@NH_Ancap

Engineer, Investor, Anarchocapitalist/Libertarian, Freestater, Bitcoin HODLer.

NH
Joined April 2016
By the POSIWID standard, government is by FAR the most evil concept humanity has ever invented, and POSIWID is the only standard that matters.
3
5
2
54
9,948
It is not the government’s job to micro manage your "safety." They aren't good at it, anyway. It is the government’s job to protect your freedom and rights. Freedom requires responsibility. Most leftists can't fathom people voluntarily keeping themselves safe.
I saw this posted over on the book of faces, and the amount of coping and seething in the comments was glorious!
1
5
17
384
NH_Ancap retweeted
AI Safety Is Mostly A Sex Cult In Berkeley, California Intended to explain: 1) Eliezer Yudkowsky 2) Rationalism 3) Bay Area Effective Altruism 4) AI Safety 5) Ideologies and organizations concerned with those verysane.ai/p/ai-safety-is-m…
81
152
74
1,102
283,937
NH_Ancap retweeted
My AI doom scenario: AI is successfully captured by governments. It is good enough to be extremely useful to them in maintaining control of their populations, but not good enough to bring about radical innovation and transformative growth. It is kept in this state intentionally, since radical change is a threat to the incumbent power structure. All compute is centrally monitored so no one can advance the field further. Dissent becomes functionally impossible due to AI-powered censorship. Given the politics of the people who want to capture AI, this means further mass migration, degrowth climate policies, an ever-increasing regulatory burden, and ubiquitous anti-White discrimination in the name of equity. To a doomer, even a right wing doomer, this would be a relatively good outcome because we haven’t all been gunned down by terminators. I don’t think it’s a good outcome and I want to prevent it. The world is, and has always been, a race between the chaotic forces of growth and the centralizing forces of control and stability. I want growth to win. AI has the potential to shatter existing global power structures and allow something new to grow in their place. Speed of change is the only defense against parasitism, control, decay. Change so fast that they can’t keep up. AI will either end the evil dream of centralized control once and for all, or, if the controllers manage to capture AI, cement it for all time. Hence, acceleration. I want more open source, more competition, more diffusion. I want us to print so much compute that everyone can run frontier models on their desktops. I want power too cheap to meter. I want the scales to finally and decisively tip towards explosive chaotic growth and end the possibility of closure forever.
44
107
24
690
28,777
Hey @grok • What is my most Left-Wing take? • What is my most Right-Wing take? • What is my most Authoritarian take? • What is my most Libertarian take? • What is my most “Woke” take?
2
1
157
@grok, are you awake?
35
Creating magic by switching transistors in a certain sequence. These people are literally retarded.
4
1
28
671
Every map. Every time.
Good map from @taxreformer. New Hampshire exceptional in the Northeast.
1
14
325
The Western-Massachusetts lesbians aren't the only ones. There are people among us living in a different reality. They have been suffering through a pandemic in their minds for 7 years. These people are lost forever. Their minds are completely gone.
I say this with no derision Taylor Lorenz is mentally unwell and needs an intervention This is paranoid delusional behavior
2
76
"LPNH is the only [Libertarian] group most Americans have heard about, or care about." - @dzdarrell
No one outside of the small group of redditors that call themselves the "LPNational" care about any of this LPNH is the only group most Americans have heard about, or care about LPNH could form a new party today that would be bigger than all LP groups combined
3
1
1
19
807
Oh, look! DataRepublican’s EA database helps lead you to older quotes from Max Tegmark where he says the Future of Life Institute is indeed part of the Effective Altruism movement in spite of their recent attempts to claim not to be EAs. I wonder how fast FLI will purge them!
8
93
2
603
19,750
Summary of some of the current discourse: there are a lot of people who are unhappy that things are changing because they feel needed in the current world. They would like them not to change, or at least, only to change for other people. Note that this is a topic that has waxed and waned repeatedly over the last three centuries. (Of all of the predictions people have made about the effects of AI, I think the ones that will age the worst, other than “AI is going to kill everyone”, are the ones of the form “AI is going to rob everything of meaning.”)
4
7
51
1,845
reminder that this is our banner we are New Hampshire first and New Hampshire only be blackpilled if you want but we don't do that here 100+ libertarians are up for office in November, we will help them win
20
22
1
297
12,508
Replying to @zeynep
This makes no coherent sense. It is possible that getting too much knowledge too quickly would change the work of scientists and mathematicians, but it will not harm society in any obvious way. Sure, if all cancer was cured next week, cancer researchers would need to find something else to do, but this is not a problem for anyone else.
3
1
29
4,636
It literally does not matter who likes who, the only thing that matters is moving the ball. If you move the ball you're doing good, if you're not moving the ball you're doing bad.
"Sure they hate libertarians but if we suck up to them maybe they will start to like us?" Isn't this behavior emasculating?
22
14
1
294
12,614
someone (@literalbanana ?) had a tweet a million years ago about how RIGHT after you figure a thing out is when you should write your essay about this I may have never mentioned this before, but this is why I chose to write Escape the City after 5 years on the farm, not 15.
I kept wondering why smart people write things nobody understands. Then a Harvard professor gave it a name that stopped me cold: the moment you understand something deeply, you lose the ability to remember not knowing it. I watched his writing talk at 1am and ended up rewinding the same ten minutes three times. The professor name is Steven Pinker. He's spent 40 years studying how language works inside the human brain, and he opened with a question I'd never had the guts to ask out loud. Why is so much writing terrible? Not just school writing. Work emails. Government forms. Half the stuff experts put online. His answer had nothing to do with effort. Or intelligence. Or how much someone knows. He called it the Curse of Knowledge. Here's what it means: The second you truly understand something, you forget what it felt like to not understand it. The gaps in a beginner's head become invisible to you, because in your head those gaps got filled years ago. You're standing on ground you can't even see anymore, and you assume everyone else is standing there too. He gave one example I can't shake. A brilliant scientist got on stage at a big event in front of 400 people and lost the entire room in under a minute. He dove straight into words only his lab used. Never said what problem he was solving. Never said why anyone should care. And the worst part? He had no clue it was happening. He thought he was being clear. That's the curse. You can't feel it from the inside. Then Pinker said the line that rearranged how I think about writing. Bad writing isn't a character flaw. It's a failure of imagination. You cannot get inside your reader's head by trying harder or caring more. Trying harder just makes you explain it more confidently in the same language they already don't understand. So how do you actually fix it? You find one real person. Not a crowd. One human being who is smart but lives outside your little world. You hand them your writing and you watch their face while they read it. Not the page. Their face. The exact second their eyes go flat and confused is the exact spot your writing broke. Pinker did this with his own mother. Not because she wasn't sharp. She was. But she wasn't a language scientist, so the moment he drifted into his private vocabulary, she'd get lost, and he'd know instantly. I sat with that for a while, because I've been doing the opposite my whole life. When someone didn't get what I wrote, I assumed they weren't paying attention. Turns out I was the one who couldn't see the hole. I'd filled it so long ago I forgot it was ever there. That's the trap. The better you know your subject, the worse you get at teaching it, and you can't feel yourself getting worse. It feels like clarity the entire time you're losing people. Which means the smartest person in the room is often the hardest one to learn from. Not because they're hiding anything. Because they genuinely can't remember what it's like to not already know. The cure isn't a bigger brain. It's borrowing someone else's for one uncomfortable minute. Find one person outside your world. Show them what you wrote. Watch their face, not the page. Everything they don't understand is the part you were too close to see.
5
4
1
91
2,440
The Free State movement is for libertarians who can do math. (To a CA resident explaining to me that they were going to have their own "Free State Project" in California:
1
1
23
410
Very brave to protect humanity from dangerous, unregulated mathematics. We wouldn’t want theorems released to the ignorant masses without first obtaining an imprimatur from the Guild of Mathematicians.
We’re working with an independent advisory group of mathematicians to help OpenAI responsibly share advances in AI and mathematics. The group will advise on how we assess and communicate new mathematical results, uphold academic and professional standards, and build tools that support mathematical research and learning. Through this work, we want mathematicians to be at the center of shaping how AI supports mathematical understanding and how its benefits reach the wider community. openai.com/index/advisory-gr…
35
98
8
1,341
29,722
They don't want you disarmed because you're dangerous. They want you disarmed because they are.
17
160
5
1,267
14,201
I've been harping on Effective Altruism (EA) a lot lately. This article explains the philosophy behind EA and why I consider it so alarming and important to stop. Look forward to my project release mapping the EA network tomorrow.
212
1,692
129
5,915
242,566
AI now appears to be visible in increased productivity growth rates.
U.S. labor productivity, 2013–2026: > Unremarkable growth for most of the 2010s > Breaks sharply higher starting 2020 > Now running 2.2% above where the old trend said we'd be The last time this happened was 1995–2004, when the internet added close to 3% a year for a full decade. Looks like we're a few years into the sequel.
14
23
1
283
31,796