natded

The parent did a partner selection before the breeding took place, unless there was rape involved; and I doubt a parent that wants a kid that turns out right goes to: "hmm today I will breed with the disabled person to make for great offspring", no they will select for a mate that they think is good and this choice is implicitly eugenic: they will not declare to be august masters of eugenics but they will look for a good partner to provide healthy offspring.

Height is a good example: nobody thinks you grow taller by playing basketball, but many think you get smarter by going to school.

The focus on the mating part: if they don't produce an above replacement level of babies they are leading the lives of gay men functionally.

Intelligence has trade-offs, costs and other limitations or we would have maxed it out hard (ie. an "intelligence explosion" would have occurred).

Increased mental illness might be one, other one is the brain size being limited by the hips of mother. Brains / intelligence also has energy costs which we might not have been able to optimize for yet.

As such, I would say that intelligence is a cost that you run. It allowed for reproduction and survival for humans when they moved towards colder regions for example, but there's little to no reason to maintain that intelligence if you don't need to adapt anymore. I think you need harsh material constraints (I don't know, space faring) to keep it from shaving itself off in order to optimize the human machine.

Taleb is just coping for his audience in this post, it is sad that he lowers himself to such status games. OTOH, winning at status games is lindy so.

Idea that you can select against intelligence would lead to an idea that eugenics == good and that is a taboo. It is a can of worms in the High Status Discussion to bring up the idea that intelligence can be measured and inherited by offspring.

According to many even ITT, intelligence is some transcendental category which can only be divined by Nurture and Education.

The point of total nuclear war is not to declare a victor anyways. States that can ensure MAD have a nuclear deterrence based on irrationality, of which you cannot exactly reason rationally like this.

FWIW. if your city has blast doors at 100m+ depth you are for sure joining the nuclear exchange.

Installing this in Ubuntu is a PITA and I always just give up. No I'm not going to start """symlink this and that""" when my aim is to save references for myself.

My unironic recommendation for any nation state is to block American social media companies and then proceed to restrict or outright ban R&D work on 'ads' and other such trinkets. Exactly because of: ".. a tragedy for ... that so many physics PhDs have gone to work in hedge funds and Silicon Valley." Just looking at the sheer amount of work gone to optimize ad clicking is insane.

It lacks diversity.

How do C++ programs / programmers enforce and manage modularity in the general sense if they don't even have simplest module system? I'm not even talking of having module functors like Ocaml, but something like Rust has. It seems to be one of the most obvious steps to reduce complexity and compose program of smaller parts.

Somewhat incredible that all of .PDF reading software is just bad. There is not a single .PDF reader that I think of as "This is a good program" when I open it. Maybe the spec (PDF) is just fucked, I don't know. That's my experience over the years as someone that consumes a lot of .PDFs.

Machine Learning. Nobody's going to program hard coded programs in 10 years. It will be looked like handwriting assembly or something equally absurd.

This is pretty funny though, if I've understood this correctly. People in the West always seem to think that a properly democratic government made by the chinese people (be it those in Taiwan or those in China) would be "peaceful", but to me if I look at a map and observe the lands Taiwan claims for herself, it seems quite a lot (if they do actually claim the rights to governing the China-China too, and not just Taiwan the Island)

Superpower logic is far too cold for terms like colonizing. There is very little focus on such ideological by-products of power when the General Staff makes its considerations and recommendations for the security of the state. If you think in terms like these, from some liberal shitlib university, against military superpowers who can guarantee MAD with nuclear weapons you are not going to make heads or tails any of it.

It is best to purify your mind and just read Thomas Schelling.

OTOH, US did just this year lose its longest war and it was against Afghanistan. I rely on this closer event. Granted, admitting the loss there was the first step in road to recovery.

The Taiwanese leader is hardly "standing up" to China. China's calculus of attacking Taiwan is probably a more global in scale: for example US submarines can end the maritime traffic in South China Sea completely at any given point.

US isn't technically drumming up war on China and Russia; they are promoting war to the last Ukrainian against Russia, and probably the last Taiwanese against China. A difference, but probably enough to help US hitch a long as superpower couple of decades if either of these events take place.

Direct confrontation between Russia, China vs. US is not even in the question. US couldn't defeat couple of goat herders and they're going to level up to S-tier opponents? I wouldn't even bet on US against Venezuela or Iran at this point.

She is a good "simplifier", taking complex phenomena and making it digestible for brainlet (like me).

Imagine thinking it shouldn't have been in a public repository to begin with.

And as I understand, this is already an old design (they started building it in the 00s).

Teaching sand to think was a mistake.

One of the best post-beginner / intermediate learning experiences wrt. Rust is to try to model the Borrow Checker behavior with Rust. Just write small (>10 LoC) programs within safe subset of Rust:

1. Rejected unsafe programs (and the why)

2. Rejected safe programs (and the why)

.. and try to convince yourself that you understand the logic behind the two.

https://whileydave.com/2021/12/06/modelling-borrow-checking-...

https://github.com/rust-lang/unsafe-code-guidelines/blob/mas...

The "dependencies" can be written off quickly as the "complaints" about them are ridiculous.

> educate their organisations on the importance of supporting open source solutions

Githubs of the world could just gate downloads, pull requests etc. behind a payment to see what is the real valuation of open source software; I imagine it'd mostly settle around $0 excluding couple of big projects.

Fact checking is censorship taken on behalf of protected opinions. This is what Facebook itself has asserted in a lawsuit[1]. It is an political act, taken against political enemies. Schmitt would have a field day in 21st century.

> [1] https://twitter.com/disclosetv/status/1469331084550852615/ph...

It's time for the butcher's bill over the silly corona restrictions, and none will ever connect the two to together.

Always like hearing his thoughts, he has some other recent interviews that were good too

https://youtu.be/y1qf2MCzneU

Rather than a list of tools, I simply recommend learning one tool well so you can always on do a quick presentation if you need. I like draw.io but it is sometimes buggy.

Not really mandatory. Check out whatever jobs you are interested in if they ask for React or Vue learn one or the other. MDN is the single best source on learning web dev, so trust it over stackoverflows etc.