My 2024 Presidential Debate
Scott Alexander presents a satirical 2024 presidential debate between Biden and Trump, featuring increasingly absurd positions on various issues.
The reader’s shortlist
Essays ranked by captured source likes. Essays without a saved count are listed last.
Scott Alexander presents a satirical 2024 presidential debate between Biden and Trump, featuring increasingly absurd positions on various issues.
Scott analyzes the legal controversy around AI companies contracting with the Department of War, showing that 'all lawful use' permits mass surveillance and autonomous weapons through existing legal loopholes, despite OpenAI's claims of safeguards.
Scott Alexander explores reasons why some readers think his writing quality has declined, addressing various factors from idea exhaustion to intellectual progression.
Scott presents results from his AI art Turing test showing most people struggled to distinguish AI from human art, with professionals doing slightly better and participants unexpectedly preferring AI art.
Scott examines the likelihood and potential severity of an H5N1 bird flu pandemic, analyzing prediction markets and historical data to estimate a 5% chance of pandemic in the next year with most likely moderate severity.
Scott examines a new genetic study on missing heritability that both hereditarians and nurturists claim vindicates their position, concluding that despite the study's advances, the fundamental debate over how heritable traits like IQ actually are remains unresolved.
Scott provides detailed probabilistic timelines and beliefs about AGI development, AI safety, geopolitics, and future outcomes, with his median expectation being AGI in 2031 and 20% probability of existential catastrophe given current safety efforts.
Scott categorizes California's 60 gubernatorial candidates into humorous types rather than covering them individually, from generic top-tier politicians to increasingly bizarre fringe candidates with conspiracy theories, supernatural visions, and incomprehensible platforms.
Scott reviews a book on culture-bound syndromes, expanding the discussion to how all mental illnesses are influenced by culture to varying degrees.
Scott Alexander analyzes the Elizabeth Hoover case to explore the complexities of racial identity, lived experience, and the ethics of cultural appropriation.
Scott Alexander defends his thorough analysis of ivermectin studies, arguing that dismissing controversial topics without addressing evidence can inadvertently promote conspiracy theories.
Scott analyzes the sudden emergence of commercial trait-based embryo selection services, discussing both the scientific validity and ethical implications of selecting embryos for health outcomes, intelligence, and physical traits.
Scott tests OpenAI's o3 model's ability to identify locations from photos, finding it has remarkable success even with minimal visual information, raising questions about AI capabilities.
Scott Alexander explores how to navigate bias in media and expert opinions through understanding the unwritten rules of misrepresentation.
Scott Alexander examines the effectiveness of education by analyzing knowledge retention, questioning the value of schooling beyond basic skills.
A satirical dialogue showing how opponents of AI pause proposals often ignore that advocates explicitly call for bilateral agreements with China, not unilateral pauses.
Scott defends liberalism against claims it has failed by explaining that happiness scales logarithmically with income, so our 225x wealth increase since medieval times correctly predicts the 3-point happiness gain we've actually seen, and recent declines are due to COVID rather than systemic failure.
Scott examines how American political discourse absorbs European narratives that don't fit the US context, particularly around immigration and crime statistics.
Scott Alexander critiques toxic Twitter behavior, explaining its personal and social costs, and warns against imitating confrontational media tactics.
Scott introduces the concept of "meta-contrarianism" - where highly intelligent people signal their status by rejecting contrarian positions and returning to simpler views, similar to how hipsters adopt uncool styles to seem cooler.
Scott reviews three methods for reducing caffeine's half-life to enable evening coffee consumption without sleep disruption, ultimately recommending paraxanthine as the safest and most effective option.
Scott Alexander reports on the Progress Studies Conference, discussing advances in energy, AI, housing policy, and other fields, with an overall optimistic tone about recent developments and potential for future progress.
Scott Alexander criticizes the misleading use of 'no evidence' in science communication and suggests more nuanced alternatives.
Scott Alexander argues that a purely biological, apolitical taxonomy of mental disorders is impossible due to ethical and practical considerations that inevitably influence classifications.
Scott Alexander explains why dismissing warnings just because previous similar warnings were wrong is a dangerous fallacy, particularly for risks that naturally increase over time.