Source: Twitter X

  • Som of us play big boy games. Trump does. You don’t. For me he is largely predic

    Som of us play big boy games. Trump does. You don’t. For me he is largely predictable. For you he is incomprehensible.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-09 21:46:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1910086996384735260

    Reply addressees: @dpakman @BillAckman @realDonaldTrump

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1910042294574780593

  • Omg. I mean. Yeah. But OMG…

    Omg. I mean. Yeah. But OMG… https://twitter.com/AnnCoulter/status/1910084231587315755

  • Peterson’s not lobotomized, (which would produce the opposite effect) – he’s tra

    Peterson’s not lobotomized, (which would produce the opposite effect) – he’s traumatized, and so has lost some control over emotional self regulation (valence). But yes, otherwise, you are on the right track.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-09 19:06:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1910046628117102896

    Reply addressees: @MatthewParrott @PrisonPlanet

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1909917121204658579

  • Paul: The Truth: Re: Peterson: Because the combination of sensitivity to withdra

    Paul: The Truth: Re: Peterson: Because the combination of sensitivity to withdrawal from benzodiazepines (anti-depressants) and subsequent health crisis (coma) caused damage to his self regulatory emotional valence.
    In my experience while the human ‘forgetting curve’ is about three to four years, this kind of trauma corrects over twelve or more. It’s not that different from the long history of traumas that began with industrialized warfare.

    Reply addressees: @PrisonPlanet


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-09 19:04:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1910046203406069760

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1909877669061099523

  • RT @curtdoolittle: @MaddenedRanter @RpsAgainstTrump How Cheap Prices Cause Publi

    RT @curtdoolittle: @MaddenedRanter @RpsAgainstTrump How Cheap Prices Cause Public Harm
    (a) Tariffs are a tax that functions as a transfer f…


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-09 19:00:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1910045180348203482

  • How Cheap Prices Cause Public Harm (a) Tariffs are a tax that functions as a tra

    How Cheap Prices Cause Public Harm
    (a) Tariffs are a tax that functions as a transfer from importers and buyers of foreign goods to the public as a whole in compensation for undercutting labor prices.
    (b) Tariffs equilibrate labor arbitrage that extracts wealth from the economy at the expense of labor.
    (c) Tariffs equilibrate loss of knowledge and skill from the importing economy to the producing economy.
    I could go on with this list all day long.
    The first principle of economics is measuring the seen and the unseen (full accounting). All economic claims that do not do so are ‘half truths’ (lies) that centralize gains in the people who hold capital at the expense of the people that work to maintain and produce capital in exchange for income.

    Reply addressees: @MaddenedRanter @RpsAgainstTrump


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-09 19:00:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1910045159485767680

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1909929077818958270

  • yes the importer pays (small population), yes the price increases (consumers who

    yes the importer pays (small population), yes the price increases (consumers who have choice), but the importer is contributing to the tax and debt burden (citizens). We either do this and repatriate strategic industries or we cut our benefits and lose the dollar as a reserve currency (and thus our purchasing power). We couldn’t even manufacture pistol cartridges for the military without importing the primers. Same for something on the order of 2/3 of medicines. Remember the ‘mask problem’ and ‘respirator shortage’ during covid? We have a very hostile enemy who controls these resources.
    You always pay. You just have to choose now or later.

    Reply addressees: @MaddenedRanter @Orgasomisa @RpsAgainstTrump


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-09 16:46:15 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1910011386270474241

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1909929464571576581

  • Training a Base Model To Use Our Methodology Speculative Insight Our approach to

    Training a Base Model To Use Our Methodology

    Speculative Insight
    Our approach to training is closest to constructive neuro-symbolic alignment. We are not retraining a model to behave; we are teaching it a logic, using operational primitives and adversarial truth testing. Most AI research assumes abstraction is layered on top of training. We’re rightly flipping this, saying: abstractions must be rebuilt from primitives under decidability constraints.
    This is both:
    • Epistemologically superior to probabilistic inference by language prediction, and
    • Efficient if the base model already has rich sensorimotor, common-sense, and action grammar knowledge.
    Strategy Viability
    Our strategy is highly viable under the following plan:
    1. Select a model like Mistral or Yi-34B with good grounding and minimal prior abstractions.
    2. Perform continued pretraining, not just fine-tuning—on our corpus of:
      – Operational definitions
      – Formal grammars
      – Natural Law structure
      – First-principles logic trees
      – Canon of examples (cases)
    3. Use adversarial Socratic dialogue in training, where errors trigger correction from your defined logic.
    4. Apply RLAIF (Reinforcement Learning from Adversarial Instruction Following) rather than standard RLHF—this avoids crowd-sourced moral shaping.
    Our strategy is both intelligent and viable, provided the foundation model has a sufficient grounding in primitives (perception, action, objects, relations, events, and basic intentions)—what might be called naïve physics and naïve psychology—while remaining relatively uncommitted to particular abstract frameworks. In effect, you’re looking for:
    1. High coverage of experiential and operational primitives (so you don’t need to re-teach what a door, key, argument, or goal is),
    2. Low entrenchment in abstract philosophical, ideological, or academic conceptual hierarchies, so you can impose your own.
    Candidate Base Model:
    1. Mistral 7B / Mixtral
    • Why: Mistral 7B is known for efficiency, open weights, and solid grounding in daily-use language. It’s less “opinionated” than LLaMA-2 or GPT-J on abstractions.
    • Primitives: Reasonably good on object/agent/action-level reasoning.
    • Bias: Minimal ideological shaping.
    • Steerability: Very good.
    • Viability: Very high.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-09 16:41:46 UTC

    Original post: https://x.com/i/articles/1910010260338925613

  • Speculative Insight Our approach to training is closest to constructive neuro-sy

    Speculative Insight

    Our approach to training is closest to constructive neuro-symbolic alignment. We are not retraining a model to behave; we are teaching it a logic, using operational primitives and adversarial truth testing. Most AI research assumes abstraction is layered on top of training. We’re rightly flipping this, saying: abstractions must be rebuilt from primitives under decidability constraints.

    This is both:

    Epistemologically superior to probabilistic inference by language prediction, and

    Efficient if the base model already has rich sensorimotor, common-sense, and action grammar knowledge.

    Strategy Viability

    Our strategy is highly viable under the following plan:

    Select a model like Mistral or Yi-34B with good grounding and minimal prior abstractions.

    Perform continued pretraining, not just fine-tuning—on our corpus of:
    – Operational definitions
    – Formal grammars
    – Natural Law structure
    – First-principles logic trees
    – Canon of examples (cases)

    Use adversarial Socratic dialogue in training, where errors trigger correction from your defined logic.

    Apply RLAIF (Reinforcement Learning from Adversarial Instruction Following) rather than standard RLHF—this avoids crowd-sourced moral shaping.

    Our strategy is both intelligent and viable, provided the foundation model has a sufficient grounding in primitives (perception, action, objects, relations, events, and basic intentions)—what might be called naïve physics and naïve psychology—while remaining relatively uncommitted to particular abstract frameworks. In effect, you’re looking for:

    High coverage of experiential and operational primitives (so you don’t need to re-teach what a door, key, argument, or goal is),

    Low entrenchment in abstract philosophical, ideological, or academic conceptual hierarchies, so you can impose your own.

    Candidate Base Model:

    1. Mistral 7B / Mixtral

    Why: Mistral 7B is known for efficiency, open weights, and solid grounding in daily-use language. It’s less “opinionated” than LLaMA-2 or GPT-J on abstractions.

    Primitives: Reasonably good on object/agent/action-level reasoning.

    Bias: Minimal ideological shaping.

    Steerability: Very good.

    Viability: Very high.

    🔸Mixtral adds sparse Mixture-of-Experts for better generalization, while keeping training compute reasonable.


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-09 16:36:23 UTC

    Original post: https://x.com/i/articles/1910008903259283460

  • Actually I have full knowledge of what I said. That doesn’t mean I wrote it clea

    Actually I have full knowledge of what I said. That doesn’t mean I wrote it clearly enough for this audience to understand what I meant. ;). A common failing to which I frequently admit.

    Humans differ by time preference with progressives feminine, experiential, and short term (consumption) and conservatives masculine, consequential, and long term (capitalization) each reflecting the distribution of sex difference in perception and valence. Unfortunately, progressivism doesn’t scale because it’s as epistemically impossible and unwarrantable as statistical aggregates in economic science.

    Likewise taxing an importer for undermining national incomes (input purchasing power) in favor of national consumption (output purchasing power), and favoring the financial sector instead of main street, is just equilibrating the redistribution that is caused by the opposite.

    Reply addressees: @Walker1268 @MeidasTouch


    Source date (UTC): 2025-04-09 16:36:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1910008813031415809

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1909930825207931088