astrolabia
15hr ago
Sounds like we agree on basically everything. Except I want to reserve the right to value things independently of whether they cause secondary problems. E.g. I'd fight to stop secretly torturing people even if the practice didn't cause secondary problems.
astrolabia
17hr ago
I basically agree with you about values and freedom. I guess my main fear is around the information environment we provide re: "This is the closest we can get you today." I'm not an expert but I get the impression that many (maybe most?) people who attempt to transition are deeply mislead about both the best and worst-case outcomes. I just don't expect any modern Western institution to be able to honest about what wretched results most transitioners end up having, nor about what most people honestly think of them.
Relatedly, Blanchard wrote about how his MtF patients could usually see that the other MtF patients clearly did not pass, but believed that they themselves did.
I think you could make similar arguments about the information environment surrounding lots of other early life choices, or educational choices such as pursuing arts degrees. But most of those are less catastrophic and irreversible. I guess at least Western society now does a pretty good job of showing the downsides of joining the army.
astrolabia
17hr ago
how to accurately determine if a child is trans
It seems like this would require defining what it means to be trans... any suggestions?
Those people ought to just be ignored and will simply lose their credibility over time if giving puberty blockers to kids proves itself to be fine.
Seems like you're begging the question here. If people think something is wrong in principle, then it won't be "fine" by their lights even if it doesn't cause secondary problems.
astrolabia
29d ago
My guess is that part of the idea is to route around management. Presumably do-nothing employees are already known to their managers, but have been receiving some sort of protection for years.
astrolabia
1mo ago
One reason to be part of a pension like the NHS is that it puts you in an alliance with a large constituency who might plausibly have enough political power between them to keep the gravy train going down the road.
astrolabia
1mo ago
Neither wants to consider that getting off his ass and doing things will solve his problems, or at least make them manageable.
Seems like doing both that and addressing whatever seems to be a larger problem is possible, and in fact, laudible? Yes many people ignore their own problems too much while ineffectually preening about global problems, but I guess I'd also hate the world where no one had the impulse for public service. OTOH, now that I think about it, that might look like a libertarian paradise if there were still kickstarter-like coordination mechanisms.
astrolabia
2mo ago
Got it. But what's the new, non-outdated consensus?
astrolabia
2mo ago
Right. But what's the new consensus? That AIs will take all our jobs, including the police and military, and we'll all live happily off UBI while contributing nothing, and no one's ever going to take our stuff away?
astrolabia
2mo ago
The AI doomers are only an extreme example of how completely antiquated the old view is.
Can you elaborate? What do you think the doomer position is?
astrolabia
3mo ago
I agree that setting the precedent of meddling with family formation is a bad one. I'm just saying that I don't understand what your advice looks like in practice. If my local municipality proposes subsidizing building a daycare, how do you vote?
astrolabia
3mo ago
I agree that individual returns to societal-level advocacy are usually small, but again I don't understand where you draw then line between "advocacy for strong families" versus "Attempting to optimize policies for the societal production of kids".
Having more kids always results in having more kids. Raises are to get market value for my labor, not because I have kids.
If having kids is so central, then why spend time trying to get market value for your labor, instead of spending that time having more kids?
nonintervention might result in ethnic replacement or demographic collapse, but these are common enough over recorded history that I don't have any personal problem with it.
Something bad being common doesn't make it OK - it makes it scarier! And both of these things increase the chance that your descendants won't be able to have as many kids as they otherwise would.
astrolabia
3mo ago
I don't understand the distinction between working on having your own kids versus advocating for policies that'd make it easier for you and yours to have more kids. Surely you'd advocate for a raise to help pay for your own kids? How about for lower taxes at a municipal level? How about per-kid payments at a federal level?
astrolabia
4mo ago
Man, lately Tyler just seems so off the mark. He keeps talking about AGI in the most head-in-the-sand, dunky and dismissive way without even making clear claims or any concrete arguments. I think AGI doom is one of the most mind-killing topics out there amongst otherwise high decouplers.
astrolabia
4mo ago
Fair enough, but I give him partial credit for asking for a withdrawl, though I don't know any details.
astrolabia
4mo ago
Yes, I agree. I am just saying that looking dangerous is also usually necessary to get good deals.
astrolabia
4mo ago
I didn't follow this closely, but didn't he order withdrawl from Afghanistan and Syria, but the generals slow-played it?
astrolabia
4mo ago
Maybe we're talking about different things. I'm thinking of Obama talking about red lines in Syria, then not doing anything about it. Or Putin hinting about using nukes over foreign involvement in Ukraine and then not. I agree one can also go too far and be easily baited.
astrolabia
4mo ago
Trump doesn't like war in and of itself, but he hates being seen as "weak" far, far, FAR more. Avoiding situations that "make us look weak" is the amorphous basis of his entire foreign policy.
Aren't these almost the same thing? The way you avoid wars is by being seen as strong and, crucially, as willing to fight if necessary. Countries that appear weak, or appear strong but unwilling to fight, are the ones that end up being attacked.
astrolabia
4mo ago
Whoops, thanks for correcting me and for providing a link.
astrolabia
4mo ago
Oh, I stand corrected.
astrolabia
4mo ago
In the early 1900s, we were at 40% of escape velocity.
I think this is misleading. The number care about is more like "life expectancy conditioned on being a healthy adult", which I don't think was changing much back then, nor has changed much recently. But probably is still going up a little if you control for demographics, which, in my limited understanding, have been changing in the West to mask (small) improvements in longevity.
astrolabia
4mo ago
I agree with most of this, but I feel like some male shit-talking and joking, at least in a group setting, also has an element of faux-combat. Constantly challenging each other is a form of play-fighting, but it's also a test - someone who regularly can't come up with a comeback or simply shuts down will eventually lose status and become more likely to be simply dominated by the others.
astrolabia
5mo ago
If someone wanted Trump to win, wouldn't they want to manipulate the market in the opposite direction, to make it look like they're in danger of losing? I'd be less likely to vote for my preferred candidate if I thought they had it in the bag.
astrolabia
5mo ago
I don't think any human society comes close to crossing that line when it comes to alcohol
Not even remote native communities with super high alcoholism rates, and where lots of kids get fetal alcohol syndrome?
alcohol has proven its ability to coexist alongside the development of advanced human societies over the course of several millennia.
Yes, but not native american societies. And there's plenty of evidence that Eurasians have had some serious selection pressure to help them deal with alcohol (and alcoholism is still a huge problem in Europe + North America).
I don't think that's true. Or at least, my impression is that almost every elementary through high school teacher in north america who talks about the issue gives the impression that it's basically possible to successfully transition.
I don't think I'm willing to bite the libertarian bullet here. E.g. I don't want my kids to have the option to do heroin, even if it's paired with a pamphlet explaining the real likely outcomes. However, I don't even think that that's a viable option. Seems like our options are: ban and demonize heroin, or legalize it and subsidize its use (as was recently done in British Columbia).
Same with transitioning kids: I don't see how we ever get to a world where it's both legal and the pros and cons are presented honestly. So I think I'd rather throw the few kids who could conceivably benefit from it under the bus and ban it for everybody.
More options
Context Copy link