Astral Codex Ten Podcast

Dive into intriguing societal experiments that juxtapose historical killers with modern public transit initiatives. Explore the provocative blend of AI in job applications and its ethical implications on political commentary. Reflect on Elon Musk’s controversial online persona and the consequences of government spending cuts on public services. Delve into emotional reactions to democracy and innovative solutions for societal challenges. Lastly, dissect trends in deforestation and the media's portrayal of environmental issues.

Conflict theory is the belief that political disagreements come from material conflict. So for example, if rich people support capitalism, and poor people support socialism, this isn’t because one side doesn’t understand economics. It’s because rich people correctly believe capitalism is good for the rich, and poor people correctly believe socialism is good for the poor. Or if white people are racist, it’s not because they have some kind of mistaken stereotypes that need to be corrected - it’s because they correctly believe racism is good for white people. Some people comment on my more political posts claiming that they’re useless. You can’t (they say) produce change by teaching people Economics 101 or the equivalent. Conflict theorists understand that nobody ever disagreed about Economics 101. Instead you should try to organize and galvanize your side, so they can win the conflict. I think simple versions of conflict theory are clearly wrong. This doesn’t mean that simple versions of mistake theory (the idea that people disagree because of reasoning errors, like not understanding Economics 101) are automatically right. But it gives some leeway for thinking harder about how reasoning errors and other kinds of error interact. https://readscottalexander.com/posts/acx-why-i-am-not-a-conflict-theorist 

[Original thread here: Tegmark’s Mathematical Universe Defeats Most Arguments For God’s Existence.] 1: Comments On Specific Technical Points 2: Comments From Bentham’s Bulldog’s Response 3: Comments On Philosophical Points, And Getting In Fights https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/highlights-from-the-comments-on-tegmarks

Explore the compelling tales of rationalist saints like St. Felix, who faced execution for his beliefs about COVID's origins, demonstrating unwavering integrity. Delight in whimsical stories of AI saints navigating philosophical dilemmas, blending humor with ethics. Witness wit and strategy as St. Michael uses probability to outsmart adversaries, while St. Avi chooses meaningful contributions over power, challenging temptations. These narratives highlight the tension between truth, societal pressures, and the sacrifices made for knowledge.

It feels like 2010 again - the bloggers are debating the proofs for the existence of God. I found these much less interesting after learning about Max Tegmark’s mathematical universe hypothesis, and this doesn’t seem to have reached the Substack debate yet, so I’ll put it out there. Tegmark’s hypothesis says: all possible mathematical objects exist. Consider a mathematical object like a cellular automaton - a set of simple rules that creates complex behavior. The most famous is Conway’s Game of Life; the second most famous is the universe. After all, the universe is a starting condition (the Big Bang) and a set of simple rules determining how the starting condition evolves over time (the laws of physics). Some mathematical objects contain conscious observers. Conway’s Life might be like this: it’s Turing complete, so if a computer can be conscious then you can get consciousness in Life. If you built a supercomputer and had it run the version of Life with the conscious being, then you would be “simulating” the being, and bringing it into existence. There would be something it was like to be that being; it would have thoughts and experiences and so on. https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/tegmarks-mathematical-universe-defeats

A recent analysis of a federal grant database uncovers that only 40% of projects are truly 'woke,' challenging common assumptions. Topics include the unintended political implications of scientific funding and the ongoing need for rigorous standards in rapidly evolving fields like neurotechnology. The focus also shifts to the balance between advancing scientific innovation and promoting inclusivity, while advocating for research quality over political narratives. Overall, it questions the government's ability to differentiate between valuable research and perceived 'woke' initiatives.

The discussion dives into the challenges of aligning AI with human values, emphasizing the need for moral reflection during training. It highlights the bizarre luck of OpenAI's alignment teams, with tales of mass resignations and tragic events. The conversation also explores the complexities of enhancing AI reasoning to improve understanding of human decisions. Finally, it navigates the future of AI alignment and governance, questioning how varying specifications will impact AI's role in society.

The podcast dives into the emerging health policies under Trump, spotlighting the innovative efforts from 1DaySooner. It discusses groundbreaking ideas like compensating organ donors to tackle kidney shortages, backed by inspiring personal stories. The conversation also covers transformative proposals such as enhancing air quality and improving FDA transparency. With a focus on fostering longevity through data-driven strategies, this discussion paints an ambitious picture of potential health reforms.

The discussion highlights PEPFAR’s remarkable success in providing AIDS drugs to Africa, saving millions of lives. Ethical dilemmas arise about prioritizing aid for Americans versus foreigners. Listeners are prompted to ponder if canceling such programs leads to better domestic alternatives. The complexities of budget allocation are unpacked, revealing the bureaucratic challenges that hinder effective fund reallocation. Ultimately, it addresses the paradox of government spending, questioning whether canceling the best programs truly leads to better outcomes.

A major ruling by the Honduras Supreme Court has declared charter cities, including Prospera, unconstitutional, highlighting a shift in political power from conservatives to socialists. The podcast delves into the implications for existing urban developments and investor sentiments in biotech and tourism. Additionally, it explores innovative ideas for creating new cities on federal lands, such as potential sites in San Francisco and Guantanamo Bay. Local opposition to housing projects in California contrasts sharply with bold international initiatives, like Bhutan's charter city proposal.