>>6756
Come back to 8kun plz. It seems all the original threads actually survived and have their original dates preserved, so it's a more accurate historical record.

>>6757
Is there anywhere else that is even remotely similar to old /ratanon/? /sci/ occasionally discusses transhumanism, rationalism, and that sort of thing, but it's diluted by massive amounts of shitposting.

>>6767
https://8kun.top/ratanon/index.html is picking up again. 8kun.top is the new 8ch.net.

Do they host Skaven porn? 'cause I ain't moving nowhere without my Skaven pron.

>>6756

You've presented me a gish gallop of claims which are so anti-true that I am losing sleep over them. I have never experienced rage this intense in my entire life; I can actually feel slight nausea. I find myself wondering how you can even conjure up so many evil, slimy, bold-facedly inaccurate things to say. If you were as well-read in Eliezer's writings as would be required for you to be justified in having made any blanket evaluations of LW rationality, there's no way you would have conveyed your disagreement exactly like this, and I am lead to believe you are intentionally creating hostility for some reason, despite actually being oblivious to Eliezer's beliefs and the practices of the LW community.

And I still want to reconcile with you, calmly and peacefully, because I expect that my gut is probably deceiving me about your intentions. There are so many causes for people saying wrong things, and usually the cause is not bad intent.

Plus, you know, once we figure out how to build an immersive virtual reality fully simulating an all female alien invasion of sexy, pervy, anthropomorphic rat-folk intent on turning the Earth into a femdom prison planet for the hapless hairless monkey population ... well. There won't be any enthusiasm left over for screaming HERESY! and fighting epic interstellar genocidal wars. No enthusiasm that is, except for occasional nostalgia-fags returning to earlier versions of what should be another initial blockbuster V/R product line, as I suspect it will be.

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1806.02404 suggests the fermi paradox is just a math error resulting from rounding the continuous estimates to point estimates too soon, and we're just alone.

>>6740
Ted Kaczynski has an interesting theory to explain the Fermi Paradox.

>But once self-propagating systems have attained global scale, two crucial differences emerge. The first difference is in the number of individuals from among which the "fittest" are selected. Self-prop systems sufficiently big and powerful to be plausible contenders for global dominance will probably number in the dozens, or possibly in the hundreds; they certainly will not number in the millions. With so few individuals from among which to select the "fittest," it seems safe to say that the process of natural selection will be inefficient in promoting the fitness for survival of the dominant global self-prop systems. It should also be noted that among biological organisms, species that consist of a relatively small number of large individuals are more vulnerable to extinction than species that consist of a large number of small individuals. Though the analogy between biological organisms and self-propagating systems of human beings is far from perfect, still the prospect for viability of a world-system based on the dominance of a few global self-prop systems does not look encouraging.
>The second difference is that in the absence of rapid, worldwide transportation and communication, the breakdown or the destructive action of a small-scale self-prop system has only local repercussions. Outside the limited zone where such a self-prop system has been active there will be other self-prop systems among which the process of evolution through natural selection will continue. But where rapid, worldwide transportation and communication have led to the emergence of global self-prop systems, the breakdown or the destructive action of any one such system can shake the whole world-system. Consequently, in the process of trial and error that is evolution through natural selection, it is highly probable that after only a relatively small number of "trials" resulting in "errors," the world-system will break down or will be so severely disrupted that none of the world's larger or more complex self-prop systems will be able to survive. Thus, for such self-prop systems, the trial-and-error process comes to an end; evolution through natural selection cannot continue long enough to create global self-prop systems possessing the subtle and sophisticated mechanisms that prevent destructive internal competition within complex biological organisms.
> Meanwhile, fierce competition among global self-prop systems will have led to such drastic and rapid alterations in the Earth's climate, the composition of its atmosphere, the chemistry of its oceans, and so forth, that the effect on the biosphere will be devastating. In Part IV of the present chapter we will carry this line of inquiry further: We will argue that if the development of the technological world-system is allowed to proceed to its logical conclusion, then in all probability the Earth will be left a dead planet-a planet on which nothing will remain alive except, maybe, some of the simplest organisms-certain bacteria, algae, etc.-that are capable of surviving under extreme conditions.
>The theory we've outlined here provides a plausible explanation for the so-called Fermi Paradox. It is believed that there should be numerous planets on which technologically advanced civilizations have evolved, and which are not so remote from us that we could not by this time have detected their radio transmissions. The Fermi Paradox consists in the fact that our astronomers have never yet been able to detect any radio signals that seem to have originated from an intelligent extraterrestrial source.

>>6765
Robin Hanson had this to say about it:
http://www.overcomingbias.com/2018/01/kaczynskis-collapse-theory.html

>>6766
>'n-no, dude!! Kaczynski was just wrong because I said so!! trust the elites, they won't screw us all over!!'

Robin Hanson is a fucking retard.

We also call the result a trans woman. Men and women, male and female, are in the most strict sense defined by anatomy and physiology, thus “trans women” should be taken as idiomatic or allegorical if we are not to incur in absurdities. Notwithstanding that the upgraded male is still a male according to a rigorous interpretation, we find it appropriate for heuristic purposes to describe and refer to her as a woman. Although not necessary, it is recommendable that the trans woman dresses like any other woman would, using clothes designed to emphasize her new feminine beauty. To say she is a man would be as true as it is misleading. She looks like a woman, she smells like a woman; she behaves like a woman. Indeed, she may adopt the name and voice of a woman as an acknowledgment of her inspiration. She deserves to be treated as a woman at least as much as any other woman does. Indeed, the trans woman has more of a claim to womanhood than those women by birth who neither learn, practice, nor care about femininity and womanhood, because she has earned her femininity several times over with her blood, sweat and tears.

Imitation is the highest form of flattery.

Copyright © «Ksenia». This work can be used, copied, modified and sold under the terms of the license Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International. This work is provided as-is, without any warranty. The reader is solely responsible for the use made of this information.

Is my bubble really weird or is Gender Accelerationism and similar ideology spreading in nerd spaces?

>>6733

I find it really difficult to believe it, and I have questions.

a) How come being a MtF trans woman can get you more dates and care than being a guy?

b) How far did you have to go in your transition to notice first major changes in how people treat you?

c) Could you try to estimate and compare the impact of physical changes, and the impact of merely identifying as a woman?

d) Are you seeking dates in isolated, woke LGBT circles?

e) Are women you date attractive?

f) How are you treated by men and society in general?

I disagree the most with your claim that women are not generally attracted to men. You might be biased because you date lesbians/pansexuals, whereas most women are Chadsexuals (attracted to top 20% men).

>>6733
delusional cope. You can be a cute male without transitioning. Shave body hair, use skin and hair products, wear cute and flattering clothes and be sweet and agreeable. You'll still look like a boy and be cute.
No need to fuck your mental and physical state with hormones and end up looking uncanny valleyish, neither feminine enough to be a girl nor masculine enough to be a boy.

https://grognor.github.io/
RIP

>>6741
Read about Mario Montano. He might be dead.

Here is his YouTube channel and blog:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCeLURmm1ICIg46GkQpWOhIw
https://vitrifyher.com/

>>6741
Not sure if this counts, but Mitchell Heisman's suicide note had a lot of ideas regarding the Singularity, AI, and those sorts of topics.

>>6741
Chris Capel

https://www.lesswrong.com/users/pdf23ds
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/GfuKGCZQ5soSFMhqE/ethics-and-rationality-of-suicide-1

>>6377
Even if true, pederasty is not really an option for the modern incel.

>>6371
>Learn how much is too much.
But the point of >>6368 is that there's no line of "too much"?

>>6384
the modern incel can avail himself of a cohort of legal-age eromenoi whose hormone treatments counteract the ravages of time.

>>6401
If you're giving up women and switching to pederasty because women are crazy, ending up dating trans women is a big oof.

Also, do you think the average incel is actually a standardcel who'd be up to his elbows if he didn't insist on getting cis female pussy? Or, fuck, if you know how to get a harem don't keep it to yourself.

>>6405
incels can learn a lot by dabbling in trannychasing. just being able to experience what dating feels like with different power dynamics is a revelation. yeah, you still have to meet a minimal standard even if you're looking at people with fewer options, but that teaches you what the standards ARE. it teaches you which aspects of dating are things you actually need to be doing to be attractive or a decent person, and which aspects are BS that the pussy cartel tries to upsell you on. it's also good for becoming comfortable with imperfection, and realizing that other people have it worse than you.

sure if you're a dumbass you might rush into things with some desperate crazy trap, but it's easy to avoid that if you have any standards whatsoever or any ability to judge character. the bottom line is, trans women are WAY more openminded and less conventional (except for the ones who are overcompensating), and they place appropriate value on "making it work" with someone who they have something positive with, rather than constantly putting their partners on trial.

>>2889
i dont like rationalism since people who call themselves rationalists are supporting human rights and other shit

>>6239
>only comparing straight and gay trans women
I feel like there's missing information here.

>>2889 (OP)
<not a "transition so you can be a superior being" rationalist
>Transsexualism is a form of self-improvement. We are biologically male, or at least, we begin that way. We are attracted to women, but love women and femininity beyond simple sexual attraction. We modify our bodies using modern pharmacology (and sometimes surgery) to adopt the desirable traits of women, in specific, secondary sexual characteristics, while preserving those traits of men that are worth preserving. The sheer intelligence of men, the tact of a woman; the tall and slender body of a man, the graceful features of a woman; the courage of a man, the peacefulness of a woman; the stoicism of a man, the empathy of a woman. Obsolete no more, by means of transsexual transitioning, the now estrogenized male has upgraded herself to the best of both sexes and thus overcomes the weaknesses of both male and female.
https://17beta.top/en/philosophy

Are you a "transition so you can be the tragic romantic figure of our time" postrationalist?

My apocalyptic cult is centered around AI and biotech, not climate change. Nuclear power is mature, clean and safe. Humans will either go back to savagery or start using nuclear power sooner or later. Honestly, the most impactful near-term project for EA types just might be to shut up those who are against nuclear. One could attack them with killer drones until they were too afraid to speak.

>>6491
Are you claiming that nuclear power will be adopted pre-collapse? Even if true, that's still just power; there's an entire ecosystem to address. OP is right on all counts, and that's just the tip of the iceberg.

>>6476
>If you're paying attention
Fortunately I'm not. Close call for human civilization though, I guess.

We've had a good run

>>6725
>do not link to content that is illegal in USA
Well well, the servers moved. I wonder why...

>>6726
Eh. Last I heard Skaven porn is still legal in the U S of A. I'm OK with the other restrictions.

>>6726
The servers have always been in the USA. Just not the rest of the company.

This place is so dead now.

Diego Caleiro, Brent Dill, Michael Anissimov(?)
Who else?