The New York Times published a hit piece on Mamdami, citing Crémieux
- 0 Followers
- 0 Following
- 1 Posts
AI weapon detection system at Antioch High School failed to detect gun in Nashville shooting
Art’s value is determined by two measurable factors: prettiness at a glance, and ungarbled signage, artist motivations be damned. With this in mind we can predict other advancements in entertainment (all art is entertainment!)
For example, future pro boxing matches will be performed by rock’em sock’em robots in skin suits. They can score more points than humans. Soccer will be performed by restaurant server robots…in skin suits. Humans will still have a place in Olympic skiing and swimming so long as human pleather warps in water.
The article in which Scott compares John Henry's mining capacity to the Machine's
Whoops! Google's reached a new level of JAQing off and decided to answer the questions instead of just leading to them
Whoops! Google's reached a new level of JAQing off and decided to answer the questions instead of just leading to them - awful.systems
> Hermansson logged in to Google and began looking up results for the IQs of different nations. When he typed in “Pakistan IQ,” rather than getting a typical list of links, Hermansson was presented with Google’s AI-powered Overviews tool, which, confusingly to him, was on by default. It gave him a definitive answer of 80. > When he typed in “Sierra Leone IQ,” Google’s AI tool was even more specific: 45.07. The result for “Kenya IQ” was equally exact: 75.2. Hmm, these numbers seem very low. I wonder how these scores were determined.
In particular, two semantic tricks are used. First, the fact that current genetic markers aren’t a good prediction for IQ heritability is used as an argument against it. The other likely explanation that our understanding of those markers is widely incomplete is not explored.
Unlike our understanding of IQ, the correlation between matching shapes and teen pregnancy, which is fully understood.
No, intelligence is not like height
TP0 gets a mention in a frontpage Atlantic article - ‘Race Science’ Is Inching Its Way Across the American Right
TP0 gets a mention in a frontpage Atlantic article - ‘Race Science’ Is Inching Its Way Across the American Right - awful.systems
Ali Breland has written some fantastic entry pieces on the new right, including right wing anons and maga tech; now he has an article about the nooticers > Other anonymous far-right accounts have accrued more than 100,000 followers by posting about the supposed links between race and intelligence. Elon Musk frequently responds to @cremieuxrecueil, which one far-right publication has praised as an account that “traces the genetic pathways of crime, explaining why poverty is not a good causal explanation.” Musk has also repeatedly engaged with @Eyeslasho, a self-proclaimed “data-driven” account that has posted about the genetic inferiority of Black people. Other tech elites such as Marc Andreessen, David Sacks, and Paul Graham follow one or both of these accounts. Whom someone follows in itself is not an indication of their own beliefs, but at the very least it signals the kind of influence and reach these race-science accounts now have. https://web.archive.org/web/20240820173451/https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2024/08/race-science-far-right-charlie-kirk/679527/ [https://web.archive.org/web/20240820173451/https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2024/08/race-science-far-right-charlie-kirk/679527/]
He also wants us to know that Hannania is much less right than he’s made out to be.. Richard gave him a signal boost and is cool with gay people! Unfortunately, Tracey hasn’t grasped that “right winger” is simply a metonym for “thinks blacks are the second least domesticable African animal after zebras”
Why so many “racists” at Manifest? — EA Forum
Comment by Isa - (This comment is more of a general response to this post and others about Manifest than a response to what Austin has specifically said here) I am a black person who attended Manifest, and I will say that I almost didn't attend because of Hanania, but decided to anyway because my interest in it outweighed my disagreements with his work. I walked past a conversation he was having where he was asked why he thinks "minorities [black people] perform so poorly in so many domains," which did not feel great, but I also chatted to someone who runs a similar twitter as him and briefly told him my issues with it, which he was receptive to. I overall prefer cultures that give me space to have those sorts of conversations, but I do flinch a bit at the fact that my demographic is on the receiving end of so much of this. Many of the "edgy" people were super nice to me, I had fun conversations about other things with some of them, and their presence didn't take away from my overall experience. I felt fine after those interactions, but many people wouldn't. Perhaps they don’t “belong” at manifest, but that explanation isn’t very satisfying to me. I think I'm much more tolerant of this sort of dynamic than many super reasonable people, including other black people. I'm personally fine engaging with critiques about how the Civil Rights Act has ushered in some not-so-great policy decisions over the last half century. “Woke Institutions” might just be civil rights law in action (according to Hanania) but the civil rights law is also, like, the reason why I have basic rights. I think it's completely reasonable for a black person to see arguments like that and think to themselves "what the actual fuck? The person who wrote that book is probably racist, and a conference hosting him might be racist too.” I think it is good to be curious about the world and interested in exploring unanswered questions so long as this is the true motivation. I take most people's self-reports about their i
TracingWoodgrains launches a defense of Manifest's controversial reputation, all without betraying a basic understanding of what the word "controversial" means.