Posts

GreaterWrong Arbital Viewer 2019-06-28T06:32:22.278Z · score: 61 (14 votes)
What societies have ever had legal or accepted blackmail? 2019-03-17T09:16:55.560Z · score: 33 (10 votes)
An alternative way to browse LessWrong 2.0 2018-02-19T01:52:06.462Z · score: 104 (33 votes)

Comments

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Effect of Advertising · 2019-11-26T21:24:10.559Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · LW · GW

If reviewers would indeed be more trustworthy, I don't see why they couldn't take over the function of letting interested people know about new products etc. that you say would go away.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Double Cruz and Verification of Claims · 2019-11-22T10:26:22.289Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Double crux is only meant to resolve a disagreement between two people, it wouldn't let third parties verify anything unless they all happened to share the same cruxes.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on The LessWrong 2018 Review · 2019-11-22T08:18:51.951Z · score: 39 (9 votes) · LW · GW

I've added support for this on GreaterWrong; you can view nominated posts here and all 2018 posts here.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Realism about rationality · 2019-11-22T07:52:26.475Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Testing, ignore this

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Insights from the randomness/ignorance model are genuine · 2019-11-14T01:24:03.508Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Could you explain why the Doomsday argument answer seems absurd, or why I don't have to be a human who was actually born?

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Experiments and Consent · 2019-11-11T09:54:28.989Z · score: 18 (6 votes) · LW · GW

Humans are known to be extremely bad at this kind of task (passively watching something for hours while remaining ready to respond to danger within a few seconds) and Uber should have known this. If Uber wanted to go ahead with this bad strategy anyway, it should have screened its employees to make sure they were capable of the task they were given.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on The Technique Taboo · 2019-11-01T04:49:38.699Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · LW · GW

How prestigious were these art classes?

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Door Ideas · 2019-10-27T08:22:44.874Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Another option would be an accordion-style door with hinges in the middle, which folds into the little space next to the doorway.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Open & Welcome Thread - October 2019 · 2019-10-25T05:05:05.392Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Literally no one is rational enough to actually reach Aumann agreement on anything but a simple toy problem. See https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/JdK3kr4ug9kJvKzGy/probability-space-and-aumann-agreement

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Open & Welcome Thread - October 2019 · 2019-10-24T07:08:37.360Z · score: 6 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Aumann's agreement theorem is an extremely bad basis for any kind of couples therapy...

Comment by clone-of-saturn on What are some unpopular (non-normative) opinions that you hold? · 2019-10-24T05:25:28.038Z · score: 3 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Something like quasi-realist Hobbesian contractualism.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on What are some unpopular (non-normative) opinions that you hold? · 2019-10-24T02:54:13.128Z · score: 18 (6 votes) · LW · GW

Utilitarianism, and most forms of consequentialism, are not just normatively wrong but also logically incoherent.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Chris_Leong's Shortform · 2019-10-23T23:35:35.077Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · LW · GW

how did Marx view a village cobbler who owned his workshop and all his tools? Hated exploiter of his neighbours?

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1847/communist-league/1850-ad1.htm

Comment by clone-of-saturn on What are some unpopular (non-normative) opinions that you hold? · 2019-10-23T22:52:46.158Z · score: 3 (2 votes) · LW · GW

It seems like it would've been more productive to set up an anonymous google form or similar (like this recent EA forum one).

Comment by clone-of-saturn on What are some unpopular (non-normative) opinions that you hold? · 2019-10-22T23:09:57.537Z · score: 2 (4 votes) · LW · GW

It seems fairly uncontroversial to say that the list of countries with mandatory national service doesn't seem like a list of countries that are notoriously terrible.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Does the body have an almost infinite number of potential positions? · 2019-10-22T20:51:00.726Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · LW · GW

What would it mean for the statement to be false? What would a body with a finite number of potential positions be like?

Comment by clone-of-saturn on "Mild Hallucination" Test · 2019-10-14T07:52:01.255Z · score: 3 (2 votes) · LW · GW

I don't have any clear explanation. I noticed them before I ever tried meditation or drugs. It's possible that I'm neurodivergent but I'm not sure.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on "Mild Hallucination" Test · 2019-10-14T07:39:42.270Z · score: 3 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Yes, I meant #1. It's only noticeable with my eyes open when I look at a textureless dark surface. If I sit with my eyes closed and concentrate on the visual snow for several minutes, it will usually progress to level 2 or 3 described here. But that goes away immediately when I open my eyes, unless the surroundings are completely dark.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Social Class · 2019-10-12T02:29:08.846Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

So this is a write-up of discussion points brought up at a meetup, it’s not intended to be a comprehensive overview about every single thing about social class.

Okay... but it still seems like a surprising omission. I'm only familiar with two concepts of class, the somewhat vacuous American one where everyone is middle class (which you seem to be criticizing) and the Marxist one.

it’s now pretty common to be wealthy without owning any productive capital

I would have thought almost all wealthy people own either stocks or real estate... what do you mean by this?

Comment by clone-of-saturn on A simple sketch of how realism became unpopular · 2019-10-12T02:12:38.829Z · score: 21 (8 votes) · LW · GW

It's relatively easy to be a master ninja of philosophy relative to anyone in 1710, because you've had a chance to crib from the work of all the smartest people who've lived since then.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Social Class · 2019-10-11T20:18:45.601Z · score: 11 (2 votes) · LW · GW

No mention of selling your labor versus owning productive capital or state-granted monopoly rights?

Comment by clone-of-saturn on "Mild Hallucination" Test · 2019-10-11T18:38:49.424Z · score: 7 (2 votes) · LW · GW

I could already see all 3 of these.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on What do the baby eaters tell us about ethics? · 2019-10-07T08:58:17.679Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · LW · GW

How would you know if you had?

Comment by clone-of-saturn on The first step of rationality · 2019-09-30T21:54:00.015Z · score: 5 (3 votes) · LW · GW

I think it's completely fair to describe that as "sexual misconduct."

Comment by clone-of-saturn on The first step of rationality · 2019-09-29T21:26:36.217Z · score: 7 (4 votes) · LW · GW

Also related: https://engagedharma.net/2019/08/19/culadasa-charged-with-sexual-misconduct/

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Feature Wish List for LessWrong · 2019-09-27T11:36:56.281Z · score: 7 (3 votes) · LW · GW

I added web push notifications to GreaterWrong, you can activate them on your inbox page. If your browser and device have the proper support, they should show up even when you don't have a GreaterWrong tab open.

This is pretty experimental, let me know how it works for you.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Honoring Petrov Day on LessWrong, in 2019 · 2019-09-27T03:41:52.081Z · score: 10 (6 votes) · LW · GW

Good point. We're unlucky that nuclear war didn't break out in 1983.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Feature Wish List for LessWrong · 2019-09-20T07:06:48.758Z · score: 5 (2 votes) · LW · GW

I want to see a backlink feature, so people can find replies to a post that aren’t in the form of a comment.

Added to GreaterWrong.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Feature Wish List for LessWrong · 2019-09-17T04:40:13.793Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Thanks! While I have you here, any rea­son why vot­ing is dis­abled in the in­box and re­cent com­ments on GW?

Voting from recent comments was enabled for a while, but Said objected to it because he thought people might vote on comments in a knee-jerk way without understanding the context. For the inbox, though, it's more of an oversight (I just never missed having the buttons there).

Also, I sub­mit­ted a fea­ture re­quest on the GW is­sue tracker to dis­play AF karma (the num­bers next to the Omega signs on LW).

Sure, that should be doable. Originally I thought it would require two independent sets of voting buttons, which seemed too weird and confusing, but it looks like that's not actually the case.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Feature Wish List for LessWrong · 2019-09-17T03:01:20.533Z · score: 5 (2 votes) · LW · GW

I sug­gest a “I already replied” in­di­ca­tor for mes­sages in my in­box.

Added to GreaterWrong.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Divergence on Evidence Due to Differing Priors - A Political Case Study · 2019-09-17T02:08:51.252Z · score: 16 (6 votes) · LW · GW

It's probably worth noting that the two tweets don't actually contradict each other.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Realism and Rationality · 2019-09-16T08:25:47.927Z · score: 16 (7 votes) · LW · GW

It seems like you've set up a dichotomy between there being universally compelling normative statements versus normative statements being meaningless, but what about the position that specific subsets of possible statements are compelling to specific people? Would that be realist, anti-realist, or neither?

Comment by clone-of-saturn on The Power to Demolish Bad Arguments · 2019-09-05T06:15:02.164Z · score: 3 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Right, but what's their motivation for transferring their wealth in this way?

Comment by clone-of-saturn on The Power to Demolish Bad Arguments · 2019-09-05T03:03:49.986Z · score: 3 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Could you explain why shareholders are subsidizing Uber drivers, in your opinion?

Comment by clone-of-saturn on A Personal Rationality Wishlist · 2019-08-30T07:43:05.542Z · score: 5 (3 votes) · LW · GW

pulling laterally on the chain, a tiny amount, makes it move from one gear to another, even if the gears are very different sizes?

There are small grooves or bumps (depending on the design) on the sides of the gears that help lift the chain onto the next gear.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Six AI Risk/Strategy Ideas · 2019-08-28T01:14:25.955Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Oops, these links should be translated properly now.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Is LW making progress? · 2019-08-24T07:18:17.122Z · score: 11 (9 votes) · LW · GW

Right, your comment was informative in letting us know that Double Crux (among other things) has replaced Bayes' Theorem in the CFAR curriculum. But it also casually asserts that this is an example of progress and that the old curriculum was worse, in a way that suggests that you expected the reader to either already agree or immediately find it obvious. So I'm just letting you know that I don't find it obvious.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Is LW making progress? · 2019-08-24T05:29:06.456Z · score: 16 (14 votes) · LW · GW

for instance, CFAR no longer teaches Bayes’s Theorem

There might be some question about whether this can be described as "definitely making progress."

Comment by clone-of-saturn on GreaterWrong Arbital Viewer · 2019-08-20T02:33:13.381Z · score: 3 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Fixed.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Partial summary of debate with Benquo and Jessicata [pt 1] · 2019-08-18T08:56:11.037Z · score: 21 (4 votes) · LW · GW

What makes you think A and B are mutually exclusive? Or even significantly anticorrelated? If there are enough very different models built out of legitimate facts and theories for everyone to have one of their own, how can you tell they aren't picking them for political reasons?

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Power Buys You Distance From The Crime · 2019-08-04T08:34:18.016Z · score: 8 (4 votes) · LW · GW

This seems like dramatically over-complicating the idea. I would expect a prototypical conflict theorist to reason like this:

  1. Political debates have winners and losers—if a consensus is reached on a political question, one group of people will be materially better off and another group will be worse off.

  2. Public choice theory makes black people worse off. (I don't know if the article is right about this, but I'll assume it's true for the sake of argument.)

  3. Therefore, one ought to promote public choice theory if one wants to hurt black people, and disparage public choice theory if one wants to help black people.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Drive-By Low-Effort Criticism · 2019-08-04T03:03:33.972Z · score: 13 (5 votes) · LW · GW

Sure, that all makes sense, but at least on LW it seems like we ought to insist on saying "rewarding results" when we mean rewarding results, and "deceiving ourselves into thinking we're rewarding results" when we mean deceiving ourselves into thinking we're rewarding results.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Drive-By Low-Effort Criticism · 2019-08-02T02:21:40.944Z · score: 9 (6 votes) · LW · GW

Strange. You bring up Goodhart's Law, but the way you apply it seems exactly backwards to me. If you're rewarding strategies instead of results, and someone comes up with a new strategy that has far better results than the strategy you're rewarding, you fail to reward people for developing better strategies or getting better results. This seems like it's exactly what Goodhart was trying to warn us about.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Drive-By Low-Effort Criticism · 2019-07-31T22:28:32.093Z · score: 17 (7 votes) · LW · GW

perhaps high-effort posts are more likely to contain muddled thinking, and hence more likely to have incorrect conclusions? but it’s hard to see why this should be the case a priori

I don't think high-effort posts are more likely to contain muddled thinking, but I do think readers are less likely to notice muddled thinking when it appears in high-effort posts, so suppressing criticism of high-effort posts is especially dangerous.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on When does adding more people reliably make a system better? · 2019-07-19T18:43:23.234Z · score: 9 (3 votes) · LW · GW

LW 1.0 had an additional problem that no one wanted to risk writing a worse than average post in Main, leading to ever increasing standards and fewer posts, but I believe user numbers were still increasing, and quality of Discussion posts decreasing, during that process.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Why artificial optimism? · 2019-07-16T04:20:55.107Z · score: 18 (5 votes) · LW · GW

Know­ingly al­low­ing some­one to get away with some­thing bad makes you bad.

While some peo­ple have a be­lief like this, this seems false from a philo­soph­i­cal eth­i­cal per­spec­tive.

I think a philosophical ethical perspective that labels this "false" (and not just incomplete or under-nuanced) is failing to engage with the phenomenon of ethics as it actually happens in the world. Ethics arose in this cold and indifferent universe because being ethical is a winning strategy, but being "ethical" all by yourself without any mechanism to keep everyone around you ethical is not a winning strategy.

The cost of explicitly punishing people for not being vegetarian is prohibitive because vegetarianism is still a small and entrepreneurial ethical system, but you can certainly at least punish non-vegetarians by preferentially choosing other vegetarians to associate with. Well-established ethical systems like anti-murder-ism have much less difficulty affording severe punishments.

An important innovation is that you can cooperate with people who might be bad overall, as long as they follow a more minimal set of rules (for example, the Uniform Commercial Code). Or in other words, you can have concentric circles of ethicalness, making more limited ethical demands of people you interact with less closely. But when you interact with people in your outer circle, how do people in your inner circle know you don't condone all of the bad things they might be doing? One way is to have some kind of system of group membership, with rules that explicitly apply only to group members. But a cheaper and more flexible way is to simply remain ignorant about anything that isn't relevant--a.k.a respect their privacy.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Why artificial optimism? · 2019-07-15T23:00:52.938Z · score: 18 (6 votes) · LW · GW

Po­lite­ness and pri­vacy are, in fact, largely about main­tain­ing im­pres­sions (es­pe­cially pos­i­tive im­pres­sions) through co­or­di­nat­ing against the rev­e­la­tion of truth.

People don't always agree with each other about what's good and bad. Knowingly allowing someone to get away with something bad makes you bad. Coordinating against the revelation of truth allows us to get something productive done together instead of spending all our time fighting.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Open Thread July 2019 · 2019-07-15T09:23:25.007Z · score: 10 (5 votes) · LW · GW

I thought your comment was fine and the irony was obvious, but this kind of misunderstanding can be easily avoided by making the straightforward reading more boring, like so:

Given that CfAR is an organization which is speci­fi­cally about seeking truth, one could safely assume that if the actual reason were “Many of the explanations here are intentionally approximate or incomplete because we predict that this handbook will be leaked and we don’t want to undercut our core product,” then the handbook would have just said that. To do otherwise would be to call the whole premise into question!

Comment by clone-of-saturn on Raemon's Scratchpad · 2019-07-08T06:56:30.226Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Knowing your plans could definitely make a difference--I do want to prioritize fixing any problems that make GW confusing to use, as well as adding features that someone has directly asked for. As such, I just implemented the related questions feature.

Comment by clone-of-saturn on GreaterWrong Arbital Viewer · 2019-06-29T04:57:13.157Z · score: 5 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Oops, fixed.