magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
No bio...
User ID: 1103
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
6hr ago
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
17hr ago
Yes, I know, but that's just a "this reduces your study's power" issue; this is trivially fixable assuming you have enough funding (and you should).
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
17hr ago
That was narrator voice, not the Valar.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
1d ago
Funny enough if you look at the totality of middle earth stories even if Sauron won it wouldn’t be lights out. Morgoth won at one point and the valar intervened.
I mean, yes, but it was a Pyrrhic victory; Beleriand, where all the elven kingdoms had been, sank into the ocean permanently with the exception of Lindon. Sauron might not have won, but the Free Peoples would have lost.
Also, there's that line from the Downfall of Numenôr: "Men could not a second time be saved by any such embassy".
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
1d ago
That's what he said; he was listing it as an exception.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
1d ago
When you say you don't "find" this to be true, are you saying you're involved with this personally in some fashion?
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
1d ago
That's not necessarily true: suppose transition, even with transition-with-extra-annoyance, always leads to strictly better outcomes. The control group will then have better outcomes if the defiant transitioners are counted than if they aren't, possibly on par with transitioners within margins of error depending on how many there are and how much the extra annoyance impacts outcomes.
By "biases in favour of transition" I mean "makes it more likely to put transition ahead". This cannot flip the study from "transition good" to "transition bad", but it can flip it from "transition bad" to "transition good".
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
2d ago
Oh, it's easy enough to tell if somebody's been taking hormones against your instructions. That just doesn't solve the problem.
-
If you count defiant transitioners as part of your control group, it biases your study in favour of transition, because defiant transitioners amount to "transition with a bunch of extra annoyance" and as such are near-guaranteed to do worse than the transition group regardless of how good or bad transition is.
-
If you kick defiant transitioners out of the control group, it biases your study against transition, because desisters will stop trying to defy you at some point, and as such success stories will make up a larger chunk of your control group than they would have if you'd successfully prevented the defiant transitioners from transitioning.
If the trans activists manage to subvert enough of your control group (which is pretty likely without the extreme measures I mentioned), these two effects will destroy the study's value; it will give the "do transitions!" answer with one set of rules and the "don't do transitions!" answer with the other. Whoops, looks like the clear liquid you poured on that fire was petrol instead of water.
Oh, and this is assuming that you picked outcome measures that don't allow for easy lying; it's not like people can't go on Twitter and yell "hey everybody, put down that you're ecstatic if you were in the transition group and suicidal if in the control group; it's for the sake of all the other transfolk". As Scott said, "sometimes people might just be actively working to corrupt your data".
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
2d ago
The "there we go" is in regard to the "dozen", not the buried reviews?
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
2d ago
· Edited 2d ago
I would have to agree with this, although some more explanation would be nice.
@Skibboleth: I don't have personal experience* (yet; I suspect this'll show up when I do my MEd) but I strongly suspect that in the arts/humanities side of things, expressing conservative views/tastes in assessments will literally often get you marked down (when you aren't thrown out), which literally makes it harder to become legibly "a historian" or "an architect" as a conservative than as a progressive. If you want to see the prior ratio, you need to either enforce political neutrality in the current universities' assessments, or enforce that degrees from those universities be held to be of negligible credential value (as in, "I hired this architect because he got a Harvard degree in architecture" becomes identical in legal ramifications to "I hired this architect because he's white").
I suspect that that ratio does favour progressives, but not remotely to the current extent.
*Well, I do have personal experience that there are opportunities open to progressives and not conservatives in university, just not in the academic side - specifically, I wasn't able to become an RA in my dorm because "spread SJ propaganda" was part of the job description. Would have been nice to not have to pay rent, particularly since I was doing much of the rest of the job anyway!
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
2d ago
Has the buried systemic review from your second link been unearthed?
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
2d ago
· Edited 2d ago
Honestly, this is one of the situations where I say "fuck it"; the amount of trans surgeries from doing the RCT, assuming it finds that they're bad, will be lower than the amount from not doing it (in contrast to the usual case), so I'm not seeing the "do no harm" issue.
The bigger issue is that trans activists will attempt to defy you and transition the control group anyway. I don't see a way to get around that that isn't either "deploy the counterterrorism apparatus in full to prevent such attempts" or "ban transition as a whole in order to saturate the trans movement's covert-ops resources and draw them away from the trial". These are both pretty drastic actions, with significant PR costs even if you personally aren't bothered by using that level of force.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
3d ago
Who is "you"?
SJ is very trigger-happy and has weak leadership; there is for the most part no "you" that actually has the security in power to take the locally-disincentivised action and actually make the mob follow along (rather than simply being replaced).
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
4d ago
I can only imagine how much more fucked up prohibition would have been if the prohibition side began mass importing Muslims who don't drink, and the anti-prohibition side scoured the globe for alcoholics. And it's hard to imagine either approach making America better off long term, even if the short term culture war issue gets "settled".
You don't need to imagine. I can identify one very obvious example of this in US history i.e. Bleeding Kansas.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
4d ago
I was already breaking it down into smaller problems; the part I was missing was memoisation to let me do all of those smaller problems only once instead of >9000 times. The algorithm we built would still run in exponential time if I took out the "@cache" on the key function, and if you'd told me memoisation was a thing I'd have probably managed it from there. Necessary and sufficient.
Also, uh, in case you weren't aware, I am Australian, so yes, I do use Commonwealth spelling.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
4d ago
Update on this:
@lagrangian and I discussed this over PM, and he introduced me to the wonderful concept of memoisation, which took the difficulty from exponential to quadratic. So, stuff that would have taken weeks (or millennia) now takes minutes, and I turned this into this in a couple of weeks (most of that being me moving data around and doing formatting).
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
6d ago
Harris was a weak candidate, though, between being Californian and her race/sex being the things that got her the candidacy.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
8d ago
I mean, read it all
I read like the first chapter and gave up. Scott's fiction style is something I can only take in small doses.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
8d ago
All but 8/10/12/13. 18 might have a rationalist meaning I'm not familiar with, though, and I think recognise Yeerk as being an Animorphs reference.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
8d ago
· Edited 8d ago
Possibly Meditations on Moloch (Ctrl-F "slave" to get to the relevant part) or Basic Income, Not Basic Jobs (Ctrl-F "useful work" to get to the relevant part).
Note that neither of these makes the full claim that if you've got people sitting around whom you have to supervise and feed anyway, you can't extract useful labour from most/any of them. The first makes the much weaker claim that owning slaves-for-life is not the most cost-effective way of getting work done (vs. allowing the slaves to earn their freedom), and the second makes the weaker claim that there exist people from whom useful labour cannot be extracted (and even there, I will note that he did not consider the "job" of "low-class prostitute", probably because that's illegal in 49/50 states of the USA and also significantly dystopian).
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
8d ago
Australia: 16/17 depending on state (16 in the four biggest states).
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
8d ago
· Edited 8d ago
I don't know who this Lomez guy is or what the wider context was of him giving the advice of pairing up with 170-pound women.
The linked post wasn't his. It was from some guy called "Labrador Skeptic".
I suspect this advice boils down to "ignore the factor of sexual attraction when looking for a mate", which I find questionable at best.
I've got to say, I find this whole discussion kind of hilarious, now that I've done the maths (not American, so I don't think in pounds), as I find (average-white-height) women of that weight quite attractive.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
8d ago
· Edited 8d ago
I don't usually express* violent disgust or other anger-adjacent emotions on the Web, but I didn't get in any trouble for this despite it pretty much being a disgust-only top-level post. Avoid hyperbolic language (especially calling people or ideas by snarl words like "parasite"), and obviously avoid specific incitement or threats of violence. Helps a lot if your disgust isn't with your interlocutor in particular, though.
*NB: I choose the word "express" carefully. Checking offsite records, there is at least one time my first reaction to a reply notification here was "take a swim in H2SO4". I just, um, didn't actually post that, because it wouldn't have been very productive.
@Amadan: I guess this might be sort of what you were looking for? It wasn't aimed at you, though.
magic9mushroom
If you're going to downvote me, and nobody's already voiced your objection, please reply and tell me
8d ago
Presumably that she spends too much time on 4chan to the extent that her perception is skewed by a similar degree to being literally intoxicated.
I'll just point out here that if you don't want to build a mountain of skulls, some of those institutions will need a replacement at least moderately close to ready before you torch them.
More options
Context Copy link