devalgo

Illuminati preventing us from hearing signals. Aliens Confirmed!!

>Someone stuck in a one-person flat will have a different experience.

As someone in this position I can say that the lack of a commute has been amazing, I'm sleeping much better and less stressed overall but the lack of social contact is definitely weighing down.

> I have several friends that actively choose to be contractors because they prefer the (legally protected) flexibility to decide their own hours, among other things

I'm sure the flexibility is nice when you are making $100+ per hour but drivers make a tenth of that and struggle to get health insurance

>have been constructed to build a specific narrative about diversity and inclusion

Just for reference, the first line in the memo is literally: "I value diversity and inclusion, am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes"

But you kapnobatairza, you actually know what was in Damore's heart better than he himself. You are an oracle and a prophet and the bringer of truth. 2+2=5 amirite.

Nice strawman you've built there. Enjoy beating it up.

No... It's to point out that the particular claim to authority that SPLC is the adjudicator on who is racist or not is stupid. OP could have easily posted the quote directly from Molyneux's twitter or wherever he rants at without invoking SPLC.

Just for fun let's try a few:

Memo line: "Women, on average, have more Openness directed towards feelings and aesthetics rather than ideas. Women generally also have a stronger interest in people rather than things, relative to men"

Research summary: "I summarize data from two meta‐analyses and three cross‐cultural studies on gender differences in personality and interests. Results show that gender differences in Big Five personality traits are ‘small’ to ‘moderate,’ with the largest differences occurring for agreeableness and neuroticism (respective d s = 0.40 and 0.34; women higher than men). In contrast, gender differences on the people–things dimension of interests are ‘very large’ (d = 1.18), with women more people‐oriented and less thing‐oriented than men." https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1751-9004...

Wow.. totally misrepresented the research there...

Memo: "Women on average look for more work-life balance while men have a higher drive for status on average"

Research: "There are no sex differences in cognitive ability but enduring sex differences in competitiveness, life goals, the relative emphasis on agency versus "connection." https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/0306988060076911...

Omg how misogynistic...

Memo: "Women, on average, have more Neuroticism (higher anxiety, lower stress tolerance)."

Research: "Secondary analyses of Revised NEO Personality inventory data from 26 cultures (N =23,031) suggest that gender differences are small relative to individual variation within genders; differences are replicated across cultures for both college-age and adult samples, and differences are broadly consistent with gender stereotypes: Women reported themselves to be higher in Neuroticism, Agreeableness, Warmth, and Openness to Feelings, whereas men were higher in Assertiveness and Openness to Ideas" https://doi.apa.org/doiLanding?doi=10.1037%2F0022-3514.81.2....

Omg he totally misrepresented the research there...

>articles that were both cherry picked and misinterpreted

Which ones?

Your edit is even more misleading and incoherent than your original comment.

Care to point out which lines in the Memo were weren't supported by standard literature?

Where did I say I dispute the quotes? I said Molyneux is a dirtbag but SPLC is not a credible org.

Stefan Molyneux is a pig but your characterization of Damore is low effort and more or less completely wrong. If you read the memo it is a relatively straightforward review of standard Biology and Psychology research. There's virtually nothing controversial in it. If you have issues with it you have issues with science. Which given the "decolonize" science lunacy recently isn't surprising. China is laughing all the way to the bank as both sides of the political divide in the West largely and the US specifically abandon logic and reason for superstition and dogma.

Molyneux is detestable but SLPC has no credibility. They recently settled a defamation lawsuit against Majid Nawaz an anti-extremism Muslim reformer who they labeled as an anti-muslim extremist. It's in the same vein as people who call Ben Shapiro, an orthodox jew, a Nazi. It's simply ridiculous hysterics.

>Direct helicopter money into everyone's bank account...oh, wait, we are doing that

Except the amount is peanuts, peer countries are doing 2k/mo without issue but its somehow a struggle or hyperinflationary for the US to do 2400 over 6 months?

In a SHTF scenario I think the idea that you would be able to reach, operate or maintain a refinery is fanciful.

>basically stealing TikTok for example

'Stealing' it for 30 Billion? Give me a break... TikTok is not the hill to die on...

I agree, but it hasn't changed yet. Despite the "teach truckers to code" kind of rhetoric and survivorship bias of self taught coders.

People always parrot this but how many Doctors do you know with no degree? Take a poll at Google engineers and see how many are actually self taught and have no degree. How many Wall Street bankers/traders/etc have no degree? How many US Senators have no degree? How many World Leaders in history have had no formal education? Not counting dropouts, what percentage of Billionaires have no college education? The reality is still that the overwhelming majority of "successful" people still have degrees. You can argue what the root of this is whether it's the added knowledge or signalling of the degree, or intrinsic self motivation of the person, etc. but that fact still remains.

>GPT-3 demonstrates that a huge volume of what's written is mostly bullshit

Have you never seen reddit or youtube comments?

But seriously this seems like a standard Pareto distribution, 20% of the writing provides 80% of the value and the rest is mostly drivel.

>I have a hunch it will work on 50% of people.

The number of people on Social Media that don't read past an article's headline is enormous, they are convinced by basic false headlines like "George Soros paying for mind control chips in Covid Vaccine" and it's astonishing. "I saw it on the internet so it must be true" used to be a joke when I was a kid and now its actually true for massive numbers of people.

>One consequence of GPT-3 is that I am now highly sceptical of the human provenance of any HN comment on an article about GPT-3

This likely isn't a bad thing. As more and more generative models come out it's likely that a majority of web based discourse will be bots. This is already a major issue on Twitter and being able to pick out real comments will probably be an important skill going forward.

John Bell would like to have a word with you.

>If anything, GPT-3 is too tied to the real world. Like a search engine, it can quickly find the answer to almost any practical question. What we're trying to figure out is if it can do anything else.

I disagree, for what it is GPT could still be incredibly powerful. No person can hold all of human knowledge in their head but could GPT reasonably approach that and be able to answer almost any question that Humans have already answered? That would be incredible imo. It's Google on steroids. All the worlds information queryable in plain "english".

It's not at an all powerful Oracle that we can ask about how to perfect Fusion power or build Warp Drives but it can still do some incredible things.

> It cannot be emulated in an environment that's secluded from the world or even in an environment that is exposed to a carefully selected slice of the world.

This has always been some kind of anthropomorphic argument to me that I don't think holds. The hard problem of consciousness isn't solved and to make such bold claims like we cannot possibly create intelligence without it having full awareness of the world seems unsupported imo.

>men and women become more educated and start earning greater incomes, they have fewer offspring

How can you get this close

>Greater incomes give one access to more of the finer things in life, which distracts from family planning

And still come to the wrong conclusion.

I promise you that high school dropouts with 5 kids are watching more netflix and playing more video games than a couple with graduate degrees from Stanford.

>Low birth rates may be exacerbated at the moment by the economy, but people's preference for their careers and the quality and availability of modern entertainment (why raise kids when you can travel, binge watch shows on Netflix, play video games, etc.) are more probable causes

Your comment fits your name, it is callous, lacking empathy and painfully out of touch. The idea that Netflix is the reason people aren't having kids in simply absurd...

Between increasing economic uncertainty, student loan debt, no mandated maternity/paternity leave, no sick leave, no vacation time, etc. etc... Is it any wonder Millennials aren't having kids?

>I don't think it's rent seeking by definition to modernize a product and/or make it more accessible to people. The fact of the matter is that there is a tremendous backlog of legacy industry/infrastructure that needs to be modernized

Out of all the VC money raised in 2019 how much was for this and how much was for things like Quibi, We-Work, gig economy, etc. ?

Sure but that's not addressing his point which is most of the ideas being funded are uninteresting and aren't really moving the ball forward. Instead they're doing some kind of rent seeking.

Just want to point out that many of the complaints in the comments here are US specific. At many PhD programs in Europe for example you are considered an employee of the university and not a student, this often comes with full benefits: salary, bonuses, vacation time, pension, etc. Academia in the US in particular is falling into disrepair.

Is there a standard set of potential side effects?

Lets say some of these potential vaccines are effective at producing an immune response enough to provide protection from Covid infection, is there a level of side effects that would cause a vaccine to fail clinical trials?