Matches for from:mircea_popescu, 253931 total results Sorted by newest | relevance
Sun Feb 28 16:58:46 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> much like the 1st soviets would have said "have more politruk/comissars in the army", the 2nd soviets want more women, unspecified, in tech.
Sun Feb 28 16:58:20 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> it is "have more women". the statistical entity.
Sun Feb 28 16:58:02 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> note that it is not said "have more WOMAN, as in, have more of the romanian chick at mit who wrote the ai guy's eulogy"
Sun Feb 28 16:57:32 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> women, not in the sense of individuals but in the sense of the mass monster they constitute in aggregate, are always and everywhere in favour of the state and the statu quo.
Sun Feb 28 16:56:32 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> which is why i put the question in asciilifeform , the is is actually thoroughly nailed down for this scope.
Sun Feb 28 16:56:13 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> all "produces" reduce to "ought to", easier for people who comprehend enough physics to know time is not a thing, but even for more pedestrian minds.
Sun Feb 28 16:55:51 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> "i do x because x OUGHT TO y" < wrong. non-thought. towards purpose.
Sun Feb 28 16:55:36 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> "i do x because x IS y" < correct. thought. from cause.
Sun Feb 28 16:55:25 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> more generally, and for extensibility & standardization purposes, the canonical form :
Sun Feb 28 16:55:06 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> which is why it's not thought.
Sun Feb 28 16:55:02 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> they end up baking in untested because unknown assumptions.
Sun Feb 28 16:54:46 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> this is the problem with forward-looking attempts at thought.
Sun Feb 28 16:54:33 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> "if no wind"
Sun Feb 28 16:53:40 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> "i do x because x produces y" is fundamentally THE forward-looking statement.
Sun Feb 28 16:53:06 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> produces.
Sun Feb 28 16:50:34 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> nevertheless, try an actual reasoning (ie, from causes) rather than a faux-fiatesque monstrosity (as to purposes)
Sun Feb 28 16:43:28 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> this is true.
Sun Feb 28 16:42:59 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> what's that mean ?
Sun Feb 28 16:42:56 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> <asciilifeform> leads to moar scar tissue.
Sun Feb 28 16:39:06 UTC 2016 <mircea_popescu> no, i am aware.