Prominent AI scientist thinks Blacks are slow learners better adapted "to a more hunting/running style of life"

[BlueWaveNeverEnd]

These Epstein files are so juicy

https://www.ms.now/news/epstein-emailed-with-silicon-valley-elites-about-racist-eugenicist-ideas

Epstein emailed with Silicon Valley elites about racist, eugenicist ideas
Recently released emails show Epstein discussed the appeal of fascism and population control through climate change with AI theorists who have ties to prominent tech billionaires.



After his conviction, sex offender Jeffrey Epstein maintained relationships with multiple Silicon Valley elites who promoted eugenics and racist pseudoscience, emails show. 

British website the Byline Times has been conducting a running series on Epstein’s ties to Silicon Valley, and one of its most recent reports looks into Epstein’s emails to several artificial intelligence researchers. In them, the men discuss the purported merits of racist pseudoscience, mass death, fascism and theories about the supposed difference in women’s and men’s cognitive skills.

Analyzing emails that Epstein’s estate turned over to the House Oversight Committee, the report digs into, for example, one 2016 email in which tech researcher and influencer Joscha Bach suggests that Black kids’ brains “are slower at learning high-level concepts” but adds that they maintain high motor skills that make them better adapted “to a more hunting/running style of life.”

In other emails, Bach tells Epstein that there are hardly any women in math because it “does not yield social attention,” that climate change might be “a good way of dealing with overpopulation” and that fascism, while discomforting to him personally, is “probably the most efficient and rationally stringent way of governance, if someone could pull it off in a sustainable way.”

(Bach recently told the Boston Globe that he has since reached different conclusions and that “Race is itself not causal in cognitive differences of course, and later research brought me to my current view that race is NOT causal for differences in development, and race is NOT a determinant of IQ in children or adults.”)

[UpInArms]

1. Omg

These “people” are monsters, in so many ways

[BlueWaveNeverEnd]

10. Double "OMG" from reading the full email

https://www.reddit.com/r/JoschaBach/comments/1oxc3j2/extremely_racist_email_in_epstein_files_from/#lightbox

From: Joscha Bach
Sent: 7/24/2016 5:23:46 AM

To: jeffrey E. [[e-mail]]
Subject: Re: Mechanisms for learning

Importance: High

Average humans are probably not fully able to learn how to program etc. Fraction of people that
reshape the

world are at the right end of the Bell curves, so difference in variation means fewer women. We
tend to be more

interested in the outliers. Have people explicitly evolved to be not to be too smart on average, or
is general

intelligence so hard to get from human brains?

Am 24.07.2016 um 00:20 schrieb jeffrey E. :
the average is the only thing that matters

On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 6:02 PM, Joscha Bach <
> wrote:

Am 23.07.2016 um 04:41 schrieb jeffrey E. :
Cells seem to be mostly indistinguishable (except for )04 I thought?
Size is different on average, but males with small brains are still male.

Variation of all traits is higher for males, so there are more high IQ men (wider bell-curve). Given
average

brain size difference, the small difference in average IQ is surprising, I think
gender differenece. unlikely motivational, every cell is different. size is didfferent..

the more radical idea is that brains are the nucleus of the human" cell: the body the membrane,
the

organizm the colletcions and interactions of brains, wisdom of crowds. mirroring. etc.. money
used

as signals. as is spoken language. . what does social behavior mean, it is the cooridiation of indiv
brains. =

I think that mathematics based thinking does not allow for censorship. money people concepts if
they are

all math, then poliiical correctness and their structures are only subsets of a larger group of
thoughts. its

not emotinal for me.

most people have censorship built in at a deep level, social reasoning gets to different results
than equivalent

abstract reasoning
On Sat, Jul 23, 2016 at 3:02 AM, Joscha Bach < H- wrote:
Some thoughts I meant to send back for a long time:
HOUSE OVERSIGHT 025960

no worry, if i understand correctly you are suggsting there are layers 1 through N. lets cal them L
1 -

Ln. there are times T 1- Tn/ and then conjecture that changing the time. correlations (by genetic
swtch

or other method., you might be able to make blacks smarter by changing the time for motor layer
development and changing the time for other layers. . ). like telemeres for the cell, are their
equivalents for

the layers.. as you talked about culling the unused neurons in each layer, each neuron in each
layer would

get dfferent (kill yourself if you are not being used instructions).

Exactly. I looked up the statistics, black kids in the US have slower cognitive development (and
never catch

up), which the study of course attributed to social factors without any evidence, and they had
faster motor

development! I suspect this means their brains are slower at learning high-level concepts,
because the low-

level structures are optimized for a shorter time. But they will keep the lead in motor development,
because it

is easier to learn, and they have more time and attention to practice once they get the structures
in place.

It could also be that they have an additional set of learning directives in place that adapts them
better to a

more hunting/running style of life, whereas the Europeans had to adapt for identifying long-term
seasonal

patterns, delayed gratification for agriculture etc.

and CONCEPTS could be layer to layer communicaiton.. are gender differences also a matter of
time,

and structure of interactions..

I suspect gender differences are mostly motivational, i.e. we have a reward system for all the
different social

and cognitive needs, which makes us receive different kinds of pleasure and pain, thereby pay
attention and

learn. You cannot learn what does not attract your attention. Women tend to find abstract
systems, conflicts

and mechanisms intrinsically boring. Most women in computer science do not write programs
because they

enjoy solving puzzles, but because they want to help people, get approval etc. There are almost
no women in

math, because it does not help people or yield social attention.

Men tend to find elaborate social relations boring. If there is no pleasure in observing and
empathizing with

people, one will not have good social cognition.

IQ is not the only meaningful difference. Chinese pay an inordinate amount of attention to
authority. I suspect

historically., the authorities tended to kill them a lot if they did not. Jews tend be intellectually
independent

and anti-authoritarian, which might make them creative and inventive in ways that are hard to find
in Asia.

At the moment, I think speed/quality of brain development plus motivational system are the key to
understanding both mind and individual differences. Important part of human language might be
the result in

a motivational need to discover/invent grammatical structure, which as a side effect makes us
interested in

music.

It would mean that Chomsky's life long hypothesis, that people have a special circuit for
grammatical

language, is wrong. They might be GENERAL learners, just like Gorillas, but with a strong
motivational urge

i

to build grammatical structure, which the brain simply invents (there are only a few ways in which
a natural

language can work). That is much easier to wire into a brain than a specific circuit.
my

self believe that african music, westrn music, chinese music are a window into the the
structure of

those layers.. western rigid, african primitve, chinese nature based, . I belive that synphoic
movments

best describe your layering, they open with a basic simple melody,, after it is learned, it is
repeated and"

developed", inverted, distorted, related, etc. the development stage take a long time. then there
is a

HOUSE OVERSIGHT 025961

recapitlaltion of the whole, and its inter and intra actions. . african musci has lots of beats. and
little

development. - no accident, it mirrors their learning process.

Interesting question if music is somehow indicative of genetically defined prefs, but I am not sure.
It could be

path effects, starting in culture.
re taboo

, maybe climate change is a good way of dealing with overpopulation.. the earths forest fire.
potentailly

a good thing for the species

Making having children expensive in terms of upbringing and missed opportunity (like in the west)
is a more

humane way. Environmental stress while leaving near rock bottom tends to lead people to have
more

children, because there is no missed opportunity, and high mortality requires more attempts at
procreation.

Humans are a hardy species, outside of focused famine events and wars only small fractions of
any given

population die.

I suspect that strong reductions in population will come from large-scale failure of agriculture. The
climate

change itself with result in migration and wars, but most people will probably survive that. But who
knows, I

might be wrong.
too many people, so many mass executions of the elderly and infirm make sense

is the fundamental fact that everyone dies at some time .make it imporrisbole to ask so why not
earilier. if

the brain discards unused neurons, why shold socieity keep their equivalent

The radical idea of treating individuals in a society as cells and the society itself as a well-
organized organism

is fascism, or course. Probably the most efficient and rationally stringent way of governance, if
someone

could pull it off in a sustainable way; and if it is aggressive and expansive, its efficiency makes it a
virus that

everybody will want to stomp out. Fascism makes romantic doo-gooders like me very
uncomfortable (I

visited KZ Buchenwald five times and it had a profound influence on me; we East Germans
inoculated

ourselves very thoroughly against fascism), and the general public will not be willing to consider it.
I rather like the treatment Fascism gets in the Amazon Series "The Man in the High Castle", which
explores

what would have happened if the Germans and Japanese had won the war: A society that tries to
function as a

brutal and ruthlessly efficient machine, eliminating all social and evolutionary slack. It is very dark,
but not a

flat caricature of pointless evil for its own sake. Heinlein's late book "Starship Troopers" explores
fascism,

too, but unlike Philipp K Dick he does not see it as a form of insanity, but as the most desirable
order.

I find your "political incorrectness" very fascinating. In the beginning, I thought it is a form of costly
signaling, but now I think you are simply entirely unconstrained in your thoughts. How did you
manage in

your youth? Did you get in trouble, or did you keep your thoughts to yourself? I wonder what kind
of person

you want to transform into.

It was interesting to notice that at the Forbidden Research conference, nobody managed to say
anything

remotely out-of line. One large discussion group wanted to address the question of whether
"democracy still

works", and mostly expressed their disagreement with Trump. Ideology is like halitosis: easy to
see in others,

hard in oneself A speaker felt that the media "stifle all criticism of Trump", another wanted to
remove "men

and Elon Musk from government", and everybody strongly agreed that we need more diversity
everywhere.

I noticed some time ago that Joi has remarkable public communication skills. He picks
controversial, insight-

laden topics, but sanitizes them by carefully replacing the parts of content that would divide his
audience with

HOUSE OVERSIGHT 025962

symbolic messages that everybody can fill with their own content in a way that resonates with
them. The non-

controversial parts will still be insightful. He manages to come across as very subversive, while
rarely

offending anyone (except the hard scientists, that miss hard substance).

He also asks influential people and smart students or faculty to write parts of his essays and
speeches for him.

This invests them in his success, especially because he is going to reward and acknowledge
them. Very few of

his ideas are original, instead he is good at identifying and testing thoughts he reads or hears
from others.

I am still beset by the ruinous instinct that the goal of communication ought to be mutual
understanding. Joi is

right. Public communication is about reaching one's goals.
Bests,
Joscha
On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 12:42 AM, Joscha Bach <
Dear Jeffrey,
thank you for your support and encouragement, even where I fail.

H wrote:

Sorry for being such an embarrassment today. I will spell out today's argument a bit better and
cohesive

when I get to it. Also, I should have recognized that the main point I tried to make would trigger
Noam (who

was as always very generous, patient, kind and humble on the personal level, even though he did
not feel like

conceding anything on the conceptual one). Almost all of Noam's work focused on the idea that
humans have

very specific circuits or modules (even when most people in his field began to have other ideas),
and his
frustration is that it is so hard to find or explain them.

I found Noam's hypothesis very compelling in the past. I still think that the idea that language is
somehow a

cultural or social invention of our species is wrong. But I think that there is a chance (we don't
know that, but

it seems to most promising hypothesis IMHO) that the difference between humans and apes is
not a very

intricate special circuit, but genetically simple developmental switches. The bootstrapping of
cognition

works layer by layer during the first 20 years of our life. Each layer takes between a few months
and a few

years to train in humans. While a layer is learned, there is not much going on in the higher layers
yet, and

after the low level learning is finished, it does not change very much. This leads to the
characteristic bursts in

child development, that have famously been described by Piaget.

The first few layers are simple perceptual stuff, the last ones learn social structure and self-in-
society. The

switching works with something like a genetic clock, very slowly in humans, but much more
quickly in other

apes, and very fast in small mammals. As a result, human children take nine months before their
brains are

mature enough to crawl, and more than a year before they can walk. Many African populations
are quite a bit

faster. In the US, black children outperform white children in motor development, even in very
poor and

socially disadvantaged households, but they lag behind (and never catch up) in cognitive
development even

after controlling for family income.

Gorillas can crawl after 2 months, and build their own nests after 2.5 years. They leave their
mothers at 3-4

years. Human children are pretty much useless during the first 10-12 years, but during each
phase, their

brains have the opportunity to encounter many times as much training data as a gorilla brain.
Humans are

HOUSE OVERSIGHT 025963

literally smarter on every level, and because the abilities of the higher levels depend on those of
the lower

levels, they can perform abstractions that mature gorillas will never learn, no matter how much we
try to

train them.

The second set of mechanisms is in the motivational system. Motivation tells the brain what to
pay attention

to, by giving reward and punishment. If a brain does not get much reward for solving puzzles, the
individual

will find mathematics very boring and won't learn much of it. If a brain gets lots of rewards for
discovering

other people's intentions, it will learn a lot of social cognition.
Language might be the result of three things that are different in humans:

- extended training periods per layer (after the respective layer is done, it is difficult to learn a new
set of

phonemes or the first language)
- more layers

- different internal rewards. Perhaps the reward for learning grammatical structure is the same
that makes us

like music. Our brains may enjoy learning compositional regular structure, and they enjoy making
themselves understood, and everything else is something the universal cortical learning figures
out on its

own.

This is a hypothesis that is shared by a growing number of people these days. In humans, it is
reflected for

instance by the fact that races with faster motor development have lower IQ. (In individuals of the
same
group, slower development often indicates defects, of course.)

Another support comes from machine learning: we find that the same learning functions can learn
visual and

auditory pattern recognition, and even end-to-end-learning. Google has built automatic image
recognition

into their current photo app:
http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2015/07/01/go o gle-mistakenly-tags-black-p eop le-as-gorillas-
showing-limits-of-
algorithms/

The state of the art in research can do better than that: it can begin to "imagine" things. I.e. when
the

experimenter asks the system to "dream" what a certain object looks like, the system can produce
a
somewhat compelling image, which indicates that it is indeed learning visual structure. This stuff
is
something nobody could do a few months ago:
http://www.creativeai.net/posts/Mv4WG6rdzAerZF7ch/synthesizing-preferred-inputs-via-deep-
generator-
networks

A machine learning program that can learn how to play an Atari game without any human
supervision or

hand-crafted engineering (the feat that gave DeepMind 500M from Google) now just takes about
130 lines of

Python code.

These models do not have interesting motivational systems, and a relatively simple architecture.
They

currently seem to mimic some of the stuff that goes on in the first few layers of the cortex. They
learn object

features, visual styles, lighting and rotation in 3d, and simple action policies. Almost everything
else is

missing. But there is a lot of enthusiasm that the field might be on the right track, and that we can
learn

motor simulations and intuitive physics soon. (The majority of the people in Al do not work on this,
however. They try to improve the performance for the current benchmarks.)

Noam's criticism of machine translation mostly applies to the Latent Semantic Analysis models
that Google

and others have been using for many years. These models map linguistic symbols to concepts,
and relate

concepts to each other, but they do not relate the concepts to "proper" mental representations of
what objects

and processes look like and how they interact. Concepts are probably one of the top layers of the
learning

hierarchy, i.e. they are acquired *after* we learn to simulate a mental world, not before. Classical
linguists

ignored the simulation of a mental world entirely.
HOUSE OVERSIGHT 025964

It seems miraculous that purely conceptual machine translation works at all, but that is because
concepts are

shared between speakers, so the structure of the conceptual space can be inferred from the
statistics of

language use. But the statistics of language use have too little information to infer what objects
look like and

how they interact.

My own original ideas concern a few parts of the emerging understanding of what the brain does.
The

"request-confirmation networks" that I have introduced at a NIPS workshop in last the December
are an
attempt at modeling how the higher layers might self-organize into cognitive programs.
Cheers!
Joscha
please note

The information contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only for
the use of the addressee. It is the property of
JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to [e-mail], and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
please note

The information contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only for
the use of the addressee. It is the property of
JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to [e-mail], and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments. copyright -all rights reserved
HOUSE OVERSIGHT 025965

please note

The information contained in this communication is
confidential, may be attorney-client privileged, may
constitute inside information, and is intended only for
the use of the addressee. It is the property of

JEE

Unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this
communication or any part thereof is strictly prohibited
and may be unlawful. If you have received this

communication in error, please notify us immediately by
return e-mail or by e-mail to [e-mail], and
destroy this communication and all copies thereof,
including all attachments. copyright -all rights

[UpInArms]

11. What a nasty bigoted POS

[Clouds Passing]

2. AI scientists and promoters are the stupidest of all. They rely on thievery as their business model.

[ret5hd]

3. "...population control through climate change..."

climate change might be “a good way of dealing with overpopulation”

mass death, fascism and theories about the supposed difference in women’s and men’s cognitive skills.

EVERYTHING WE ARE FIGHTING ISNT A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION…ITS ON PURPOSE.

[travelingthrulife]

7. They are forcing women to bear babies while discussing how to deal with overpopulation.

[markodochartaigh]

4. Bach was also taking money from Epstein.

https://www.sfgate.com/tech/article/ai-exec-jeffery-epstein-21331953.php


I hope that as anthropogenic climate change spirals out of control the younger generation will remember that this death was chosen for them by Sillycon Valley oiligarchs.

[sakabatou]

5. Vedal: Hey, Evil, how shall we describe this AI "scientist"?

Evil: A piece of shit.

[Sweet Rosie Red]

6. Sorry, You can deny but

the stench clings. I’d like to tatoo a swastika on the forehead of everyone who ever expressed these views as a lifelong warning to civilized human beings

[Tree Lady]

8. There are so many very intelligent

People black and all races. He needs to shut up!!!

[malaise]

9. That we the oldest human species are still here

despite the slaughter, the theft of our land, the exploitation and abominable treatment says otherwise.
Fuck off racist.