Want to wade into the sandy surf of the abyss? Have a sneer percolating in your system but not enough time/energy to make a whole post about it? Go forth and be mid: Welcome to the Stubsack, your first port of call for learning fresh Awful you’ll near-instantly regret.
Any awful.systems sub may be subsneered in this subthread, techtakes or no.
If your sneer seems higher quality than you thought, feel free to cut’n’paste it into its own post — there’s no quota for posting and the bar really isn’t that high.
The post Xitter web has spawned soo many “esoteric” right wing freaks, but there’s no appropriate sneer-space for them. I’m talking redscare-ish, reality challenged “culture critics” who write about everything but understand nothing. I’m talking about reply-guys who make the same 6 tweets about the same 3 subjects. They’re inescapable at this point, yet I don’t see them mocked (as much as they should be)
Like, there was one dude a while back who insisted that women couldn’t be surgeons because they didn’t believe in the moon or in stars? I think each and every one of these guys is uniquely fucked up and if I can’t escape them, I would love to sneer at them.
(Credit and/or blame to David Gerard for starting this.)
Maybe if you’re a scrub. 19 minutes baby!!! And that included the minute or so that I thought about copypasting it into a text editor so I could highlight portions to sneer at. Best part of this story is that it is chess themed and takes place in “Skewers”, Washington, vs. “Forks”, Washington, as made famous by Twilight.
Anyway, what a pile of shit. I choose not to read Yud’s stuff most of the time, but I felt that I might do this one. What do you get if you mix smashboards, goofus and gallant strips, that copypasta about needing a high IQ to like rick and morty, and the worst aspects of woody allen? This!
My summary:
Part 1. A chess player, “Mr. Humman”, plays a match against “Mr. Assi” and loses. He has a conversation with a romantic interest, “Socratessa”, or Tessa for short, about whether or not you can say if someone is better than another in chess. Often cited examples of other players are “Mr. Chimzee” and “Mr. Neumann”.
Both “Humman” and “Socratessa” are strawmen. “Socratessa” is described as thus:
Humman, of course, talks down to her, like so:
I hate to give credit to Yud here for anything, so here’s what I’ll say: This characterisation of Humman is so douchey that it’s completely transparent that Yud doesn’t want you to like this guy. Yud’s methodology was to have Humman make strawman-level arguments and portray him as kind of a creep. However, I think what actually happened is that Yud has accidentally replicated arguments/johns you might hear from a smash scrub about why they are not a scrub, but are actually a good player, just with a veneer of chess. So I don’t like this character, but not because of Yud’s intent.
Socratessa (Tessa for short) is, as gerikson points out, is a Socratic strawman. That’s it. It’s unclear why Yud describes her as either a troll or pretty. He should have just said she was gallant.* She argues that Elo ratings exist and are good enough at predicting whether one player will beat another. Of course, Humman disagrees, and as the goofus, must be wrong.*
The story should end here, as it has fulfilled its mission as an obvious analog to Yud’s whole thing about whether or not you can measure intelligence or say someone is smarter than another.
Part 2. Humman and Socratessa argue about whether or not you can measure intelligence or say someone is smarter than another.
E: if you were wondering, yes, there is eugenics in the story.
E2: forgot to tie up some allusions, specifically the g&g of it all. Marked added sentences with a *.
I hope Yud doesn’t mind if I borrow Mr. Assi for my upcoming epic crossover fic, “Naruto and Batman Stop the Poo-Pocalypse”
Wait a minute, what do you mean, it’s not supposed to be that kind of ass?
Yeah, after establishing a deeply tortured chess metaphor and beating it to death and beyond, Yud proceeds to just straight-up bitching about how nobody is taking his book seriously. It just fucking keeps going even as it dips into the most pathetic and hateful eugenics part of their whole ideology because of course it does.
“Outsiders aren’t agreeing with me. I must return to the cult and torture my flock with more sermons.” type shit
Yes, the bit about John von Neumann sounds like he is stuck in the 1990s: “there must be a gene for everything!” not today “wow genomes are vast interconnected systems and individual genes get turned on and off by environmental factors and interventions often have the reverse effect we expect.” Scott Alexander wrote an essay admiring the Hungarian physics geniuses and tutoring.
yud’s scientific model is aristotlean, i.e. he thinks of things he thinks should be true, then rejects counter-evidence with a bayesian cudgel or claims of academic conspiracy. So yeah genes are feature flags, why wouldnt they be (and eugenics is just SRE ig)
Meanwhile he objects to people theorycrafting objections (Tessa’s dialogue about the midwit trap and an article for the Cato Institute called “Is that your true rejection?”) That is an issue in casual conversations, but professionals work through these possibilities in detail and make a case that they can be overcome. Those cases often include past experience completing similar projects as well as theory. A very important part of becoming a professional is learning to spot “that requires a perpetual motion machine,” “that implies P = NP,” “that requires assuming that the sources we have are a random sample of what once existed” and not getting lost in the details; another is becoming part of a community of practitioners who criticize each other.
and don’t even get me started on splice variants