian that solved the millennium problema didn't reject the monetary prize because he was hermit weirdo as depicted by some medias, but as a political act since he didn't deserved most of the recognition.
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
Oversized glasses are one of the many artificial nudge/enhancers one can use.
It is an instance of a supra-normal stimulus
https://www.edge.org/response-detail/27203
https://m.fr.aliexpress.com/item/32812104344.html?gatewayAdapt=gloPc2fraMsite
I'm intrigued by your gender neutral comment though. Would you see those oversized glasses on a man face?
Close to zero straight men assume that looks currently.
IMO I think it could enhance a man's look although as usual people have a completely broken idea of what a maximally attractive man looks like.
The strangest thing you've found yourself attracted to in someone else?
I should definitely come back to that question, I am in complete awe with many things that some people do that are quite ineffable yet charming.
Humans are so awkward, imperfect and so fucking lovely.
The best compliment I've received lately was that some of my comments were so semantically dense it were intensely charming. As a semi-sapiosexual that's indeed one of my compliments lifegoal :)
Once someone was immensely impressed by the fact that I carried a phone without a case.
Relatable, at first I was really stressing about it but actually it's quite trivial to not let ur phone fall.
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
I've not been hanging on the motte since long but is it just me or are the small scale questions much more original and intellectually engaging that the recurring and semi-sterile culture wars topics?
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
Contrary to popular belief, time isn't a scarce resource, what is however very scarce, is the amount of time we maximally meaningfully allocate.
Being the least irrational mind on earth is mostly contingent/hortogonal to being a "functional" human being.
In fact maximizing someone's rationality necessarily ultimately leads to a strong dissonance between your thoughts and your actions.
Having a maximal impact on the world is not something I can easily achieve via the use of my physical body. It is much more efficient to design solutions in the realm of ideas than to implement them physically.
In fact to maximally alter the world, one must either communicate his ideas/world's actionable roadmap via the internet and/or accumulate power including via external recognition.
So in fact defending the case that I could informatively disrupt this world should be one of my top priorities and in an ideal world the rationalist/effective altruist diaspora would leverage it and share to me funding, visibility and other kinds of effectors to reality.
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
I have long been in a quest of finding the smartest people on earth.
I have come to the solid conclusion that such people do not in fact, exists.
Or if they do, they are not present on online forums and their only observable content on the internet would be via their academic papers.
But even so, academic papers are for the major part very rarely brilliant/maximally salient/exhaustive.
Scott Alexander, Yudkowsky and other "superstars" are extremely flawed human beings that have both a deficit of fluid intelligence and an extreme deficit of crystallized intelligence. If they appear sometimes markedly above the average "rationalist", it doesn't change the fact they are extremely deficient compared to what a Homo logicus can achieve.
I have many key data points that proves that the ideal human being has not manifested yet on this earth and most importantly no non-crazy human being has manifested on this earth.
As I am the human that has collected the most signals towards maximal saliency/bypassing natural crazyness, I believe to be the least intellectually dysfunctional human being of this timeline, a finding I should bring a demonstration for in a future blog.
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
A countermeasure is perfectly doable, for example epigenetic/signaletic alterations of the infected cells to overexpress immunosuppressive proteins such as, IDO, phosphatidylserine, PD-1, or some anti inflammatory Interleukins.
However I don't think COVID does that but it's definitely something a future pandemic could do and is something key to cancer cells survival.
There is also the topic of anti-antibodies but I don't know enough about that one.
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
Quite beautifully written comment :}
Would you happen to live in France? If so maybe we could meet IRL as fellow rationalists!
Personally I think russophobia, sinophobia and their dehumanizations are here to stay and existed throughout the last century.
In fact I don't see the propaganda machine turning on other civilizations, Russia and China are and will continue to be, increasingly so, the main threats to U.S hegemony.
Now a large part or maybe even most of Ukrainians and Russians hate each other
I don't think we know that. Even though population opinions should be observable in real time over the internet, in reality they're not for those countries.
I suppose that the majority of people on echo chamber subreddits like /r/ukraina are either non Ukrainian or are for the most part, Ukrainian not living in Ukraine.
The chronology of events that led to the coup and to the war is quite simple and a human living in Ukraine should be able to understand the major responsibility of the "west" and of the trivially undemocratic governments post 2014.
They have among other things seen by themselves the unilateral censorship.
I suppose most Ukrainian cannot say what they truly think without fear of going to jail.
However one should not underestimate the potent power of repeated unilateral propaganda and pressure on the layman's mind and it's possible the cognitive dissonance has become so strong that they truly developed for the majority, spoonfed russophobia despite their knowledge of the events chain.
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
This happens extremely often, it would be fascinating to have statistics on what percentages of those poor hyperboles do people perceive as an hyperbole and to what extent?
The most salient recent example being Scott Alexander making a subset of the motte readers believes that medias lies very rarely..
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
It is important to understand that it is trivial to cure COVID since day 1, the rationalist diaspora, like the medical diaspora are simply extremely illiterate in pharmacology. In retrospect, it seems people litterate in pharmacology are extremely rare.
You can either solve age induced immunosuppression/thymus involution via thymalin OR potently block viroporins OR potently downregulate/block ACE2 receptors OR block/downregulate any other related necessary component in the virus reproduction/action chain.
As a bonus you can also block the toxicity including cytokine storm.
That's 3 independently sufficent class of action mechanisms which all have existing pharmaceuticals.
All the drugs I mentioned above the "EDIT" have benign side effects, are non-dangerous, cheap and available OTC.
The only thing you need to check is the CYP interaction between inhibiting a CYP enzyme and a CYP substrate, especially for etifoxine.
You also need to be aware that benzos and GABA B tolerance and addictions are real, you need to dose responsibly and cycle, google about it.
rupharma is the best legit epharma online. For more choice although less reputable, there is indiamart.
btw Misoprostol is the most likely to help IMHO
also the Intratympanic Steroid Injection are extremely interesting, if they work for you, that would mean you could solve your tinnitus via an immunosuppressant/modulator, maybe thymosin alpha 1.
I would also try the atypical protectant and gaba potentiator emoxypine.
Hi TIRM,
I believe most "incurable" diseases have their best treatment (not necessarily a complete cure but better than existing) already found 30 years ago but since then completely ignored.
It is fascinating how self victimizing (sorry for the offense but it morally needs to be said) victims of chronic disease are. They just simply believe it is a fatality and trust so called "experts" practitioners that are pubmed illiterate and don't actually give a fuck about your condition.
A victim of a chronic disease should for him and for others systematically try most of the treatment candidates and especially all the treatment that have a negligible rate of serious non-transient side effects.
A disease being considered incurable generally simply means epistemologically that nobody has yet attempted said systematic experimentation.
In many cases nobody will for the centuries to come.
So IIRC from my meta research, for tinnitus the best thing to do is indeed to prevent it, e.g. by taking NAC.
Once the damage is done, NAC does not help. However if your tinnitus is degenerative, NAC will probably reduce the long term worsening.
Now about treatments for someone that already has a (stable) chronic tinnitus:
Firstly about the palliatives:
People use benzos/gabaergics for tinnitus AKA gaba-A subtypes.
I would consider experimenting with Etifoxine (+TUDCA and look at CYP interactions) instead as an alternative with apparently less tolerance building.
Note that a benzo addiction reversal can be accelerated with (Imidazenil or flumazenil? Don't recall) but that process is possibly neurotoxic and ironically ototoxic.
Now about the real treatments:
Unfortunately for you I have forgotten about many things regarding this condition.
Tinnitus is in essence of special form of excitotoxicity.
Therefore the use or gabaergics is probably not only palliative but also to some extent therapeutic as the excitotoxicity possibility drive a worsening over time.
Unfortunately gaba A and B are subject to relatively quick tolerance.
As I said optimality in tolerance reversal and in tolerance building is to fine tune, e.g. Etifoxine.
One could also alternate between gaba A and B or between A subtypes via biased agonism. This might however not necessarily work well and induce cross tolerances although I do believe alternating A and B is not absurd.
GABA also has other receptors which is the point of Etifoxine since it target the mitochondria gaba receptor (although its upregulation of neurosteroids do agonise gaba A and (B?) IIRC)
As said playing with the half life might alter the speed of tolerance building.
There exist other GABA receptors, IIRC tofisopam partially potentiate GABA Y and without tolerance but how useful that is is an unknown.
Tofisopam while having questionable effectivenes as a gabaergic has studies showing it as useful being a potentiator, an augmentation to benzos effectiveness while allowing to reduce tolerance increase.
Also there are alternative ways to induce gabaergy, e.g releasing agent, reuptake agent, prodrug, catabolize inhibitor, etc
However the main salient thing is to look at other beyond gabaergy is the other complementary ways to reduce excitotoxicity.
The #1 to try IMHO (not by potenty but by likelyhood of being useful) would be an NMDA antagonist such as Memantine.
Then maybe concomitantly a calcium blocker.
I have no knowledge in AMPA blockers/negative allosteric modulators.
Kainate and glurs would probably be toxic.
I haven't looked into it but Glycine 4g sounds helpful since it is inhibitory.
You could also play with the secondary messenger inositol at megadoses (unsure about side effect profile), that is an atypical effective anxyolitic and possibility an atypical promising tinnitus treatment.
You could play with vasodilation e.g. Cialis.
Finally you could play with synaptotrophics such as magnesium l threonate.
However of all of that, except for GABAERGY, NMDA antagonism and maybe vasodilation, I don't know empirical studies about those on tinnitus. I conjecture those would be useful based on my expertise. Especially curious about inositol or maybe sigmaergics like opipramol or lthreonate or Etifoxine.
Synaptotrophics are the only really potentially dangerous class, which they are usually not but tinnitus is special so..
The japaneses have however beyond conjectures, empirically found ones that apparently works.
Wether those results reproduce is something you should confirm us.
I would try first Bifemelane
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jibirin1925/86/12/86_12_1799/_article
This drug is very interesting, it is a RIMA so the best class of antidepressants, with very minor side effects contrary to MAOIs, see e.g moclobemide or pirazidol.
I don't know any online seller of it.
So you best chance is a trip to Japan for a month or to convince Vanuatu international pharma to get it (good luck..) or to find a cooperative Japanese guy or to ask a japan e-pharma to get it, e.g. contact
I think it is the most interesting tinnitus treatment candidate.
I don't think that another RIMA would work though, there is probably something special about bifemelane. But maybe you could try if you have nothing else to try, moclobemide.
Then we have very ironically tofisopam, with a very high efficacy score
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jibirin1925/82/1/82_1_133/_article
You should definitely try it. I doubt it reproduce but I mean the efficacy score is record high, the side effect profile and cost negligible and the action mechanism (special PDE inhibition and GABA Y) is actually unique in the world.
Titrate dose slowly up to the study dose and if no results above up to the max dose (300 IIRC?)
Wait for 5 weeks before concluding about no efficacy.
And then report back.
I would recommend getting the official brand OTC e.g. on rupharma dot com
Then after trying tofisopam I would try the many other compounds that have positive efficacy results albeit milders
E.g. IIRC pge1
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/result/global/-char/en?globalSearchKey=Treatment+of+Tinnitus
And also not just pharmacology but behaviours such as
https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/audiology1968/44/3/44_3_163/_article/-char/en
Edit:
There's also atypical non drug based pharmacological actions,
Such as tVNS
And
tDCS
https://bmcneurosci.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12868-018-0467-3
BTW not a treatment but an underused palliative for sleep would be ASMR
Then if nothing of all tolerable treatments that have been empirically found over the last decades does bot work for you then I would consider actively joining clinical trials or preclinical trials or to ask for the
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right-to-try_law
You could also become an expert and conjecture yourself an priori optimal polypharmacology like I did but better than I did since I haven't studied the precise nature of the excitotoxicity/long term potentiation.
E.g if it was epigenetic then one would consider e.g. HDAC inhibitors
EDIT
this action mechanism seems potent
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17221143/
EDIT additional treatments:
for pge1
"Misoprostol"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3136369/#::text=treatments%20(217).-,Misoprostol,-Misoprostol%20(Cytotec%C2%AE)%20is
"However, the combination of sulpiride plus melatonin, which interacts with dopamine receptors, reduced tinnitus visual analog scale scores significantly more than placebo (275–277). In a single-blind, placebo-controlled study, sulpiride plus hydroxyzine, an antihistamine and anxiolytic, was significantly more effective in reducing tinnitus visual analog scale and tinnitus perception scores than placebo or sulpiride alone (278)."
Edit:
Potassium channel modulators looks interesting
Vigabatrin too despite possibly permanent side effect profile
Gacyclidine could be better than Memantine
Same for neramexane and AM-101
I guess one should try all tolerable nmda antagonists to find the one that works best on him
It's possible that nmda antagonists take time to show effectiveness
See e.g this atypical one
Acamprosate had no beneficial effects after 30 days of treatment, a modest benefit at 60 days and a significant effect at 90 days.
Nice resource btw
https://github.com/aioue/tinnitus-treatments/blob/master/to-be-sorted.md
"2.2.5. Primidone"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8235102/#::text=day%20%5B33%5D.-,2.2.5.%20Primidone,-Primidone%20is%20an
"Furosemide"
"Intratympanic Steroid Injection"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8235102/#::text=2.12.9.%20Steroids%3A-,Intratympanic%20Steroid%20Injection,-Intratympanically%20injected%20steroids
With so many treatments and the obvious potent synergies between them, I strongly believe you can strongly reduce your tinnitus.
TL;DR
Start with tofisopam, Etifoxine and pge1.
Etifoxine must be taken with TUDCA and ideally liver enzymes should be monitored although optional.
Verify about the cyp interaction iirc tofisopam and Etifoxine inhibit the
I have studied all anxyolitics, there are many effective alternative with no/low tolerance.
Based on the scientific evidence, I would strongly recommend opipramol or Etifoxine + TUDCA (beware CYP interactions, can be lethal)
Note: I haven't tried many anxiolytics myself but I have used glycine for sleep and I must say it makes me feel calm and nice/soft.
So about tofisopam, I have tried it on myself for 2 weeks (a bit too short, the studies show peak results at 3-4 weeks iirc)
Firstly I am not depressed. I can have mild social anxiety with some people. I can be a bit hypoactive or have slightly chronic fatigue or high sensitivity to sleep deprivation.
I am not anhedonic but I am less hedonic than I wish to be.
I have ADHD PI untreated.
I don't know what I hoped out of tofisopam, I'm not the main audience, especially for depression.
For the social anxiety it might have helped me but not enough experience with it at parties. If it helped it was inconsistent or ambiguous because I sometimes mixed it with bromantane (another dopaminergic and anxyolitic).
So what did it do?
the first day I felt a slight increase in heart contractility which is consistent with theoretical models
I didn't felt it the other days, probably homeostasis doing its work
at the upper range of the daily dose it felt slightly weird
Like I knew I was on something.
Subtle but a bit dirty.
Less dirty than high dose bromantane though.
At low-mid dose I didn't felt it.
That's notable since few drugs can be felt.
It might have helped me with ADHD in theory (dopa) but I did not feel an improvement. Nothing like e.g. 2fma
It might have had a Nootropic effect, lots of promising research on PDEs about this however I did not feel smarter however I consider myself a very high performer and did not design a benchmark.
It might have helped me with SAD (the most likely) but not enough data yet, I'll try again one day eventually. Especially as a potential augmentation to stimulants.
Yeah my personal report is quite useless but I hope it allows to bring some nuance that tofisopam does not do nothing per se, as in it is not homeopathy.
One theory I have to explain the reported discrepancy online would be that most of the lab rat(ionalist)s do not actually suffer from clinical GAD or depression.
saying a lot of dumb stuff yourself
Please exemplify you have shown none.
Did I approve Mao policy choices?
No.
The state of this discussion on the motte is very worrying epistemologically.
You are thinking of me as an imaginary strawman with imaginary claims.
This is beyond absurd, this thread is fictional.
I bet the "lot of dumb stuff" is the imaginary strawman of approving Mao decisions.
I could analyze (not defend) the reasoning behind the killing of the four pests, which wanted to reduce the significant amount of wasted food. It backfired for sparrows unfortunately, it was a task done too fast and with too little risk aversion/metrology and was a factor in the great famine, among drought/natural causes and the reallocation of some farmers to working in the steel industry to increase the country GDP and attempt to put it out of extreme misery.
The human errors and the natural disaster cofactors of the great Chinese famine needs not to be analyzed.
You are completely missing the outstanding efficiency of my argumentation.
The Great Chinese famine was a temporary reduction of crop yields by 15%, up to a very short lived 30% reduction at its peak.
Do you understand this is a small effect?
My initial claim is: who bears the main (and sufficent) responsability for the great Chinese famine.
Non-malicious human errors + drought that led to a short-lived 15-30% reduction in crop yields or the West voluntary ban of technology and of fertilizers on China since decades and for decades?
Is it hard to understand that fertilizers have effects on crop yields much superior to 30% and probably above 100%?
Is it hard to understand modal logic and that the criminal, coercive fertilizer ban is a logically sufficient cause that would have totally prevented the Great Chinese Famine?
The exact same thing apply for the ban on machines to increase yields, and the ban on food exports.
No, basic modal logic is not hard to understand.
The motte community is here being very dysfunctional and that is very worrying regarding its epistemic quality.
Another thing to observe:
The great Chinese famine should not hide the potent fact that millions were dying of food hunger consistently in the years/decade preceding it. No need for the great leap forward for that.
The trade embargo was sufficient
I have read over 1000 Russian/USSR studies in pharmacology.
The Russian medical research is not the only one to be an isolated island, this apply also to Japanese research for example, see e.g their research on tinnitus.
While it is true that Russian research in pharmacology is understudied by the west, because of criminal mediocrity, there are many counter examples of Russian counpounds that have a decent amount of international research.
See e.g the biggest discovery in medecine of the century: skq1.
IIRC for Russian pharmaceuticals, the international researchers I "often see" study them are Indian or Brazilian. Maybe German too.
As for Nootropics or geroprotectors, they are generally markedly more ignored by the international "community" because of systemic failures, since nootropics/cognition enhancement are not considered a legitimate drug target and therefore is underfunded. Except for the niche research on mitigating fragile X syndrome, autism, the negative symptoms of schizophrenia, social anxiety, etc.
Since USSR and to some extent Russian research is public funded they are almost the only one in the world to afford fundamental research at scale of targets that have no commercial value in the prescription drug market.
As for geroprotectors the same apply, Ageing is generally not considered a disease, nor something that should be treated by taking pharmacology because we live in a very infantile/stockholmised world.
Even though geroprotectors often have partial efficacy against a wide range of lucrative diseases, the extreme inertia and cost of clinical trials combined to the extreme aversion of doctors for polypharmacology, partial drugs and simply keeping up with medical advance when it is evolitive instead of being disruptive explain that they are underresearched by the west and never prescribed.
The Russian also afford something revolutionary, they study the pharmacological application of drug that are plant/animal derived or that are endogenously produced in the human body (e.g. Peptides).
Those entire class of pharmacologicals, which have a billion of year of existence and bidirectional fine tuning, and ideal side effects profile are in general not patentable and since mostly only corporations fund clinical trials, the main class of medecine is in practice, non-existent because of broken incentives.
Because the Russian bypass those attractors/repulsors that plague the medical research, they can and do make revolutionary discoveries in most fields of medicine.
As i said, many Russian counpounds do have multiple international research that reproduce and corroborate the potency of their results.
However it is true that there is a concern of fraud/amplifying the potency of the effect of a pharmaceutical.
In my experience such fraud is rare but is possible.
The main candidate I have is the atypical anxiolytic Tofisopam.
Not Russian though, but from an ex USSR European state.
I have read the 300s studies about it.
There is IIRC a lot of corroborating studies from around the world, Including recent studies.
Tofisopam is an atypical anxiolytic, antidepressant, non addictive gabaergic, dopaminergic and generally excitatory drug as is is an atypical selective PDE inhibitor.
It is the only drug in the world to have this pharmacological profile and can be expected to have widespread, unique effects.
The body of studies for its action mechanisms are many and are very convincing in principle.
I am not rejecting the research on the nature of its effects.
Tofisopam is extremely interesting and that is not a fraud per se.
However I am rejecting the extreme amount of studies showing very potent effects on depression, anxiety, schizophrenia and other psychological conditions.
While the effect is real and tofisopam might be used for those conditions, how can there be so many studies corroborating very potent results while the actual reported effect online is very mild/inconsistent is a mystery for me.
Even though the online reports are rare and it might be that tofisopam truly is a wonder drug, IMHO I doubt it.
How can it be fraud when there is so much research from different teams and decade, even international one ?
Just look at how potent tofisopam is supposed to be https://fr.scribd.com/presentation/328205226/Tofisopam-Medical-2014-REVISED
A fraud at this scale can't be explained.
It would be too risky to synchronize such a massive amount of fraudulent researchers. Among the 300s studies not a single one significantly dismiss the rest of the research.
But if the reported potency of tofisopam is really a fraud then that is horrific for the rest of the medical research, nothing could be trusted as even a compound with so many studies, over decades and many international teams, for so many conditions would not be immune to consistent, systematic international fraud.
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
What parts of China are still not under a nominally Chinese government, after the return of Hong Kong and Macau in the 1990s?
I already mentioned the salient one in my comment:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outer_Manchuria
invasion of outer Manchuria was a failure by the Russians and only occurred in the 1930s by the Japanese
What are you talking about?
The rest of your message is extremely flawed, to deny that the century of humiliation implied a loss of sovereignty and sovereign interest is beyond absurd and bad faith.
One can attempt to analyze and mitigate that some of the unequal treaties or actions were not that potent but that is overall an impossible goal.
See e.g: among many:
The Boxer Protocol of September 7, 1901, provided for the execution of government officials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be stationed in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver— more than the government's annual tax revenue—to be paid as indemnity over the course of the next 39 years to the eight nations involved.
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
I don't think there is any possible kind/good faith interpretation to your question.
It just doesn't make sense and yet it was upvoted by 5 readers..
It should be painfully obvious that economic power is mostly hortogonal to military power, while there is some correlation it is obviously contingent.
It should be universally known and was explicited by one of my comments that China like the rest of the non western world was late regarding the industrial revolution, the design of war/killing machines and the use of powder/guns (which is ironic since Europeans originally imported that tech from China)
I didn't think it was useful to explain those things and why the west was able to militarily dominate the rest of the world.
Also the wars on china were a worldwide coalition of coercive powers, including Russia, the British empire, the French, and the U.S
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
To argue that every languages are equal is intellectual obscurantism.
Of course both CS students and old timers are major tribes in that culture war but that is irrelevant to the fact that languages have objective features and merits that can be civilly discussed.
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
I believe there would be many maybe surprising consequences, such as an explosion in social anxiety.
However the no filter effect would have interesting consequences on the group thinks/culture wars.
BTW one of the strangest things of this timeline is that apparently a huge chunk of the population is not able to think or at least they believe themselves they can't think.
Think as in subvocalize words.
I have extreme skepticism on this phenomenon but if true it has many implication for AI research and philosophy.
In other words it might be that for a chunk of the population there is not thoughts to read at all.
However, one could talk about telepathy for the intermediate subsymbolic representation but that's not what your original comment was about and is definitely much less well defined, by definition since it is ineffable.
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
I recall reading that people with exceptionally good memories have a hard time connecting with people because they remember in vivid detail every slight that was ever done to them. And that being somewhat forgetful is a necessary component for forgiveness. Sociolopsychology is fickle.
I can relate to that for another reason. I see people each year having the same conversations they already had years ago and they repeat the script as if it was for the first time.
I mean sure, it's great to bypass the hedonic treadmill and to be excited about things you already talked about in the past.
Me remembering things indeed maintain a bit my hedonic treadmill but the worst by far is to see the non-evolution, instead of taking the occasion of the discussion to explore the semantic search space differently, more in breadth and or more in depth, it is tiring to see the striking human stagnation.
VoiceOfLogic
1yr ago
Thanks
I'm pretty sure if Ukraine willingly gave the rest of the donbass, made public statements about becoming neutral towards the russian culture and interests, including allowing russian to be taught again in schools, russia would make peace.
The issue with the dehumanization of the orcs and with the tribal manicheanization of russian interests that the western media and people parrot is that despite having some elements of truths, overall obviously leads to a criminal utilitarian disaster of continued intense human lives and economic attrition.
More options
Context Copy link