Published in May 2021, Myths and misconceptions in the debate on Russia debunks 16 myths:
  1. Russia and the West are as "bad" as each other
  2. Russia and the West want the same thing
  3. Russia was promised that NATO would not enlarge
  4. Russia is not in a conflict with the West
  5. We need a new pan-European security architecture that includes Russia
  6. We must improve the relationship with Russia, even without Russian concessions, as it is too important
  7. Russia is entitled to a defensive perimeter - a sphere of "privileged interests" including the territory of other states
  8. We must drive a wedge between Russia and China to impede their ability to act in tandem against Western interests
  9. The West's relations with Russia must be normalized in order to counter the rise of China
  10. The Eurasian Economic Union is a genuine and meaningful counterpart to the EU
  11. The peoples of Ukraine, Belarus and Russia are one nation
  12. Crimea was always Russian
  13. Liberal market reform in the 1990s was bad for Russia
  14. Sanctions are the wrong approach
  15. It's all about Putin - Russia is a manually run, centralized autocracy
  16. What comes after Putin must be better than Putin
and makes 10 policy recommendations:
  1. Adopt strategies based on an honest appraisal of the evidence of Russia's capabilities, intentions and actions.
  2. Remember that the Kremlin is not the West's friend.
  3. Do not accommodate or appease Russia in return for assumed benefits. These will not materialize!
  4. Expect to be disappointed by Russia!
  5. Don't give up. Keep the pressure on Russia!
  6. Accept that an unfriendly relationship with Russia is appropriate at present and dictated by the realities we face.
  7. Place security above economic gains.
  8. Resist the temptation to compromise interests and values in pursuit of cooperation.
  9. Expect noisy, angry and vituperative responses from Moscow.
  10. Build expertise.
Well worth a read.
И опять про Свинство как часть культуры:

Иностранец (эстонец/японец) спрашивает дорогу у местного в России (Питер/Москва) по-русски, а в ответ получает хамство на его собственном языке (эстонском/японском).

Обе истории популярны: 2е и 1е места за день.

Personally, I would prefer unbridled Free Speech, no censorship whatsoever.

However, I admit that many people prefer a more sanitized environment, and their preferences should be respected.

The question arises: what is hate speech?

E.g., is this a scientific statement or hate speech:

There are two biological sexes: male and female

Right now the decision is made by largely anonymous and very politically homogeneous (ahem) "fact checkers", or, worse yet, by some "AI".

Proposal: when a post is reported as "hate speech", it is displayed with a "hate speech suspected" button, and anyone can click "yes" or "no" depending on whether they consider this "HS" or not.

The result would be a "HS" score (based on Wilson score confidence interval).

(Optionally: When the score goes down below 10%, the button disappears and is only shown to users who try to report the post as HS).

Squeamish users can define a threshold, and they will not see posts with HS score above it.

However, no matter what the HS score of the post it, it is never deleted (except by the owner).

Finally researchers are speaking up. The Royal Society published a report on what it calls the "online information environment"...

Most non-fiction books have endnotes instead of footnotes (e.g., 1, 2, 3 - but not 4).
Why?
Footnotes are much more convenient for readers and cost next to nothing to publishers.
Most notes are small, so footnotes will not damage the aesthetics of formatting.
Ever since LaTeX (i.e., for almost 40 years!) footnote placement has been automated.
Even before that, footnotes (and side notes!) were common, just look at the Talmud.
So, why do I have to flip to the end of the book every few paragraphs?!

Многие научно-популярные книги помещают сноски в конце книги, а не внизу страницы ("подстрочные примечания").
Читателю, очевидно, удобнее второе (не приходится постоянно перелистывать книгу), и это давно признали издатели (см., например, Виленское издание Талмуда).
Так почему же мы сейчас должны мучаться?
В дополнение к Свинство как часть культуры: Идентичная история (не копи-паста!) рассказана дважды на анекдот.ру:
  1. 778 очков, 2е место: нам поднасрали, но мы не обиделись
  2. 1656 очков, 1е место: нам поднасрали, и мы передали дальше
Есть, конечно, и альтернативные истории про "pass it on", но популярность истории (и бОльшая популярность более свинского варианта) и её повтор огорчают...

Both English and Russian have just one word for Knowledge: to know/знать. All other terms, like familiarity/знакомство, convey connotations that can also be expressed by the main word, possibly with an adverb.

However, in French and Hebrew, there are two words for knowledge, and the difference between them appears to be identical:

savoir/לָדַעַת
to know something one has learned, and never a human being (outside of the biblical context)
connaître/להכיר
to know about something or someone by having met them

What about other languages?

PS. Apparently, Spanish is like French...
Summary:

  1. Hominid brains were getting bigger, but around 70kyo they plateaued, and have been shrinking ever since. Over the last 20k years, human brains have shrunk from 1,500 cubic centimeters (cc) to 1,350 cc.

  2. The encephalization quotient, EQ, is the proportion of brain size to body size.
    (The more muscles one has, the more brain one needs to control them).
    Human 7.4, dolphin 5.6, whales 2.9.
    Brain shrinkage moving much faster than our body shrinkage.

  3. Human brain uses around 25% of the energy but accounts for only 2-3% of body weight

  4. Synaptic pruning is the process of synapse elimination that occurs from the time one is born until mid 20’s.

  5. Idiocracy: As population density increases, humans don’t have to be as smart to stay alive because they can rely on other people to support and protect them.

  6. Dysgenic pressure: education and birth rate are inversely related

  7. Domestication: domesticated animals have a brain 10-15% smaller than its wild ancestors.
PsyArXiv 20th Oct 2021:

We investigated sex differences in 473,260 adolescents’ aspirations to work in things-oriented (e.g., mechanic), people-oriented (e.g., nurse), and STEM (e.g., mathematician) careers across 80 countries ... In each country and region, more boys than girls aspired to a things-oriented or STEM occupation and more girls than boys to a people-oriented occupation. These sex differences were larger in countries with a higher level of women's empowerment. We explain this counter-intuitive finding through the indirect effect of wealth. Women's empowerment is associated with relatively high levels of national wealth and this wealth allows more students to aspire to occupations they are intrinsically interested in.
  • Netflix has 6-7k movies, series, and shows

  • Amazon has 24k movies and 2.1k shows to choose from

  • Average person watches TV ~ 3.5h per day

  • 400 hours of video are uploaded to YouTube every minute worldwide

  • Average household has three streaming services (according to Likewise Inc.)

  • 70% agree they often struggle to figure out what to watch

  • Viewers need more than 15 mins trying to decide what to watch

Trusted AI

Oct. 4th, 2021 03:11 pm
AI is very useful but people often don't trust it.

The scientific establishment thinks (or claims to think) that the problem is with explainablity (or interpretability): AI is often a "black box" and cannot explain its actions. IMO, this is "looking where the light is, not where the keys were dropped".

The political establishment claims that the problem is that AI actions often contradict the official ideology. E.g., women often receive recommendation to watch "knitting" videos while men get "robotics" (even when the AI does not know the customer's sex - because the customer liked "cooking" or "engineering" before). The "liberal" establishment calls that "gender discrimination".

Personally, I don't trust AI because it's a tool that is not working for me, i.e., I neither own nor control it. E.g., Google Assistance will recommend a product that promotes Google revenue, not my well being. Even more sinister, the AI can be updated remotely, so today it will take care of me and tomorrow it will try to sabotage me.
The last ~300 years ("the (pre-)modern period") is characterized by two major interconnected ideas:
  1. Freedom of Speech
  2. Scientific Method

Free exchange of ideas is fruitless without a method to determine which ideas work and which do not.
Advancement of science is impossible in isolation, without free conversation it withers away.
What we see today in the West is a Replication crisis in science (one of the sources is incomplete publication - not including raw data in published works) and a Believe in Science meme (especially beloved by those who deny basic biology and statistics) paired with suppression of dissent on social media (FB & Twitter) and web search where most people get (mis)informed.
The net result is that science is being transformed from a method to acquire knowledge to a religion/ideology used to justify government power grab.
I wonder is this is a permanent transformation of just a temporary aberration...
aphar: (lambda)
We have a monopoly in each social media domain: social networking (Facebook), microblogging (Twitter), videos (Youtube).
This is bad because the monopolies control the information flow and censor it under the guise of "filtering disinformation".
Fortunately, there is a way to deal with them - distributed (AKA federated) social networks. Essentially, there are many servers (A, B, &c) and different users (X, Y, &c) on each server, and user "X@A" can "befriend" user "Y@B" and receive their content transparently, so that if user "Y@B" moves to server "C", the latter imports all Y's data from B and notifies A that X should now get their Y's feed from C instead of B.
The technology is quite mature (10+ years old).
It will essentially revert the current monopoly-dominated environment back to the world where there were hundreds of newspapers - if you don't like your server's censorship, just switch the server!
All the government has to do is to ban a single entity from managing more than, say, 100k users, if they manage content in any way whatsoever (e.g., reorder the feed or "suppress misinformation").
Since ad-based income is proportional to the number of users, only smaller, "boutique" servers will engage in censorship.

Check out Unstoppable Freedom of Speech!

German FTW

Apr. 8th, 2021 05:43 pm
Schadenfreude (finding joy in someone else's misfortune) has no good English translation (but an exact Russian one - злорадство).
Verschlimmbessern (making something worse while trying to improve it) has neither English nor Russian translation.
aphar: (lambda)
Claim: Jews eat matzo with human blood (Blood libel)
Explanation: 3 pages on the importance of eating matzo on Passover; the "blood" part is "unsubstantiated".
Verdict: Mostly True (Jews do eat matzos!)

Claim: Arab/Palestinian media routinely call for murder of Jews
Explanation: Cut-outs from classified ads sections of Arab/Palestinian newspapers with translations - no mention of Jews
Verdict: False
Page generated Feb. 24th, 2026 07:43 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios