I’d agree that most humans are not pathological power seekers; however I believe that’s exactly why we end up with successful pathological power seekers.
Like the world is learning with nukes, you cannot rely on the powerful for mercy. You can only rely on the powerful to grasp for more power and the only way to stop them is to yourself be as strong as possible.
If a utopia ever exists, it will only be because of a stalemate arms race (see: no nuclear powers have had an open war). Peaceful utopia is otherwise too easily disrupted by a single asshole with a big stick.
I remember in the 2010s reading about them and also reading that there are de facto hierarchies within Valve for given projects, even if they aren’t explicitly laid out.
It would be interesting if the de facto hierarchies arose entirely by bottom-up merit (not, say, approval from above), and were flexible and ephemeral, not self-perpetuating.
People could self-organize, on-demand, for a task, and structure whatever hierarchy was appropriate, based on somewhat optimal resource allocations for that task.
(Example: Person A might normally be the most experienced at facilitating the group's coordination, but A is providing key technical expertise for this task. Person B isn't critical path on this task, and has facilitating skills and interest in that role, so B volunteers for that role for the duration of the task.)
This exists; they are called sprint races. Sprint races are generally a stepping stone to the bigger leagues because it doesn't require the same type of manpower and coordination to be competitive. A lot of spec series (like the MX-5 series that runs with IMSA sometimes) tend to be this way to lower the barrier of entry.
Your definition of "learning" is incomplete because you're applying LLM concepts to how human brains work. An LLM only "learns" during training. From that point forward all it has is its context and vector DBs. If an LLM and vector DB is not actively interacted with, nothing happens to it. However for the brain, experiencing IS learning. And the brain NEVER stops experiencing.
Just because I don't remember my experiences at second 45232 on May 22, doesn't mean that my brain was not actively adapting to my experiences at that moment. The brain does a lot more learning than just what is conscious. And then when I went to sleep the brain continued pruning and organizing my unconscious learning for the day.
Seeing if someone can go from token to freeform physical usefulness will be interesting. I'm of the belief that LLMs are too verbose and energy intensive to go from language regurgitation machines to moving in the real world according to free form prompting. It may be accomplishable with the vast amount of hype investment, but I think the energy requirements and latency will make an LLM-based approach economically infeasible.
> I'm of the belief that LLMs are too verbose and energy intensive to go from language regurgitation machines to moving in the real world according to free form prompting.
This is not just possible, it is already happening. It just gets drowned in the media noise about chatbots. Look at some current research in this area (e.g. by Nvidia last year).
I don't think they believe collusion isn't happening.
I think the argument above is that democrats are one of the drivers of building restrictions, leading to the ability to collude. If new entrants to the market were plentiful then the existing cartels would be undercut. Also, rent control puts a tight lock on the rental market by forcing landlords to keep their rents high lest they become locked into the low rents they may otherwise offer.
I'll leave it as an exercise for the reader whether to be on board with that assessment, but there is a reasonable argument to be made that a free-er market could actually benefit housing costs.
What this completely discounts is the existence of corporate landlords. Thousands of homes are being bought and kept empty to restrict that supply. It's ridiculous to destroy land used for other purposes just to build more empty houses and hope Blackstone et al. don't notice. It's also silly to hand those corporate landlords the right to jack up rents overnight as though they won't use it. The assumption that they'd rather have lower risk agreements over a longer period of time (e.g. lower rents now with slow increases year-to-year) is naively assuming that publicly traded companies will not attempt to maximize profits for the coming quarter.
This test is actually fairly well validated. The purpose isn't to specifically diagnose your problems, it is to find the floor for how much trauma you may have experienced. Sure, some may have had parents under the influence occasionally while others witnessed heavy usage in front of them. The point is that even for the "light" case, that is a significant issue.
Think of it as childhood trauma triage. It is a good first pass to help people understand their past and maybe help some people understand that their past is more traumatic than they realize.
I don't doubt it's well validated, and the point of it also is clear. Based on the questions I could appreciate exactly your point -- people with some mixture of traumatic experiences will score higher, people without (or with fewer) will score lower. I imagine, as a total laymen in this field, the intended application is surveying large groups to focus resources, or perhaps as intake material.
But sharing and comparing scores on an internet forum seems (to me, as a laymen) outside of the test's design purpose. Initially I thought I would share my experiences here, but like mentioned in other comments -- I just don't want to breathe life into any of that. I hope other people who participated in the discussion found catharsis at least.
ACE of 6, father of 3 under 7. I love fatherhood, but it is easily the most difficult leap of faith I've taken in my life. A majority of my coping mechanisms were based around quiet time to myself and that basically doesn't exist anymore for me.
Children are a deeply personal choice that make basically no sense. They are the ultimate selfless act, and much of the emotional damage children suffer is due to their parents not understanding this. They are exhausting, expensive, and time consuming... until you die. And every time you decide to use them for your own gain, it will cost them something.
To more directly address your point: children will force you to cope with their existence. Whether you have the ability to introspect on yourself during the process can turn that into growth is on you, not them.
If you don't mind me asking, what is your blood pressure with this abnormality? My gut feeling would be that it you have a much larger gap between your systolic and diastolic numbers than average?
