🔥The 9th Round of Easy Loan, Earn $40 Reward is in progress❗️ ⏰ Promotion Period: January 15th - Feburary 15th, 2025 👉 Register now and check more details at gate.io/campaigns/358

Sounds good - the debate on the future of AI needs to improve. Another thing I think could help is more critical method nerds - e.g. statisticians, economists, other social scientists - who scrutinise big claims carefully. I think the debate needs more rigour.

…

We have our drama too

More generally, most people have imo the wrong conception of many scientific metrics, thinking they're much more direct reflections of the relevant phenomena than they really are. This is true of everything from GDP to the Satiety Index.

Though many green policies are increasingly strict, policies vs woodburning continue to be lax "Last year, a study by the chief medical officer for England, found that even “eco-design” wood-burning stoves produced 450 times more toxic air pollution than gas central heating."

Great pics from this new account by Brian Potter

Yes this is a common misconception. Conversely sociable and popular people aren’t always very good at reading other people.

Ironically does the thing they accuse others of. (Lacking imagination and interpreting others uncharitably.)

I think one important implication of this is that the standard notion that we're adapted to be hunter-gatherers isn't generally true. Our bodies and brains likely are - to an extent that probably varies highly across traits - partly adapted to the more recent agricultural era.

Finnish kids who were taught a Soviet-inspired curriculum chose other occupations and worked less, reducing earnings by 10%

This is an example of how many people talking about “what men want” don’t seem to talk about actual men or actual statistics but about some twisted Platonic ideal of masculinity.