Cryptography, personal trivia, and the future of all humanity. I block for rudeness or sarcasm.
Scotts Valley, CA
Joined November 2008
- Tweets90.9K
- Following1.5K
- Followers9.4K
- Likes209K
Pinned Tweet
"To be able to destroy with good conscience, to be able to behave badly and call your bad behavior ‘righteous indignation’ — this is the height of psychological luxury, the most delicious of moral treats." - Aldous Huxley, 1933
ALT Men show at least as much zeal in mischief as in well doing, in folly as in wisdom. The surest way to work up a crusade in favor of some good cause is to promise people that they will have a chance of maltreating someone. Men must be bribed to build up and do good by the offer of an opportunity to hurt and pull down. To be able to destroy with good conscience, to be able to behave badly and call your bad behavior ‘righteous indignation’ — this is the height of psychological luxury, the most delicious of moral treats.” Aldous Huxley, Introduction to The Easton Press edition of Samuel Butler’s Erewhon (1934), signed July 24, 1933.
William Donald Hamilton, my name is William Donald Hamilton...
Hamilton kuralı ölmüyor:
Günümüz modern toplumu insanlara geniş bir "sosyal tercih" alanı sunmasına rağmen, insanların başkalarına yaptıkları yardım hala genetik benzerlik katsayısına göre işliyor: çocuk>ebeveyn>kardeş>yeğen>kuzen*
Araştırmacıların ifadesiyle:
"Sosyologlar kardeşlerin devam eden önemi gibi olgular karşısında şaşkınlıklarını dile getirdiler; ancak genel olarak evrimsel etkileri hesaba katma konusunda isteksiz kaldılar."
How would you write a program that deals five cards from a deck of 52, so every hand is equally likely? It's subtler than it looks.
Here's Cardchoose: a dozen lines that never retry, need no extra memory, and are provably fair.
github.com/ciphergoth/sansre…
Also on YouTube youtu.be/5br30I2trKU
Discussed here:
xitter.cf/ciphergoth/status/2109…
Eight years ago I found this way to fairly sample k distinct integers below n: no hash set, no extra memory, O(k log k). Still can't believe it's novel. The innovation is a step that deliberately favours duplicates...
github.com/ciphergoth/sansre…
Paul Crowley retweeted
This is a specific sore point from lived experience.
I had Samsung devices that would or could not capture a true likeness of a child's skin rash during a severe allergic reaction.
It effectively airbrushed for beauty, ruining the opportunity to collect evidence for the MD.
Paul Crowley retweeted
This is why I think debates are the worst format for comparing and contrasting viewpoints, it benefits the dishonest in a way that can't possibly be evened out.
Do I know anyone in SF with a guest room who might like to put me up for a few days? I'm especially happy if I can, say, help look after a cat :) Happy to share dates and more details via DM. Thanks!
Paul Crowley retweeted
Important, and I'm glad this is finally public. Google DeepMind researchers are under in perpetuity non-disparagement clauses forbidding them from ever speaking critically of the company. I'd already confirmed this with multiple people.
Yes, some ex-employees have spoken out nonetheless. But it has also discouraged others from doing so. And yes, it most certainly has a chilling effect with regards to discussions on safety and risk.
Others have written compellingly about how important the ability to speak freely and critically is, especially on topics like safety and risk. And what a testament to the research employee community's coordination and hard-won bargaining power it has been to get there at other companies.
GDM burn that commons by having this. And everyone who signs burns that commons too. Let's get it changed.
Congrats to Sofia for having the courage to resign and speak out!
This is also very important:
Staff are scared to speak out about AI safety and its uses in warfare because their employment contracts prohibit them from publicly criticising the company.
bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cmre…
Paul Crowley retweeted
The problem with using obscure philosophical vocabulary to sound smart is that every once in a while you use a word wrong and end up looking totally epistemological.
I fear very few people are set up to resist scams like this :(
(assuming all this is true ofc!)
🚨 Wow. WOW. I just witnessed the most involved and sophisticated phishing attempt I've ever seen and y'all need to know about this.
The TL;DR is that @beaconlayer reached out invite me onto their show, spent days going over the run-of-show in detail with clearly AI-assisted extensive knowledge of my work, booked the recording, and then tried to get me to install malware in order to join the call.
Some of you have probably already heard about the similar attempt made on @0xzak but this one was news to me. The difference is that this isn't just someone posing as a producer from a popular show, it's the actual show, which has episodes out and a sizeable audience on @X which makes them look legit. I suspect all of those other guests have malware installed already and I caution everyone to do a security sweep.
I've been cautioning people against deepfake scams for a decade so you'd think I'd have smelled something sooner — it takes real balls to go after cypherpunks specifically — but at least I caught it before they convinced another rube to commit a bash command and give up all of their passwords.
Here's the full story — I have the receipts, and now you do too:
1/13
Paul Crowley retweeted
Claims:
Game detects “ad whales,” then periodically gives them smooth runs until they barely beat their high scores. Right at that point, it kills them deliberately and offers a revive if they watch an ad.
$100 million annually in revenue. Hellish.
I thought You Can See Everything was fine. I don't think I needed to run to the cinema to see it and I don't think my experience was greatly enhanced by making sure I didn't learn anything about it first.
It is fucking infuriating that ABC are giving this bullshit a bullhorn, knowing that many who see this will not see the inevitable followup that the car wasn't in fact on FSD.
I love a good community note so much.
everyone thinks for some reason that they are closer to becoming a millionaire than becoming homeless.
Readers added context they thought people might want to know
Recent polling shows a majority of US voters believe they are more likely to become homeless than a millionaire. US data show roughly 23.6 million millionaires versus ~746,000 experiencing homelessness on a given night.
dataforprogress.org/blog/2026/8/13…
investopedia.com/new-report-rev…
hud.gov/news/hud-no-26…
Paul Crowley retweeted
Maybe I shouldn't say this out loud, but if I was an economist worried about EA false flag cybersecurity incidents, I would fist a grizzly bear. Sure, the bear will maul you, but what could be higher expected value than raising awareness of EAFFCSI-risk with your gruesome death?
unavailable
