Podcast appearances and mentions of sarah constantin

In this episode, Patrick McKenzie (@patio11) is joined by Tim Fist, Director of Emerging Technologies at the Institute for Progress, to discuss how energy constraints could bottleneck AI development. They explore how AI training clusters will soon require gigawatts of power—equivalent to multiple nuclear plants—with projections showing a single cluster needing 5 gigawatts by 2030. Tim explains why behind-the-meter generation and geothermal energy offer promising solutions while regulatory hurdles like NEPA and transmission permitting create "litigation doom loops" that threaten America's competitiveness. The conversation covers the global race for compute infrastructure, with China and the UAE making aggressive investments while the US struggles with permitting delays, highlighting how energy policy will determine which nations lead the AI revolution. –Full transcript available here: www.complexsystemspodcast.com/the-ai-energy-bottleneck-with-tim-fist/–Sponsor:  VantaVanta automates security compliance and builds trust, helping companies streamline ISO, SOC 2, and AI framework certifications. Learn more at https://vanta.com/complex–Recommended in this episode:Compute in America https://ifp.org/compute-in-america/Tim Fist on Twitter https://x.com/fiiiiiist The Enchippening by Sarah Constantin https://sarahconstantin.substack.com/p/the-enchippening Solar economics with Casey Handmer https://open.spotify.com/episode/0GHegWgLSubYxvATmbWhQu?si=VKJYaSwaRJq_YcK8kJIdvQ AI & Power economics with Azeem Azhar https://open.spotify.com/episode/3KkvPiYpGvXCRukWxHP7Ch?si=RPEjrs67S9CFA0lLak6OVAFracking with Austin Vernon  https://open.spotify.com/episode/0YDV1XyjUCM2RtuTcBGYH9?si=hSniC3N0QkqhF74ra-XAcA Economics of the grid with Travis Dauwalter https://open.spotify.com/episode/5JY8e84sEXmHFlc8IR2kRb?si=BsqMZGu6Qr-2F7-RSyyEhw–Timestamps:(00:00) Intro(00:40) Energy bottlenecks in AI development(02:56) Technical and policy solutions for energy needs(05:18) Challenges in transmission infrastructure(12:14) Behind the meter generation explained(17:50) Solar and storage: The future of energy(18:47) Sponsor: Vanta(20:05) Solar and storage: The future of energy (part 2)(29:07) Power purchase agreements and financing(33:17) Financing geothermal wells(33:53) The promise of geothermal energy(35:25) Challenges in geothermal adoption(36:59) Industrial applications of geothermal heat(45:01) Geothermal energy and national security(49:27) Global investments in AI and energy infrastructure(56:29) Policy and technical expertise in AI(01:00:54) The role of government in technological advancements(01:05:07) Wrap

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Why so many "racists" at Manifest?, published by Austin on June 18, 2024 on The Effective Altruism Forum. Manifest 2024 is a festival that we organized last weekend in Berkeley. By most accounts, it was a great success. On our feedback form, the average response to "would you recommend to a friend" was a 9.0/10. Reviewers said nice things like "one of the best weekends of my life" and "dinners and meetings and conversations with people building local cultures so achingly beautiful they feel almost like dreams" and "I've always found tribalism mysterious, but perhaps that was just because I hadn't yet found my tribe." Arnold Brooks running a session on Aristotle's Metaphysics. More photos of Manifest here. However, a recent post on The Guardian and review on the EA Forum highlight an uncomfortable fact: we invited a handful of controversial speakers to Manifest, whom these authors call out as "racist". Why did we invite these folks? First: our sessions and guests were mostly not controversial - despite what you may have heard Here's the schedule for Manifest on Saturday: (The largest & most prominent talks are on the left. Full schedule here.) And here's the full list of the 57 speakers we featured on our website: Nate Silver, Luana Lopes Lara, Robin Hanson, Scott Alexander, Niraek Jain-sharma, Byrne Hobart, Aella, Dwarkesh Patel, Patrick McKenzie, Chris Best, Ben Mann, Eliezer Yudkowsky, Cate Hall, Paul Gu, John Phillips, Allison Duettmann, Dan Schwarz, Alex Gajewski, Katja Grace, Kelsey Piper, Steve Hsu, Agnes Callard, Joe Carlsmith, Daniel Reeves, Misha Glouberman, Ajeya Cotra, Clara Collier, Samo Burja, Stephen Grugett, James Grugett, Javier Prieto, Simone Collins, Malcolm Collins, Jay Baxter, Tracing Woodgrains, Razib Khan, Max Tabarrok, Brian Chau, Gene Smith, Gavriel Kleinwaks, Niko McCarty, Xander Balwit, Jeremiah Johnson, Ozzie Gooen, Danny Halawi, Regan Arntz-Gray, Sarah Constantin, Frank Lantz, Will Jarvis, Stuart Buck, Jonathan Anomaly, Evan Miyazono, Rob Miles, Richard Hanania, Nate Soares, Holly Elmore, Josh Morrison. Judge for yourself; I hope this gives a flavor of what Manifest was actually like. Our sessions and guests spanned a wide range of topics: prediction markets and forecasting, of course; but also finance, technology, philosophy, AI, video games, politics, journalism and more. We deliberately invited a wide range of speakers with expertise outside of prediction markets; one of the goals of Manifest is to increase adoption of prediction markets via cross-pollination. Okay, but there sure seemed to be a lot of controversial ones… I was the one who invited the majority (~40/60) of Manifest's special guests; if you want to get mad at someone, get mad at me, not Rachel or Saul or Lighthaven; certainly not the other guests and attendees of Manifest. My criteria for inviting a speaker or special guest was roughly, "this person is notable, has something interesting to share, would enjoy Manifest, and many of our attendees would enjoy hearing from them". Specifically: Richard Hanania - I appreciate Hanania's support of prediction markets, including partnering with Manifold to run a forecasting competition on serious geopolitical topics and writing to the CFTC in defense of Kalshi. (In response to backlash last year, I wrote a post on my decision to invite Hanania, specifically) Simone and Malcolm Collins - I've enjoyed their Pragmatist's Guide series, which goes deep into topics like dating, governance, and religion. I think the world would be better with more kids in it, and thus support pronatalism. I also find the two of them to be incredibly energetic and engaging speakers IRL. Jonathan Anomaly - I attended a talk Dr. Anomaly gave about the state-of-the-art on polygenic embryonic screening. I was very impressed that something long-considered scien...

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Medical Roundup #1, published by Zvi on January 17, 2024 on LessWrong. Saving up medical and health related stories from several months allowed for much better organizing of them, so I am happy I split these off. I will still post anything more urgent on a faster basis. There's lots of things here that are fascinating and potentially very important, but I've had to prioritize and focus elsewhere, so I hope others pick up various torches. Vaccination Ho! We have a new malaria vaccine. That's great. WHO thinks this is not an especially urgent opportunity, or any kind of 'emergency' and so wants to wait for months before actually putting shots into arms. So what if we also see reports like 'cuts infant deaths by 13%'? WHO doing WHO things, WHO Delenda Est and all that. What can we do about this? Also, EA and everyone else who works in global health needs to do a complete post-mortem of how this was allowed to take so long, and why they couldn't or didn't do more to speed things along. There are in particular claims that the 2015-2019 delay was due to lack of funding, despite a malaria vaccine being an Open Phil priority. Saloni Dattani, Rachel Glennerster and Siddhartha Haria write about the long road for Works in Progress. They recommend future use of advance market commitments, which seems like a no brainer first step. We also have an FDA approved vaccine for chikungunya. Oh, and also we invented a vaccine for cancer, a huge boost to melanoma treatment. Katalin Kariko and Drew Weissman win the Nobel Prize for mRNA vaccine technology. Rarely are such decisions this easy. Worth remembering that, in addition to denying me admission despite my status as a legacy, the University of Pennsylvania also refused to allow Kariko a tenure track position, calling her 'not of faculty quality,' and laughed at her leaving for BioNTech, especially when they refer to this as 'Penn's historic research team.' Did you also know that Katalin's advisor threatened to have her deported if she switched labs, and attempted to follow through on that threat? I also need to note the deep disappointment in Elon Musk, who even a few months ago was continuing to throw shade on the Covid vaccines. And what do we do more generally about the fact that there are quite a lot of takes that one has reason to be nervous to say out loud, seem likely to be true, and also are endorsed by the majority of the population? When we discovered all the vaccines. Progress continues. We need to go faster. Reflections on what happened with medical start-up Alvea. They proved you could move much faster on vaccine development than anyone would admit, but then found that there was insufficient commercial or philanthropic demand for doing so to make it worth everyone's time, so they wound down. As an individual and as a civilization, you get what you pay for. Potential Progress Researchers discover what they call an on/off switch for breast cancer. Not clear yet how to use this to help patients. London hospital uses competent execution on basic 1950s operations management, increases surgical efficiency by a factor of about five. Teams similar to a Formula 1 pit crew cut sterilization times from 40 minutes to 2. One room does anesthesia on the next patient while the other operates on the current one. There seems to be no reason this could not be implemented everywhere, other than lack of will? Dementia rates down 13% over the past 25 years, for unclear reasons. Sarah Constantin explores possibilities for cognitive enhancement. We have not yet tried many of the things one would try. We found a way to suppress specific immune reactions, rather than having to suppress immune reactions in general, opening up the way to potentially fully curing a whole host of autoimmune disorders. Yes, in mice, of course it's in mice, so don't ge...

Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Medical Roundup #1, published by Zvi on January 17, 2024 on LessWrong. Saving up medical and health related stories from several months allowed for much better organizing of them, so I am happy I split these off. I will still post anything more urgent on a faster basis. There's lots of things here that are fascinating and potentially very important, but I've had to prioritize and focus elsewhere, so I hope others pick up various torches. Vaccination Ho! We have a new malaria vaccine. That's great. WHO thinks this is not an especially urgent opportunity, or any kind of 'emergency' and so wants to wait for months before actually putting shots into arms. So what if we also see reports like 'cuts infant deaths by 13%'? WHO doing WHO things, WHO Delenda Est and all that. What can we do about this? Also, EA and everyone else who works in global health needs to do a complete post-mortem of how this was allowed to take so long, and why they couldn't or didn't do more to speed things along. There are in particular claims that the 2015-2019 delay was due to lack of funding, despite a malaria vaccine being an Open Phil priority. Saloni Dattani, Rachel Glennerster and Siddhartha Haria write about the long road for Works in Progress. They recommend future use of advance market commitments, which seems like a no brainer first step. We also have an FDA approved vaccine for chikungunya. Oh, and also we invented a vaccine for cancer, a huge boost to melanoma treatment. Katalin Kariko and Drew Weissman win the Nobel Prize for mRNA vaccine technology. Rarely are such decisions this easy. Worth remembering that, in addition to denying me admission despite my status as a legacy, the University of Pennsylvania also refused to allow Kariko a tenure track position, calling her 'not of faculty quality,' and laughed at her leaving for BioNTech, especially when they refer to this as 'Penn's historic research team.' Did you also know that Katalin's advisor threatened to have her deported if she switched labs, and attempted to follow through on that threat? I also need to note the deep disappointment in Elon Musk, who even a few months ago was continuing to throw shade on the Covid vaccines. And what do we do more generally about the fact that there are quite a lot of takes that one has reason to be nervous to say out loud, seem likely to be true, and also are endorsed by the majority of the population? When we discovered all the vaccines. Progress continues. We need to go faster. Reflections on what happened with medical start-up Alvea. They proved you could move much faster on vaccine development than anyone would admit, but then found that there was insufficient commercial or philanthropic demand for doing so to make it worth everyone's time, so they wound down. As an individual and as a civilization, you get what you pay for. Potential Progress Researchers discover what they call an on/off switch for breast cancer. Not clear yet how to use this to help patients. London hospital uses competent execution on basic 1950s operations management, increases surgical efficiency by a factor of about five. Teams similar to a Formula 1 pit crew cut sterilization times from 40 minutes to 2. One room does anesthesia on the next patient while the other operates on the current one. There seems to be no reason this could not be implemented everywhere, other than lack of will? Dementia rates down 13% over the past 25 years, for unclear reasons. Sarah Constantin explores possibilities for cognitive enhancement. We have not yet tried many of the things one would try. We found a way to suppress specific immune reactions, rather than having to suppress immune reactions in general, opening up the way to potentially fully curing a whole host of autoimmune disorders. Yes, in mice, of course it's in mice, so don't ge...

De retour pour une nouvelle saison, les Ficelles reçoivent cette semaine, en direct de L'Idéal, Victoria Charlton (elle) et Bob le Chef (il) pour discuter du premier épisode de la saison d'OD Andalousie!Recommandations culturelles : * Le GROS talk show, du Groupe Équilibre * La galerie d'art en ligne Galerie Galerie * Le livre de photographies de l'exposition Montréal en mutation, de Joanie Lafrenière * Le livre Clit révolution, de Sarah Constantin et Alice Des Elvire Duvelle-Charles

Débat entre Charles Juillard du Centre (JU), Thomas Blaesi de l'UDC (GE), Virginie Trachsel du PLR (JU), Leonardo Gomez Mariaca des Vert'Libéraux, (FR), Sarah Constantin du PS (VS), et Sarah Blum du POP (NE).

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: AI doom from an LLM-plateau-ist perspective, published by Steve Byrnes on April 27, 2023 on The AI Alignment Forum. (in the form of an FAQ) Q: What do you mean, “LLM plateau-ist”? A: As background, I think it's obvious that there will eventually be “transformative AI” (TAI) that would radically change the world. I'm interested in what this TAI will eventually look like algorithmically. Let's list some possibilities: A “Large Language Model (LLM) plateau-ist” would be defined as someone who thinks that categories (A-B), and usually also (C), will plateau in capabilities before reaching TAI levels. I am an LLM plateau-ist myself. I'm not going to argue about whether LLM-plateau-ism is right or wrong—that's outside the scope of this post, and also difficult for me to discuss publicly thanks to infohazard issues. Oh well, we'll find out one way or the other soon enough. In the broader AI community, both LLM-plateau-ism and its opposite seem plenty mainstream. Different LLM-plateau-ists have different reasons for holding this belief. I think the two main categories are: Theoretical—maybe they have theoretical beliefs about what is required for TAI, and they think that LLMs just aren't built right to do the things that TAI would need to do. Empirical—maybe they're not very impressed by the capabilities of current LLMs. Granted, future LLMs will be better than current ones. But maybe they have extrapolated that our planet will run out of data and/or compute before LLMs get all the way up to TAI levels. Q: If LLMs will plateau, then does that prove that all the worry about AI x-risk is wrong and stupid? A: No no no, a million times no, and I'm annoyed that this misconception is so rampant in public discourse right now. (Side note to AI x-risk people: If you have high credence that AI will kill everyone but only medium credence that this AI will involve LLMs, then maybe consider trying harder to get that nuance across in your communications. E.g. Eliezer Yudkowsky is in this category, I think.) A couple random examples I've seen of people failing to distinguish “AI may kill everyone” from “.and that AI will definitely be an LLM”: Venkatesh Rao's blog post “Beyond Hyperanthropomorphism” goes through an elaborate 7000-word argument that eventually culminates, in the final section, in his assertion that a language model trained on internet data won't be a powerful agent that gets things done in the world, but if we train an AI with a robot body, then it could be a powerful agent that gets things done in the world. OK fine, let's suppose for the sake of argument he's right that robot bodies will be necessary for TAI. Then people are obviously going to build those AIs sooner or later, right? So let's talk about whether they will pose an x-risk. But that's not what Venkatesh does. Instead he basically treats “they will need robot bodies” as the triumphant conclusion, more-or-less sufficient in itself to prove that AI x-risk discourse is stupid. Sarah Constantin's blog post entitled “Why I am not an AI doomer” states right up front that she agrees “1. Artificial general intelligence is possible in principle . 2, Artificial general intelligence, by default, kills us all . 3. It is technically difficult, and perhaps impossible, to ensure an AI values human life.” She only disagrees with the claim that this will happen soon, and via scaling LLMs. I think she should have picked a different title for her post!! (I've seen many more examples on Twitter, reddit, comment threads, etc.) Anyway, if you think LLMs will plateau, then you can probably feel confident that we won't get TAI imminently (see below), but I don't see why you would have much more confidence that TAI will go well for humanity. In fact, for my part, if I believed that (A)-type systems were sufficient for TAI—which I don't...

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: AI doom from an LLM-plateau-ist perspective, published by Steven Byrnes on April 27, 2023 on LessWrong. (in the form of an FAQ) Q: What do you mean, “LLM plateau-ist”? A: As background, I think it's obvious that there will eventually be “transformative AI” (TAI) that would radically change the world. I'm interested in what this TAI will eventually look like algorithmically. Let's list some possibilities: A “Large Language Model (LLM) plateau-ist” would be defined as someone who thinks that categories (A-B), and usually also (C), will plateau in capabilities before reaching TAI levels. I am an LLM plateau-ist myself. I'm not going to argue about whether LLM-plateau-ism is right or wrong—that's outside the scope of this post, and also difficult for me to discuss publicly thanks to infohazard issues. Oh well, we'll find out one way or the other soon enough. In the broader AI community, both LLM-plateau-ism and its opposite seem plenty mainstream. Different LLM-plateau-ists have different reasons for holding this belief. I think the two main categories are: Theoretical—maybe they have theoretical beliefs about what is required for TAI, and they think that LLMs just aren't built right to do the things that TAI would need to do. Empirical—maybe they're not very impressed by the capabilities of current LLMs. Granted, future LLMs will be better than current ones. But maybe they have extrapolated that our planet will run out of data and/or compute before LLMs get all the way up to TAI levels. Q: If LLMs will plateau, then does that prove that all the worry about AI x-risk is wrong and stupid? A: No no no, a million times no, and I'm annoyed that this misconception is so rampant in public discourse right now. (Side note to AI x-risk people: If you have high credence that AI will kill everyone but only medium credence that this AI will involve LLMs, then maybe consider trying harder to get that nuance across in your communications. E.g. Eliezer Yudkowsky is in this category, I think.) A couple random examples I've seen of people failing to distinguish “AI may kill everyone” from “.and that AI will definitely be an LLM”: Venkatesh Rao's blog post “Beyond Hyperanthropomorphism” goes through an elaborate 7000-word argument that eventually culminates, in the final section, in his assertion that a language model trained on internet data won't be a powerful agent that gets things done in the world, but if we train an AI with a robot body, then it could be a powerful agent that gets things done in the world. OK fine, let's suppose for the sake of argument he's right that robot bodies will be necessary for TAI. Then people are obviously going to build those AIs sooner or later, right? So let's talk about whether they will pose an x-risk. But that's not what Venkatesh does. Instead he basically treats “they will need robot bodies” as the triumphant conclusion, more-or-less sufficient in itself to prove that AI x-risk discourse is stupid. Sarah Constantin's blog post entitled “Why I am not an AI doomer” states right up front that she agrees “1. Artificial general intelligence is possible in principle . 2, Artificial general intelligence, by default, kills us all . 3. It is technically difficult, and perhaps impossible, to ensure an AI values human life.” She only disagrees with the claim that this will happen soon, and via scaling LLMs. I think she should have picked a different title for her post!! (I've seen many more examples on Twitter, reddit, comment threads, etc.) Anyway, if you think LLMs will plateau, then you can probably feel confident that we won't get TAI imminently (see below), but I don't see why you would have much more confidence that TAI will go well for humanity. In fact, for my part, if I believed that (A)-type systems were sufficient for TAI—which I don't—then I thin...

Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: AI doom from an LLM-plateau-ist perspective, published by Steven Byrnes on April 27, 2023 on LessWrong. (in the form of an FAQ) Q: What do you mean, “LLM plateau-ist”? A: As background, I think it's obvious that there will eventually be “transformative AI” (TAI) that would radically change the world. I'm interested in what this TAI will eventually look like algorithmically. Let's list some possibilities: A “Large Language Model (LLM) plateau-ist” would be defined as someone who thinks that categories (A-B), and usually also (C), will plateau in capabilities before reaching TAI levels. I am an LLM plateau-ist myself. I'm not going to argue about whether LLM-plateau-ism is right or wrong—that's outside the scope of this post, and also difficult for me to discuss publicly thanks to infohazard issues. Oh well, we'll find out one way or the other soon enough. In the broader AI community, both LLM-plateau-ism and its opposite seem plenty mainstream. Different LLM-plateau-ists have different reasons for holding this belief. I think the two main categories are: Theoretical—maybe they have theoretical beliefs about what is required for TAI, and they think that LLMs just aren't built right to do the things that TAI would need to do. Empirical—maybe they're not very impressed by the capabilities of current LLMs. Granted, future LLMs will be better than current ones. But maybe they have extrapolated that our planet will run out of data and/or compute before LLMs get all the way up to TAI levels. Q: If LLMs will plateau, then does that prove that all the worry about AI x-risk is wrong and stupid? A: No no no, a million times no, and I'm annoyed that this misconception is so rampant in public discourse right now. (Side note to AI x-risk people: If you have high credence that AI will kill everyone but only medium credence that this AI will involve LLMs, then maybe consider trying harder to get that nuance across in your communications. E.g. Eliezer Yudkowsky is in this category, I think.) A couple random examples I've seen of people failing to distinguish “AI may kill everyone” from “.and that AI will definitely be an LLM”: Venkatesh Rao's blog post “Beyond Hyperanthropomorphism” goes through an elaborate 7000-word argument that eventually culminates, in the final section, in his assertion that a language model trained on internet data won't be a powerful agent that gets things done in the world, but if we train an AI with a robot body, then it could be a powerful agent that gets things done in the world. OK fine, let's suppose for the sake of argument he's right that robot bodies will be necessary for TAI. Then people are obviously going to build those AIs sooner or later, right? So let's talk about whether they will pose an x-risk. But that's not what Venkatesh does. Instead he basically treats “they will need robot bodies” as the triumphant conclusion, more-or-less sufficient in itself to prove that AI x-risk discourse is stupid. Sarah Constantin's blog post entitled “Why I am not an AI doomer” states right up front that she agrees “1. Artificial general intelligence is possible in principle . 2, Artificial general intelligence, by default, kills us all . 3. It is technically difficult, and perhaps impossible, to ensure an AI values human life.” She only disagrees with the claim that this will happen soon, and via scaling LLMs. I think she should have picked a different title for her post!! (I've seen many more examples on Twitter, reddit, comment threads, etc.) Anyway, if you think LLMs will plateau, then you can probably feel confident that we won't get TAI imminently (see below), but I don't see why you would have much more confidence that TAI will go well for humanity. In fact, for my part, if I believed that (A)-type systems were sufficient for TAI—which I don't—then I thin...

Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: AI doom from an LLM-plateau-ist perspective, published by Steve Byrnes on April 27, 2023 on The AI Alignment Forum. (in the form of an FAQ) Q: What do you mean, “LLM plateau-ist”? A: As background, I think it's obvious that there will eventually be “transformative AI” (TAI) that would radically change the world. I'm interested in what this TAI will eventually look like algorithmically. Let's list some possibilities: A “Large Language Model (LLM) plateau-ist” would be defined as someone who thinks that categories (A-B), and usually also (C), will plateau in capabilities before reaching TAI levels. I am an LLM plateau-ist myself. I'm not going to argue about whether LLM-plateau-ism is right or wrong—that's outside the scope of this post, and also difficult for me to discuss publicly thanks to infohazard issues. Oh well, we'll find out one way or the other soon enough. In the broader AI community, both LLM-plateau-ism and its opposite seem plenty mainstream. Different LLM-plateau-ists have different reasons for holding this belief. I think the two main categories are: Theoretical—maybe they have theoretical beliefs about what is required for TAI, and they think that LLMs just aren't built right to do the things that TAI would need to do. Empirical—maybe they're not very impressed by the capabilities of current LLMs. Granted, future LLMs will be better than current ones. But maybe they have extrapolated that our planet will run out of data and/or compute before LLMs get all the way up to TAI levels. Q: If LLMs will plateau, then does that prove that all the worry about AI x-risk is wrong and stupid? A: No no no, a million times no, and I'm annoyed that this misconception is so rampant in public discourse right now. (Side note to AI x-risk people: If you have high credence that AI will kill everyone but only medium credence that this AI will involve LLMs, then maybe consider trying harder to get that nuance across in your communications. E.g. Eliezer Yudkowsky is in this category, I think.) A couple random examples I've seen of people failing to distinguish “AI may kill everyone” from “.and that AI will definitely be an LLM”: Venkatesh Rao's blog post “Beyond Hyperanthropomorphism” goes through an elaborate 7000-word argument that eventually culminates, in the final section, in his assertion that a language model trained on internet data won't be a powerful agent that gets things done in the world, but if we train an AI with a robot body, then it could be a powerful agent that gets things done in the world. OK fine, let's suppose for the sake of argument he's right that robot bodies will be necessary for TAI. Then people are obviously going to build those AIs sooner or later, right? So let's talk about whether they will pose an x-risk. But that's not what Venkatesh does. Instead he basically treats “they will need robot bodies” as the triumphant conclusion, more-or-less sufficient in itself to prove that AI x-risk discourse is stupid. Sarah Constantin's blog post entitled “Why I am not an AI doomer” states right up front that she agrees “1. Artificial general intelligence is possible in principle . 2, Artificial general intelligence, by default, kills us all . 3. It is technically difficult, and perhaps impossible, to ensure an AI values human life.” She only disagrees with the claim that this will happen soon, and via scaling LLMs. I think she should have picked a different title for her post!! (I've seen many more examples on Twitter, reddit, comment threads, etc.) Anyway, if you think LLMs will plateau, then you can probably feel confident that we won't get TAI imminently (see below), but I don't see why you would have much more confidence that TAI will go well for humanity. In fact, for my part, if I believed that (A)-type systems were sufficient for TAI—which I don't...

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: [Link] Sarah Constantin: "Why I am Not An AI Doomer", published by lbThingrb on April 12, 2023 on LessWrong. This is a good post from Sarah Constantin explaining why her expected timeline to agentic AGI is long (> 10 years). Topics discussed include whether LLMs and other current major research directions will endow AIs with adequate world models, causal inference, and goal robustness across ontological shifts. Thanks for listening. To help us out with The Nonlinear Library or to learn more, please visit nonlinear.org.

Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: [Link] Sarah Constantin: "Why I am Not An AI Doomer", published by lbThingrb on April 12, 2023 on LessWrong. This is a good post from Sarah Constantin explaining why her expected timeline to agentic AGI is long (> 10 years). Topics discussed include whether LLMs and other current major research directions will endow AIs with adequate world models, causal inference, and goal robustness across ontological shifts. Thanks for listening. To help us out with The Nonlinear Library or to learn more, please visit nonlinear.org.

Rencontre avec Lou Sarabadzic, autrice avec Marko Mille (dessins) de la BD "Toujours trop ou pas assez. En finir avec la rhétorique foireuse du patriarcat", publiée mi-septembre en France, aux éditions Mango Society (Fleurus Editions) et prochainement au Québec, où vit la dessinatrice. Dans cette bande dessinée, elles abordent les nombreuses injonctions faites aux femmes, leurs origines, comment les combattre. Nous évoquons ensemble dans cet épisode la conception de la BD, mais aussi son précédent livre : "Poétique réjouissante du lubrifiant" (éditions Monstrograph, renommé en "éloge poétique du lubrifiant", éditions Le nouvel Attila), et bien sûr son parcours, ses combats, ses coups de cœur artistiques. Bonne écoute ! Référence citées dans l'épisode (ou en bonus) :Livres et revues Les œuvres de Lou Sarabadzic https://fr.lousarabadzic.com/ Les livres des édition éditions Monstrograph, fondées par Martin Page et Coline Pierré https://www.monstrograph.com/ dont "Au-delà de la pénétration" de Martin Page syndrome de la Schtroumpfette https://www.lespetitspoings.fr/2021/10/31/le-syndrome-de-la-schtroumpfette/ évoqué aussi dans le podcast Mansplaining https://www.slate.fr/audio/mansplaining/ et le livre "A l'écart de la meute, sortir de l'amitié masculine" (ed. Marabout), par Thomas Messias recommandations de Lou Sarabadzic : - Soeurs, revue de poésie https://www.revuesoeurs.fr/ - Les Editions des lisières, avec en particulièrement des œuvres de femmes http://editionsdeslisieres.com/ Podcasts Matière grasse, de Gras Politique, avec Daria Marx, Eva Perez-Bello et leurs invitées. Podcast d'utilité publique à faire écouter à toutes et tous. L'épisode sur l'école évoque les profs de sport. Mais je vous recommande de tout écouter. C'est édifiant. https://open.spotify.com/episode/5mXidBpcrZW6PnaKpZHiLe?si=A7O0JydeS4iE8UWrYt8ijQ&nd=1 "Première et dernière fois" de Lucile Bellan, Slate Podcasts (Benjamin Saeptem Hours, Aurelie Rodrigues, Christophe Carron), où je parle (sous pseudo) notamment, de l'homme qui trouvait "sale" de doigter une femme. o_O https://www.slate.fr/audio/premiere-derniere-fois/lou-38-ans-je-sais-faire-bander-un-garcon-y-des-techniques "Plaisir d'offrir" de Klaire fait grr, sur sa démarche pour faire un don d'ovocytes. Prises de son additionnelles : Elodie Font. Réalisation & mix : Samuel Hirsch, sur Arte Radio https://www.arteradio.com/serie/plaisir_d_offrir/1300 "Single Jungle", épisode 3 avec Sharone Omankoy AKA Le Kitambala agité, où elle évoque l'afroféminisme et la misogynoir, car dans l'épisode avec Lou, nous parlons notamment de Serena Williams qui a subi toute sa carrière des critiques racistes et sexistes. https://singlejungle.lepodcast.fr/ep-3-afrofeminisme-charge-sexuelle-avec-sharone-omankoy-aka-le-kitambala-agite Emissions/Articles/autres "Toutes musclées" sur Arte, docu recommandé par Victoire Tuaillon https://www.arte.tv/fr/videos/RC-022998/toutes-musclees/ Newsletter de Victoire Tuaillon "Vraiment super" https://vraimentsuper.kessel.media/posts?landing=true Lisa Nasri, Happy fit, pour une autre approche de la pratique sportivehttps://www.instagram.com/happy.fit_/ Go Girlz, de Marie Lerpscher, qui réalise des portraits de sportives, des personnes de toute morphologie, dont des femmes grosses, comme moi ! https://gogirlz.fr/portrait/portrait-97-louisa/ Vasectomie, itw de Julien pour la série "Déclic", par Lucile Bellan sur Yahoo Style, extrait : https://twitter.com/Louisa_A/status/1350202655549829120 Vidéo entière https://fr.style.yahoo.com/d%C3%A9clic-journ%C3%A9e-mondiale-vasectomie-julien-170207527.html statistiques sur le Maninterrupting https://citizenpost.fr/manterrupting-coupler-parole-aux-femmes-systematiquement-sexiste/ Tweet de Nora Bouazzouni sur la PMA et l'âge arbitraire choisi par l'Etat français : "J'apprends donc qu'en france, les femmes n'ont pas le droit de faire une PMA après 43 ans. Pour les hommes, c'est 60 ans. Que l'état aille bien se faire foutre et se mêle de son cul." https://twitter.com/norabz/status/1582808147458084865 "L'hygiène" intime est un concept problématique. La flore vaginale d'une femme n'est pas sale. Post sur le lobby de l'hygiène intime sur le compte Instagram de Clit Révolution (Elvire Duvelle-Charles et Sarah Constantin) https://www.instagram.com/p/CWykVYjgmQd/ AVERTISSEMENT IMPORTANT : Ne jamais s'inscrire sur une application ou site de rencontres payant sans 1) lire les avis sur Google (Play store) ou Apple (App store) 2) lire les conditions tarifaires de l'abonnement. Ainsi je vous déconseille fortement le site PARSHIP, qui pratique l'extorsion : on ne peut pas résilier avant 1 an obligatoire, même si on n'utilise plus le service, qui n'est pas satisfaisant, car très peu de personnes dans votre région. Le service client n'a que mépris pour les clients et le service communication ne veut rien entendre (un comble), aucun arrangement possible. Donc évitez-vous une dépense inutile. Episode enregistré à distance via Zencastr.Montage, mixage : Isabelle Field https://ginkio.com/isabelle-fieldMusique : Générique de "Manimal", virgules sonores : Edouard Joguet, et https://www.zapsplat.com/Logo conçu par Lynda Mac-ConnellHébergement : Podcloud

Cet épisode a été réalisé en partenariat avec le Wagon, organisme de formation digitale ouvert à tous.tes pour apprendre à coder.Cette semaine, dans Quoi de Meuf, on se demande si les algorithmes veulent la peau des féministes. L'histoire des sciences informatiques est riche de pionnières à l'instar d'Ada Lovelace, Hedy Lamarr ou encore Grace Hopper. Pourtant, leurs contributions ont été invisibilisées et aujourd'hui cette invisibilisation se poursuit dans les entreprises de la tech où le gender gap continue d'affecter les femmes et sur les réseaux sociaux ou les femmes et les personnes LGBTQ+ sont affectées par les biais algorithmiques.Alors, l'informatique est-elle neutre? Qu'est-ce que c'est un algorithme? Comment impactent-ils notre usage des réseaux sociaux? Comment lutter contre ces biais? Clémentine Gallot et Anne-Laure Pineau décortiquent ces points et vous en parlent dans ce nouvel épisode de Quoi de Meuf.-Le Wagon est un organisme de formations intensives qui accompagne les personnes qui souhaitent se lancer ou s'épanouir dans une carrière dans la tech. Leur ambition : démontrer que le secteur est accessible à toutes et tous, quel que soit le genre, le milieu d'origine, la situation pro et perso, etc.Le Wagon propose des formations en Développement Web et en Data Science dans 8 villes françaises dont Paris, Lille, Bordeaux, Nantes et Lyon. Et organise tous les mois des ateliers gratuits d'introduction au code et à la data science." -Références entendues dans l'épisode : Lack of females in drug dose trials leads to overmedicated women par Yasmin Anwar pour Berkeley News. États-Unis : la reconnaissance faciale accusée de favoriser les biais racistes par Maxime Tellier pour France Culture. Des youtubeurs LGBT attaquent YouTube pour discrimination par Léa Polverini pour Slate. (2019)Apple : sa carte de crédit est-elle sexiste ? de Forbes. (2019)Féminisme et réseaux sociaux d'Elvire Duvelle-Charles. (2022)Clit revolution de Sarah Constantin et Elvire Duvelle-Charles. (2019)Instagram de Clit revolution. Instagram de Jouissance Club. Instagram de spmtamere.Censure : des créatrices de contenus délaissent Instagram pour Patreon d'Anna Cuxac pour Causette. (2021)Les oubliées du numérique d'Isabelle Collet. (2019)Des ordis, des souris et des hommes de Victoire Tuaillon dans les Couilles sur la Table. (2020)De l'autre côté de la machine d'Aurélie Jean. (2019)Computer Grrrls, l'expo qui veut en finir avec les « boy's clubs » de la tech par Margaux Dussert pour l'ADN. (2019) Gender Scan dans l'innovation par Global Contact. (2022)500 euros le premier entretien, 1 000 pour le suivant... le nouveau prix à payer pour espérer recruter dans la tech par Marine Protais pour l'ADN. (2022)Startups françaises : les équipes mixtes grandes gagnantes des levées de fonds de BCG et de Sista. (2022)The State of European Tech. (2021)Geena Davis announces 'Spellcheck for Bias' tool to redress gender imbalance in movies d'Andrew Pulver. (2019)Lesbians who tech & Allies. Ada Tech School. Opération les Ingénieuses.Féministes contre le cyberharcèlement.Millenium de Stieg Larsson. (2006)Stranger Things de Matt et Ross Duffer. (2016)Her de Spike Jonze. (2014)Westworld de Jonathan Nolan et Lisa Joy. (2016)Traque sur internet d'Irwin Winkler. (1995)Hedy Lamarr : from Extase to Wifi d'Alexandra Dean. (2017)Nos cœurs si loin d'Elaine Castillo. (2022)Les choses sont contre nous de Lucy Ellmann. (2022)Quoi de Meuf est une émission de Nouvelles Écoutes. Rédaction en chef : Clémentine Gallot. Journaliste chroniqueuse : Anne-Laure Pineau. Mixage et montage : Laurie Galligani. Prise de son Adrien Beccaria à l'Arrière boutique. Générique réalisé par Aurore Mahieu. Réalisation et coordination : Cassandra de Carvalho et Mathilde Jonin.Vous pouvez consulter notre politique de confidentialité sur https://art19.com/privacy ainsi que la notice de confidentialité de la Californie sur https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Mandatory Post About Monkeypox, published by Zvi on May 24, 2022 on LessWrong. It's 2022, so of course enough people are worried about an epidemic of Monkeypox that it feels like a necessary public service to do a post about Monkeypox. I didn't get to it especially fast exactly because I am not all that concerned, but I'm not entirely not concerned, so here we are. Sarah Constantin has a basic facts post. Basic facts if nothing has changed: The smallpox vaccine is 85% effective at stopping spread, but it uses live virus and leaves a scar. It is not generally available but we have a strategic stockpile that is sufficient for the entire United States (like we should aim to do with all possible pandemic viruses, but congress is refusing). There are claims of both a 2.1% and a 3.6% case fatality rate from this version of monkeypox. Most deaths are in immunocompromised individuals. Can also be dangerous for pregnant women or children. Most cases historically come from animal-to-human transmission. Person to person transmission comes from prolonged social contact, sexual contact, living with the infected, saunas or contact with infected clothing or bedding. Most cases in the outbreak are men who have sex with men, but that's not true of cases in Africa. Historical R0 estimate of 1.0. The WHO is treating this as a standard outbreak and following standard procedure. Link includes diagnostic criteria. Except that it looks like it has changed 50 SNPs, so maybe things changed. This is a link to a spreadsheet of cases. This thread also has a version of basic facts. This thread also covers the facts. This thread is excellent and has a bunch of facts. I go over that one later. This thread contains links to 10 scientific papers, none of which I have read. I haven't reached the ‘read all the papers' level of dive yet, which tells you I'm not that worried. Here is an OurWorldInData monkeypox data explorer. As of writing this cases are continuing to climb. I have more hope that the WHO will respond reasonably to something like this, that has been around for a while, as opposed to Covid-19 which was novel. That doesn't mean I'm counting on it. I am not overly concerned, but I would describe the current situation as ‘concerning' and would be much more concerned if no precautions were being taken or if people were generally acting as unconcerned as health officials are urging us to be. The situation does not seem all that analogous to the situation with Covid. This is not a new virus. It is a virus that has been around for a long time. There is the concern that as our vaccination campaigns against smallpox fade into the past the population gets incrementally more vulnerable in a way that might require countermeasures, but it seems highly unlikely those countermeasures would need to be onerous or even include vaccination. The pattern of spread only makes sense if this is not that easy a virus to catch. One thing that does make me worry is that the worst-case scenario, if things do get bad, is not that everyone gets vaccinated. That would be the worst-case scenario for a saner civilization. In ours, there is every reason to expect widespread resistance to such a campaign were it to prove necessary, and for this and other reasons a widespread reluctance to pull the trigger on the campaign. And of course, because of the insanity of our healthcare system, unless and until we're ready for a major vaccination push it is unlikely that the shot will be generally available at all. So the more realistic worst-case scenarios are either that we end up having an epidemic without the vaccine because of these factors, or we have the vaccine but few people choose to take it. The good news is I do not expect things to come to that unless the genetic changes are a big deal. The bad news is there is some ch...

Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Mandatory Post About Monkeypox, published by Zvi on May 24, 2022 on LessWrong. It's 2022, so of course enough people are worried about an epidemic of Monkeypox that it feels like a necessary public service to do a post about Monkeypox. I didn't get to it especially fast exactly because I am not all that concerned, but I'm not entirely not concerned, so here we are. Sarah Constantin has a basic facts post. Basic facts if nothing has changed: The smallpox vaccine is 85% effective at stopping spread, but it uses live virus and leaves a scar. It is not generally available but we have a strategic stockpile that is sufficient for the entire United States (like we should aim to do with all possible pandemic viruses, but congress is refusing). There are claims of both a 2.1% and a 3.6% case fatality rate from this version of monkeypox. Most deaths are in immunocompromised individuals. Can also be dangerous for pregnant women or children. Most cases historically come from animal-to-human transmission. Person to person transmission comes from prolonged social contact, sexual contact, living with the infected, saunas or contact with infected clothing or bedding. Most cases in the outbreak are men who have sex with men, but that's not true of cases in Africa. Historical R0 estimate of 1.0. The WHO is treating this as a standard outbreak and following standard procedure. Link includes diagnostic criteria. Except that it looks like it has changed 50 SNPs, so maybe things changed. This is a link to a spreadsheet of cases. This thread also has a version of basic facts. This thread also covers the facts. This thread is excellent and has a bunch of facts. I go over that one later. This thread contains links to 10 scientific papers, none of which I have read. I haven't reached the ‘read all the papers' level of dive yet, which tells you I'm not that worried. Here is an OurWorldInData monkeypox data explorer. As of writing this cases are continuing to climb. I have more hope that the WHO will respond reasonably to something like this, that has been around for a while, as opposed to Covid-19 which was novel. That doesn't mean I'm counting on it. I am not overly concerned, but I would describe the current situation as ‘concerning' and would be much more concerned if no precautions were being taken or if people were generally acting as unconcerned as health officials are urging us to be. The situation does not seem all that analogous to the situation with Covid. This is not a new virus. It is a virus that has been around for a long time. There is the concern that as our vaccination campaigns against smallpox fade into the past the population gets incrementally more vulnerable in a way that might require countermeasures, but it seems highly unlikely those countermeasures would need to be onerous or even include vaccination. The pattern of spread only makes sense if this is not that easy a virus to catch. One thing that does make me worry is that the worst-case scenario, if things do get bad, is not that everyone gets vaccinated. That would be the worst-case scenario for a saner civilization. In ours, there is every reason to expect widespread resistance to such a campaign were it to prove necessary, and for this and other reasons a widespread reluctance to pull the trigger on the campaign. And of course, because of the insanity of our healthcare system, unless and until we're ready for a major vaccination push it is unlikely that the shot will be generally available at all. So the more realistic worst-case scenarios are either that we end up having an epidemic without the vaccine because of these factors, or we have the vaccine but few people choose to take it. The good news is I do not expect things to come to that unless the genetic changes are a big deal. The bad news is there is some ch...

Rencontre avec ELVIRE DUVELLE-CHARLESà l'occasion de la parution de son livre au éditions Hors d'atteinte :Féminisme et réseaux sociauxune histoire d'amour et de haineOn tourne un peu en rond, comme dans un bocal. Nos discussions ressemblent de plus en plus à des réunions d'instagrammeuses anonymes. On déteste les réseaux sociaux mais on ne peut plus s'en passer. On est accros. Aux likes, aux abonnés, aux DM, à l'argent. Chaque nouveau partenariat rémunéré me donne envie de vomir. Le lendemain, je me réveille avec une grosse gueule de bois et une envie de tout arrêter. Mais il y a toujours une étincelle qui arrive de temps à autre…De la révolution du clitoris au Womanizer premium, il n'y a qu'un pas. Elvire Duvelle-Charles, journaliste, réalisatrice et activiste, coautrice du Manuel d'activisme féministe (Des femmes, 2019), écrit une histoire qui n'existait pas encore. Recueillant les témoignages d'autres influenceuses féministes tout en retraçant son parcours depuis Femen jusqu'à la gestion de sa communauté Clit Révolution de plus de 120 000 abonné·es sur Instagram, elle interroge la capitalisation et la violence du militantisme digital face à des algorithmes plus forts que les lois et à la vague réactionnaire qui s'annonce.Elvire Duvelle-Charles est journaliste, réalisatrice et activiste féministe. Depuis ses débuts dans le militantisme en 2012 chez Femen, elle a décliné ses modes d'action pour se faire entendre : happenings seins nus, parodie de clip de rap, affichage sauvage… Son dernier fait d'armes : Clit Révolution, un compte Instagram suivi par plus de 100 000 personnes et une série documentaire diffusée sur France TV Slash dans laquelle elle part aux côtés de son acolyte Sarah Constantin aux quatre coins du monde à la rencontre de personnes qui réconcilient sexualité joyeuse et empouvoirement. De cette série est né un livre : Le Manuel d'activisme féministe de Clit Révolution (Des femmes, 2019), une boîte à outils inspirée de techniques du monde entier.____Vous souhaitez vous offrir ce livre ? c'est par ici : https://www.laffranchielibrairie.com/livre/20186909-feminisme-et-reseaux-sociaux-une-histoire-d-a--elvire-duvelle-charles-hors-d-atteinte Hébergé par Acast. Visitez acast.com/privacy pour plus d'informations.

Interview de Sarah Constantin, cheffe de groupe du parti socialiste au Grand Conseil valaisan.

Welcome to the nonlinear library, where we use text-to-speech software to convert the best writing from the rationalist and ea communities into audio. This is: On the importance of Less Wrong, or another single conversational locus, published by AnnaSalamon on the LessWrong. Epistemic status: My actual best bet. But I used to think differently; and I don't know how to fully explicate the updating I did (I'm not sure what fully formed argument I could give my past self, that would cause her to update), so you should probably be somewhat suspicious of this until explicated. And/or you should help me explicate it. It seems to me that: The world is locked right now in a deadly puzzle, and needs something like a miracle of good thought if it is to have the survival odds one might wish the world to have. Despite all priors and appearances, our little community (the "aspiring rationality" community; the "effective altruist" project; efforts to create an existential win; etc.) has a shot at seriously helping with this puzzle. This sounds like hubris, but it is at this point at least partially a matter of track record.[1] To aid in solving this puzzle, we must probably find a way to think together, accumulatively. We need to think about technical problems in AI safety, but also about the full surrounding context -- everything to do with understanding what the heck kind of a place the world is, such that that kind of place may contain cheat codes and trap doors toward achieving an existential win. We probably also need to think about "ways of thinking" -- both the individual thinking skills, and the community conversational norms, that can cause our puzzle-solving to work better. [2] One feature that is pretty helpful here, is if we somehow maintain a single "conversation", rather than a bunch of people separately having thoughts and sometimes taking inspiration from one another. By "a conversation", I mean a space where people can e.g. reply to one another; rely on shared jargon/shorthand/concepts; build on arguments that have been established in common as probably-valid; point out apparent errors and then have that pointing-out be actually taken into account or else replied-to). One feature that really helps things be "a conversation" in this way, is if there is a single Schelling set of posts/etc. that people (in the relevant community/conversation) are supposed to read, and can be assumed to have read. Less Wrong used to be a such place; right now there is no such place; it seems to me highly desirable to form a new such place if we can. We have lately ceased to have a "single conversation" in this way. Good content is still being produced across these communities, but there is no single locus of conversation, such that if you're in a gathering of e.g. five aspiring rationalists, you can take for granted that of course everyone has read posts such-and-such. There is no one place you can post to, where, if enough people upvote your writing, people will reliably read and respond (rather than ignore), and where others will call them out if they later post reasoning that ignores your evidence. Without such a locus, it is hard for conversation to build in the correct way. (And hard for it to turn into arguments and replies, rather than a series of non sequiturs.) It seems to me, moreover, that Less Wrong used to be such a locus, and that it is worth seeing whether Less Wrong or some similar such place[3] may be a viable locus again. I will try to post and comment here more often, at least for a while, while we see if we can get this going. Sarah Constantin, Ben Hoffman, Valentine Smith, and various others have recently mentioned planning to do the same. I suspect that most of the value generation from having a single shared conversational locus is not captured by the individual generating the value (I suspect there is much distributed value from having "a conversation" with better structural integrity / more coherence, but that the va...

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: My current framework for thinking about AGI timelines, published by Alex Zhu on the AI Alignment Forum. At the beginning of 2017, someone I deeply trusted said they thought AGI would come in 10 years, with 50% probability. I didn't take their opinion at face value, especially since so many experts seemed confident that AGI was decades away. But the possibility of imminent apocalypse seemed plausible enough and important enough that I decided to prioritize investigating AGI timelines over trying to strike gold. I left the VC-backed startup I'd cofounded, and went around talking to every smart and sensible person I could find who seemed to have opinions about when humanity would develop AGI. My biggest takeaways after 3 years might be disappointing -- I don't think the considerations currently available to us point to any decisive conclusion one way or another, and I don't think anybody really knows when AGI is coming. At the very least, the fields of knowledge that I think bear on AGI forecasting (including deep learning, predictive coding, and comparative neuroanatomy) are disparate, and I don't know of any careful and measured thinkers with all the relevant expertise. That being said, I did manage to identify a handful of background variables that consistently play significant roles in informing people's intuitive estimates of when we'll get to AGI. In other words, people would often tell me that their estimates of AGI timelines would significantly change if their views on one of these background variables changed. I've put together a framework for understanding AGI timelines based on these background variables. Among all the frameworks for AGI timelines I've encountered, it's the framework that most comprehensively enumerates crucial considerations for AGI timelines, and it's the framework that best explains how smart and sensible people might arrive at vastly different views on AGI timelines. Over the course of the next few weeks, I'll publish a series of posts about these background variables and some considerations that shed light on what their values are. I'll conclude by describing my framework for how they come together to explain various overall viewpoints on AGI timelines, depending on different prior assumptions on the values of these variables. By trade, I'm a math competition junkie, an entrepreneur, and a hippie. I am not an expert on any of the topics I'll be writing about -- my analyses will not be comprehensive, and they might contain mistakes. I'm sharing them with you anyway in the hopes that you might contribute your own expertise, correct for my epistemic shortcomings, and perhaps find them interesting. I'd like to thank Paul Christiano, Jessica Taylor, Carl Shulman, Anna Salamon, Katja Grace, Tegan McCaslin, Eric Drexler, Vlad Firiou, Janos Kramar, Victoria Krakovna, Jan Leike, Richard Ngo, Rohin Shah, Jacob Steinhardt, David Dalrymple, Catherine Olsson, Jelena Luketina, Alex Ray, Jack Gallagher, Ben Hoffman, Tsvi BT, Sam Eisenstat, Matthew Graves, Ryan Carey, Gary Basin, Eliana Lorch, Anand Srinivasan, Michael Webb, Ashwin Sah, Yi Sun, Mark Sellke, Alex Gunning, Paul Kreiner, David Girardo, Danit Gal, Oliver Habryka, Sarah Constantin, Alex Flint, Stag Lynn, Andis Draguns, Tristan Hume, Holden Lee, David Dohan, and Daniel Kang for enlightening conversations about AGI timelines, and I'd like to apologize to anyone whose name I ought to have included, but forgot to include. Table of contents As I post over the coming weeks, I'll update this table of contents with links to the posts, and I might update some of the titles and descriptions. How special are human brains among animal brains? Humans can perform intellectual feats that appear qualitatively different from those of other animals, but are our brains really doing anything so different? How u...

Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: The two-layer model of human values, and problems with synthesizing preferences, published by Kaj Sotala on the AI Alignment Forum. I have been thinking about Stuart Armstrong's preference synthesis research agenda, and have long had the feeling that there's something off about the way that it is currently framed. In the post I try to describe why. I start by describing my current model of human values, how I interpret Stuart's implicit assumptions to conflict with it, and then talk about my confusion with regard to reconciling the two views. The two-layer/ULM model of human values In Player vs. Character: A Two-Level Model of Ethics, Sarah Constantin describes a model where the mind is divided, in game terms, into a "player" and a "character". The character is everything that we consciously experience, but our conscious experiences are not our true reasons for acting. As Sarah puts it: In many games, such as Magic: The Gathering, Hearthstone, or Dungeons and Dragons, there's a two-phase process. First, the player constructs a deck or character from a very large sample space of possibilities. This is a particular combination of strengths and weaknesses and capabilities for action, which the player thinks can be successful against other decks/characters or at winning in the game universe. The choice of deck or character often determines the strategies that deck or character can use in the second phase, which is actual gameplay. In gameplay, the character (or deck) can only use the affordances that it's been previously set up with. This means that there are two separate places where a player needs to get things right: first, in designing a strong character/deck, and second, in executing the optimal strategies for that character/deck during gameplay. [...] The idea is that human behavior works very much like a two-level game. [...] The player determines what we find rewarding or unrewarding. The player determines what we notice and what we overlook; things come to our attention if it suits the player's strategy, and not otherwise. The player gives us emotions when it's strategic to do so. The player sets up our subconscious evaluations of what is good for us and bad for us, which we experience as “liking” or “disliking.” The character is what executing the player's strategies feels like from the inside. If the player has decided that a task is unimportant, the character will experience “forgetting” to do it. If the player has decided that alliance with someone will be in our interests, the character will experience “liking” that person. Sometimes the player will notice and seize opportunities in a very strategic way that feels to the character like “being lucky” or “being in the right place at the right time.” This is where confusion often sets in. People will often protest “but I did care about that thing, I just forgot” or “but I'm not that Machiavellian, I'm just doing what comes naturally.” This is true, because when we talk about ourselves and our experiences, we're speaking “in character”, as our character. The strategy is not going on at a conscious level. In fact, I don't believe we (characters) have direct access to the player; we can only infer what it's doing, based on what patterns of behavior (or thought or emotion or perception) we observe in ourselves and others. I think that this model is basically correct, and that our emotional responses, preferences, etc. are all the result of a deeper-level optimization process. This optimization process, then, is something like that described in The Brain as a Universal Learning Machine: The universal learning hypothesis proposes that all significant mental algorithms are learned; nothing is innate except for the learning and reward machinery itself (which is somewhat complicated, involving a number of systems and m...

Entre les applis de rencontre et les coach en séduction, la drague n'a jamais été aussi présente dans nos quotidiens. Pourtant plusieurs questions restent en suspens : Qui fait le premier pas ? Est-ce mal vu de draguer dans la rue ? Les meilleur.es séducteur.ices sont-ils les meilleur.es au lit ? Naya nous donne ses meilleurs conseils pour pécho avec Clarisse, Elvire et Léa.  Naya : Twitter @misundergirl Instagram @misundergirl   Clarisse : Twitter @_Clarification Instagram @clarisseluiz Chaîne Youtube clarification Tiktok _clarification Elvire: Twitter @ElvireDCharles Instagram @elviredcharles pour ClitRevolution @clitrevolution sur Instagram  Léa : Instagram @mercibeaucul_ Quelques conseils :  Le consentement avant tout ! Si vous allez un date, que vous n'avez plus envie d'aller plus loin, c'est ok de dire non.  Selon une étude menée par l'IFOP, depuis le premier confinement, on compte 1 français sur 3 inscrit sur un site ou une application de rencontre.  Sur les manières d'engager une conversation sur les applis de rencontre : selon une étude produite par l'application de rencontres Inner Circle et l'agence d'étude de marché Opinium, seule une personne sur dix utilisant “Salut” en formule d'accroche – peu originale – recevra une réponse de son interlocuteur. Les références entendus dans l'épisode :  Emily Nagoski, “Je jouis comme je suis”, Leduc S. (2021) La Bringue (@bringue_party) est une soirée 100% filles (+18 ans) en non-mixité, dans un espace privatisé et organisé par Clarisse ( @_Clarification), deux fois par mois à Paris (hors Covid-19) au Velvet Bar. La première soirée post-Covid est le 9 juillet à Châtelet ! Retrouvez la newsletter ici.  Clit Révolution (@clitrevolution sur Instagram) est une série documentaire interactive, sur Francetv Slash, qui invite les femmes à dénoncer l'ordre établi en prenant conscience du pouvoir politique de leur corps. Elle est co-fondée par Elvires Charles et Sarah Constantin. Retrouvez également le livre “Clit Révolution : manuel d'activisme féministe”, publié en 2020 aux éditions Des Femmes - Antoinette Fouque.  Le pegging est une pratique sexuelle où une femme pratique le coït à l'aide d'un gode ceinture sur un homme ou sur une femme. Hot Line est un podcast Original Spotify, produit par Spotify en association avec Nouvelles Écoutes. Animé par moi-même, Naya Ali, et en compagnie aujourd'hui de Léa, Elvire, et Clarisse.  Merci à Clémence, Kira, Assia, Emy, et Dimitri, de nous avoir laissé leurs messages vocaux. Notre numéro c'est le 07 88 05 64 84. Laissez-nous vos messages ! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Seul.e, à deux ou à plusieurs, avoir un orgasme est-il absolument le but à atteindre lors d'un rapport sexuel ? Souvent glorifié ou fantasmé, aujourd'hui l'orgasme est de moins en moins tabou pour les femmes, conduisant ainsi à la libération du plaisir fémin. Plusieurs questions restent en suspens : C'est quoi avoir un orgasme ? Jouir et avoir un orgasme, est-ce la même chose ? Y-a-t-il un âge pour l'atteindre ? Naya en parle aujourd'hui avec Rosa, Elvire et Laetitia. Naya: Twitter @misundergirl Instagram @misundergirl   Rosa: Twitter @burszteinrosa Instagram @rosabursztein  Laetitia: Twitter @Loun_R Instagram @loun_r Elvire: Twitter @ElvireDCharles Instagram @elviredcharles  Références de l'épisode :  Call me by your name est un film de Luca Guadagnino (2017) Clit Révolution (@clitrevolution sur Instagram) est une série documentaire interactive, sur Francetv Slash, qui invite les femmes à dénoncer l'ordre établi en prenant conscience du pouvoir politique de leur corps. Elle est co-fondée par Elvires Charles et Sarah Constantin. Retrouvez également le livre “Clit Révolution : manuel d'activisme féministe”, publié en 2020 aux éditions Des Femmes - Antoinette Fouque.  Erika Lust est une réalisatrice, scénariste, productrice de films pornographiques et écrivaine suédoise féministe.  Le Womanizer est un sextoy qui stimule le clitoris avec des aspirations. Le clitoris n'est donc pas stimulé par un contact avec une surface qui vibre, comme les autres sextoys. Le Satisfyer est un sextoy qui stimule non seulement le clitoris par des vibrations mais aussi par un procédé sans contact qui se fait à l'aide de pressions appelées aspirations. Odile Buisson est gynécologue et obstétricienne. Dans une conférence pour Les Ernest, elle explicite les mystères de l'orgasme féminin et le fonctionnement de l'organe clitoridien. Le lien de la conférence : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tz943Y3AtZE   Philippe Lacheau est un acteur, scénariste et réalisateur français. Il a réalisé notamment Babysitting 1 et 2, Alibi.com, et Nicky Larson et le parfum de Cupidon.  Hot Line est un podcast Original Spotify, produit par Spotify en association avec Nouvelles Écoutes Animé par Naya Ali, et en compagnie aujourd'hui de Rosa, Laetitia et Elvire.  Merci à Claire, Jason, Alex, Lucie et Monica de nous avoir laissé leurs messages vocaux. Notre numéro c'est le 07 88 05 64 84. Laissez-nous vos messages ! Chaîne Youtube de Naya Ali / Facebook de Naya Chaîne Youtube de Rosa / Facebook de Rosa Chaîne Youtube d'Elvire / Patreon de Clit Révolution Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Andrey Nikolaevich Kolmogorov was one of the giants of 20th-century mathematics. I've always found it amazing that the same man was responsible both f... https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3376&utm_source=Thinking+About+Things&utm_campaign=cf79e1519a-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_1_2019_1_5_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_33397823f0-cf79e1519a-412551669 Shtetl-OptimizedIs “information is physical” contentful?What I believe II (ft. Sarah Constantin and Stacey Jeffery)The Kolmogorov optionAndrey Nikolaevich KolmogorovfoundationsKolmogorov complexity“sophistication,”Hilbert’s thirteenth problemawe-inspiring listLeonid LevinGessen’s biography of Perelmanexcluded from the top math programsLysenkoismLuzin affaircommon knowledgeTed NelsonH.C. Pocklington“and yet it moves”Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systemsdifferent viewNerd InterestThe Fate of HumanityRSS 2.0trackback

#Rediff ! Clitrevolution c'est un compte Instagram mais surtout une websérie dans laquelle Sarah Constantin et Elvire Duvelle-Charles, deux activistes féministes passées par FEMEN, explorent l'impact du sexisme et du patriarcat dans la sphère intime. C'est aussi devenu un livre : le Manuel d'activisme féministe, qu'on peut retrouver en librairie depuis le 5 mars dernier ! A l'occasion de sa sortie, Elvire est revenue avec nous sur son parcours d'Activiste justement. Retrouve la dans cet épisode initialement diffusé le 3 mars dernier !Retrouve Clitrevolution :Sur leur compte Instagram @clitrevolution https://www.instagram.com/clitrevolution/Sur la chaîne YouTube de France TV Slash https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLE7XZO5PXeLXRldGXFqS8hrCSnVGuOKq_En Librairie ! Manuel d'activisme féministe, par Elvire Duvelle-Charles et Sarah ConstantinDans cet épisode, on a parlé de :Inna Shevchenko et Femen FranceActivistes ! est produit et réalisé par Clémence Bodoc et Esther Meunier.Pour retrouver Esther :@estherreporter sur Instagram https://www.instagram.com/estherreporter/Esther Reporter sur YouTube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCATMfqNNOxrf4CwmXKyaS5Q/@EstherMeunier sur Twitter https://twitter.com/EstherMeunierPour retrouver Clémence :@clem_bodoc sur Instagram https://www.instagram.com/clem_bodoc/la soutenir sur Patreon https://www.patreon.com/clembodocS'abonner à sa newsletter http://bit.ly/clembodocActivistes ! est un podcast Tuto Conquérir Le Monde, une série produite et réalisée par Clémence BodocLes autres podcast Tuto Conquérir Le Monde https://play.acast.com/s/tuto-conquerir-le-mondeLes Impertinentes — Interviews de femmes libres et indépendantes... See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Bonjour et bienvenu(e)s dans « Ovaires et Contre tout » Emmanuelle Durand Rodriguez introduit cette émission puis virevolte sur une chronique où elle égrène avec son prisme clairvoyant et engagé les différents articles puis ouvrages suivant : « Sea, sexisme and sun - Chroniques du sexisme ordinaire» Marine Spaak (Premières pages disponibles sur Google Books : https://books.google.fr/books/about/Sea_sexisme_and_sun_chroniques_du_sexism.html?id=QXOqDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button&redir_esc=y) « Clit Révolution - Manuel d’activisme féministe », Sarah Constantin et Elvire Duvelle-Charles. Extrait dispo : https://books.google.fr/books/about/Clit_R%C3%A9volution.html?id=5k3cDwAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=kp_read_button&redir_esc=y « Covid - 19 : Menaces sur les femmes dans le monde » par Marlène Schiappa https://jean-jaures.org/nos-productions/covid-19-menaces-sur-les-femmes-dans-le-monde https://www.huffingtonpost.fr/entry/lauren-bastide-tribune-coronaviril_fr_5eb56b2ec5b6a67335418711 Les Initiatives mises en avant dans l’émission : Elodie Simorre a promené son micro à la découverte de "Become Tech", BECOMTECH est une association nationale qui œuvre pour la mixité dans les métiers techniques du numérique. L'asso initie les filles à l’univers du digital et de la programmation informatique. http://becomtech.fr/ Alexia Anglade nous parle d'Adelphité .. Mais c'est quoi ? Une BD conseillée par Caroline, dans sa chronique littéraire cette semaine : « Grandeur et Décadence » Liv Stromquist. Elle nous parle de reality shows et de classes populaires. Notre chroniqueur Boris Georgelin nous invite à prendre notre revanche sur le sexisme ordinaire, il s’est promené sur le compte Instagram @punchlinettes où Marion invite chaque femme à témoigner des remarques sexistes quotidiennes subies où chaque réflexion masculine est souvent un combat. Si vous êtes dans la situation où à chaque fois qu’un homme vous fait une sale remarque vous trouvez la répartie 2 jours plus tard, si vous vous dites souvent « J’aurais dû lui répondre ça! » mais que vous n’osez pas, c’est par là : Ovaires et contre tout évoque aussi : http://digitalgirls.fr/ Digital Girls est un mouvement de femmes actives favorisant la mixité, levier de développement socio-économique territorial harmonieux, intelligent et durable, par le biais de l’innovation et du digital.

On peut confiner des corps mais pas des idées. La lutte politique se poursuit malgré le confinement de nos fenêtres réelles à nos fenêtres virtuelles. Certain.e.s se politisent, d’autres radicalisent leur militantisme. Clémentine passe en revue les initiatives et l’insurrection de celles et ceux qui se battent depuis le jour d’avant et qui préparent le fameux “jour d’après”.Références entendues dans l’épisode L’action de l’association ACLefeu en Seine Saint-Denis. Les manifestants israéliens qui respectent les distances de sécurité.L’action du groupe Center for Popular Democracy Action devant le Trump International Hotel à Washington. Dan Patrick un homme politique américain Républicain passé par la télévision, aujourd’hui vice-gouverneur du Texas, il est entre autre opposé au droit à l’avortement, à l’immigration illégale.L’image de de Bolsonaro projetée sur les murs au Brésil. Les drones à Nice qui surveillent la population. La garde à vue de la toulousaine à la banderole “Macronavirus.”L’application Urgence Violences Policières a été créé par la militante Amal Bentounsi, fondatrice du collectif "Urgence notre police assassine". Elle disponible sur Android et prochainement sur iOS. À propos du taux de contrôle beaucoup plus élevé de la population du département de Seine Saint-Denis. L’augmentation de l’insurrection en Russie pendant le confinement. La hausse de la pratique du revenge porn pendant le confinement. Le blog et le compte twitter du médecin Baptiste Beaulieu.La pétition virtuelle de l’association New York Communities for Change.L’application Manif.app permet de manifester virtuellement avec un avatar. Elle a été créée par l’artiste Antoine Schmidtt. Yandex.map est l’équivalent russe de Google Map sur lequel les manifestants russes organisent des rassemblements virtuels. Le hashtag #Protestathome a été lancé en Pologne par le compte twitter d’Amnesty International en Pologne pour incite à diffuser des panneaux sur les réseaux sociaux et leur symbole, les parapluies noirs. Un article à propos des manifestation virtuelles de Gilets Jaunes et des hong-kongais sur Animal Crossing Le compte Instagram @Tds_vs_grindrr pour parler des réalités des conditions de travail des TDSÉmilie participe aux collages féminicides virtuels. L’essai de Naomi Klein s’intitule La Stratégie du choc : la montée d'un capitalisme du désastre et a été écrit en 2007. Il a donné lieu à un documentaire du même nom en 2009. Les Chicago Boys désigne un groupe d'économistes chiliens des années 1970 travaillant pour la dictature du Général Pinochet et influencés par Milton Friedman. Bacurau est un film des brésiliens Kleber Mendonça Filho et Juliano Dornelles, sorti en 2019. La BD d’Eleonor Davis, Un monde terrible et beau. Le Manuel d’activisme féministe : Clit Revolution a été publié en 2020 par Sarah Constantin et Elvire Duvelle-Charles aux éditions Des Femmes. Le tome I et le tome II du hors-série du magazine belge Axelle “On bricole toutes.”Quoi de Meuf est une émission de Nouvelles Écoutes, cet épisode est conçu et présenté par Clémentine Gallot, mixé par Charles de Cillia. Générique réalisé par Aurore Meyer Mahieu. Montage et coordination Ashley Tola.

Clitrevolution c'est un compte Instagram mais surtout une websérie produite par France TV Slash, et c'est l'œuvre de deux activistes féministes : Sarah Constantin et Elvire Duvelle-Charles. Elvire présente dans ce podcast le manuel d'activisme féministe qu'elle publie avec Sarah, et que vous pouvez retrouver en librairie dès le 5 mars !Retrouve Clitrevolution : Sur leur compte Instagram @clitrevolution https://www.instagram.com/clitrevolution/Sur la chaîne YouTube de France TV Slash https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLE7XZO5PXeLXRldGXFqS8hrCSnVGuOKq_En Librairie ! Manuel d'activisme féministe, par Elvire Duvelle-Charles et Sarah Constantin Dans cet épisode, on a parlé de :Inna Shevchenko et Femen FranceActivistes ! est produit et réalisé par Clémence Bodoc et Esther Meunier.Pour retrouver Clémence :@clem_bodoc sur Instagram https://www.instagram.com/clem_bodoc/la soutenir sur Patreon https://www.patreon.com/clembodocS'abonner à sa newsletter http://bit.ly/clembodocPour retrouver Esther :@estherreporter sur Instagram https://www.instagram.com/estherreporter/Esther Reporter sur YouTube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCATMfqNNOxrf4CwmXKyaS5Q/@EstherMeunier sur Twitter https://twitter.com/EstherMeunierActivistes ! est un podcast Tuto Conquérir Le Monde, une série produite et réalisée par Clémence BodocLes autres podcast Tuto Conquérir Le Monde https://play.acast.com/s/tuto-conquerir-le-mondeLes Impertinentes — Interviews de femmes libres et indépendantes https://play.acast.com/s/les-impertinentes/Participez à la communauté Tuto Conquérir Le Monde :Par email à tutoconquerirlemonde[at]gmail[point]comSur Instagram :

Scruter sa vulve, caresser son clito, explorer son vagin jusqu’au col. Pour son plaisir et sa santé, mieux vaut connaître son corps jusqu’au bout des lèvres. Longtemps caché, jugé honteux, le sexe féminin reste un mystère pour beaucoup, y compris pour les premières concernées.En quoi le « self-help », mouvement dès les années 1970 qui préconise l’auto-exploration, fait son grand retour ? Pourquoi la sexualité des femmes est-elle encore considérée comme passive ? Pourquoi pratiquer ou parler de masturbation féminine est-elle encore teintée de honte ? Comment bien choisir son gynécologue ou sa sage-femme, qu’on soit cisgenre ou transgenre ?Pour répondre à ces questions, Jennifer Padjemi reçoit Clarence Edgard-Rosa, autrice de « Connais-toi toi-même – Guide d’auto-exploration du sexe féminin » (éd. La Musardine, 2019).RECOMMANDATIONS ET COUPS DE CŒURLES RECOS DE CLARENCE : les deux bibles du mouvement self-help : « Notre corps, nous mêmes » (en cours de réédition) et « A New View of a Woman’s Body » (disponible en anglais seulement) ; pour se plonger dans le mouvement féministe punk, « Riot Grrrls. Chronique d’une révolution punk féministe » de Manon Labry (éd. Zones, 2016) ou « The Riot Grrrl Collection » de Lisa Darms ; « Une chambre à soi » de Virgina Woolf ; « Les Monologues du vagin » d’Eve Ensler ; pour rire, « Ces hommes qui m’expliquent la vie » de Rebecca Solnit ; Too Much Pussy ! Feminist Sluts, A Queer X Show d’Emilie Jouvet ; Clit Revolution de Sarah Constantin et Elvire Duvelle-CharlesRÉFÉRENCES CITÉES DANS L’ÉMISSIONOur Bodies, Ourselves (Boston Women’s Health Book Collective, Judy Norsigian, Angela Phillips, Jill Rakusen, éd. Simon and Schuster, 1970), A New View of a Woman’s Body (The Federation of Feminist Women’s Health Centers, éd. Simon and Schuster, 1981), Teeth (Mitchell Lichtenstein, 2008), omgyes.com, le collectif catalan GynePunk, T’as joui ? (Dora Moutot, Instagram), Variation in Orgasm Occurrence by Sexual Orientation in a Sample of U.S. Singles (Justin R. Garcia, The Journal of Sexual Medicine, 2014)CRÉDITS Miroir miroir est un podcast de Jennifer Padjemi, produit par Binge Audio. Réalisation : Thomas Plé et Solène Moulin. Générique : Théo Boulenger. Chargée de production : Juliette Livartowski. Chargée d’édition : Diane Jean. Identité graphique : Marion Lavedeau et Sébastien Brothier (Upian). Direction des programmes : Joël Ronez. Direction de la rédaction : David Carzon. Direction générale : Gabrielle Boeri-Charles. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

We discuss Sarah Constantin’s recent post Degrees of Freedom, addressing where optimization and free-will conflict. Mentioned in this episode: The parable of The Whispering Earring The Transporter Argument Our episode about Desirism with Alonzo Fyfe Eneasz’s Classic WoW guild – … Continue reading →

Où l'on fait le point clito... Ni P, ni G, ni le point dans ta gueule, mais le point Clito ! Le point Clito, c’est le point qui n’en est pas un. Le clito, kézaco ? Et pourquoi est-il sur le devant de la scène, notamment féministe ? Avec Julia Pietri, fondatrice du compte @gangduclito et Sarah Constantin, qui a lancé, avec Elvire Duvelle-Charle, le compte @clitRevolution et la série documentaire du même nom. Une émission animée par Joe, Cécile Martin et Claire Alquier.

Cette semaine, c’est la Clit Révolution dans tes oreilles. Sarah Constantin et Elvire Duvelle Charles sont parties autour du monde tourner une web-série documentaire sur les féministes qui s’emparent de leur sexualité pour faire la révolution. La première étape de leur odyssée : une rencontre avec VOXXX. Nous les avons accueillies dans notre studio pour qu’elles réalisent leur 1er porno audio. Il est dédié aux règles, et à ces envies brûlantes de sexe qui les accompagnent. Quand on saigne et qu’on veut s’envoyer en l’air, la seule règle, c’est qu’il n’y en a pas ! Un épisode plein d’un joyeux lâcher prise, à faire rougir toutes les culottes de France et de Navarre. Pour découvrir leur série Clit Révolution et découvrir, dans l’épisode 2, les coulisses de cet enregistrement, rendez-vous sur france.tv/slash/clit-revolution.www.voxxx.org Voir Acast.com/privacy pour les informations sur la vie privée et l'opt-out.

Flux, c’est le nouveau podcast de l’équipe de Cheek Magazine qui fait circuler les bonnes ondes féministes en moins d’une heure. Tous les quinze jours, l’équipe de Cheek –Faustine Kopiejwski et Julia Tissier– se retrouve pour décrypter la planète féministe, échanger sur des infos réjouissantes ou agaçantes et tendre le micro à des personnalités féminines marquantes. Dans Flux, on débat, on donne notre avis, bref on est là pour se mouiller, alors suivez le courant, on vous embarque! Pour ce neuvième épisode, on reçoit Sarah Constantin et Elvire Duvelle-Charles, qui viennent de lancer leur Clit Revolution. “J’ai toujours trouvé ma chatte plutôt moche”. Ouvertement cash, l’entrée en matière du 1er épisode de Clit Revolution donne le ton. Cette série documentaire en 9 épisodes signée Sarah Constantin -qui prononce ces paroles face caméra- et Elvire Duvelle-Charles, veut aborder la question des sexualités féminines avec un ton neuf. Les deux activistes au sein du mouvement Femen, dont l’une est journaliste et l’autre réalisatrice, ont mis sur pieds ce projet ambitieux aux airs de programme politique, qui se décline en vidéos sur le site de France TV Slash, aussi bien que sur un compte Instagram suivi par plus de 35 000 personnes. Pour le lancement de cette révolution du clitoris, qui emmènera ses protagonistes autour du monde, à la rencontre de celles qui font bouger les lignes des sexualités féminines, on a invité ces deux héroïnes militantes à prendre le micro. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Cette semaine, pour ce quinzième épisode de Quoi de meufs, Clémentine Gallot et Pauline Verduzier nous parlent du fossé orgasmique qui existe entre les femmes et les hommes. Elles abordent aussi des questions autour des préliminaires dans les relations hétérosexuelles, de réinventer un script sexuel et du périnée, organe qui n'est pas utile uniquement pour l'accouchement.Du côté de la pop culture, petit focus sur les fausses représentations sexuelles dans le cinéma illustrés par les films : 40 jours et 40 nuits, Sex Friends et BridesMaid.Et enfin, Clémentine et Pauline répondent à Linda qui demande conseil sur la conduite à avoir face au sexisme ordinaire présent dans son environnement professionnel.L'actu féministe de Pauline Verduzier et de Clementine Gallot ( 00:56)Le thème de l'épisode : «orgasm gap» :le fossé orgasmique (04:40)Témoignages des deux journalistes Sarah Constantin et Elvire Duvelle-Charles sur leur projet « Clit Révolution »,un documentaire sur le plaisir féminin (18:30)Expériences personnelles de Pauline Verduzier et de Clémentine Gallot (22:33)Les recommandations culturelles ( 29:40)Le moment Pop culture ( 33:30)Le courrier des auditrices ( 40:22)Les références entendues dans l'épisodeLe compte instagram de Dora Moutot : @tasjoui, où sont publiés des commentaires de femmes qui se sentent délaissées par leur conjoint.L'article sur une étude menée par le journal officiel de l'Académie internationale de recherche sur la sexualité. Réalisée sur 50 000 personnes avec la question suivante : Jouissez-vous la plupart du temps ou tout le temps avec votre partenaire? (2017)L'article sur Freud et ses deux types d'orgasmes féminins.Odile Buisson gynécologue-obstétricienneayant pratiqué des échographies du clitoris et qui a montré que ce qu'on appelle « point G » est une surface à l'intérieur du vagin qui est en contact avec la « fourche » du clitoris qui lui-même est à cheval sur le tube vaginal.La flibanserine, le Viagra fémininL'enquête sur l'orgasme dans le corps, des chercheurs américains, Masters et Johnson.Les travaux de la gynécologue obstétricienne, Odile Buisson.Le livre des sociologues, John Gagnon et William Simon, «Sexual Conduct», sur le concept de script sexuel. (1973)Le Livre de Camille Emmanuelle, « Sexpowerment » (2016)La Chaine de la youtubeuse, Marine Périn, vidéos sur la sexualité et le féminisme.Le film « 40 jours et 40 nuits » de Michael Lehmann (2002)Le film « Sex Friend » de Ivan Reitman avec Natalie Portman (2011)Le film « BridesMaid » de Paul Feig (2011)Le film de « The Bold Type » Sarah WatsonL'article de Laura Melvet « Visual pleasure and narrative cinema » avec le concept du « male gaze » : le regard masculin très souvent privilégié dans le cinéma.Les recommandations culturelles : Pauline : Le livre de l'universitaire, Laure Murrat « Une révolution sexuelle », (2018)Clémentine : Le livre de Nina Brochmann et Ellen Stokken Dahl, « Les joies d'en bas » ( 2018)Épisode de « En bref » sur Netflix, qui parle de l'orgasme fémininLe podcast How cum de Remy KassimirLove Store Chic : Le passage du désir , 22 rue du pont Neuf, quartier des Halles, 75001, Paris.Le site : « Oh my god yes » : site où des femmes montrent leur technique pour atteindre l'orgasmeLa série « Master of sex » qui parlent des découvertes des chercheurs Masters et Johnson.Comptes Instagram : @clitrevolution et @jouissance.clubSur Facebook Watch : la série : « Sorry for you loss » avec Elizabeth OlsenPour poser une question à la team Quoi de meuf : hello@quoidemeuf.netPour s'inscrire à la géniale newsletter Quoi de meuf : http://quoidemeuf.net/Quoi de Meuf est une émission de Nouvelles Écoutes, animée par Clémentine Gallot et Pauline Verduzier. Réalisée par Aurore Meyer Mahieu, montée et mixée par Laurie Galligani, coordonnée par Laura Cuissard.

Sarah Constantin is a mathematician & data scientist with a PhD from Yale. We discover how computer vision and machine learning can be used to do drug discovery what the biggest challenges in today's cancer research with potential solutions

Source: Effective Altruism Global (original video).