Posts
Comments
Thanks Sam. I thought about this some more and realized where I went wrong - I was applying the deduction theorem incorrectly (as other comments in this thread have pointed out).
By the way, when you say that PA proves its own inconsistency, do you mean that or that ? From your reasoning I agree that if we assume then we can arrive at and , from which we can conclude that . If you meant that though, could you explain how you arrived at that?
I don't think there's a flaw in this argument. I'm pretty sure that is a theorem of PA for any sentence . However, even if we consider to be a sentence like , that does not mean that we can conclude that is a theorem of PA, since proving that there doesn't exist a proof for a given sentence in PA is equivalent to proving that PA is consistent, which is not possible if we assume that PA is consistent.
Sorry :/, it was my fault for posting it at such short notice. No one else came.
There's a chance I'll be back in Bogota during the first week of March. If so, I'll make sure to post it with a bit more notice.
Do you go to Medellin every once in a while? I'm thinking of starting a regular meetup here.
Largely a result of Salsa dancing.
Do casual sex partners count under the "Number of Current Partners" question?
The instructions tell me that higher numbers are for "polyamorous relationships" which makes it seem like a monogamous person who has multiple casual sex partners should answer 0 for that question.
I genuinely do not understand how you were insulted by my comment. Could you please explain it to me so I can avoid in the future.
Note, I am not purposely insulting you in this comment.
find tickets for free for strange trips around the world (there are loads)
Can you please elaborate?
There's no disagreement here, you're just confused about semantics.
I see in a reply of yours that you're interested in salsa dancing. By far the most important factor in getting better is to quickly achieve a level of competency that makes salsa socials really fun. I don't think I've gone more than 7 days in the last 2.5 years without attending a salsa social, and this has been the biggest factor in my improvement.
You may already be at this stage since you said you enjoy dancing, but if not I suggest you learn the basics from a friend or a class (I would spend no more than 10 hours on this stage), and then force yourself to attend a bunch of salsa socials, until you start really enjoying the experience.
Once you've reached this stage, you've solved the motivation problem, and now you can optimize towards becoming a really good dancer (if you even want to at this point - it's not necessary to reap the majority of the benefits).
This is the best description of a fairly strong chess player's thought process that I've read. If it were worth the effort, I would link every person who asked me, "How many moves deep do you calculate in chess?", to your comment.
If the King's Gambit was actually solved, it would be trivial to solve the rest of chess.
Nadie llego a la meetup. Creo que si haces un meetup en Bogota (escojer un tiempo y un sitio), y te comprometes a estar ahi, van a llegar varias personas.
Ah bacano, vas a los meetups de Seattle?
Yo estoy pensando estar en Bogota en los proximos meses, si quieres podemos urganizar una meetup en ese entonces. Tambien podriamos hacer algo atravez de Google hangouts. Te mandare un mensaje privado para cuadrar.
VIves en Cali?
I'm interested.
I go out social dancing 2-5 times a week.
I'm fairly sure we're limited to 16 chess pieces available to white, otherwise the problem can be trivially solved with 64 queens.
So the set of pieces you can use is eight pawns, one queen, one kind, two bishops, two knights, and two rooks?
Can the bishops be placed in squares of the same colour?
Jasen Murray suggested specific techniques and specific resources, which I unfortunately cannot remember (I was not that interested in that part of RBC).
The food at RBC was awesome, mostly due to a small number of attendees being very good cooks. Many of us also had similar fitness goals with regards to gaining muscle, so we had a 25 pound tub of protein, and cooked high-protein meals.
My diet has been nowhere near as good since leaving RBC.
RBC was mostly young college age students (oldest participant was 29 years old if I recall correctly. I believe I was the first or second youngest at 21). The median age for the minicamps was probably a bit higher, but not substantially so.
The previous camps were held in Berkeley, and I'm fairly sure these will be held there as well. They also picked up the camp participants from the airport last time.
I highlight things, mostly new ideas, that I want to memorize as I'm reading the book (the number of highlights is a good proxy to how good the book was). Then I login to Amazon, and for each highlight I make an Anki card.
This saves me from having to go through the book and find all the highlights, and also from copying the text into Anki (since I can just copy and paste).
A kindle has finally allowed me to start reading one book per week, something I've been trying to do for quite a while now with little success. The ability to buy books instantly, and the fact that it's much easier to take along than an actual book, means I get a ton more reading done. The ability to highlight and have it automatically sync to Amazon servers makes Anki deck making A LOT easier.
You can also sell your gift card for ~80% of its value (just google "sell gift card").
This is why I said "average" venture-backed founder. You may have tons of assets such that losing/gaining 10% is not a big deal, or you may be naturally less risk-averse than the average person.
Some level of risk-aversion is rational, and it's not obvious to me if people are naturally over or below that level. it's also not obvious to me at all that people on LW would have unnaturally low risk-aversion.
The exact figure I'm aiming for is $5 M USD or above. I'd quit trying to make money as soon as I hit $5 M basically.
It's more or less win/lose. Being the average venture-backed founder actually has negative expected utility.
I've spoken to Carl about the subject and he pointed me to this paper: http://www.nber.org/papers/w14219
This paper puts the success rate of venture-backed companies at ~18%.
Name amnesia (I saw you mention this on the link you gave).
I think this as a result of:
- My prior that you're a good hypnotist
- My prior that I am a suggestible person
- My prior that this can be done through online means
However, it doesn't seem to specify why the very end of life is a significantly more important time than say, the first 12 weeks after turning 65.
It's probably not - I was simply replying to your point about how all 12 week periods of life are equally valid.
More time to think about past experiences and also more time to see their long-term consequences.
Should I care more about making money or doing something that I have a "passion" for?
Depends on what your passion is. If it's something that allows you to make a lot of money, and doesn't otherwise obstruct you from taking part in other things that you enjoy, then your best bet would probably be to choose that - even if there is another, passionless option, which gives you more money.
If on the other hand the things that you are passionate about you do not make money (which will hamper your ability to produce utilons in a variety of ways), then your best bet will probably be to become wealthy by means of doing something you're not passionate about. With something like tech entrepreneurship you can become a millionaire in 5-8 years, and then focus on producing utilons at optimal exchange rates for your entire life.
Personally, I'm not passionate about any careers that make a ton of money, so my current plan is to become a millionaire through tech entrepreneurship, and then focus on studying/writing philosophy and dancing afterwards.
How long have you been doing this?
What is your 15 minute morning ritual?
I'm totally willing to by hypnotized by you. I'm also willing to bet I cannot be hypnotized.
I noticed throughout your post you said "turns out she didn't like me" twice, as if this was a simple boolean value that you have to find out the value of.
The truth is that attraction is pretty malleable and it's totally possible that your friend had romantic interest in you which disappeared while having dinner with her, or that the potential date that cancelled on you twice was turned off through non-physical interactions (texts, phonecalls).
Your 3 step action plan sounds solid though. The fundamentals of pick up artistry will also help a ton.
I used a combination of google and reddit.com/r/waterloo to find voice coaches in my city (Waterloo). I settled on the two that looked best, and am now getting 1 half hour session a week from each of them to A/B test which one is better. It costs $20 per half hour session.
I told them that my goal was to have a captivating voice that gets people's attention in small/large groups. They both said that learning how to sing was really important in terms of my stated goals, so right now I'm learning the basics of singing. This includes how to warm up your voice, properly breathing with your diaphragm, bringing up the soft-palette on command, etc...
We also go over the speeches that I am going to present in my public presentation class, which I find incredibly useful. For example, we'll go over the same sentence in a paragraph about 15 times, ensuring that I have correct diction, tone of voice etc...
I am currently trying to become really socially effective. During the next 8 months I plan to:
- Take voice coaching *
- Take a public presentation class at my University *
- Join debate club *
- Join toastmasters *
- Get a telemarketing job
- Get a door-to-door sales job
- Become a competent pick-up-artist
- Take an improv acting class
"*" means I'm currently doing this activity.
I haven't encountered the rationalist ethic of "psychological pain is unimportant". Can you link to it?
Why is this sam0345 character so heavily downvoted?
One wouldn't put all of one's money into one stock in the market because we have decreasing marginal utility towards money. If we didn't and all we wanted was the highest expected value (which is how we should optimize for charity), then we would put our money into the stock that is likeliest to make us the most money.
In other words, I don't want to have a minimum number of lives saved - I want to maximize the number of lives I save.
This would only be useful if there is skill in tech entrepreneurship, and it's not just luck. The fact that previously successful entrepreneurs have a higher success rate points to that, but it's hardly conclusive.
Creating good exercises for traditional concepts that form the building blocks of rationality is probably the best way to go about this. Once you've shown that you can create engaging exercises, and have formed relationships with people at Khan Academy, your suggestions will have more weight and you can create more experimental type exercises. Sal can only create about 10 videos a day, and the requests he gets from teachers using Khan Academy in actual classrooms (or from the people giving him funding) probably trump those he gets from people on a rationality blog.
For anyone reading this who wants to create an exercise teaching Bayes' Theorem, first read the Github Wiki. You can also get help from Khan Academy employees and volunteers in the HipChat room.
I'm an ex-intern at Khan Academy (who worked quite a bit on the exercise framework) so feel free to email me any questions or to get me to look at your pull request. My email is jp@julianpulgarin.com.
Youtube video is down :(
Count me in: http://www.admonymous.com/jpulgarin
Awesome! I'll be back in Waterloo in January and I hope these continue till then. I had plans to start them myself.