“If Socrates had come before the Athenians with some fine new piece of machinery like a protective tariff, workmen's compensation, old-age pensions, collective ownership of the means of production, or what not; if he had told them that what they must do to be saved was simply to install his piece of machinery forthwith, and set it going; no doubt he would have interested a number of people, perhaps enough to put him in office as the standard-bearer of an enlightened and progressive liberalism. When he came before them, however, with nothing to say but "Know thyself," they found his discourse unsatisfactory, and became impatient with him.”
Path of so many causes: finding a worthy problem, proposing a horribly inefficient set of actions to take under the supposition of solving it, calling anyone who doesn't accept and take (or fake) that set of actions “an enemy”.
“The problem with a paradigm shift is that it’s hard to even have a conversation with someone whose conceptualization of the world doesn’t even allow them to recognize the problem they have”
for the paranoid: if you are afraid of a MitM attack substituting your keys but can't meet in person (or need a pseudonymous identity confirmation),
you can, in principle, verify the key using time-limited non-easily-alterable communication, e.g. saying the fingerprint over a live voice (voip) connection, or making a complicated statement like “10th character of the fingerprint is …” over live chat.
Short version of everything: the AIXI model is also relevant to [some part of] human brains.
With the corresponding conclusions about knowledge, self-wireheading, etc.
Really, from this theory half of previously-philosophical claims can be rebuilt (and proven/disproven) formally.
… I do not remember the experiment results< thus, likely, there was nothing interesting in the results, thus, likely, there was nothing unexpected in the results, thus, likely, my current expectations are correct after all.