Dennis Hackethal’s Blog
My blog about philosophy, coding, and anything else that interests me.
Tweets
An archive of my tweets and retweets through . They may be formatted slightly differently than on Twitter. API access has since gotten prohibitively expensive – I don't know whether or when I'll be able to update this archive.
But in case I will, you can subscribe via RSS – without a Twitter account. Rationale
RT @TitaniaMcGrath:
Teachers who refer to “boys” or “girls” are attempting to radicalise a new generation of bigots. This must stop NOW.
I…
“If imposed, it would be the first time it has been made a crime for an Australian to enter their own country.” twitter.com/nomadcapitalis…
RT @CodeWisdom:
"Programming is not about typing, it's about thinking." - Rich Hickey
If there were any evidence for it, would that make it better as an explanation for whatever it purports to explain?
Yes. I expect much of Popperian epistemology to live on in the first theory of AGI as an approximation.
Isn't that a bit like saying dogs were already evolving when there were only wolves?
Better safe than sorry! Unless you want people to DIE twitter.com/TheBabylonBee/…
Saul: "It's his stomach. Now, where were we..."
Skyler: "Professionalism."
In my new blog post, "Objectivism vs. the Myth of the Framework", I explain why Ayn Rand made a mistake identified by Karl Popper, and why her ideal society would be an unstable one that would evolve into anarchy (a conclusion she would not have liked!).
“If you make this one mistake you should also make this other mistake.” twitter.com/Chesschick01/s…
Except in the very highest bracket there's also a surcharge in the form of house arrest.
But you didn't show that your problems with game theory can help you solve collective action problems.
I don't think problems can be solutions.
Meanwhile, your country just got over-run, because you were unable to field an army to defend it.
voluntary, non tax-funded army
To address something more specific again:
The optimal outcome for you is that everyone else pays their taxes, and you don’t. This is true for everyone.
Can you think of a specific circumstance where that isn't true for everyone?
You feel wrong. In my first tweet I answered your questions. Then I added more information about what’s wrong with game theory generally in my second tweet.
@__adamjohnson_
If the paper is intended to be read physicists
I've argued that it isn't (only).
Also, Papers directed at peers can still be obscurantist. Cf. Feynman's example at blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/analyzin…
LOL yea. Malice solved this by immediately dropping the term "anarchy" in favor of Brook's preferred term "voluntarism" and its definition. Very Popperian. Didn't work anyway, showing that Brook's move was just defensive and Malice's usage of terms wasn't wrong.
@__adamjohnson_
Maybe. He can address physicists specifically in addition to a general audience, that doesn’t really change my argument because he still gets to impress laymen anyway.
One need not present specific solutions to every problem in question for the claim that problems are soluble to be valid.
But generally speaking, people persuade each other all the time. They make arguments, point out contradictions, offer better alternatives, etc.
Game theory also assumes a fixed set of choices and outcomes. But as I’ve said, people are creative: they can create new outcomes and new avenues to achieve them.
Game theory fundamentally views people as automata mechanically making decisions. Which is gross (and false).
People’s choices aren’t fixed to what some economists think their Rational Choice should be. You can convince people that, say, free riding is wrong and then fewer of them will do it.
@__adamjohnson_
So considering this and also keeping in mind how obscurely he talks on his show all the time, also to a general audience, I find that overwhelming evidence that his paper is meant to obscure.
@__adamjohnson_
Well, it’s like I write in the comment I linked. To elaborate: he explicitly distances himself from academia, then refers to his paper as a work of entertainment. I don’t think that means there are inside jokes, but that it’s meant for a broad audience, like ~all entertainment.
@__adamjohnson_
Yes, I agree that that falls under obscurantism. And that maybe he’s not doing it deliberately. But I’m guessing you underestimate how prevalent obscurantism is in academia, even when subject-matter experts address each other.
Yes, the American government still employs much coercion, unfortunately. But in time, the amount of coercion can be reduced by creating more knowledge.
However, if there's a diffing tool I don't know about that can diff words, not just lines, and visually accommodate this without messing up the flow of the writing, then it could work great.
Sadly, using git for writing doesn't work well because lines get much, much longer than in code (every paragraph is a single line), which obscures the diffs.
But in principle, that problem is also soluble without coercion, like all problems. The US has solved it, for example. Other countries haven't.
If a society doesn't know how to defend itself without coercing its members, it can be argued that a draft is better than death.
But the example is a bit flawed because the evil situation the society and its members are put in is caused by foreign coercion in the first place.
Yes. And it is written for the general public, as Weinstein points out himself. See blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/a-compre…
@__adamjohnson_
It is written for the general public. See blog.dennishackethal.com/posts/a-compre…
To clarify, yes coercion is worse, no you don't just live with it. You find other ways of dealing with it that are better than the status quo.
For aggressive coercion: no. Problems are soluble. Create new outcomes and solutions and try more persuasion.
Brook should have conceded the point. He made a conjectured, Malice immediately offered a refutation. Malice was right and Brook knew it. But I'm guessing Brook feels he has too much riding on looking in the right to people—apparently more than he has riding on pursuing truth.
Later, Brook (paraphrase): "Anarchy can't work because the guy with the biggest gun always wins."
Malice (paraphrase): "Then how come we didn't win in Vietnam?"
Brook, stuttering: "Well, you're taking things out of context."
Disappointing performance by Brook.
Brook: “The only way to achieve a better world is through government.”
That could have been said by a communist.
Dunno why you put persuasion in quotes, but the answer is "no". Persuasion can always work, but there is no guarantee that it will.
Is doing god's work this ginger brother.
RT @DaFeid:
24/x
Danke Kathrin Osterode 🙏
#allesdichtmachen
#niewiederaufmachen
#lockdownfürimmer
allesdichtmachen.de https://t.co/TK…
RT @DaFeid:
20/x
Danke Karoline Teska 🙏
#allesdichtmachen
#niewiederaufmachen
#lockdownfürimmer
allesdichtmachen.de https://t.co/qpWq…
RT @DaFeid:
19/x
Danke Inka Friedrich 🙏
#allesdichtmachen
#niewiederaufmachen
#lockdownfürimmer
allesdichtmachen.de https://t.co/5AT…
RT @DaFeid:
17/x
Danke Claudia Rippe 🙏
#allesdichtmachen
#niewiederaufmachen
#lockdownfürimmer
allesdichtmachen.de https://t.co/fkQRn…
RT @DaFeid:
16/x
Danke Christine Sommer 🙏
#allesdichtmachen
#niewiederaufmachen
#lockdownfürimmer
allesdichtmachen.de https://t.co/3…
RT @DaFeid:
13/x
Danke Cem Ali Gültekin 🙏
#allesdichtmachen
#niewiederaufmachen
#lockdownfürimmer
allesdichtmachen.de https://t.co/nTY…
RT @DaFeid:
10/x
Danke Felix Klare 🙏
#allesdichtmachen #niewiederaufmachen #lockdownfürimmer
allesdichtmachen.de https://t.co/6xfFB8…
RT @DaFeid:
12/x
Danke Pasquale Aleardi 🙏
#allesdichtmachen
#niewiederaufmachen
#lockdownfürimmer
allesdichtmachen.de https://t.co/BP…
RT @dchackethal:
@Evolving_Ego @ashishkjha
Problems arise when too many group members choose to pursue individual profit
LOL those pesky…
Persuasion is always possible. And even if it weren’t, that wouldn’t explain why coercion would be morally okay. Nor is it okay when one fails to persuade.
One has two options, really: persuade others or leave them alone.
That’s presupposing that one knows what’s best for others. Which is highly problematic.
When one fails to persuade, it needn’t be because the other person is being irrational or something. It can also be because one sucks at persuading.
Problems arise when too many group members choose to pursue individual profit
LOL those pesky group members never going with the program!
I recall that article. Maybe we have spoken before. The strings "persua" and "convinc" appear 0 times in the article, so I'm guessing the article doesn't address what I was saying, nor does it refute the notion that persuasion can solve problems. Or does it?
To be clear, you don't think persuasion works because it can lead to free-riding? Or you're attributing that problem to taxation?
You wrote: "Perhaps you missed the part about ending a pandemic." That sounds to me like you think I don't want the pandemic solved.
Do you think taxes/force are the only way to solve the pandemic, or do you think persuading people could work?
That doesn’t imply that I don’t want the pandemic solved.
What did I say that led you to think I didn’t know ending the pandemic would be desirable?
@TripThomasGames @MarsCuriosity
Doubtful it would be that far. I'm guessing it's the much closer faint pixel, at around 5 o'clock.
Beautiful picture, but ironic that the very technology that leads the way to escaping from this cruel rock one day spreads memes to forever preserve that rock. It claims we're all "connected by earth", although its very presence on Mars is evidence of the opposite. twitter.com/MarsCuriosity/…
Who’s “we”?
If you’re allowed to purchase large quantities of the vaccine, do so, then donate them.
But I have the impression that you’re not. Meaning the government would need to do it. Meaning everyone would have to pay for it, even against their will.
@AfJyag @disclosetv
Where taxes are lower. @nomadcapitalist would know better.
Before asking “how can we”, shouldn’t we ask “should we”? twitter.com/royalsociety/s…
@AnnikaJoeres @M_Hundhausen @HolzheuStefan
Aus Ihren Tweets wird nicht klar, ob die Zahlen nun 36 Dezibel zu hoch oder zu niedrig sind. Nur anhand der Bemerkung, dass es Gegnern in die Hände gespielt hat, kann man erahnen, dass sie 36 zu hoch waren.
Correct, but we need an explanation to say either way.
I thought number inputs don’t even let you type values that are outside the specified range?
RT @Replit:
This is the most creative personal website I've ever seen 😍
It injects CSS into the page as it's written: https://t.co/WgS99uC…
Ok but within those constraints there could still be infinitely many ways.
Why couldn’t there be infinitely many ways to make an eye? twitter.com/RichardDawkins…
Holding past generations' mistakes against current generations. A nasty result of collectivism. twitter.com/ElefentJames/s…
In other words, there's a problem we don't yet know how to solve. Is that really an argument against libertarianism?
Mir ist gerade aufgefallen, dass "zusammenschreiben" und "getrennt schreiben" beide auf sich selbst zutreffen. Sie sind also homolog. Eine schoene Eigenschaft der deutschen Sprache!
The second-handedness level is over 9000. twitter.com/lillianyoung/s…
RT @dchackethal:
@angela4LNCChair
Would it have mattered if public opinion on lockdowns had been overwhelmingly negative? Would Newsom have…
Would it have mattered if public opinion on lockdowns had been overwhelmingly negative? Would Newsom have cared?
Same logic as when parents impose screen times against their children's will: "They don't know what's best for them, I do."
Very handy for sending form fields over a socket or ajax.
IIRC you can also use it to turn FormData into an object.
Note the official-sounding, proper language they're using to normalize this stuff. Also note their facial expressions of regret here and there, as if to say that they're so sorry to do this, but it's for 'the right reasons.' They're committing evil with good intentions. twitter.com/ComicDaveSmith…
RT @MrAndyNgo:
He was white, so no need to riot.
The @Oregonian, Portland’s paper of record. archive.is/2021.04.16-194… https://t.co/7PTOxMom…
@snipperbytes @nixcraft
The foreach also looks a bit like stack-safe tail recursion.
RT @Lukewearechange:
FAUCI: "I don't look at this as a liberty thing."
JORDAN: "Well, that's obvious!" https://t.co/XqPot9QIqj
Have you tried Tillamook? I didn't know vanilla could be this good. Highly recommended: tillamook.com/products/ice-c…
RT @ClimateWarrior7:
Initially one feels an enormous wave of happiness. One is complying with the government's wishes! One is accepted by s…
RT @paulg:
@kimmytaylor
It has died at many times and places. They are for that reason times and places you don't want to be.
If you want to give minorities money, just do it. Why force others to do the same? twitter.com/nowthisnews/st…
@mynameisChesto @BennyChugg @DavidDeutschOxf @DorfGinger
Brains are made of atoms. And those atoms had to exist before brains existed so that brains could be constructed by evolution in the first place, i.e. before anyone could in principal perceive atoms.