@spherical-cow.bsky.social
One word: Manimal.
December 10, 2025 at 3:56 AM
One word: Manimal.
Let me put it this way: Ted Kaczynski was diagnosed with Schizophrenia, so was Nathaniel Ayers, the Juilliard violinist who inspired the film The Soloist. One was a criminal mastermind, the other a man who has enormous difficulty carrying on a conversation.
December 10, 2025 at 3:12 AM
Let me put it this way: Ted Kaczynski was diagnosed with Schizophrenia, so was Nathaniel Ayers, the Juilliard violinist who inspired the film The Soloist. One was a criminal mastermind, the other a man who has enormous difficulty carrying on a conversation.
You could, I suppose do a longitudinal study where you took genetic samples early in life and tracked the correlation with eventual diagnosis, but the technology is so new that I don't think anyone's had the time to do that.
December 10, 2025 at 3:07 AM
You could, I suppose do a longitudinal study where you took genetic samples early in life and tracked the correlation with eventual diagnosis, but the technology is so new that I don't think anyone's had the time to do that.
How many severely and pressitantly psychotic people are participating in those studies? How could you ethically get informed consent?
December 10, 2025 at 3:04 AM
How many severely and pressitantly psychotic people are participating in those studies? How could you ethically get informed consent?
It's not argument that Sz is highly heritible, it's an argument that we probably don't have good way of knowing if it is.
December 10, 2025 at 3:02 AM
It's not argument that Sz is highly heritible, it's an argument that we probably don't have good way of knowing if it is.
My point is basically orthogonal to questions about twin studies, because the hypothesis is that people with a genetic predisposition to severe mental illness are significantly less likely to participate in them, or any genetic study really.
December 10, 2025 at 3:01 AM
My point is basically orthogonal to questions about twin studies, because the hypothesis is that people with a genetic predisposition to severe mental illness are significantly less likely to participate in them, or any genetic study really.
In general, any given psychiatric diagnositic category is a very heterogeneous thing. It seems at least possible that more serious, debilitating illnesses are more heritible.
December 10, 2025 at 2:57 AM
In general, any given psychiatric diagnositic category is a very heterogeneous thing. It seems at least possible that more serious, debilitating illnesses are more heritible.
The idea that severe and persistent schizophrenia might be more heritible than mild depression seems worth considering, and how many such people are participating in genetic studies? If nothing else, there are serious ethical issues about informed consent.
December 10, 2025 at 2:20 AM
The idea that severe and persistent schizophrenia might be more heritible than mild depression seems worth considering, and how many such people are participating in genetic studies? If nothing else, there are serious ethical issues about informed consent.
I'm generally a skeptic of hereditarianism, but I seriously wonder if participation bias is pushing down h² estimates for psychiatric conditions.
December 10, 2025 at 2:17 AM
I'm generally a skeptic of hereditarianism, but I seriously wonder if participation bias is pushing down h² estimates for psychiatric conditions.
In the arts, one can objectively succed or fail at appealing to a particular audience. To the extent that Tommy Wiseau was trying to appeal to people into serious melodrama, he's an incompetent filmmaker, but nobody can be right or wrong for liking The Room.
December 10, 2025 at 1:33 AM
In the arts, one can objectively succed or fail at appealing to a particular audience. To the extent that Tommy Wiseau was trying to appeal to people into serious melodrama, he's an incompetent filmmaker, but nobody can be right or wrong for liking The Room.
There can be times in natural science, for example, arguably, the interpretation of quantum mechanics, where multiple theories that preform equally well, and in those cases, one is not objectively better than another.
December 10, 2025 at 1:29 AM
There can be times in natural science, for example, arguably, the interpretation of quantum mechanics, where multiple theories that preform equally well, and in those cases, one is not objectively better than another.
Objectively better chemistry and astronomy makes more accurate predictions about the world with fewer assumptions.
December 10, 2025 at 1:28 AM
Objectively better chemistry and astronomy makes more accurate predictions about the world with fewer assumptions.
I don't understand his point. Does anybody really think that the human brain has some special quality that allows it to construct an entirely consistent and complete system of mathematical axioms, or solve the halting and entscheidung problems?
December 10, 2025 at 12:13 AM
I don't understand his point. Does anybody really think that the human brain has some special quality that allows it to construct an entirely consistent and complete system of mathematical axioms, or solve the halting and entscheidung problems?
Of course, the flip side of this is that TV used to be about 75% slop.
December 9, 2025 at 11:41 PM
Of course, the flip side of this is that TV used to be about 75% slop.
Yeah, but there used to be good movies too. And most of the bad movies were original properties, some of them bad in ways that were at least interesting. Now it's just the latest iteration of green screened comic book slop.
December 9, 2025 at 11:38 PM
Yeah, but there used to be good movies too. And most of the bad movies were original properties, some of them bad in ways that were at least interesting. Now it's just the latest iteration of green screened comic book slop.
Apropos of Nothing, Conspiracy is streaming on HBO and is a hell of a movie.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspir...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspir...
Conspiracy (2001 film) - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
December 8, 2025 at 7:19 AM
Apropos of Nothing, Conspiracy is streaming on HBO and is a hell of a movie.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspir...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspir...
And even if successful, any such purge will require replacing experienced civil servants with inexperienced radicals chosen for ideological purity and not competence.
December 8, 2025 at 7:17 AM
And even if successful, any such purge will require replacing experienced civil servants with inexperienced radicals chosen for ideological purity and not competence.
Past a certain point, the layers of euphemism and pretext form a kind of quagmire into which the ship of state slows sinks. In the long run, the federal workforce will either have to be purged on a much larger scale than anything we've seen, or the enterprise will grind to an incoherent halt.
December 8, 2025 at 7:15 AM
Past a certain point, the layers of euphemism and pretext form a kind of quagmire into which the ship of state slows sinks. In the long run, the federal workforce will either have to be purged on a much larger scale than anything we've seen, or the enterprise will grind to an incoherent halt.
The new national security policy is clearly steeped in white nationalist thinking, but it remains impossible for the administration to embrace the 14 words as a mission statement, even internally.
December 8, 2025 at 7:11 AM
The new national security policy is clearly steeped in white nationalist thinking, but it remains impossible for the administration to embrace the 14 words as a mission statement, even internally.
Making workable public policy is a complex process which is made enormously more difficult when the rationale for those policies must be hidden from the people implementing them.
December 8, 2025 at 7:07 AM
Making workable public policy is a complex process which is made enormously more difficult when the rationale for those policies must be hidden from the people implementing them.
Three things seem to be true:
1)The explicit embrace of a world view that is centered on racial superiority and conflict remains taboo.
2)A growing minority of young conservatives are deeply committed to those ideas.
3)They are already influenng and making policy.
Something has got to give.
1)The explicit embrace of a world view that is centered on racial superiority and conflict remains taboo.
2)A growing minority of young conservatives are deeply committed to those ideas.
3)They are already influenng and making policy.
Something has got to give.
December 8, 2025 at 7:05 AM
Three things seem to be true:
1)The explicit embrace of a world view that is centered on racial superiority and conflict remains taboo.
2)A growing minority of young conservatives are deeply committed to those ideas.
3)They are already influenng and making policy.
Something has got to give.
1)The explicit embrace of a world view that is centered on racial superiority and conflict remains taboo.
2)A growing minority of young conservatives are deeply committed to those ideas.
3)They are already influenng and making policy.
Something has got to give.
The show was patient zero for Lost syndrome, but making mundane things creepy was one of Vince Gilligan's strengths on the X-Files. OTOH, this one really seems like a premise that can't support an entire series.
December 7, 2025 at 9:56 PM
The show was patient zero for Lost syndrome, but making mundane things creepy was one of Vince Gilligan's strengths on the X-Files. OTOH, this one really seems like a premise that can't support an entire series.