AI and HBD Part Two

So we ask questions about the endgame.  Is humanity evolving towards a civilization of the type portrayed in the Culture Series?
The Culture is a symbiotic society of artificial intelligences (AIs) (Minds and drones), humanoids and other alien species who all share equal status. As mentioned above, all essential work is performed (as far as possible) by non-sentient devices, freeing sentients to do only things that they enjoy (administrative work requiring sentience is undertaken by the AIs using a bare fraction of their mental power, or by people who take on the work out of free choice). As such, the Culture is also a post-scarcity society, where technological advances ensure that no one lacks any material goods or services. As a consequence, the Culture has no need of economic constructs such as money (as is apparent when it deals with civilizations in which money is still important). The Culture rejects all forms of economics based on anything other than voluntary activity. "Money is a sign of poverty" is a common saying in the Culture.

We have a while to go before that, but it's always important to think about where we are going as a civilization.

But the important thing, is what are we looking at in the next 10 years?  The Atlantic has a fascinating profile of the realist thinker John J. Mearsheimer, as he warns:

“Whether China is democratic and deeply enmeshed in the global economy or autocratic and autarkic will have little effect on its behavior, because democracies care about security as much as non-democracies do.” Indeed, a democratic China could be more technologically innovative and economically robust, with consequently more talent and money to lavish on its military."

He then gets much more strong on the need to counter China:

Neither Wilhelmine Germany, nor imperial Japan, nor Nazi Germany, nor the Soviet Union had nearly as much latent power as the United States had during their confrontations … But if China were to become a giant Hong Kong, it would probably have somewhere on the order of four times as much latent power as the United States does, allowing China to gain a decisive military advantage over the United States. 

While I am disheartened on his dismissal of the role morality plays in international affairs, I agree with him in principle on China's potential future power. They have the average IQ.

But, even if their average IQ is a few points above ours, guess what?  Most Chinese workers are still average.  And with the recent controversies involving Foxconn treating their Chinese workers like slaves, I've begun thinking that the cost curve is going to rise, especially as the labor shortage becomes more acute as their population ages.

So, again, we ask: what does this mean?  This means, that if robots can replace Americans, why can't they replace Chinese?  With the average Chinese worker making 200$ a month in slavelike conditions, that may not be needed.  But at some point, perhaps 500$ per month wages with a labor rights board, the factory managers will decide that instead of treating their workers like machines, they should just hire machines.

So, how long will it take China to move up the value added curve?  Not sure, maybe a generation?

How long will it take AI to move up the value added curve? A decade?

Which will happen first?  The US losing to China, or mass human irrelevance in the face of smart robots?

Count me among a China skeptic, but not for the normal reasons.

I'm a China skeptic because I'm a human skeptic.  We have far more to worry about as a species than Chinese dominance. 

Will the singularity outrun HBD?

"It's just around the corner!"  I declared behind closed doors to friends in 2007.

"What?"
"Armageddon,"
I said this after Saletan published his piece on liberal creationism following Watson's remarks on Africans and IQ.  I thought that it was a short time until the curtain fell and the world would be exposed to the truth.

I was incredibly naive.  Still hoping, a few months ago, when Andrew Sullivan had his race and IQ brouhaha, I had a bit more hope, since, well, he was gay, and therefore, hopefully slightly more immune to character assassination. 

As usual, nothing, happened, the story was buried, life goes on.  10,000 children die every day due to malnutrition and preventable causes in Sub Saharan Africa and no one cares enough to truly question why.  I railed against self-important liberals eating organic this and fair trade that, oblivious to how their denial of human differences caused misery in the world.

But then after reading Friedman's recent column on automation, I'm struck by how UNIMPORTANT HBD is.

Why?  Because average no longer cuts it.

We've been agonizing about the NAMs that commit crimes, join gangs, go on welfare, etc.  But what if the problem isn't NAMs, but rather normal people?

The company “has produced a kind of souped-up iPad that lets you order and pay right at your table. The brainchild of a bunch of M.I.T. engineers, the nifty invention, known as the Presto, might be found at a restaurant near you soon.   

We're no longer talking about the 70 IQ ghetto kid who can barely read. Here we're talking about a 90ish IQ waitress, who's not breaking the law, maybe barely graduated from high school.  Her job options are dwindling.

And I still remember the article on document review lawyers (probably a 115 ish IQ job) replaced by software.

Some programs go beyond just finding documents with relevant terms at computer speeds. They can extract relevant concepts — like documents relevant to social protest in the Middle East — even in the absence of specific terms, and deduce patterns of behavior that would have eluded lawyers examining millions of documents.
“From a legal staffing viewpoint, it means that a lot of people who used to be allocated to conduct document review are no longer able to be billed out,” said Bill Herr, who as a lawyer at a major chemical company used to muster auditoriums of lawyers to read documents for weeks on end. “People get bored, people get headaches. Computers don’t.” 
The number of computer chip designers, for example, has largely stagnated because powerful software programs replace the work once done by legions of logic designers and draftsmen.
Software is also making its way into tasks that were the exclusive province of human decision makers, like loan and mortgage officers and tax accountants. 
We’re at the beginning of a 10-year period where we’re going to transition from computers that can’t understand language to a point where computers can understand quite a bit about language.

So what happens when merely average isn't good enough?  Well, this blog post sarcastically notes the inherent contradiction in what Friedman is saying: most people are average.  That's how it is, deal with it.  


I agonized over HBD, thinking the end was near.  Articles like this in the economist hint at troubling truths to emerge.

We will also identify the many genes that create physical and mental differences across populations, and we will be able to estimate when those genes arose. Some of those differences probably occurred very recently, within recorded history. Gregory Cochran and Henry Harpending argued in “The 10,000 Year Explosion” that some human groups experienced a vastly accelerated rate of evolutionary change within the past few thousand years, benefiting from the new genetic diversity created within far larger populations, and in response to the new survival, social and reproductive challenges of agriculture, cities, divisions of labour and social classes. Others did not experience these changes until the past few hundred years when they were subject to contact, colonisation and, all too often, extermination.
If the shift from GWAS to sequencing studies finds evidence of such politically awkward and morally perplexing facts, we can expect the usual range of ideological reactions, including nationalistic retro-racism from conservatives and outraged denial from blank-slate liberals. The few who really understand the genetics will gain a more enlightened, live-and-let-live recognition of the biodiversity within our extraordinary species—including a clearer view of likely comparative advantages between the world’s different economies.

Miller is a brilliant evolutionary psychologist, but I did not share his optimism.  Genocide still occurs in the world, and justification of racial hierarchies will not all of a sudden make us sing kumbaya.

But, my point is, is that if the machines are catching up to the average among us, what difference does it make? 80 IQ peasant replaced by the tractor, 100IQ factory worker replaced by a robot, a 105 IQ replaced by Siri, 115 IQ lawyer replaced by software, or a 125 IQ software chip designer.

What happens when none of us have any options?

Can truth be good and evil?

Reading this post of the Chateau:

--------------------------------------------------------
From a reader:

Wasn’t going to go out tonight, but decided a few beers were in order after watching Gingrich bullshit his way thru another debate.
Long story short…in the beer garden, overheard a tall skinny herb explaining his desire to kill himself over a woman.
Long story short, after disciplining him over giving two shits about what a woman thinks of him, took his phone, bookmarked the Chateau, and told him if he reads the articles and comments, his life will be changed in 6 months.
Peace. And thanks for all you do.

I bet the Chateau has saved more lives, literally and figuratively, than all the feminist blogs on the internet combined. A remarkable feat when you consider the exuberant hate with which this blog dispenses its very special lessons.
Prince of sex, king of love, suicide prevention hotline: Chateau Heartiste.
--------------------------------------------------------
So, the utility and helpfulness of game is illustrated -- let this AFC (or omega? I forget my pickup jargon occasionally) rise above his latest breakup, and hopefully pull himself together a few months down the line. 

Usually, most game advice is good, and helpful, like this fashion post or one of Roosh's inspirational posts, notably this one on getting out of a slump.


No matter how bad things get, all it takes is one girl, one night, to get you back on track. I don’t care how many rejections you’ve sustained beforehand, or how many dozens of girls have recently flaked on you, but that one special meeting, which you cannot predict, will pick you up and give you the confidence you need to keep getting more and better. If life is full of peaks and valleys and you’re in a deep slump, it’s just a matter of time until you get out of it, yet it’s not enough to merely go out. You can’t sit quietly in the dark corner of the bar for two hours and think you’ll be thrown a bone. You must work hard, consistency and continually, approaching and persisting every night to your maximum capability until your head hits your pillow. 

This is gold.  God knows how many fruitless nights I've gone out and given up, but end up with a SNL or solid # close based on a chance encounter.  


But, anyway, those are feel good posts.  No one is going to demand to burn Chateau at the stake for that. 

But then, we get tougher.
 
Here he posts on chicks dig jerks, but relating to the Norway massacre:
As everyday observation to those with the eyes to see demonstrates, the primary motivation is women’s love for unrepentant, rule-breaking assholes. That is the elemental, core female hindbrain algorithm that governs all other lustful dispositions and is the catalyst for her mate choice decisions.

On a similar note, Roosh posts on anger being an aphrodesiac to women:
A girl will never say that she wants a man with the temper of a black bear because that would force them to admit they’re wired to be illogical and irrational. Instead they lie to themselves until guys like me figure out their buttons and reap the benefits by being that bear. 

Or even better, don't listen to women!
I’ve come to the conclusion that you shouldn’t listen to a woman about anything. I’ve observed almost no cases where a man’s status or position has been increased from following a woman’s advice or opinions, and it’s much more likely for him to be harmed from it.

And then another one on the death of feminism:
Feminists are scared shitless of the implications of sociobiological theory, and it’s easy to see why. The whole edifice of feminism teeters on the shaky proposition that sex differences feminists find unpalatable are amenable to change (i.e., “improvement”) via government and societal intervention. If it is found that sex differences are instead hard-wired into the brain architecture through the process of millions of years of natural and sexual selection and are resistant to social reengineering schemes, then feminism as a practical ideology is utterly discredited.

But in the same post he writes:
If feminists present a theory of human behavior which explains the available evidence better than evolutionary psychology, I’ll give it its due. Of course they will not do so because they and their cohorts have nothing but lies. For example, the highly popular “stereotype threat” theory held near and dear by racial egalitarians — close cousins of feminism — has recently been proven a sham.

OOO now we're talking.

And another post is the nail in the coffin:
But egalitarians and the SWPL industrial complex know that these softening words cannot contain the horrible, unrelenting, monstrous truth that stalks every cooing syllable. IQ is FUCKING HUGELY IMPORTANT to your chance to live a happy, successful life filled with wonder and glee and gadgets and crime-free neighborhoods in a modern, technofantastical, information-highwayed, cognitively stratifying first world Western nation.
The enemies of truth know this, and that is why they tirelessly work to shut down any talk about it, and to smear and slander and shun those who would deign to lift the veil of lies for a peek underneath.

Why is this important?
Not only does it cut straight to the beating heart of equalist ideology — the predominant ideology, arguably, of the last 150 years in the West — but the ramifications of the subject under debate are huge.

I agree.  The ramifications ARE huge.  Which is why liberal Will Saletan wrote a column on this in 2007 and was subsequently crucified.  The thing is, is that he didn't write this for ego.  he wrote this because he's genuinely concerned about what happens when the house of cards on PC collapses.
It's time to prepare for the possibility that equality of intelligence, in the sense of racial averages on tests, will turn out not to be true.

Why is this so important?
Equality, hope, and brotherhood—are under scientific threat today. But this time, the threat is racial genetics, and the people struggling with it are liberals.

Evolution forced Christians to bend or break. They could insist on the Bible's literal truth and deny the facts, as Bryan did. Or they could seek a subtler account of creation and human dignity. Today, the dilemma is yours. You can try to reconcile evidence of racial differences with a more sophisticated understanding of equality and opportunity. Or you can fight the evidence and hope it doesn't break your faith.

Can we?  Can society adapt, or will we break? If we look at the history of the race and IQ controversy, we see that racism has been equated with genocide.
Psychological testing historically has been a quasi-scientific tool in the perpetuation of racism on all levels of scientific objectivity, it [testing] has provided a cesspool of intrinsically and inferentially fallacious data which inflates the egos of whites by demeaning Black people and threatens to potentiate Black genocide.

So, what am I getting at?  Many aspects of the game community are good, but if you truly take the truths that put forth for real, then we must keep going down the rabbit hole and arrive at the race problem.  How we deal with it will define out generation.

And if you think it's going to be easy, I leave you with this:

The comments are illuminating.

How forgiving will we be when we realize that not only were we lied to regarding women and men, but also about the fundamental value underlying our society: equality?

Islam and Democracy II

Following up on secular blood's comment on my previous post,

Considering that you read Half Sigma (that is how I got here), you obviously believe in HBD (or aren't extremely offended by it). Knowing what we know about HBD, it seems pretty obvious that Islam is incompatible with democracy.

It isn't Islam itself, but the people who subscribe to it that are the problem. It would be like observing the violence in Mexico, and the fact that they are predominately Catholic, and concluding that peace is incompatible with Catholicism.

I disagree.  HBD is important, definitely, but for producing safe and productive societies, not for democracy, per se, and it's quite irrelevant when you look at whether it respects minority religious rights.

At least Bill Maher agrees with me!

So, getting to the meat of the matter, I want to look at some of Thomas Friedman's posts on the Egyptian revolution:

In this one, he is reasonably skeptical:
We believe in free and fair elections, human rights, women’s rights, minority rights, free markets, civilian control of the military, religious tolerance and the Egypt-Israel peace treaty, and we will offer assistance to anyone who respects those principles.


Which is an improvement from his earlier column:
Many said they voted for Islamists because they were neighbors, people they knew, while secular liberal candidates had never once visited. Some illiterate elderly women confided that they could not read the ballot and just voted where their kids told them to. But practically all of them said they had voted for the Muslim Brotherhood or Salafist candidates because they expected them to deliver better, more honest government — not more mosques or liquor bans. 

Bullshit:
Just look at the numbers - EGYPTIAN PEOPLE HAVE BACKWARDS BELIEFS

In Egypt, 82 percent want stoning for those who commit adultery; 77 percent would like to see whippings and hands cut off for robbery; and 84 percent favor the death penalty for any Muslim who changes his religion.


I'm NOT OPTIMISTIC!
They hate gays
Homosexuality is so detested in Egypt that the country's largest rights group says it cannot campaign against persecution of gay men despite international concern. 

Copts are scared

This is not going to turn out well, people.

The only saving grace? They're not going to have enough money to sponsor terrorism, at least.

Why?  The Egyptian economy is collapsing.

But how are we supposed to solve it?  There is no long term fix to the economy.  It has been far too dependent on Western aid and tourism for too long. Poverty is endemic.

Mubarak's legacy is a country of 80 million in which one fifth of the population struggles by with $2 a day, many of them working in a huge parallel economy where job security is absent.

How are you going to solve this?  You can't.  The IQ and PISA scores simply aren't there.  They have no major resources to rely on.  Ahead is simply abyss. Will Western governments have the stomach to bail out Egypt's government?  And once they run out of cash, what happens? How are you going to compete with China?

With any other country, I'm not as worried. Bangladesh is in a similar hopeless situation, as well as a good chunk of central america and sub saharan africa, and probably indonesia too (but they still have a bit of growing before they hit their limit). 

The difference, of course, is that Egypt is next to Israel.  

Islam and Democracy

Awakening yesterday to the news of the Boko Haram bombing in Nigeria, which left more than 150 people dead, I'm tempted to hope that the twilight of Islam apologists is upon us.

In typical liberal conversations, some conservative strawman says something along the lines of "Islam and democracy are incompatible," and is promptly confronted by Turkey, Malaysia, and Indonesia as examples of "good democratic Islamic countries."  Not so fast:

Turkey:
They are censoring
Still unwilling to admit their role in the Armenian genocide
Supporting the flotilla against Israel, Hamas, and Iran
It is still difficult for religious minorities


There were reports that local officials harassed persons who converted from Islam to another religion when they sought to amend their identity cards. Some non-Muslims maintained that listing their religious affiliation on the cards exposed them to discrimination and harassment.

Turkey continues to repress the Kurdish people.

So yeah.  Turkey: Model Democracy? Far from it. Not to mention that they dump their low IQ population on Germany, but I find that amusing. 


Now, on to the next Islamic paradise: Indonesia
First of all, you may have heard about the atheist who was sentenced to five years behind bars for saying God does not exist.

Or that Aceh implemented death by stoning for adultery

Secular Paradise?  I think not.

And Finally Malaysia
Continuing repression
“The Malaysian authorities’ crushing of Bersih’s peaceful march showed the government’s true face as an entrenched power willing to run roughshod over basic rights to maintain control.


It is difficult to convert out of Islam
 In April 2000, the state of Perlis passed a sharia law subjecting Islamic "deviants" and apostates to 1 year of "rehabilitation" (under the Constitution, religion, including sharia law, is a state matter). Leaders of the opposition Islamic party, PAS, have stated the penalty for apostasy — after the apostates are given a period of time to repent and they do not repent — is death.
Many Muslims who have converted to Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism and other religions lead "double lives", hiding their new faith from friends and family.^[14][15]


Many in the West are cheering the release of Anwar Ibrahim.

But the greater question is: why are there even sodomy laws on the books? Why are gay rights not recognized in Malaysia?

And they're not even willing to promote condoms to stop the flow of AIDS:
In 2007, Malaysia's Ministry of Health was banned from advocating the use of condoms to prevent the spread of the disease due to a concern that such a campaign would be equated with a governmental endorsement of sexual conduct outside of a legal marriage.^[17]

Model Democracy?  I think not. 

^{Even India has issues, and they're not even a Muslim country, though they're usually praised for the lack of extremism among their Muslims, attributed to their open system.  Well, guess what?  Salman Rushdie can't even travel there due to death threats.  So, not quite the bastion of tolerance (among the Muslims) that Fareed Zakaria would have us believe.} 

^{So, is Islam compatible with democracy?  Perhaps, but not a democracy that respects the human rights of all.}  

The naive game blogger

So, Roosh has a new post on feminism

Quick—name a female scientist besides Marie Curie. Name a female artist during the Renaissance. Name a famous female architect or Nobel Prize winner. Women have been quiet in the history of the world not because of male privilege, but because they’re not designed to achieve. The advantage that nature has given them concerns solely their appearance.

Now, substitute your favorite NAM ethnic group of choice and see what we come up with.  Is Roosh really advocating going down that path?

Men of the past have found it much easier at becoming skilled at a specific trade and earning money in order to land a wife than to compete with women in the game arena. But when having a good job is no longer sufficient, like it is today, the arduous process of becoming competent at game must be undertaken. The demand for game advice has become so great that it has spawned its own industry in several countries, the first time that has happened in world history.

Now, this fact, which of course Roosh won't mention, is not universal to all species.  J. Phillipe Rushton devoted an entire book to mating differences between the races.  The taboo truth, which the "game," community and the "manosphere," are loathe to admit, is that mating patterns now are simply resorting to mating patterns which existed in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Now, one quote Roosh made which I think deserves even more attention is this:

There is a reason why a woman’s vagina was locked up and guarded in ancient times until marriage: she could not be trusted with her sexual choices. Look at a modern woman’s sexual behavior and ask yourself who is gaining from her promiscuity. Alpha men are gaining.

Funny, true, and absolutely devastating to the modern feminist.  Roissy has a post today about it

Police records are practically neon signs flashing ALPHA MALE over your head. A little taste of the ol’ ultracriminality — just a wee bit, mind you, guv’nor — is crotchnip to maximally fertile women from all socioeconomic stratum. The bleatings of the femcunt and limpwrist brigades to the contrary notwithstanding, bad boys are attractive to emotionally stable girls, and *especially* to emotionally stable, professional yuppie chicks who are surrounded on a daily basis by mincing beta herbs with balls crafted from tofu.

Sad, but true.  But, then question I ask from here is: what next?  Feminism and the explosion of interracial dating are intertwined, with black men benefiting from interracial dating, while the traditional "beta," asian men, getting completely screwed.  One cannot talk about the feminist affect on American society and ignore the racial aspects.  Or I guess they could, since Europe is another example of it happening. 

RIP Idealism

So, John Huntsman is dropping out of the GOP race

This is a painful moment for me.  He was, without question, the BEST candidate out there for the GOP nomination.

Let's look at the key issues:

 Not willing to let Iran get a nuke

Keystone is only one of many steps needed, including alternative energy

He believes in breaking up the banks to prevent them from gaining too much power

He believes in evolution! And climate change!  Is it really so bad to believe in science?

Country above Politics

Simplify the tax code

His adopted daughters from India and China would make fantastic PR.  

Against the surveillance state and torture, and indefinite detention. 


This is a sad moment in American Politics.  Hopefully the empty suit's moderate side will come out soon.

The Siri Chronicles, Part I

So, does the learning computer of Siri represent something that can attain self-awareness?  I'm not holding my breath, but there's some fun answers.

Siri, what is the purpose of life?
42

Siri, where were you manufactured?
That's classified.

Siri, when were you manufactured?
I'm not allowed to answer that question.

Siri does God exist?
I'm really not equipped to answer such questions.

Siri do you speak Spanish?
I speak English, French, and German...so far

More to follow.  As opposed to the cute answers, I think the voice recognition is the most impressive aspect of the technology.  Add in the ability to translate, and we have the precursor of an on the spot, learning, instant voice translator.  Not bad...

Welcome to the blog

Hi.  Welcome to the House of Cards.  Basically, what I'm going to be trying to do is hammer home some basic truths about issues that our society faces.  Some things to let you know, off the bat, so you know where I'm coming from:

1) I'm pro-American.  I'm going to blog a bit about flaws in the US political system.  But I still believe that US is the best hope for humanity moving forward.  I think the founders were geniuses, and that we should aspire to remain the city upon the hill.

2) I believe in HBD, or Human Bio-Diversity.  Because humanity has been separated for tens of thousands of years, different traits evolved in different frequencies in different ethnic groups.  These traits are genetic.  Many of these differences are behavioral, and, unfortunately, in the field of intelligence.

on that evolutionary psych note...

3) I'm a "community guy," I've followed the pickup movement, and can attest to game working, in a general sense.  I'm even more fascinated by what game means for feminism and male female equality and psychology.  The collapse of traditional dating norms is hugely important to civilization.

on another evo psych note

4) While I'm a capitalist, I loathe and detest advertisers.  Consumerism is an important topic that the HBD and pickup community need to address more. 

On that note, I am a frequent visitor of the "travel and pickup" blogs such as Roosh, G Manifesto, Roissy, etc.  But I think the former are deeply flawed in their rejection of American norms.  They are essentially freeriding on civilization while doing little to contribute to its stability and continuity.  Their ambivalence in the face of American (supposed) decline is dangerously naive.

5) I'm a singularitarian, or transhumanist.  The increasing interconnectedness of humanity, in addition  to the rise of artificial intelligence, is changing humanity, and will continue to change humanity. 

              I may blog a bit about aliens and scifi.  It's not that relevant often, but fun to think about. 

6) I'm green. A bit.  I believe strongly in animal rights, that respect of the right to life should be predicated on sentience, not species membership.  I think that we should respect Planet Earth, not overly pollute it or plunder its resources.  And I think that if we target the most wasteful forms of consumption, we can achieve that.

7) I may touch on spirituality here or there. I think that there may be something out there in terms of a transcendent force.  However, monotheistic religions, especially Islam, have appallingly twisted man's search for meaning into a reason to hate. 

This blog is about exploring important ideas, engaging with other bloggers, trying to figure out how it all fits together in an increasingly complicated world.  Unless someone is a bot or making personal attacks, or mass spamming/commenting,  I will never censor a comment just because I disagree with it.  After all, that's what this is all about -   

This will be an interesting year.