Is Musk known to be a heavy ketamine user? That's very interesting if so. I've come to think of it as a "false psychedelic" in a sense in that it can engender a state resembling egolessness in its level of all-consuming immersion, but without really confronting the user with their own personality flaws or really breaking down ego defenses at all. It also seems to be somewhat addictive, even perhaps physically, which is mostly unheard of with the serotonergic psychedelics.
I am quite sure Elon Musk has used LSD too. LSD (and stronger 3-day versions like Bromo-dragonfly) is a major part of what Burning Man is about. And MDMA. FWIW - There is a paper showing normalization of autism using low dose of LSD, quite old [1]. I suspect that Elon (who is quite Aspie) feels better when he has taken it. His Asperger's also makes him more tolerant of drugs than most. (viz. Kanye) Partying with Elon could be problematic for most people to try to match. But, even a strong reality testing mechanism can get overwhelmed.
I also note that the more extreme effects on John Lilly MD (inventor of the floatation tank) were due to the combination (in series) of LSD and ketamine tripping. John came to believe that invisible aliens were fighting over the earth and called the White House. (Which is a plot line from real life worthy of Dr. Strangelove or Resident Alien. One can only laugh at a certain point.) We aren't at that point with Elon Musk yet.
I do think an intervention with Elon is called for. But there is nobody who has the power and influence to do it, except JD Vance perhaps. JD must be wondering about Elon a little bit. He knows what addiction looks like from growing up. But Elon's antics are drawing fire to him, which is politically ok, and Elon is getting some results, if mixed.
I suspect that JD Vance intervened with that nasty little troll running HHS and told him to --- make his recent statement to take the MMR vaccine --- or else.
The attack on science cuts right to the heart of what America needs to be more competitive in the future. We need to invest more in science, scientific research, scientific careers, scientific literacy, and the infrastructure that science education and research depend upon. Not cut all of this to, then through, the bone!
I live outside Woods Hole, MA and can't even imagine what life is now going to be like for people associated with MBL (THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO MARINE BIOLOGICAL LABORATORY) given the thoughtless cuts at NSF, NOAA and other federal agencies.
My grad school (UMASS Amherst) will be devastated.
Where does Elon musk think all his employees come from? And neuralink is just a summation of academic research in brain computer interfaces. Don't know about rockets or electric cars but sure it's the same story. It's all just extensions of academic work, including and especially "AI".
Say what you like about Hinton he has earned his success by working in academia for decades before it became worth any money. Many, many people didn't see it coming and next time it won't happen without funding for academic research.
As a uk person, i've been googling "musk royal society" for several weeks. They did have a meeting a few days ago. Dorothy bishop, a well known developmental psychologist resigned from the royal society last year over Elon musk. Stephen curry organised a a letter last week. They are expected to be chickenshit about this, but let's see. Maybe they will show some moral fibre. I think it does matter, musk is doubtless narcissistic and they notice when their accolades are removed.
Thought you might. It's not a small thing for an ordinary person to give up an award like that. In the unlikely event I get one I don't know that I could.
Not that she's an ordinary researcher. But she's not a billionaire or an aristocrat.
The cuts are abrupt, unplanned, and made without consultation. They are indiscriminate and lack strategic consideration.
Funding for graduate students across all STEM fields is being reduced. Critical staff who maintain shared research facilities are being lost. Research on advanced materials for computing, software for medical devices, and new disease therapies—along with many other vital projects—is being delayed or halted.
It's abundantly obvious that it's the neo reactionary Curtis Yarvin playbook to a T. Accelerationism. The economy is crashing on purpose. It's the whole point. You're operating under the assumption that there is any other goal here beyond destroying all institutions. None of this deters them because it's the entire point. Combine it at a time of heavy research in robotics and AI and it's honestly ridiculous to deny what the goal of it all is.
"Institutions that took decades to build are being rapidly disassembled, for no good reason." I would agree with this. But, beyond this 'no 'good' reason," might we all be best trying to understand what the underlying reason actually is, and for whom that good is intended? Could the ideas of Curtis Yarvin, and those, such as J.D. Vance and Peter Thiel, who seem to be onboard with his perspective, provide some enlightenment? If this is the motivation behind some or all of Musk's actions, then we have a whole lot more to be very concerned about, than this one issue, as significant as it is. What's your opinion on this?
Elon seems to be following the plan outlined by Yarvin for the creation of a technocracy. There is a lot darkness to be found in the heart of Silicon Valley. This might be the rot that Gary found in the valley and I still need to get his most recent book.
I was terrible in science in high school and college and had tremendous respect for what I couldn't understand or had interest in. With a keystroke by a 19 year old, we are losing people who could have made discoveries in science and are now sidelined by idiots who have no clue what they are doing.
You and Musk are in agreement that history is the ultimate judge. But Musk seems not to understand that this has no relevance in the here and now. His "history will be the judge" is an argument that has no *use* at this point (it does not lead to a change in any decision or action), and — following Uncle Ludwig — is thus a meaningless statement for the here and now.
If at all meaningful, it is a proof of Musk being strongly convinced: Musk seems convinced he is right and thus history will prove him right. No doubt is discernible, not even "I will make mistakes" is doubt, as the wanton making of mistakes ('move fast and break things') is what the critique is about. Convictions (mental automation) is a key element of human psychology and they produce any argument that will help to keep a conviction unchanged. A reference to a deity or to future historians is more or less equal in that respect.
Hinton's link to 'free speech' is a silly non sequitur, by the way. What does he expect? Musk has an utter naive idea about free speech (and about human intelligence — the basis of free speech absolutism). He is fine with Hinton saying this and his reaction fits in that pattern. Hinton and Musk in some respect are akin: they act on the basis of strong convictions (Hinton on AI) and neither makes the impression to be capable of much doubt.
I suppose it is clear this era won't be called "the second age of enlightenment". Maybe it is going to be called "the age of distrust" or "the age of fragmentation". And the information (digital) revolution definitely has a part in that. Oh well, history will be the judge. If we still have historians, that is...
The problem with this analysis is that we are liquidating history itself. The notion of 'history as judge' assumes a continuity that no longer holds. What remains is pure immediacy, without the structures that would make future judgment meaningful.
The fact that you are defending Collins means you have no credibility.
In his blog post, dated March 26, 2020, Collins expressed his strong opposition to the lab leak theory, which he called “outrageous.” The sole basis for Collins' post was the fraudulent Proximal Origin paper, published just a few days earlier. Collins failed to acknowledge that he, along with Fauci, played a significant role in orchestrating the publication of this fraudulent paper, which explicitly aimed to promote the natural origin theory while discrediting the lab leak theory. Wolinetz's justification for silencing a prominent colleague was so flimsy that the only reasonable conclusion one can draw from her actions is that she was helping Collins and Fauci to cover up their involvement in seeding the pandemic, which included outsourcing gain-of-function experiments on coronaviruses to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Avoid politics if you do not want to get caught in polarized debates.
No matter the issue, there will always be pushback and controversy. Cutting unnecessary expenses is not inherently bad, but it will not benefit everyone.
AI is in the spotlight, with different forces backing each other. There is no perfect solution—every choice will impact someone.
When the tides shift, new investments will replace the current funding drought.
Don’t blame me—I am just pointing out that every decision has consequences. In politics, no one is ever fully satisfied because agreeing with every move is nearly impossible.
Understand the game, keep it civil, and defend your stance without going too far.
I had an enlightening conversation with a relative of Peter Acworth, founder of kink(dot)com. (Just don't.) Peter dropped out of grad school in math to create the premier web site for BDSM porn in the world. His family was horrified.
But, then it came to their attention that... ahem. Peter was making, (oh my) $17 million a year. So, he appeared at Christmas dinners for the clan, clad in his trademark skirt. He is now respectable and "eccentric" because of the money. Next stop, a young lady of said parentage shall marry into the Royal Family. Or perhaps Peter can be inducted into the Royal Society?
I'd say the Royal Society worries about reputation as well as money. If they lose their reputation, they are over. It wasn't that crazy to elect Elon Musk in 2018 because he developed his own space program, not a porn site. I don't know what he donated. It might be possible to look it up since they are a registered UK charity.
They might expel him, not necessarily because they are moral but because they are worried about how they look. But they might also do it because they are moral, it is after all run by scientists who are not known for their interest in money. Who knows what they will do, or what they should do. I don't know what power Musk has to harm them or UK science which they exist to promote. He has a lot of power that's for sure.
Meh. Elon has always been like that. A charging rhino with a smile and industriousness. It is why he is so successful. The last thing his people want is for him to return and guide them directly again.
The "abrupt, unplanned, indiscriminate" nature of the cuts to science are reflected in the DOGE cuts across the board. The cruel, random, unjustified firings of talented, dedicated, idealistic young people from government is indefensible, and will do lasting damage to our country. "Any jackass can kick down a barn, but it takes a skilled carpenter to build one" -- DOGE is a team of such jackasses. The conflicts of interest alone make Musk the absolute last person who should be wielding this kind of power, not to mention an abject lack of expertise in the areas of government he's cutting. The repeated misrepresentations and errors in the nature and value of the cuts is clear evidence that the results can't be trusted. There's no accountability here. No transparency. The claims of success are so much spin and propaganda.
First it’s some wacky WaPo piece, then Zeynep and now Francis Collins is who you choose to align your principles with? Yes, Elon needs figure out the right balance, but you need to not let your emotions get the better of you and lead you some truly disingenuous people. Collins may have done a lot of good things in his life, but as it relates to COVID he played a disastrous role which he has continued to lie (and get exposed for it even as recently as last week) about in the face of an over-abundance of evidence. Agreed that a more balanced approach needs to be taken around the funding of scientific research but I would stick to the topic and refrain from lionizing the more despicable characters of our the recent pandemic. I’m just sitting here with baited breath waiting for you to start telling us what admirable guy Fauci was too.
Is there any way to organize a SUFS rally in London on the short notice? Anyone have any connections with activists and organizers here? DM me and let's make it happen!
An unelected individual making cuts in NIH, NSF, or ICR without congressional oversight is several steps toward autocracy. Now, will our autocracy be the 'timeout' version (Xi and Jack Ma) or the defenestration type? I think a high possibility is the puttanesca kind.
However, the US is fully capable of innovating in this domain. Estimates place nonmilitary gun ownership in the US at 120 per 100 people. Adjusting out the non-adult population and for the non-gun owners, the 120 is 500. Picking Pareto as a distribution suggests there is a subset of citizens who have 1,984 per 100.
Who are these people? I don't know, but you'll find a significant portion of this group by automating trucking, surplussing the UAW, and bankrupting the companies that pay UAW pensions.
This US population (extreme gun ownership) is roughly half the population of Afghanistan. Afghanistan has, in total, 4.27M guns. This subset of the US has 313.6M guns.
In that potential dystopia, there is no NIH or NSF. So, I don't think the question is how much Elon is cutting NSF, but rather, in a representative democracy, how is it that he is cutting NSF at all?
The intellectual center of the world is migrating East. At that’s my read on the three autocrats as of this morning. That magic of compounding effort is moving east as well. So, if you’re in the west, drop whatever you’re doing.
Musk is a good lab rat (n=1) for ketamine frying brain cells. It makes one nostalgic for LSD... ;P
BTW, his use of insults as arguments is truly pathetic.
Lastly: “The insult dishonors the one who infers it, not the one who receives it.” ― Diogenes of Sinope
Is Musk known to be a heavy ketamine user? That's very interesting if so. I've come to think of it as a "false psychedelic" in a sense in that it can engender a state resembling egolessness in its level of all-consuming immersion, but without really confronting the user with their own personality flaws or really breaking down ego defenses at all. It also seems to be somewhat addictive, even perhaps physically, which is mostly unheard of with the serotonergic psychedelics.
I am quite sure Elon Musk has used LSD too. LSD (and stronger 3-day versions like Bromo-dragonfly) is a major part of what Burning Man is about. And MDMA. FWIW - There is a paper showing normalization of autism using low dose of LSD, quite old [1]. I suspect that Elon (who is quite Aspie) feels better when he has taken it. His Asperger's also makes him more tolerant of drugs than most. (viz. Kanye) Partying with Elon could be problematic for most people to try to match. But, even a strong reality testing mechanism can get overwhelmed.
I also note that the more extreme effects on John Lilly MD (inventor of the floatation tank) were due to the combination (in series) of LSD and ketamine tripping. John came to believe that invisible aliens were fighting over the earth and called the White House. (Which is a plot line from real life worthy of Dr. Strangelove or Resident Alien. One can only laugh at a certain point.) We aren't at that point with Elon Musk yet.
I do think an intervention with Elon is called for. But there is nobody who has the power and influence to do it, except JD Vance perhaps. JD must be wondering about Elon a little bit. He knows what addiction looks like from growing up. But Elon's antics are drawing fire to him, which is politically ok, and Elon is getting some results, if mixed.
I suspect that JD Vance intervened with that nasty little troll running HHS and told him to --- make his recent statement to take the MMR vaccine --- or else.
1. Simmons, JQ et al. (1966) Modification of autistic behavior with LSD-25. Am J Psychiatry;122(11):1201-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.122.11.1201
The attack on science cuts right to the heart of what America needs to be more competitive in the future. We need to invest more in science, scientific research, scientific careers, scientific literacy, and the infrastructure that science education and research depend upon. Not cut all of this to, then through, the bone!
I live outside Woods Hole, MA and can't even imagine what life is now going to be like for people associated with MBL (THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO MARINE BIOLOGICAL LABORATORY) given the thoughtless cuts at NSF, NOAA and other federal agencies.
My grad school (UMASS Amherst) will be devastated.
Academia will be crushed.
Where does Elon musk think all his employees come from? And neuralink is just a summation of academic research in brain computer interfaces. Don't know about rockets or electric cars but sure it's the same story. It's all just extensions of academic work, including and especially "AI".
Say what you like about Hinton he has earned his success by working in academia for decades before it became worth any money. Many, many people didn't see it coming and next time it won't happen without funding for academic research.
As a uk person, i've been googling "musk royal society" for several weeks. They did have a meeting a few days ago. Dorothy bishop, a well known developmental psychologist resigned from the royal society last year over Elon musk. Stephen curry organised a a letter last week. They are expected to be chickenshit about this, but let's see. Maybe they will show some moral fibre. I think it does matter, musk is doubtless narcissistic and they notice when their accolades are removed.
I know Dorothy from my earlier career in language development was proud to see her take a stand.
Thought you might. It's not a small thing for an ordinary person to give up an award like that. In the unlikely event I get one I don't know that I could.
Not that she's an ordinary researcher. But she's not a billionaire or an aristocrat.
Brits? Chickensh*t? Nooooo!
Say it ain't so!
Just the Royal Society. To be fair being chickenshit isn't our national stereotype at all.
The cuts are abrupt, unplanned, and made without consultation. They are indiscriminate and lack strategic consideration.
Funding for graduate students across all STEM fields is being reduced. Critical staff who maintain shared research facilities are being lost. Research on advanced materials for computing, software for medical devices, and new disease therapies—along with many other vital projects—is being delayed or halted.
I wish I said that as concisely. in fact, i am going to update the online version, quoting you, if that’s ok
It's abundantly obvious that it's the neo reactionary Curtis Yarvin playbook to a T. Accelerationism. The economy is crashing on purpose. It's the whole point. You're operating under the assumption that there is any other goal here beyond destroying all institutions. None of this deters them because it's the entire point. Combine it at a time of heavy research in robotics and AI and it's honestly ridiculous to deny what the goal of it all is.
"Institutions that took decades to build are being rapidly disassembled, for no good reason." I would agree with this. But, beyond this 'no 'good' reason," might we all be best trying to understand what the underlying reason actually is, and for whom that good is intended? Could the ideas of Curtis Yarvin, and those, such as J.D. Vance and Peter Thiel, who seem to be onboard with his perspective, provide some enlightenment? If this is the motivation behind some or all of Musk's actions, then we have a whole lot more to be very concerned about, than this one issue, as significant as it is. What's your opinion on this?
Elon seems to be following the plan outlined by Yarvin for the creation of a technocracy. There is a lot darkness to be found in the heart of Silicon Valley. This might be the rot that Gary found in the valley and I still need to get his most recent book.
https://www.thenerdreich.com/reboot-elon-musk-ceo-dictator-doge/
I was terrible in science in high school and college and had tremendous respect for what I couldn't understand or had interest in. With a keystroke by a 19 year old, we are losing people who could have made discoveries in science and are now sidelined by idiots who have no clue what they are doing.
You and Musk are in agreement that history is the ultimate judge. But Musk seems not to understand that this has no relevance in the here and now. His "history will be the judge" is an argument that has no *use* at this point (it does not lead to a change in any decision or action), and — following Uncle Ludwig — is thus a meaningless statement for the here and now.
If at all meaningful, it is a proof of Musk being strongly convinced: Musk seems convinced he is right and thus history will prove him right. No doubt is discernible, not even "I will make mistakes" is doubt, as the wanton making of mistakes ('move fast and break things') is what the critique is about. Convictions (mental automation) is a key element of human psychology and they produce any argument that will help to keep a conviction unchanged. A reference to a deity or to future historians is more or less equal in that respect.
Hinton's link to 'free speech' is a silly non sequitur, by the way. What does he expect? Musk has an utter naive idea about free speech (and about human intelligence — the basis of free speech absolutism). He is fine with Hinton saying this and his reaction fits in that pattern. Hinton and Musk in some respect are akin: they act on the basis of strong convictions (Hinton on AI) and neither makes the impression to be capable of much doubt.
I suppose it is clear this era won't be called "the second age of enlightenment". Maybe it is going to be called "the age of distrust" or "the age of fragmentation". And the information (digital) revolution definitely has a part in that. Oh well, history will be the judge. If we still have historians, that is...
I call it the age of open corruption. Nothing is inevitable – the tech eschaton is a belief system just like free market fundamentalism.
The problem with this analysis is that we are liquidating history itself. The notion of 'history as judge' assumes a continuity that no longer holds. What remains is pure immediacy, without the structures that would make future judgment meaningful.
I wrote about this process yesterday.
https://wewillnotbeflattened.substack.com/p/the-liquidation-of-history-in-the?r=lb7jj
Pure immediacy, and utter lack of shame (on the contrary, grandiose narcissism).
The fact that you are defending Collins means you have no credibility.
In his blog post, dated March 26, 2020, Collins expressed his strong opposition to the lab leak theory, which he called “outrageous.” The sole basis for Collins' post was the fraudulent Proximal Origin paper, published just a few days earlier. Collins failed to acknowledge that he, along with Fauci, played a significant role in orchestrating the publication of this fraudulent paper, which explicitly aimed to promote the natural origin theory while discrediting the lab leak theory. Wolinetz's justification for silencing a prominent colleague was so flimsy that the only reasonable conclusion one can draw from her actions is that she was helping Collins and Fauci to cover up their involvement in seeding the pandemic, which included outsourcing gain-of-function experiments on coronaviruses to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Avoid politics if you do not want to get caught in polarized debates.
No matter the issue, there will always be pushback and controversy. Cutting unnecessary expenses is not inherently bad, but it will not benefit everyone.
AI is in the spotlight, with different forces backing each other. There is no perfect solution—every choice will impact someone.
When the tides shift, new investments will replace the current funding drought.
Don’t blame me—I am just pointing out that every decision has consequences. In politics, no one is ever fully satisfied because agreeing with every move is nearly impossible.
Understand the game, keep it civil, and defend your stance without going too far.
Who the heck thought he belonged in the Royal Society to begin with?
Come now. It's all about the Benjamins dahling.
I had an enlightening conversation with a relative of Peter Acworth, founder of kink(dot)com. (Just don't.) Peter dropped out of grad school in math to create the premier web site for BDSM porn in the world. His family was horrified.
But, then it came to their attention that... ahem. Peter was making, (oh my) $17 million a year. So, he appeared at Christmas dinners for the clan, clad in his trademark skirt. He is now respectable and "eccentric" because of the money. Next stop, a young lady of said parentage shall marry into the Royal Family. Or perhaps Peter can be inducted into the Royal Society?
What say all of you?
I'd say the Royal Society worries about reputation as well as money. If they lose their reputation, they are over. It wasn't that crazy to elect Elon Musk in 2018 because he developed his own space program, not a porn site. I don't know what he donated. It might be possible to look it up since they are a registered UK charity.
They might expel him, not necessarily because they are moral but because they are worried about how they look. But they might also do it because they are moral, it is after all run by scientists who are not known for their interest in money. Who knows what they will do, or what they should do. I don't know what power Musk has to harm them or UK science which they exist to promote. He has a lot of power that's for sure.
“History will be the ultimate judge” is exactly what every single villain and imbecile in history would have said: Hitler, Stalin, Chairman Mao, etc.
Elon is so arrogant and unperceptive it is unfathomable.
Meh. Elon has always been like that. A charging rhino with a smile and industriousness. It is why he is so successful. The last thing his people want is for him to return and guide them directly again.
The "abrupt, unplanned, indiscriminate" nature of the cuts to science are reflected in the DOGE cuts across the board. The cruel, random, unjustified firings of talented, dedicated, idealistic young people from government is indefensible, and will do lasting damage to our country. "Any jackass can kick down a barn, but it takes a skilled carpenter to build one" -- DOGE is a team of such jackasses. The conflicts of interest alone make Musk the absolute last person who should be wielding this kind of power, not to mention an abject lack of expertise in the areas of government he's cutting. The repeated misrepresentations and errors in the nature and value of the cuts is clear evidence that the results can't be trusted. There's no accountability here. No transparency. The claims of success are so much spin and propaganda.
First it’s some wacky WaPo piece, then Zeynep and now Francis Collins is who you choose to align your principles with? Yes, Elon needs figure out the right balance, but you need to not let your emotions get the better of you and lead you some truly disingenuous people. Collins may have done a lot of good things in his life, but as it relates to COVID he played a disastrous role which he has continued to lie (and get exposed for it even as recently as last week) about in the face of an over-abundance of evidence. Agreed that a more balanced approach needs to be taken around the funding of scientific research but I would stick to the topic and refrain from lionizing the more despicable characters of our the recent pandemic. I’m just sitting here with baited breath waiting for you to start telling us what admirable guy Fauci was too.
Is there any way to organize a SUFS rally in London on the short notice? Anyone have any connections with activists and organizers here? DM me and let's make it happen!
please send me a substack DM with your email address
An unelected individual making cuts in NIH, NSF, or ICR without congressional oversight is several steps toward autocracy. Now, will our autocracy be the 'timeout' version (Xi and Jack Ma) or the defenestration type? I think a high possibility is the puttanesca kind.
However, the US is fully capable of innovating in this domain. Estimates place nonmilitary gun ownership in the US at 120 per 100 people. Adjusting out the non-adult population and for the non-gun owners, the 120 is 500. Picking Pareto as a distribution suggests there is a subset of citizens who have 1,984 per 100.
Who are these people? I don't know, but you'll find a significant portion of this group by automating trucking, surplussing the UAW, and bankrupting the companies that pay UAW pensions.
This US population (extreme gun ownership) is roughly half the population of Afghanistan. Afghanistan has, in total, 4.27M guns. This subset of the US has 313.6M guns.
In that potential dystopia, there is no NIH or NSF. So, I don't think the question is how much Elon is cutting NSF, but rather, in a representative democracy, how is it that he is cutting NSF at all?
The intellectual center of the world is migrating East. At that’s my read on the three autocrats as of this morning. That magic of compounding effort is moving east as well. So, if you’re in the west, drop whatever you’re doing.