source nitter link

@EY
This advice won’t be for everyone, but: anytime you’re tempted to say “I was traumatized by X”, try reframing this in your internal dialogue as “After X, my brain incorrectly learned that Y”.

I have to admit, for a brief moment i thought he was correctly expressing displeasure at twitter.

@EY
This is of course a dangerous sort of tweet, but I predict that including variables into it will keep out the worst of the online riff-raff - the would-be bullies will correctly predict that their audiences’ eyes would glaze over on reading a QT with variables.

Fool! This bully (is it weird to speak in the third person ?) thinks using variables here makes it MORE sneer worthy, especially since this appear to be a general advice, but i would struggle to think of a single instance in my life where it’s been applicable.

  • elmtonic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Someone in the replies brings this up, that trauma could be the result of learning something correct. Yud’s brilliant response is that this makes no sense to describe this as trauma, because you don’t get traumatized by physics class, right?

    https://nitter.net/ESYudkowsky/status/1701691489548697793#m

    I feel like this is where first-principles rationalism + his intelligence god complex really shines through. He thought he had figured out the root cause of trauma, was told that this wasn’t the case, then tries to redefine trauma itself instead of admitting that his (extremely simple, by the way) idea was wrong. I mean look at the way he starts his response:

    Why then describe it as trauma … ?

    Because it’s traumatic, that’s why. No further explanation required.

    • 200fifty@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yud’s brilliant response is that this makes no sense to describe this as trauma, because you don’t get traumatized by physics class, right?

      Isn’t this literally formally fallacious? “There exist non-traumatizing true things” doesn’t imply “all true things are non-traumatizing.”

      Ordinarily I’m not one to harp on logical fallacies, but come on Yudkowsky, you’re supposed to be Mr. Rational!

    • swlabr@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      Scene: Yud, a middle aged man, walks around in a forest. epistemic status: no knowledge of bear traps.

      Yud steps in a bear trap. His shin bones break, blood begins geysering out from his leg, and he howls in pain.

      Yud, gritting teeth: “I have attained correct knowledge about bear traps. My biases are now less wrong. Thusly, this is not trauma!”

      • Soyweiser@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re in a forest, walking along in the leaves, when all of a sudden you look down…

        You look down and see Yud, Swlabr. he’s crawling toward you…

        Yud lays on its back, his leg bleeding in the hot sun, struggling to get a bear trap of his leg, but he can’t. Not without your help. But you’re not helping.

        You’re correcting his usage of the word trauma! Why is that, Swlabr?

    • Steve@awful.systems
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      He thought he had figured out the root cause of trauma, was told that this wasn’t the case, then tries to redefine trauma itself instead of admitting that his (extremely simple, by the way) idea was wrong

      It’s funny how this is a perfect model for how transhumanists, rationalists, cryptoists etc try to model human behaviour in binary terms.