LessWrong 2.0 Reader
View: New · Old · Top← previous page (newer posts) · next page (older posts) →
← previous page (newer posts) · next page (older posts) →
I think the proposed method could still work though. A substantial fraction of the pseudorandomness may be consistent on the individual person level.
The type of pseudorandomness you describe here ought to be independent at the level of individual items, so it ought to be part of the least-reliable variance component (not part of the general trait measured and not stable over time). It's possible to use statistics to estimate how big an effect it has on the scores, and it's possible to drive it arbitrarily far down in effect simply by making the test longer.
ruby on Now THIS is forecasting: understanding Epoch’s Direct ApproachThe title is strong with this one. I like it.
adamzerner on adamzerner's ShortformI wish there were more discussion posts on LessWrong.
Right now it feels like it weakly if not moderately violates some sort of cultural norm to publish a discussion post (similar but to a lesser extent on the Shortform). Something low effort of the form "X is a topic I'd like to discuss. A, B and C are a few initial thoughts I have about it. Thoughts?"
It seems to me like something we should encourage though. Here's how I'm thinking about it. Such "discussion posts" currently happen informally in social circles. Maybe you'll text a friend. Maybe you'll bring it up at a meetup. Maybe you'll post about it in a private Slack group.
But if it's appropriate in those contexts, why shouldn't it be appropriate on LessWrong? Why not benefit from having it be visible to more people? The more eyes you get on it, the better the chance someone has something helpful, insightful, or just generally useful to contribute.
The big downside I see is that it would screw up the post feed. Like when you go to lesswrong.com and see the list of posts, you don't want that list to have a bunch of low quality discussion posts you're not interested in. You don't want to spend time and energy sifting through the noise to find the signal.
But this is easily solved with filters. Authors could mark/categorize/tag their posts as being a low-effort discussion post, and people who don't want to see such posts in their feed can apply a filter to filter these discussion posts out.
review-bot on Don't Dismiss Simple Alignment ApproachesThe LessWrong Review [? · GW] runs every year to select the posts that have most stood the test of time. This post is not yet eligible for review, but will be at the end of 2024. The top fifty or so posts are featured prominently on the site throughout the year. Will this post make the top fifty?
jblack on Thomas Kwa's ShortformIt definitely should not move by anything like a Brownian motion process. At the very least it should be bursty and updates should be expected to be very non-uniform in magnitude.
In practice, you should not consciously update very often since almost all updates will be of insignificant magnitude on near-irrelevant information. I expect that much of the credence weight turns on unknown unknowns, which can't really be updated on at all until something turns them into (at least) known unknowns.
But sure, if you were a superintelligence with practically unbounded rationality then you might in principle update very frequently.
askwho on Introducing AI-Powered Audiobooks of Rational Fiction ClassicsThanks! Glad you are enjoying it.
askwho on Introducing AI-Powered Audiobooks of Rational Fiction ClassicsThanks, appreciate it.
askwho on Introducing AI-Powered Audiobooks of Rational Fiction ClassicsIt is not cheap. It's around ~$20 per hour of audio. Luckily there are people on bord with this project who help cover cost through a Patreon
askwho on Introducing AI-Powered Audiobooks of Rational Fiction ClassicsThanks so much! Glad you are enjoying the audio format. I really agree this story is worth "reading" in some form, it's why I'm working on this project.
askwho on Introducing AI-Powered Audiobooks of Rational Fiction ClassicsYes! There are RSS feeds for Planecrash, Luminosity, Animorphs and the article feed.