Comment by gwern on What is up with carbon dioxide and cognition? An offer · 2019-03-26T00:48:19.696Z · score: 7 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Some recent kerfluffles over CO2 (prompted by people rediscovering Allen et al 2016 on Twitter etc) lead me to one I missed: "Breathing Carbon Dioxide (4% for 1-Hour) Slows Response Selection, Not Stimulus Encoding", Vercruyssen 2014. 4% is a ton but the results remain subtle, at best.

Comment by gwern on 'This Waifu Does Not Exist': 100,000 StyleGAN & GPT-2 samples · 2019-03-25T03:14:58.998Z · score: 3 (1 votes) · LW · GW

And now a full guide to using StyleGAN:

Comment by gwern on Inverse p-zombies: the other direction in the Hard Problem of Consciousness · 2019-03-13T01:55:26.805Z · score: 11 (2 votes) · LW · GW

"This is what it’s like waking up during surgery: General anaesthetic is supposed to make surgery painless. But now there’s evidence that one person in 20 may be awake when doctors think they’re under", Robson:

One day, for instance, she was waiting in the car as her daughter ran an errand, and realised that she was trapped inside. What might once have been a frustrating inconvenience sent her into a panic attack. “I started screaming. I was flailing my arms, I was crying,” she says. “It just left me so shaken.” Even the wrong clothing can make her anxiety worse. “Anything that’s tight around my neck is out of the question because it makes me feel like I’m suffocating,” says Donna, a 55-year-old from Altona in Manitoba, Canada.

...The lingering trauma can resurface with the slightest trigger, and still causes her to have “two or three nightmares each night”. Having been put on medical leave from her job, she has lost her independence. She suspects that she will never fully escape the effects of that day more than a decade ago. “It’s a life sentence.”

...When she woke up, she could hear the nurses buzzing around the table, and she felt someone scrubbing at her abdomen – but she assumed that the operation was over and they were just clearing up. “I was thinking, ‘Oh boy, you were anxious for no reason.’” It was only once she heard the surgeon asking the nurse for a scalpel that the truth suddenly dawned on her: the operation wasn’t over. It hadn’t even begun. The next thing she knew, she felt the blade of his knife against her belly as he made his first incision, leading to excruciating pain. She tried to sit up and to speak – but thanks to a neuromuscular blocker, her body was paralysed. “I felt so… so powerless. There was just nothing I could do. I couldn’t move, couldn’t scream, couldn’t open my eyes,” she says. “I tried to cry just to get tears rolling down my cheeks, thinking that they would notice that and notice that something was going on. But I couldn’t make tears.”

...Various projects around the world have attempted to document experiences like Donna’s, but the Anesthesia Awareness Registry at the University of Washington, Seattle, offers some of the most detailed analyses. Founded in 2007, it has now collected more than 340 reports – most from North America – and although these reports are confidential, some details have been published, and they make illuminating reading.

As you might expect, a large majority of the accounts – more than 70 per cent – also contain reports of pain. “I felt the sting and burning sensation of four incisions being made, like a sharp knife cutting a finger,” wrote one. “Then searing, unbearable pain.” “There were two parts I remember quite clearly,” wrote a patient who had had a wide hole made in his femur. “I heard the drill, felt the pain, and felt the vibration all the way up to my hip. The next part was the movement of my leg and the pounding of the ‘nail’.” The pain, he said, was “unlike anything I thought possible”. It is the paralysing effects of the muscle blockers that many find most distressing, however. For one thing, it produces the sensations that you are not breathing – which one patient described as “too horrible to endure”. Then there’s the helplessness. Another patient noted: “I was screaming in my head things like ‘don’t they know I’m awake, open your eyes to signal them’.” To make matters worse, all of this panic can be compounded by a lack of understanding of why they are awake but unable to move. “They have no reference point to say why is this happening,” says Christopher Kent at the University of Washington, who co-authored the paper about these accounts. The result, he says, is that many patients come to fear that they are dying. “Those are the worst of the anaesthesia experiences.”


The result is that many more people might be conscious during surgery, but they simply can’t remember it afterwards.

To investigate this phenomenon, researchers are using what they call the isolated forearm technique. During the induction of the anaesthesia, the staff place a cuff around the patient’s upper arm that delays the passage of the neuromuscular agent through the arm. This means that, for a brief period, the patient is still able to move their hand. So a member of staff could ask them to squeeze their hand in response to two questions: whether they were still aware, and, if so, whether they felt any pain. (Read more in this short on how doctors are trying to detect anaesthesia awareness.) In the largest study of this kind to date, Robert Sanders at the University of Wisconsin–Madison recently collaborated with colleagues at six hospitals in the US, Europe and New Zealand. Of the 260 patients studied, 4.6 per cent responded to the experimenters’ first question, about awareness. That is hundreds of times greater than the rate of remembered awareness events that had been noted in the National Audit Project. And around four in ten of those patients who did respond with the hand squeeze – 1.9 per cent across the whole group – also reported feeling pain in the experimenters’ second question.

These results raise some ethical quandaries. “Whenever I talk to the trainees I talk about the philosophical element to this,” says Sanders. “If the patient doesn’t remember, is it concerning?” Sanders says that there’s no evidence that the patients who respond during the isolated forearm experiments, but fail to remember the experience later, do go on to develop PTSD or other psychological issues like Donna. And without those long-term consequences, you might conclude that the momentary awareness is unfortunate, but unalarming. Yet the study does make him uneasy, and so he conducted a survey to gather the public’s views on the matter. Opinions were mixed. “Most people didn’t think that amnesia alone is sufficient – but a surprisingly large minority thought that as long as you didn’t remember the event, it’s OK,” Sanders says.


The survey is (Given the described wording and the remarkably blase acceptance claimed, I'm left wondering a little if the respondents really appreciated the scenario being described - being gutted like a fish and feeling every last bit of it, so to speak.)

"Patient perspectives on intraoperative awareness with explicit recall: report from a North American anaesthesia awareness registry", Kent et al 2015:

Background: Awareness during general anaesthesia is a source of concern for patients and anaesthetists, with potential for psychological and medicolegal sequelae. We used a registry to evaluate unintended awareness from the patient’s perspective with an emphasis on their experiences and healthcare provider responses.

Methods: English-speaking subjects self-reported explicit recall of events during anaesthesia to the Anesthesia Awareness Registry of the ASA, completed a survey, and submitted copies of medical records. Anaesthesia awareness was defined as explicit recall of events during induction or maintenance of general anaesthesia. Patient experiences, satisfaction, and desired practitioner responses to explicit recall were based on survey responses.

Results: Most of the 68 respondents meeting inclusion criteria (75%) were dissatisfied with the manner in which their concerns were addressed by their healthcare providers, and many reported long-term harm. Half (51%) of respondents reported that neither the anaesthesia provider nor surgeon expressed concern about their experience. Few were offered an apology (10%) or referral for counseling (15%). Patient preferences for responses after an awareness episode included validation of their experience (37%), an explanation (28%), and discussion or follow-up to the episode (26%).

Conclusions: Data from this registry confirm the serious impact of anaesthesia awareness for some patients, and suggest that patients need more systematic responses and follow-up by healthcare providers.

"Incidence of Connected Consciousness after Tracheal Intubation: A Prospective, International, Multicenter Cohort Study of the Isolated Forearm Technique", Sanders et al 2017:

Background: The isolated forearm technique allows assessment of consciousness of the external world (connected consciousness) through a verbal command to move the hand (of a tourniquet-isolated arm) during intended general anesthesia. Previous isolated forearm technique data suggest that the incidence of connected consciousness may approach 37% after a noxious stimulus. The authors conducted an international, multicenter, pragmatic study to establish the incidence of isolated forearm technique responsiveness after intubation in routine practice.

Methods: Two hundred sixty adult patients were recruited at six sites into a prospective cohort study of the isolated forearm technique after intubation. Demographic, anesthetic, and intubation data, plus postoperative questionnaires, were collected. Univariate statistics, followed by bivariate logistic regression models for age plus variable, were conducted.

Results: The incidence of isolated forearm technique responsiveness after intubation was 4.6% (12/260); 5 of 12 responders reported pain through a second hand squeeze. Responders were younger than nonresponders (39 ± 17 vs. 51 ± 16 yr old; P = 0.01) with more frequent signs of sympathetic activation (50% vs. 2.4%; P = 0.03). No participant had explicit recall of intraoperative events when questioned after surgery (n = 253). Across groups, depth of anesthesia monitoring values showed a wide range; however, values were higher for responders before (54 ± 20 vs. 42 ± 14; P = 0.02) and after (52 ± 16 vs. 43 ± 16; P = 0.02) intubation. In patients not receiving total intravenous anesthesia, exposure to volatile anesthetics before intubation reduced the odds of responding (odds ratio, 0.2 [0.1 to 0.8]; P = 0.02) after adjustment for age.

Conclusions: Intraoperative connected consciousness occurred frequently, although the rate is up to 10-times lower than anticipated. This should be considered a conservative estimate of intraoperative connected consciousness.

Comment by gwern on Inverse p-zombies: the other direction in the Hard Problem of Consciousness · 2019-03-12T01:13:36.572Z · score: 5 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Daniel Dennett turns out to discuss precisely this problem in the context of curare/analgesics/anesthetics/amnestics in Dennett 1978, "Why You Can't Make A Computer That Feels Pain".

He also discusses an interesting detail of pain, "reactive dissociation". In my pain taxonomy, I split the various kinds of pain disorders into useful/motivating/qualia; the only combination I was missing was a kind of pain which is experienced as painful and yet was not motivating/aversive/unpleasant. "reactive dissociation" turns out to be just that - if morphine is administered after pain starts happening, people apparently frequently will report that the pain is excruciatingly painful, and yet they don't mind it.

Aspirin by antagonizing bradykinin thus prevents pain at the earliest opportunity. This is interesting because aspirin is also unique among analgesics in lacking the 'reactive disassociation' effect. All other analgesics (e.g., the morphine group and nitrous oxide in sub-anesthetic doses) have a common 'phenomenology.' After receiving the analgesic subjects commonly report not that the pain has disappeared or diminished (as with aspirin) but that the pain is as intense as ever though they no longer mind it. To many philosophers this may sound like some sort of conceptual incoherency or contradiction, or at least indicate a failure on the part of the subjects to draw enough distinctions, but such philosophical suspicions, which we will examine more closely later, must be voiced in the face of the normality of such first-person reports and the fact that they are expressed in the widest variety of language by subjects of every degree of sophistication. A further curiosity about morphine is that if it is administered before the onset of pain (for instance, as a pre-surgical medication) the subjects claim not to feel any pain subsequently (though they are not numb or anesthetized - they have sensation in the relevant parts of their bodies); while if the morphine is administered after the pain has commenced, the subjects report that the pain continues (and continues to be pain), though they no longer mind it.

...Lobotomized subjects similarly report feeling intense pain but not minding it, and in other ways the manifestations of lobotomy and morphine are similar enough to lead some researchers to describe the action of morphine (and some barbiturates) as "reversible pharmacological leucotomy [lobotomy]".^23^

23: A. S. Keats and H. K. Beecher, "Pain Relief with Hypnotic Doses of Barbiturates, and a Hypothesis", J. Pharmacol, 1950. Lobotomy, though discredited as a behavior-improving psychosurgical procedure, is still a last resort tactic in cases of utterly intractable central pain, where the only other alternative to unrelenting agony is escalating morphine dosages, with inevitable addiction, habituation and early death. Lobotomy does not excise any of the old low path (as one might expect from its effect on pain perception), but it does cut off the old low path from a rich input source in the frontal lobes of the cortex.

Dennett throws in this disturbing anecdote in footnote 27:

Scopolamine and other amnestics are often prescribed by anesthesiologists for the purpose of creating amnesia. "Sometimes", I was told by a prominent anesthesiologist, "when we think a patient may have been awake during surgery, we give scopolamine to get us off the hook. Sometimes it works and sometimes not."

Comment by gwern on 'This Waifu Does Not Exist': 100,000 StyleGAN & GPT-2 samples · 2019-03-07T17:05:33.429Z · score: 3 (1 votes) · LW · GW

I now have poetry samples up using a retrained/finetuned version of GPT-2-small:

February newsletter

2019-03-02T22:42:09.490Z · score: 13 (3 votes)
Comment by gwern on 'This Waifu Does Not Exist': 100,000 StyleGAN & GPT-2 samples · 2019-03-02T00:14:06.141Z · score: 5 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Nothing makes sense when Google Translates tries Japanese. Although the fact that that is still better than pre-RNN shows you how much of an upgrade that was.

Comment by gwern on 'This Waifu Does Not Exist': 100,000 StyleGAN & GPT-2 samples · 2019-03-01T04:29:37.262Z · score: 9 (4 votes) · LW · GW

Implementation details:

'This Waifu Does Not Exist': 100,000 StyleGAN & GPT-2 samples

2019-03-01T04:29:16.529Z · score: 38 (11 votes)
Comment by gwern on Life, not a game · 2019-02-23T21:35:27.404Z · score: 12 (3 votes) · LW · GW

OP's rebuttal the first time I asked him to enlarge on his first paragraph:

[...They all 3 killed themselves like a chain reaction.] It seems like the only time that is possible by which a person is able to choose to live without anyone getting involved in this and the only possible way to keep his name from being forgotten. What if in a sense, for it is in the best interest of humanity for everyone else to live without anyone knowing about the other, it comes to people in need of life? Who would really argue that not everyone is the same? Who would argue that if a person can only choose the way, then not everyone may take some responsibility for their death? People who make the decisions should take responsibility for their own lives. In contrast, they should make a living only with the goal that they make a living for themselves, and not some other person. Are we being overly simplistic and the people who make them feel inadequate (i.e., just lazy) only make more like us even though they will be better than everyone else if they have a better life but are unable to earn income for it that would be of benefit, or would we be able to increase our income and get more as a team instead of just having two or a few more people around to take care of it? The answer is: No. I think the world needs not only the people with the power to make decisions but also the people to decide on, and that will be the greatest force for change in the whole of human experience. And we all need to join together in a great struggle in coming weeks and not one day go to war. The whole world needs this revolution.

Comment by gwern on Implications of GPT-2 · 2019-02-19T00:29:51.646Z · score: 10 (4 votes) · LW · GW

I don't know why you would think that would be such a barrier. You don't need Transformers at all to do analogical reasoning, and both the CoQA and SQUAD results suggests at least some 'modest logic-related stuff' is going on. If you put your exact sample into the public/small GPT-2 model, it'll even generate syntactically correct list completions and additional lists which are somewhat more sorted than not.

Comment by gwern on Implications of GPT-2 · 2019-02-18T16:28:23.227Z · score: 8 (2 votes) · LW · GW

It’s a cool language model but can it do even modest logic-related stuff without similar examples in the training data?

Have you looked at the NLP tasks they evaluated it on?

January 2019 newsletter

2019-02-04T15:53:42.553Z · score: 15 (5 votes)
Comment by gwern on Which textbook would you recommend to learn decision theory? · 2019-01-29T23:45:17.169Z · score: 7 (4 votes) · LW · GW is a starting point.

Comment by gwern on [Link] Did AlphaStar just click faster? · 2019-01-29T00:17:33.772Z · score: 6 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Also discussed in

"Forecasting Transformative AI: An Expert Survey", Gruetzemacher et al 2019

2019-01-27T02:34:57.214Z · score: 17 (8 votes)
Comment by gwern on "AlphaStar: Mastering the Real-Time Strategy Game StarCraft II", DeepMind [won 10 of 11 games against human pros] · 2019-01-27T01:14:57.421Z · score: 10 (5 votes) · LW · GW

Yes, if it's as simple as 'spam clicks from imitation learning are too hard to wash out via self-play given the weak APM limits', it should be relatively easy to fix. Add a very tiny penalty for each click to incentivize efficiency, or preprocess the replay dataset - if a 'spam click' does nothing useful, it seems like it should be possible to replay through all the games, track what clicks actually result in a game-play difference and what clicks are either idempotent (eg multiple clicks in the same spot) or cancel out (eg a click to go one place which is replaced by a click to go another place before the unit has moved more than epsilon distance), and filter out the spam clicks.

Comment by gwern on "AlphaStar: Mastering the Real-Time Strategy Game StarCraft II", DeepMind [won 10 of 11 games against human pros] · 2019-01-25T16:13:56.643Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · LW · GW

There's also the CPU. Those <=200 years of SC2 simulations per agent aren't free. OA5, recall, was '256 GPUs and 128,000 CPU cores'. (Occasionally training a small NN update is easier than running many games necessary to get the experience to decide what tweak to make.)

Comment by gwern on "AlphaStar: Mastering the Real-Time Strategy Game StarCraft II", DeepMind [won 10 of 11 games against human pros] · 2019-01-25T15:16:38.892Z · score: 7 (4 votes) · LW · GW

It's worth noting that NLP took a big leap in 2018 through simple unsupervised/predictive training on large text corpuses to build text embeddings which encode a lot of semantic knowledge about the world.

Comment by gwern on "AlphaStar: Mastering the Real-Time Strategy Game StarCraft II", DeepMind [won 10 of 11 games against human pros] · 2019-01-24T21:48:38.570Z · score: 9 (4 votes) · LW · GW
  • DM Q&A:
  • Video:
  • /r/reinforcementlearning discussion:

"AlphaStar: Mastering the Real-Time Strategy Game StarCraft II", DeepMind [won 10 of 11 games against human pros]

2019-01-24T20:49:01.350Z · score: 62 (23 votes)
Comment by gwern on Link: That Time a Guy Tried to Build a Utopia for Mice and it all Went to Hell · 2019-01-23T16:09:19.004Z · score: 41 (12 votes) · LW · GW

No one really knows. Calhoun did a bad job writing it up. When I went looking for details years back, I think the most in-depth primary source I found was like... 2 pages long.

I've wondered if what actually happened was just a contagious infection (sterility is a consequence of many infectious diseases), which given the population density should be near-inevitable. Even if he had checked for infections (it's unclear if he did) it would be easy to miss a lot of organisms, which is why we still regularly run into new evidence of infectious contributions to various problems.

He also ran a number of mouse utopias, IIRC, and usually you hear only about the one which gave the 'collapse' narrative.... At this point, I assign it to the mental bucket of 'wrong 1960s blankslatism like Rosenthal or Pygmalion effect or the Stanford Prison Experiment or Robber's Cave but which will live on forever in pop science because their message is too appealing'.

Comment by gwern on Stale air / high CO2 may decrease your cognitive function · 2019-01-22T17:36:11.544Z · score: 30 (9 votes) · LW · GW

Earlier discussion of the research:

Comment by gwern on Beware Trivial Inconveniences · 2019-01-19T17:49:37.718Z · score: 18 (3 votes) · LW · GW

"The Impact of Media Censorship: Evidence from a Randomized Field Experiment in China", Chen & Yang 2018:

Media censorship is a hallmark of authoritarian regimes. We conduct a field experiment in China to measure the effects of providing citizens with access to an uncensored Internet. We track subjects' media consumption, beliefs regarding the media, economic beliefs, political attitudes, and behaviors over 18 months. We find four main results:

  1. free access alone does not induce subjects to acquire politically sensitive information;
  2. temporary encouragement leads to a persistent increase in acquisition, indicating that demand is not permanently low;
  3. acquisition brings broad, substantial, and persistent changes to knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, and intended behaviors; and
  4. social transmission of information is statistically-significant but small in magnitude.

We calibrate a simple model to show that the combination of low demand for uncensored information and the moderate social transmission means China's censorship apparatus may remain robust to a large number of citizens receiving access to an uncensored Internet.

Comment by gwern on Doing Despite Disliking: Self‐regulatory Strategies in Everyday Aversive Activities · 2019-01-19T00:48:40.387Z · score: 11 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Preprint: Fulltext:

Comment by gwern on New article on in vitro iterated embryo selection · 2019-01-18T23:12:10.473Z · score: 5 (2 votes) · LW · GW

As far as I can tell, his only public reaction is a line in Sparrow 2014: "A recent treatment of this topic by Shulman and Bostrom^6 calls the same technology 'iterated embryo selection' - a name that Matthews and Fujita et al may prefer.". So, he never acknowledged being scooped.

Although after more looking into it, if we're going to argue about priority, it looks like IES was actually first proposed a decade before MIRI did, in Haley & Visscher 1998's "Strategies to Utilize Marker-Quantitative Trait Loci Associations" - their Figure 5c is unambiguously IES.

Comment by gwern on What is up with carbon dioxide and cognition? An offer · 2019-01-16T00:13:59.743Z · score: 7 (3 votes) · LW · GW

A new one: "Using EEG to characterise drowsiness during short duration exposure to elevated indoor Carbon Dioxide concentrations", Snow et al 2018:

Drowsiness which can affect work performance, is often elicited through self-reporting. This paper demonstrates the potential to use EEG to objectively quantify changes to drowsiness due to poor indoor air quality. Continuous EEG data was recorded from 23 treatment group participants subject to artificially raised indoor CO2 concentrations (average 2,700 ± 300 ppm) for approximately 10 minutes and 13 control group participants subject to the same protocol without additional CO2 (average 830 ± 70 ppm). EEG data were analysed for markers of drowsiness according neurophysiological methods at three stages of the experiment, Baseline, High CO2 and Post-Ventilation. Treatment group participants’ EEG data yielded a closer approximation to drowsiness than that of control group participants during the High CO­2 condition, despite no significant group differences in self-reported sleepiness. Future work is required to determine the persistence of these changes to EEG over longer exposures and to better isolate the specific effect of CO2 on drowsiness compared to other environmental or physiological factors.

Comment by gwern on Visualizing the power of multiple step selection processes in JS: Galton's bean machine · 2019-01-12T21:35:30.309Z · score: 11 (5 votes) · LW · GW


Any selective breeding program operates similarly to this, and iterated embryo selection operates even more like this; if you consider the full life cycle from ethnicity to individual to assortative mating to embryo selection, much of the logic carries through (and considering such scenarios where there are multiple 'stages' is what made me appreciate the asymptotic advantage). Particle filters/swarm optimization algorithms operate similarly, in a sense, and evolutionary computation methods like CMA-ES operate pretty much exactly like this. This can also be a good intuition pump for pipeline scenarios like Scannell's drug discovery pipeline model.

Visualizing the power of multiple step selection processes in JS: Galton's bean machine

2019-01-12T17:58:34.584Z · score: 27 (8 votes)

Littlewood's Law and the Global Media

2019-01-12T17:46:09.753Z · score: 37 (8 votes)

Evolution as Backstop for Reinforcement Learning: multi-level paradigms

2019-01-12T17:45:35.485Z · score: 18 (4 votes)
Comment by gwern on The Craigslist Revolution: a real-world application of torture vs. dust specks OR How I learned to stop worrying and create one billion dollars out of nothing · 2019-01-09T04:37:19.870Z · score: 11 (2 votes) · LW · GW

The optional banner is harmless,

Revisiting this page now in 2019, I'd take more exception to this. For entirely unrelated reasons, I ran my own banner ad A/B test, and the results were far from harmless: And this turns out to parallel experiments by both Pandora and Mozilla. Scuttlebutt has it there are more suppressed experiments also demonstrating long-term harm. (I'm running a followup experiment which I hope will show smaller effects but I don't know what it is finding yet.)

Extrapolate the various estimates out to Craigslist and that's a lot of potential global deadweight loss from sales/deals/rentals not happening.

December newsletter

2019-01-02T15:13:02.771Z · score: 20 (4 votes)
Comment by gwern on LessWrong Help Desk - free paper downloads and more (2014) · 2018-12-31T23:01:55.322Z · score: 7 (3 votes) · LW · GW

A bit late, but I've tried to write up what I know about searching:

Comment by gwern on Why Don't Creators Switch to their Own Platforms? · 2018-12-23T15:18:51.986Z · score: 3 (1 votes) · LW · GW

WordPress is not analogous to YouTube for reasons quanticle just explained.

Internet Search Tips: how I use Google/Google Scholar/Libgen

2018-12-12T14:50:30.970Z · score: 54 (13 votes)
Comment by gwern on Is Science Slowing Down? · 2018-12-11T00:13:29.066Z · score: 13 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Theranos, as I understand it, was promising blood testing of all sorts of biomarkers like blood glucose, and nothing to do with DNA. DNA sequencing is different from measuring concentration - at least in theory, you only need a single strand of DNA and you can then amplify that up arbitrary amounts (eg in PGD/embryo selection, you just suck off a cell or two from the young embryo and that's enough to work with). If you were trying to measure the nanograms of DNA per microliter, that's a bit different.

I don't know anything about RNA sequencing, since it's not relevant to anything I follow like GWASes.

Comment by gwern on What precisely do we mean by AI alignment? · 2018-12-09T02:34:23.777Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Where did the rest of this article go? There's just a paragraph at the start, on both LW2/GW.

Comment by gwern on Is Science Slowing Down? · 2018-12-08T01:34:12.349Z · score: 10 (4 votes) · LW · GW

The gossip I hear is that the Gods of Straight Lines continued somewhat but prices took a breather because of the Illumina quasi-monopoly (think Intel vs AMD). Several of the competitors stumbled badly for what appear to be reasons unrelated to the task itself: BGI gambled on an acquisition to develop its own sequencers which famously blew up in its face for organizational reasons, and rumor has it that 23andMe spent a ton of money on an internal effort which it eventually discarded for unknown reasons. You'll notice that after WGS prices paused for years on end, suddenly, now that other companies have begun to catch up, Illumina has begun talking about $100 WGS next year and we're seeing DTC WGS drop like a stone.

Comment by gwern on Coherence arguments do not imply goal-directed behavior · 2018-12-04T19:58:01.516Z · score: 41 (13 votes) · LW · GW

That's not very imaginative. Here's how a chess tree search algorithm - let's take AlphaZero for concreteness - could learn to kill other processes, even if it has no explicit action which corresponds to interaction with other processes and is apparently sandboxed (aside from the usual sidechannels like resource use). It's a variant of the evolutionary algorithm which learned to create a board so large that its competing GAs crashed/were killed while trying to deal with it (the Tic-tac-toe memory bomb). In this case, position evaluations can indirectly reveal that an exploration strategy caused enough memory use to trigger the OOM, killing rival processes, and freeing up resources for the tree search to get a higher win rate by more exploration:

  1. one of the main limits to tree evaluation is memory consumption, due to the exponential growth of breadth-first memory requirements (this is true regardless of whether an explicit tree or implicit hash-based representation is used); to avoid this, memory consumption is often limited to a fixed amount of memory or a mix of depth/breadth-first strategies are used to tame memory growth, even though this may not be optimal, as it may force premature stopping to expansion of the game tree (resorting to light/heavy playouts) or force too much exploitation depthwise along a few promising lines of play and too little exploration etc. (One of the criticisms of AlphaZero, incidentally, was that too little RAM was given to the standard chess engines to permit them to reach their best performance.)

  2. when a computer OS detects running out of memory, it'll usually invoke an 'OOM killer', which may or may not kill the program which makes the request which uses up the last of free memory

  3. so, it is possible that if a tree search algorithm exhausts memory (because the programmer didn't remember to include a hard limit, the hard limit turns out to be incorrect for the machine being trained on, the limit is defined wrong like in terms of max depth instead of total nodes, etc), it may not crash or be killed but other programs, using unknown & potentially large percentages of memory, may be killed instead to free up memory. (I've observed this on Linux, to my frustration, where the programs I don't want killed get killed by the OOM reaper instead of the haywire program.)

  4. once other programs are killed to free up memory, all that memory is now available for the tree search algorithm to use; using this memory will increase performance by allowing more of the game tree to be explicitly evaluated, either wider or deeper.

  5. in AlphaZero, the choice of widening or deepening is inherently controlled by the NN, which is trained to predict the result of the final values of each position and increase win probabilities.

  6. reaching a position (which can be recognized by its additional complexity, indicating it lies at a certain additional depth in the tree and thus indirectly reveals how much memory is being used by the NN's cumulative exploration) which triggers an OOM killing other programs will result in more accurate position evaluations, leading to higher values/higher win probability; so it will reinforce a strategy where it learns to aggressively widen early in the game to exhaust memory, waits for an OOM to happen, and then in the rest of the game proceeds to explore more aggressively (rather than depth-first exploit) given the new memory.

    (Depending on the exact details of how the tree expansion & backups are done, it's possible that the AlphaZero NN couldn't observe the benefits of wide-then-deep - it might just look like noise in value estimates - but there are expert iteration variants where the NN directly controls the tree expansion rather than merely providing value estimates for the MCTS algorithm to explore using, and those should be able to observe indirect benefits of exploration strategies over a game.)

At no point does it interact directly with other processes, or even know that they exist; it just implicitly learns that expanding a decision tree in a particular wide-then-deep fashion leads to better evaluations more consistent with the true value and/or end-game result (because of side-effects leading to increased resource consumption leading to better performance). And that's how a tree-search algorithm can hit upon killing other processes.

Comment by gwern on Book Review - Other Minds: The Octopus, the Sea, and the Deep Origins of Consciousness · 2018-12-04T03:44:59.162Z · score: 15 (5 votes) · LW · GW

That's a good question, and the answer may be that they don't have color vision in any normal sense; what they have is the ability to use chromatic aberration to focus their eyes for various colors, and this serial focusing scan lets them decide how to adjust their skin to match surroundings: "Spectral discrimination in color blind animals via chromatic aberration and pupil shape", Stubbs & Stubbs 2016.

Should this be considered color vision? It seems safe to say that whatever the qualia of scanning chromatic-aberration vision would be, it would be very different from our simultaneous realtime trichromatic color vision. And it's worth noting that under the Stubbs model, to explain why behavioral assays (not just the finding that they only have one kind of photoreceptor) found them to be color blind, there's a lot of things they can't do with the chromatic aberration trick:

Second, some behavioral experiments (7⇓⇓⇓–11) designed to test for color vision in cephalopods produced negative results by using standard tests of color vision to evaluate the animal’s ability to distinguish between two or more adjacent colors of equal brightness. This adjacent color comparison is an inappropriate test for our model (Fig. 4R). Tests using rapidly vibrating (8, 9) color cues are also inappropriate. Although these dynamical experiments are effective tests for conventional color vision, they would fail to detect spectral discrimination under our model, because it is difficult to measure differential contrast on vibrating objects. These results corroborate the morphological and genetic evidence: any ability in these organisms for spectral discrimination is not enabled by spectrally diverse photoreceptor types

...In our proposed mechanism, cephalopods cannot gain spectral information from a flat-field background or an edge between two abutting colors of comparable intensity (Fig. 3). This phenomenology would explain why optomotor assays and camouflage experiments using abutting colored substrates (7, 9, 11) fail to elicit a response different from a flat-field background. Similarly, experiments (10) with monochromatic light projected onto a large uniform reflector or training experiments (8, 9) with rapidly vibrating colored cues would defeat a determination of chromatic defocus

...We predict that the animals will fail to match flat-field backgrounds with no spatial structure as previously shown in figure 3B in the work by Mäthger et al. (7) just as a photographer could not determine best focus when imaging a screen with no fine-scale spatial structure. If, for instance, their ability to spectrally match backgrounds was conferred by the skin or another potential unknown mechanism, they would successfully match on flat-field backgrounds. However, under our model, they should succeed when there is a spatial structure allowing for the calculation of chromatically induced defocus, such as in our test patterns (Fig. 4) or the more naturally textured backgrounds by Kühn (21). If, however, cephalopods truly cannot accurately match their background color but solely use luminance and achromatic contrast to determine camouflage, we would expect the response on colored substrates to be identical to that on a gray substrate of similar apparent brightness with identical spatial structure.

November 2018 newsletter

2018-12-01T13:57:00.661Z · score: 35 (8 votes)
Comment by gwern on Genetically Modified Humans Born (Allegedly) · 2018-11-29T15:42:12.483Z · score: 11 (4 votes) · LW · GW

Watching the Q&A was mindbending, and reminded me why I dislike bioethicists so much. Asking He Jiankui whether the participants were literate enough to read the forms! (You got one question, with so many important things to ask, and that was the point you decided to make?)

Comment by gwern on Open Thread, January 15-31, 2012 · 2018-11-22T03:43:02.563Z · score: 3 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Well, do you have anything in mind specifically to do with it? If you do, it may not be worthwhile to wait. But if you don't have something which needs to be done with a WGS right now, you probably aren't going to be struck with inspiration once you get your download either.

Comment by gwern on Open Thread, January 15-31, 2012 · 2018-11-20T17:53:18.702Z · score: 3 (1 votes) · LW · GW

No, I was mentioning the sales because they offer a measurement of what WGS costs end to end now - presumably Veritas/Dante or Nebula are offering at close to their marginal cost (as they aren't big or wealthy enough to afford to give it away and WGSes aren't exactly a repeat-customer business). As far as Dante goes, I have seen some complaints about very slow or inconsistent service; on IRC, one of us did a previous sale and their original spit didn't work, so they sent him another tube and forgot the postage. Not sure if he's gotten his WGS yet either.

Comment by gwern on Open Thread, January 15-31, 2012 · 2018-11-20T03:09:35.287Z · score: 3 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Yes. In fact, I am already a PGP participant.

I am not sure you necessarily want to use Veritas/Dante Labs (Veritas might be sold out already based on their Twitter), as WGS reports are usually pretty raw and you won't get all of the interpretive services somebody like 23andMe would provide. I don't believe 23andMe or the other major services let you just upload sequencing data either, only download. Offhand, I'm not sure how easy it would be to even use Promethease (not that Promethease is very worthwhile, as most of their report is candidate-gene junk). Personally, I am holding off on getting a WGSes done. I don't know what I would do with mine, and the price should keep getting lower.

Comment by gwern on Kenshō · 2018-11-20T03:05:37.038Z · score: 11 (2 votes) · LW · GW

I wonder if Jill Bolte Taylor was temporarily enlightened? (Incidentally, The God Formula is now on Libgen.)

Comment by gwern on Open Thread, January 15-31, 2012 · 2018-11-19T13:45:26.232Z · score: 15 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Just got a Veritas-related email:

Veritas Genetics will be offering their MyGenome product (30x whole genome sequencing) normally $999, for $199 to the first 1000 customers, starting tomorrow, Monday, 9 AM ET.

Even allowing for promotional discounts, I'm still impressed. EDIT: Dante Labs too!

Comment by gwern on Wear a Helmet While Driving a Car · 2018-11-19T01:29:33.762Z · score: 3 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Galaxy brain take: one man's modus ponens is another man's modus tollens - he wouldn't wear a car helmet, so by the same logic, it's not worthwhile to wear a helmet while biking:

Comment by gwern on Is Clickbait Destroying Our General Intelligence? · 2018-11-17T00:19:27.904Z · score: 24 (11 votes) · LW · GW

I felt some deja vu reading this and looked it up. Did anything in particular prompt crossposting it to LW over a year later, or is this just when you got around to it?

Comment by gwern on Conjuring An Evolution To Serve You · 2018-11-11T16:04:10.414Z · score: 7 (3 votes) · LW · GW

It's worth remembering that the chicken experiment was specifically designed to elicit that effect, and chickens are unusual in being confined to extremely small cages with other chickens. That doesn't happen with cows or apples or wheat or... As far as I know, animal/plant breeders typically totally ignore such indirect genetic effects/group-level effects (or even model them away, absorbing them into fixed/random effects), along with ignoring apparently vital stuff like epistasis/dominance, and yet the dumb simple selection methods based on additivity work fine and still realize all the improvements they are supposed to. Yields go up reliably every year.

Comment by gwern on Open Thread, January 15-31, 2012 · 2018-11-03T20:16:43.503Z · score: 6 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Consumer WGSes hit ~$1000 with Veritas in 2016. In 2018, Dante Labs began offering WGS at ~$600, with a sale of $350. And we now have a rumor that Illumina will announce a $100 genome in a few months (presumably in early 2019):

$100 might be a little questionable here (apparently Illumina has a history of making the most favorable possible assumptions about volume/amortization) but revisiting my original prediction from 7 years ago:

As part of my work for Luke, I looked into price projections for whole genome sequencing, as in not SNP genotyping, which I expect to pass the $100 mark by 2014. The summary is that I am confident whole-genome sequencing will be <$1000 by 2020, and slightly skeptical <$100 by 2020.

I was too pessimistic about SNP genotyping (it was actually more like $50 in 2014, I was completely unaware of UK Biobank at the time or its scale or savings), definitely right about '<$1000 by 2020', and I think I will turn out to be somewhat wrong about WGS being <$100 by 2020: even if Illumina is fudging some numbers for early 2019 at $100, it'll have almost a whole year to drop the cost a little more, and honestly, even if it's actually $110 does it make a difference considering how many things you can use whole genomes for & general medical overhead? You can hardly get some prescription aspirin these days for $100...

Overall self-assessment: I was more right than I had any right to be in that set of predictions given I was using some simple extrapolating and adding some pessimism/mean-reversion. Not bad, past-self!

Comment by gwern on October links · 2018-11-01T19:21:10.488Z · score: 18 (6 votes) · LW · GW

I was thinking more of Harry Potter: it's similar in that we have a pervasively magical/fantasy universe in which the main characters often are engaged in adventures and are special or elevated in various ways, but there's enough worldbuilding that you can easily imagine writing a fanfic simply about ordinary everyday life (eg about a Ministry of Magic clerk struggling with goblin negotiations or Ollivander experimenting with wand R&D tweaks - "I have not failed 100 times, I have discovered 100 ways to not process unicorn hair for wands"). The Potterverse is entirely flexible enough to let you write almost any story you want - just set it among muggles, or in America, if you need to. Even J.K. Rowling does it... That doesn't seem like a major driver of HP fanfics, though. And the MLP fics I've personally read do tend to draw heavily on the main characters or at least fantasy or genre tropes (eg that one based on Death Note, or the isekai Myou've got to be kidding). One counterexample that comes to mind is Twilight fics which discarded all of the vampire stuff entirely, and that niche spawned 50 Shades of Grey, but I never would've heard of that niche if not for 50 Shades, of course, so maybe it's not the best example. If we sampled randomly (whether weighting by work, chapter, words, or pageviews), would we really come up with a lot of MLP fanfics which weren't either very based on MLP adventure/fantasy plot or based 'on wizards' or 'about vampires' or 'about ninjas'? I'm doubtful.

(I agree that from what I've used of it, does seem a lot better technically than, which certainly can't hurt. That thing must be running on 30 year old code by now... and I've always been irritated by their dumb little tricks like CSS for disabling copy-paste.)

Comment by gwern on October links · 2018-11-01T12:44:40.147Z · score: 10 (5 votes) · LW · GW

At specifically.

October links

2018-11-01T01:11:28.763Z · score: 31 (8 votes)
Comment by gwern on Open thread, July 16-22, 2013 · 2018-10-29T02:32:41.368Z · score: 1 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Bryan Caplan, "A Non-Conformist's Guide to Success in a Conformist World":

1. Don't be an absolutist non-conformist. Conforming in small ways often gives you the opportunity to non-conform in big ways. Being deferential to your boss, for example, opens up a world of possibilities.

2. Don't proselytize the conformists. Most of them will leave you alone if you leave them alone. Monitor your behavior: Are you trying to change them more often than they try to change you? Then stop. Saving time is much more helpful than making enemies.

3. In modern societies, most demands for conformity are based on empty threats. But not all. So pay close attention to societal sanctions for others' deviant behavior. Let the impulsive non-conformists be your guinea pigs.

10. Social intelligence can be improved. For non-conformists, the marginal benefit of doing so is especially big.

12. When faced with demands for conformity, silently ask, "What will happen to me if I refuse?" Train yourself to ponder subtle and indirect repercussions, but learn to dismiss most such ponderings as paranoia. Modern societies are huge, anonymous, and forgetful.

13. Most workplaces are not democracies. This is very good news, because as a non-conformist you'll probably never be popular. You can however make yourself invaluable to key superiors, who will in turn protect and promote you.

Comment by gwern on Rationality Quotes April 2013 · 2018-10-27T23:03:05.009Z · score: 21 (4 votes) · LW · GW

That link is now broken. It turns out it was a highly incomplete excerpt from "Vectors 3.0" so I've put By the Numbers on Libgen and put up a complete version taken from the book. (I like some of the aphorisms, so I've ordered the other 2 books to scan as well.)

Whole Brain Emulation & DL: imitation learning for faster AGI?

2018-10-22T15:07:54.585Z · score: 15 (5 votes)

New /r/gwern subreddit for link-sharing

2018-10-17T22:49:36.252Z · score: 45 (13 votes)

September links

2018-10-08T21:52:10.642Z · score: 18 (6 votes)
Comment by gwern on Genomic Prediction is now offering embryo selection · 2018-10-07T21:28:33.149Z · score: 3 (1 votes) · LW · GW

/r/SSC discussion.

Genomic Prediction is now offering embryo selection

2018-10-07T21:27:54.071Z · score: 39 (14 votes)
Comment by gwern on The tails coming apart as a strategy for success · 2018-10-01T20:26:56.463Z · score: 9 (5 votes) · LW · GW

You might look into the Lotka curve, the 'o-ring model', or Shockley's analysis of productivity as a lognormal phenomenon: "On the Statistics of the Individual Variations of Productivity in a Research Laboratory". The 'adjacency' of skills clearly must break down at some point, otherwise specialization & division-of-labor wouldn't be so useful, and there are probably a lot of other things like hard thresholds for skills to be worthwhile, but probably many people aren't at the optimal balances of skills/traits - I think yak shaving may be a particularly strong symptom of when certain skills or tools have been underinvested in.

Comment by gwern on Leto among the Machines · 2018-10-01T01:01:08.640Z · score: 28 (10 votes) · LW · GW

I am a fan of Dune (I recently wrote a whole essay on the genetics in Dune), but I've never drawn on it much for LW topics.

The basic problem with Dune is that Herbert based a lot of his extrapolations and discussion on things which were pseudoscience or have turned out to be false. And to some extent, people don't realize this because they read their own beliefs into the novels - for example, OP commits this error in describing the Butlerian Jihad, which was not a war against autonomous machines but against people who used machines (likewise, Leto II's 'Arafel' involved prescient machines... made by the Ixians), and which was not named after Samuel Butler in the first place. If Herbert had been thinking of a classic autonomous AI threat, that would be more interesting, but he wasn't. Similarly, 'ancestral memories': Herbert seriously thought there was some sort of hidden memory repository which explained various social phenomena, and the whole Leto II/Fish Speaker/war is apparently sourced from a highly speculative outsider, probably crank, book (which is so obscure I have been unable to get a copy to see how far the borrowings go). We know now normal humans can't be trained into anything like Mentats, after centuries of failure of education dating at least back to Rousseau & Locke's blankslatism, and especially all the many attempts at developing prodigies, and case-studies like dual n-back. His overall paradigm of genetics was reasonable but unfortunately, for the wrong species - apples rather than humans. Or the sociology in The Dosadi Experiment or how to design AI in Destination: Void or... the list goes on. Nice guy, nothing like L. Ron Hubbard (and a vastly better writer), and it makes for great novels, but like many SF authors or editors of the era* he often used his fiction as tracts/mouthpieces, and he was steeped in the witch's brew that was California & the human potential movement and that made his extrapolations very poor if we want to use them for any serious non-fiction purpose.

So, it just doesn't come up. The Butlerian Jihad isn't that relevant because it's hardly described at all in the books and what is described isn't relevant as we're concerned about entirely different scenarios; human prescience doesn't exist, period, so it doesn't matter that it probably wouldn't follow the genetics he outlines so the whole paradigm of Bene Gesserit and Houses is irrelevant as is everything that follows; Mentats can't exist, at least not without such massive eugenics to boost human intelligence that it'd spark a Singularity first, so there's not much point in discussing nootropics with an eye towards becoming a Mentat because all things like stimulants or spaced repetition can do is give you relatively small benefits at the margin (or to put it another way, things Mentats do in fiction can be done in reality, but only using software on computers)

* eg Hubbard, Asimov, Cordwainer Smith even discounting the hallucination theory, especially John W. Campbell

I don't think he was saying with his books that the multi-millennial ideologically motivated political stranglehold of the Bene Gesserit was a good thing. I don't think that Herbert thinks that feudalism is a good thing just because it's the system he presents.

I would say that he clearly presents the breeding program as a very good thing and vital for the long-term preservation & flourishing of humanity as the only way to create humans who are genuine 'adults' capable of long-term planning (in a rather gom gabbar sense).

As far as feudalism goes, there's an amusing anecdote from Norman Spinrad I quote in my essay where he tweaks Herbert about all "this royalist stuff" and Herbert claims he was going to end it with democracy. (Given how little planning Herbert tended to do, I have to suspect that his response was rather embarrassed and he was thinking to himself, 'I'll do it later'...) He wouldn't be the first author to find feudalism a lot more fun to write than their own liberal-democratic values. (George R. R. Martin is rather liberal, is a free speech advocate, was a conscientious objector, and describes Game of Thrones as anti-war, but you won't find too much democracy in his books.)

August links

2018-09-25T15:57:20.808Z · score: 18 (5 votes)
Comment by gwern on Historical mathematicians exhibit a birth order effect too · 2018-08-21T04:07:39.559Z · score: 11 (5 votes) · LW · GW

After removing the individuals that I couldn’t find data for, we had a sample size of 86. A paired t-test, comparing the number of first-borns with the expected number of first-borns (one data point for each of the 86 mathematicians) was statistically significant, t(85)=2.86, p = 0.00529.

Wouldn't this be a chi-squared/proportion test? Or a binomial regression? (What would you be comparing means of, taking birth category as an integer and averaging them?)

Comment by gwern on Trust Me I'm Lying: A Summary and Review · 2018-08-15T02:11:49.301Z · score: 25 (9 votes) · LW · GW

I actually think leaving comments online is a more scaleable strategy than people realize. I leave a lot of comments on LW, the EA Forum, etc. and I'm now no longer surprised when I meet someone IRL and they recognize my name. It took me a while to internalize how skewed reader/writer ratios are online and how many lurkers there really are.

My experience has been similar. I also believe this is true of Wikipedia articles, and that's one reason I still engage. I'm less confident that I am making a difference by hosting fulltexts or scanning books, but I figure at some point I can do a time-series analysis of citations as a proxy.

As far as genetics goes, direct interactions haven't gone too well, especially on Twitter; if you're dealing with someone who flatly denies that GWAS hits replicate or that sibling comparisons prove causal effects or who claims that all hits are population stratification, at this point, there's no reasoning with them. So I try to simply publicize a little all the research going on for the hidden masses, hoping that it'll be Grothendieck's 'rising sea'.

July newsletter

2018-08-02T13:42:16.534Z · score: 24 (8 votes)

June newsletter

2018-07-04T22:59:00.205Z · score: 36 (8 votes)

May newsletter

2018-06-01T14:47:19.835Z · score: 73 (14 votes)

$5m cryptocurrency donation to Alcor by Brad Armstrong in memory of LWer Hal Finney

2018-05-17T20:31:07.942Z · score: 47 (11 votes)

Tech economics pattern: "Commoditize Your Complement"

2018-05-10T18:54:42.191Z · score: 97 (27 votes)

April links

2018-05-10T18:53:48.970Z · score: 20 (6 votes)

March link roundup

2018-04-20T19:09:29.785Z · score: 27 (6 votes)

Recent updates to (2016-2017)

2017-10-20T02:11:07.808Z · score: 7 (7 votes)

The NN/tank Story Probably Never Happened

2017-10-20T01:41:06.291Z · score: 2 (2 votes)

Regulatory lags for New Technology [2013 notes]

2017-05-31T01:27:52.046Z · score: 5 (5 votes)

"AIXIjs: A Software Demo for General Reinforcement Learning", Aslanides 2017

2017-05-29T21:09:53.566Z · score: 1 (3 votes)

Keeping up with deep reinforcement learning research: /r/reinforcementlearning

2017-05-16T19:12:04.201Z · score: 3 (4 votes)

"The unrecognised simplicities of effective action #2: 'Systems engineering’ and 'systems management' - ideas from the Apollo programme for a 'systems politics'", Cummings 2017

2017-02-17T00:59:04.256Z · score: 9 (8 votes)

Decision Theory subreddit

2017-02-07T18:42:55.277Z · score: 6 (7 votes)

Rationality Heuristic for Bias Detection: Updating Towards the Net Weight of Evidence

2016-11-17T02:51:19.316Z · score: 10 (11 votes)

Recent updates to (2015-2016)

2016-08-26T19:22:02.157Z · score: 27 (29 votes)

The Brain Preservation Foundation's Small Mammalian Brain Prize won

2016-02-09T21:02:02.585Z · score: 43 (45 votes)

Recent updates to (2014-2015)

2015-11-02T00:06:11.241Z · score: 21 (22 votes)

[Link] 2015 modafinil user survey

2015-09-26T17:28:17.324Z · score: 9 (10 votes)

LW survey: Effective Altruists and donations

2015-05-14T00:44:42.661Z · score: 18 (23 votes)

[POLL] LessWrong group on (2015)

2015-03-03T03:08:32.748Z · score: 12 (13 votes)

Harper's Magazine article on LW/MIRI/CFAR and Ethereum

2014-12-12T20:34:45.244Z · score: 47 (46 votes)

Confound it! Correlation is (usually) not causation! But why not?

2014-07-09T03:04:26.084Z · score: 44 (44 votes)

Recent updates to (2013-2014)

2014-07-08T01:44:01.951Z · score: 26 (27 votes)

A Parable of Elites and Takeoffs

2014-06-30T23:04:35.372Z · score: 23 (36 votes)

Anonymous feedback forms revisited

2013-12-01T02:50:25.202Z · score: 23 (24 votes)

Notes on Brainwashing & 'Cults'

2013-09-13T20:49:51.412Z · score: 37 (40 votes)

LW wiki spam filtering

2013-03-30T16:13:12.929Z · score: 24 (25 votes)

Recent updates to (2012-2013)

2013-03-18T19:54:30.809Z · score: 63 (74 votes)

Notes on Autonomous Cars

2013-01-24T03:09:42.772Z · score: 21 (25 votes)

LW anchoring experiment: maybe

2013-01-23T22:41:33.964Z · score: 14 (17 votes)

On the Importance of Systematic Biases in Science

2013-01-20T21:39:01.820Z · score: 26 (26 votes)

Case Study: the Death Note Script and Bayes

2013-01-04T04:33:37.458Z · score: 25 (30 votes)