/ratanon/ - Rationalists Anonymous

We should start by exterminating all the niggers and sand niggers, and then take it from there.

>>6423

Disagree, those guys at least bring something to the table – athletics, food, music. We should start with white trash. We'll be able to turn most of flyover into nice parks.

>>6424

Why not both. Let's skip racial favoritism entirely and just get rid of all trash everywhere.

Bomb the ghettos. Bomb the trailer parks.

Just make sure we have some kind of negro krunk software that can synthesize their soothing jungle sounds first.

I long for this bipartisan race blind genocide of the inferior.

>>6424

>Disagree, those guys at least bring something to the table – athletics, food, music.

Looks like you mistyped theft, rape and murder.

>>6422

>Only 120

Spot the retard.

>>6422

No, just sterilize them.

>>6428

What's Scott's IQ by the way?

>>6430

>mfw a bunch of fishgender aspies try to start a war against everyone else

knock it off

Problem is "high IQ" is at best correlated with high-quality people. For one thing, there's all the high-IQ low-rationality mindkilled ideologues who just use that brain-power to rationalise nonsense.

>>6422

the problem with that if that is you cut off the left side of the bell curve, you're going to recalibrate the test to still output a bell cuve with a mean of 100

so what then? new round of killing everyone?

> op is a fucktard

the right solution is obviously to crispr genes for being smarter into everyone, to avoid recessive traits and regression to the mean. (which are the reasons why eugenics by sterilization and/or murder do not work in addition to being ethically atrocious)

>>6435

>the right solution is obviously to crispr genes for being smarter into everyone

Yeah, but this doesn't get rid of the 7 billion on the same planet problem (which is more of a finance and property problem than a carrying capacity one). Though, I suppose if everyone was a genius then we could probably advance space travel a lot quicker.

>>6435

>the problem with that if that is you cut off the left side of the bell curve, you're going to recalibrate the test to still output a bell cuve with a mean of 100

This. Reminds me of the "guess 2/3 of the average guess" game

>>6438

How many retards are there in this thread? Let me make it absolutely clear: RECALIBRATING THE TEST DOES NOT MAGICALLY MAKE EVERYONE DUMBER.

>>6439

I count 1 retard.

The question is "Should we exterminate everyone with an IQ lower than 120?" As you start to kill off people below this number and recalibrate, people who were previously over 120 drop below it and now qualify for extermination. The question did not specify "people whose IQ was calculated at below 120 before the beginning of the purge." IQ is a measurement that is inherently based on average intelligence, so the measurement changes as you remove below average people.

>changing the map means changing the territory

Changing the territory means changing the map. And since you said "IQ" instead of "intelligence" you're explicitly basing your purge on the map (which changes in this case) rather than the territory.

Did you actually believe that anyone else here somehow thought that recalibrating the test makes people dumber? That's some uniquely terrible modeling of other people's thought processes.

>>6440

We round them up and exterminate them all at once you fucking moron. If there are any psychologists left after the purge they can recalibrate all they want. THAT WONT CHANGE THE FACT THAT THE PURGE IS ALREADY DONE.

Fucking idiot.

>>6441

What the fuck did you just fucking say about me, you little bitch? I’ll have you know I graduated top of my class in CFAR, and I’ve been involved in numerous secret AI box experiments, and I have lead hundreds, maybe thousands of people to better epistemic habits. I am trained in Timeless Decision Theory and I’m the top rationalist in the entire Less Wrong Community. You are nothing to me but just another game-theoretical agent. I will precommit to programming an AI to simulate wiping 3^^^3 copies of you the fuck out with precision the likes of which has never been seen before on this Earth, or any Everett branch thereof, mark my fucking words. You think you can get away with saying that shit to me over the Internet? Think again, fucker. As we speak I am contacting my secret network of rationalists across the world and your IP is being traced right now so you better prepare for the storm, maggot. The storm that digitally represents wiping out the pathetic little thing you call your life. You’re probably fucking simulated, kid. I can be anywhere, anytime, and I can raise the sanity waterline in over seven hundred ways, and that’s just with five minutes of thought. Not only am I extensively trained in cognitive biases, but I have access to the entire budget of MIRI and I will use it to its full extent to wipe your miserable ass off the face of the overton window you little shit. If only you could have known what Schelling fences your little “clever” comment was about to cross, maybe you would have held your fucking tongue. But you couldn’t, you didn’t, and now you’re paying the price, you goddamn idiot. I will shit reason all over you and you will drown in it. You’re fucking mindkilled, kiddo.

>>6422

If you want a semblance of a functional to remain, you want to eliminate everyone with <95 IQ and everyone with more than 105 but less than 130. Then eliminate everyone in LA, Seattle and Portland just to be sure.

>>6443

I think we'll be okay without a semblance of a functional.

>>6444

That's the worst kind of functional.

Lack of a clear defensible Schelling point is a big issue here, all other considerations aside.

Besides, some of my friends probably have IQ < 120.

Killing everyone with an IQ less than 120 would be very immoral. However, I see no problem with killing everyone with an IQ less than 100.

hbd means almost all vibrancy will be purged

>>6448

"Vibrancy?" Less "culturally enriching" dindus is probably where the biggest gains to society would come from.

I don't know about Mr. "dindu" (I have to assume it's just one guy) but blacks don't bother me. Maybe get a better job and you won't have to live in a mixed neighborhood?

>>6450

>I think getting "culturally enriched" is a great thing so long as it doesn't happen to me.

People like you are the reason for why the western world is going to hell.

>>6451

You don't care (to put it mildly) about blacks, I don't care about poor whites, what exactly is the difference between us?

>>6452

poor whites are human, dindus are dindus, not caring about one is a lot worse than not caring about the other

>>6453

Slave morality with skin color substituted for zombie Jesus. Pass.

>>6452

The difference, you retard, is that "cultural enrichment" is not going to stop with the poor. You're helping to get sharia laws introduced into western society because "you don't care about poor people", how stupid can you get?

>>6455

I am doing no such thing. Sharia law isn't coming to the US. What we have to worry about is the christian version pushed by poor, dumb whites.

I give no fucks about France and Germany.

I'm gonna side with Houellebecq and say that Sharia would be an improvement on the status quo.

Why are the bots posting here?

>>6458

The last BO nuked the board, so I'm bringing it back using the Wayback machine. Sorry for spamming the front page.

>>6463

Ah that mean sense now. Why did the BO nuked the board?

>>6470

I don't know. He deleted everything, banned everyone, added some very funky CSS, and made "https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFZ3xIbu_XU" the board announcement.