site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   31958 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 5, 2022

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

9
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If it helps, a bit of information about MIT's Science Core, which is one of the graduation requirements for every undergraduate, regardless of major--two semesters of Calculus (single and multivariable), two semesters of Physics (mechanics and electricity/magnetism), one semester of Chemistry, and one semester of Biology. Also, if you have not completed every class on that list by the end of your freshman year, something has gone wrong.

As one example from the list, the course summary for 18.02 (Multivariable Calculus) is as follows, from MIT's Course Catalog:

"Calculus of several variables. Vector algebra in 3-space, determinants, matrices. Vector-valued functions of one variable, space motion. Scalar functions of several variables: partial differentiation, gradient, optimization techniques. Double integrals and line integrals in the plane; exact differentials and conservative fields; Green's theorem and applications, triple integrals, line and surface integrals in space, Divergence theorem, Stokes' theorem; applications."

I assume that you and a number of people on this board would have no trouble passing these classes, particularly when you were college-age, but the Admissions Office shouldn't be in the business of approving candidates that can't pass hard graduation requirements, and you need a bit of a pushed IQ to get through that material.

None of that material is remotely difficult to learn and get throught for the first time, if you are a student with no day job or child caring responsibilities that is.

Not that I went to MIT, but the material remains the same even if you study it somewhere else ;-)

I admit trying to learn it between say 2330 and 0000 after being busy all day and having to get up at 6am might be difficult.

Anyone about 100- 115 IQ wise really shouldn't struggle with it if they actually try imho.

Putting SBFs intelligence lower bound as...median..

Anyone about 100- 115 IQ wise really shouldn't struggle with it if they actually try imho.

You severely underestimate how stupid I am 🤣

Not that I went to MIT, but the material remains the same even if you study it somewhere else ;-)

MIT is not a plug and chug school. Their goal is to create engineers and scientists who understand the technology they use/manage on a deep level.

Deep understanding of first year undergraduate material?

Deep understanding, as relevant for scientists or engineers, of the stuff previously listed is still quite superficial.

Edit: For clarity, superficial as in a first year undergraduate course as part of training for scientists or engineers.

I do agree - comparing the deep knowledge in computer science between MIT/CMU/etc grads and even just the next tier of CS universities is night and day - but I was under the impression that much of that happens after freshman year. In which case this…

None of that material is remotely difficult to learn and get throught for the first time, if you are a student with no day job or child caring responsibilities that is.

…makes a bit more sense, even if I think @Azth rather underestimates how much difficulty the average 100-IQ person would have with something like calculus or physics. Like, for someone smart, even something like 15-213 in CMU is possibly doable solo, let alone freshman calculus (not even analysis!), physics, chemistry, and biology.

I guess what I mean is that both of you are kind of right but some statements are kind of wrong? @Azth underestimates the intelligence needed to take those classes without trouble, and you overestimate the deep learning required in such entry level courses, but would nevertheless be on point about the degree generally.

Yes, I can accept that.

Maybe I underestimate the intelligence reuqired - like stokes theorem is brought up by another poster and that is, at a deep level, implcitly obvious and formalising it is straightforward, dare I say trivial so perhaps I fell into the typical mind fallacy trap (although I am retarded).

Do you really think if you asked a sample of 100 IQ people to learn Stokes' theorem (perhaps with some monetary incentive) to the extent they could describe it and use it in applications that most would be able to?

Yes, once you filter for those who don't know calculus, other prerequisites, have sufficient time, etc. Pay them to learn the prequesites then stokes theorem. I think the main barrier would not be that people can't understand it but that they simply do not care.

Yeah, I think most of us can agree Bankman-Fried is smart. Not as smart as made out when everyone was polishing his shoes with their tongues because he was worth (notional) billions, but not an ordinary dumb criminal either.

Smart in one particular way, but not street-smart enough to know to keep his damn mouth shut. Caroline Ellison seems to be smarter than that, I think she did one NYT interview (but I might be wrong about that) but otherwise has said nothing. Singh and Wang, his co-founders, seem to have dropped off the radar altogether (although the authorities might be on their track). It's Bankman-Fried who keeps stoking the fires with interviews and appearances and what-not.

What are the odds he's making a noble sacrifice play to draw all the heat away from his partners?

I don't think so, he seems to be throwing blame around on everyone he can think of but he was only careless, not intentionally fraudulent.

More like 99%. Even legit smart guys do not get into jane street. You need another tier of intelligence above that.

That’s still just 135. 90-95% would be just 125-130. The 1% aren’t all actual geniuses.

employment at Jane Street suggest he is probably at least 90-95th percentile

That's conservative. Jane Street doesn't hire 90th percentile interns. They work pretty hard to ensure all their interns are 99+ in quantitative skills

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats