EVERYBODY IS DOING SOMETHING

Is this the same guy who wrote the Harry Potter Rationalism fan-fic and started the ai worshipping cult?

yeah all while ~~being a high school dropout~~ he never went to high school
- wasn't he entirely homeschooled
from my understanding, the ai cult initially sprang up on the forum he hosted (hosts? idk), but he didn't exactly start it, any more than Queen Elizabeth II invented punk rock.
but he did write the fanfic, and it's honestly pretty good. low bar i know, but dude's a better author than jowling ever was, and i definitely recommend it to anyone into HP fanfics.
- People are always praising that fanfic for some reason so I tried reading it a while back. If it's the one I'm thinking of then hard disagree, the protagonist is a self-insert Mary Sue clearly written by a kid who thinks they're the smartest person alive. One part that still sticks in my mind years later is their fundamental misunderstanding of how fiat currency works, it was some ridiculous get-rich-quick scheme like melting down wizard currency into pure gold to sell to non-wizard community then using that money to buy silver which they'd trade up to magic society gold coins. It was some years ago so I may be misremembering the details, but there should be a ton of issues that immediately jump out to you there.
  I trudged through and got as far as the first meeting with Malfoy where the author realized they were being too friendly with each other, but since Malfoy is supposed to be a bad guy they decided he should randomly blurt out something about how he wants to rape some girl.
  Maybe it's just because I don't have the context of other bad fanfics, but that's a solid 0/10 from me.
- Counterpoint: https://danluu.com/su3su2u1/hpmor/
- Possibly the only thing more annoying than Yudkowsky are the anonymous online people who think they figured him out. Many of them are in these threads.
  https://hpmor.com/ for anyone else with delusions of literary grandeur.
that ai cult also doubles as a get smart quick scheme

Sugar manufacturers lobbied for fats to take the blame for all of the serious health issues people have had in the last 60 years

I know in my case, cutting sugar and simple carbs has done more than cutting fats.

This reads more like an anti-science meme. Things are complex, if you don't understand them fine, but keeping yourself deliberately ignorant isn't going to stop reality from being reality.

It is, this guy is a known fraud and all-round bad dude
- I literally thought this was a parody/sarcasm when I posted it lmfao.
- By who?
  Everything I've heard about big yud is that he's a bit of a douchebag with a cult of personality. Never heard he's anti science, or that he's done anything wrong.
this is borderline.
there's a point where we can argue that the US has shit standards for food safety. and there's arguing that chemicals names are scary.
plus, he's a bit of a weirdo with the Rocco's Basilisk and his weird harry potter fanfiction
- i assure you, there is much weirder harry potter fanfiction out there. i once read a Hogwarts Castle/Giant Squid smut fic.
  Also, pretty sure a fellow named Roko came up with the basilisk, not Yudkowsky.
Maybe he's got a finer point, but it actually just looks like an argument against categorization. It's like saying I don't trust math about "triangles" or "scalene triangles" or "rhombuses" when you find out about the special properties of the equilateral triangle or the square.
The fact that there are differences between elements of a category does not eliminate the utility of the commonalities shared by elements of a category. It does limit that utility, yes.
For example, just because you are getting plenty of protein, if you somehow completely avoid one of the amino acids that the human body uses but can't synthesize, then eventually you will have some fairly specific health problems. That's not strong evidence that it's worth micromanaging your macronutrients by tracking your intake of all amino acids individually. (It might be; I haven't seen it studies either way.)
Maybe I'm missing some context, but I also get the "anti-science" vibe from the image.
- I think it's a shit post about how he's been reading into the science and it is just way more complicated than what most people talk about.

Downvoted for Yud. Ice this clown out.

this sounds like the kinda thing that I (uneducated in this topic) would go "heh.. yeah.." and upvote not understanding the joke

then I open comments and it's actually about tossing toddlers into a volcano and I am immediately sentenced with the guilt of upvoting a meme about child volcano sacrifice and I have to come to terms about how I am a horrible person who will blindly follow someones agenda because they were using big words and I am actually incredibly foolish and don't deserve an opinion about anything ever..

or it's just an extremely nerdy joke that nobody really understands but upvotes anyways

Same.
I was like oh it makes sense that there would be different types of protein. Here I go into the comments to increase the fidelity of my mental model! rofl guess not
no you were right the first time

This guy should learn to view science more like a constructivist. Pretty much everything in science is just something we made up that mostly aligns with the natural world, and just because one model is less accurate than another does not mean it's no longer useful.

We didn't abandon Newtonion physics when Einstein's model was accepted for instance, since Newtonian physics is still very useful, and much easier to use compared to others.

Edit: changed language from 'proven' to 'accepted'.

We didn’t abandon Newtonion physics when we accepted Einstein’s model ~~was proven~~
- Well did I miss hearing that someone has proven Einstein?
- That's fair. Language changed for accuracy.
I wasn't familiar with the term, but I always (until this moment) assumed that everybody viewed science that way.
- The amount of people who think that scientists don't understand how bees fly is evidence that most people don't have this world view. As if someone would see a bee flying, not only having been around for eons, but a very common creature most people are familiar with, would just throw their hands up and say "WHOA! THIS VIOLATES ALL THE LAWS OF PHYSICS! THIS SHOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE!"
- Not so. There are those that believe objectivism is the true way of viewing the world. They view that we are on the way to understanding the universe as it truly is, that human perception will not pose an obstacle to that pursuit, and that there will eventually be one true method of viewing the universe in its entirety that is yet to be discovered. Constructivist beliefs directly oppose that idea, since all science is a man-made construct that can only approximate reality in their view. Constructivism also, then, leaves room for multiple theories coexisting because they provide better utility and insights in different circumstances. In the example of Einstein's Relativity vs Newton's Physics, we are talking about an older theory and the theory which usurped it because it was more accurate, and the general expectation is that another theory will be accepted down the line which will be better than both. That expectation is fairly objectivist, since it assumes there is a true model which we just haven't discovered yet. Constructivism does not make that assumption, since the universe likely does not fit neatly into our constructions in its image.
  The other thing, is that constructivism challenges scientific realism to some extent, in that it challenges the existence of many things which we cannot directly observe, such as quarks, proteins, particles, etc... because "how can we actually confirm these things exist, when we physically can't observe them, and the things we're using to show their existence are constructs made up by us?"
  This topic is still very much in a state of debate that has very strong implications around the philosophy of how science works and how it should be conducted. That's also just talking about constructivism's implications in the physical sciences. Things get much hairier when you start looking at the social sciences, where biases and perception are extremely influential on what we discover. Constructivism directly challenges the attainability of scientific objectivity, which has serious implications across all fields of science.
I mean, it's a shit post about how nutrition science is hard and full of misinformation.

This is so ignorant lmao

this is about exactly what you can expect from a man whose approach to science is take a phenomenon -> think about it really, really hard -> just know how it works and have an answer (without checking if it's correct or not, he already thinks he figured it out and won't change opinion ever even in the face of contrary evidence)

Pictured: The creature who has promised to protect us from sentient machines not sounding like a carbon-based life form

If you eat more plants and animals and less breads and sugars you do lose weight and feel better. I’m no science guy but that does work. People over complicate this shit.

It's mostly the plants tbh, dietary fiber is frequently ignored in macro discussions but absolutely critical
- fiber is so strange because it's function is basically just to pass through you, and yet it's so vital for the digestive system to function properly
  everyone keeps saying "oh dietary supplements are just pissing away money" but fibre supplements are the one supplement most people would benefit hugely from taking, just get some psyllium husk or whatever and enter toilet nirvana
well, besides that other remark, sugars come from plants, though not all sugars are equal (ahem added sugar; fruit sugars are prolly fine)
- fruit sugars are prolly fine
  Fruits in general aren't as good for you as general thinking have them. The majority have been bred to be so exaggerated in their sugar content that, as an example, you can't feed pet primates fruit very often or they will get diabetes (without getting into the horrors that keeping primates as pets encompasses). You can quickly get an idea of this by searching for 'wild strawberries vs grocery strawberries.'
  The fibrous parts of fruits is good, the 'nutritional' aspects of them are decent, but the absolute black-hole-mass of sugar on the one side of the teeter-totter is a pretty big negative for them.
I no longer trust anyone who talks about “plants” or “animals”. It turns out, every single plant or animal is doing something different!
If it copies like a pasta, it’s copypasta!
This is some ignorant shit, you.
How is bread and sugar not plants?? Oversimplifying stuff doesn't make it better...
- Say whatever you want but you can’t argue with results my man.
You're over complicating this shit.
Weight loss is primarily just calories burned minus calories eaten...
(times some factor, plus/minus some constant, ignoring higher order terms, excluding exogenous variables, etc.)
- Yeah that’s a good rule too. Calories in vs calories out.
This has been my experience. I find nutritional science incredibly boring, I've tried many times to get excited about it, but I just can't seem to find an 'in' with it to make it my 2-week special interest and learn the basics properly.
At this point the bar is "if you can't explain in one sentence, written, what meal I can make for cheap in less than 1-2 min of active effort and no more than 10 min total prep/cooking time with no skills, effort or culinary knowledge that will be tasty to give me dopamine for the day and feed me for the entire day, I'm not interested".
I just eat bacon, pork sausages, eggs, and throw in some kale, spinach & watercress. I've cut out all bread, sweets, snacks and alcohol. It's probably not healthy but fuck it we all gotta go sometime. Right now though, feels great, I lost a ton of weight. Hard not to overdo it on the salt added to eggs but I keep a close eye on it.
The only negative I've noticed it as I often get hit with random low blood sugar fainting like symptoms after my 2nd-3rd coffee, later I realized I basically was consuming no sugar at all, so now I gulp down 4 red bulls a day with my elvanse for breakfast and the problem went away. MH got way better too.
For dinner I have some frozen pizza or something like that that I can make without any effort or time, but lately it's way way way too much effort to cook/eat.
Wish there was some "nutri-slop 3000" type magic pill that just gave me all nutrients I need for the day so I wouldn't have to worry about this shit.
This is all meant with no offense to nutritionists/scientists, way I see it, y'all doing god's work. Literally. If that lazy mfer bothered existing or got off his ass we wouldn't be cursed with this shit fr.
Edit: Wow what's with the downvotes? Le Reddit hivemind is upset?
- I mean, there are these "complete meal" drinks, specifically for people like you who don't really want to think about their next meal
- Homemade soylent recipes
  https://www.completefoods.co/
- You calling it elvanse makes me suspect you have access to maultaschen. Bürger vegan maultaschen (Typ 1) have macronutrients in the proportion suggested by nutritionists; taste good raw, sautéed, or in soup; cost <€2,50; and keep very well. Other varieties are possibly similar, but I don’t know if they can be eaten raw or how they keep.
  Plus, they’re a good base for taking elvanse.

go back to your harry potter fan fiction

My standard response to that kind of statement is 'Good for you. Have a cookie.'

My standard response is I would like to know more

The truth is, anything but saccharin.

Trust the overseer to do what's best for you. /s

The research is pretty consistent that Transfats are worse for your health, if only due to correlation with high processed factory made meats, though.

Japanese Buddhist curated amino acid diet for the win

i've been chugging DNA juice for 10 years and i'm just about to evolve

It's useful to talk about macros intake, but it's more important to just eat a variety of whole foods to reach those macros.

Fucking what? Is he suggesting "protien" is a social construct?

No he's suggesting he's completely confused and is going to tune out.