tdba

A big influence for sure, but that claim is a stretch.

Look at

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boethius https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_books#Middle_Ages

It's worth noting that Britain bombed German civilians before Germany bombed British civilians.

See https://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/oct/15/second-world-w...

Peace.

There are real ancestry differences across populations that correlate to the social constructions we have. We have to deal with that.

— David Reich, quoted in Angela Saini, Superior: The Return to Race Science, (Chapter 7: Roots)

Antiracism is the active process of identifying and eliminating ideas that suggest one racial group is inferior to or superior to another racial group in any way

If there are observable differences between racial groups (not a contested fact I think?) then you are racist or not depending on your values. For example, if you observe that there is difference in average height between two racial groups, and you consider being tall to be good, then you are racist because you must therefore see one group as superior in that respect. The anti-racist response, according to your definition, must therefore be to eliminate the idea that being tall is good.

For example, if you are a basketball scout, and you disproportionately recruit people from one race over another because they are on average taller, then you are racist. Anti-racist activists would aim to change your "systems, structures, policies, practices and attitudes" to ensure that the opportunity to become a professional basketball player is distributed equitably.

But no matter how you implement it, to achieve that goal implies that someone who would likely have been a better basketball player is going to have to be passed over in favor of someone else who was scouted in order to boost the number of people of their racial group in the pipeline. That is, someone was given (or not given) something because of their race, at least in part. Many reasonable people would consider that racially biased, or "racist" according to the way the word is used in common parlance.

In the period 1950-2000, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan and China all achieved their economic miracles through heavy government intervention in markets to build new industrial capacity, what is sometimes called state capitalism. in the period 1930-1950, Germany, the USSR and the US did the same in rising out of the Great Depression through national mobilization before and during WW2. And well before that, Britain became the world's economic leader in the 19th century in part through state capitalist practices that began in the 18th (e.g. the British East India company) - the British parliament was arguably the most actively interventionist state apparatus in Europe at this time. Many have also argued that Silicon Valley itself emerged from state capitalist actions by the US in its technological and industrial competition with the USSR from 1950-1990.

Free markets certainly have an important role to play, but they usually work best after the heavy lifting has been done by huge investments and interventions on the part of government to create fertile ground for entrepreneurs. That is, the government invests heavily to kick start development, creates a legal framework in which smaller scale enterprises can contribute and reap rewards for themselves, then steps back to allow the market to do its work, adding regulation as needed to keep it running smoothly.

> ... participants posed questions that required an awareness of the letters within words. For example, they might have asked their chat partner to spell a word backwards, to identify the third letter in a given word, to provide the word that begins with a specific letter, or to respond to a message like "?siht daer uoy naC", which can be incomprehensible for an AI model, but a human can easily understand...

> Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal-scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war.

https://www.stevenstrogatz.com/books/nonlinear-dynamics-and-...

I literally read it cover to cover like a novel

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Model_T#Price_and_product...

> I will build a motor car for the great multitude. It will be large enough for the family, but small enough for the individual to run and care for. It will be constructed of the best materials, by the best men to be hired, after the simplest designs that modern engineering can devise. But it will be so low in price that no man making a good salary will be unable to own one – and enjoy with his family the blessing of hours of pleasure in God's great open spaces.

where do I find these insane defaults?

My point is that in-group relations is not the same as out-group relations. High trust is about how you treat members of your in-group. Enslaving foreign people is most certainly a "low trust" move (how can I possibly enter an agreement with you when I know you might just show up one day and enslave me?) but it's fully possible and consistent for the perpetrator to belong to a high trust society.

lol