'Good enough' way to clean an O2 Curve respirator? 2021-09-16T14:51:44.014Z
Is anyone else frustrated with 'un-informative' post titles? 2021-05-28T20:11:20.063Z
What's a good way to test basic machine learning code? 2021-03-11T21:27:15.535Z
Are UFOs just drones? 2021-01-08T20:51:26.068Z
[Link] Faster than Light in Our Model of Physics: Some Preliminary Thoughts—Stephen Wolfram Writings 2020-10-04T20:26:51.611Z
[Link] Where did you get that idea in the first place? | Meaningness 2020-09-25T15:38:00.092Z
Link: Vitamin D Can Likely End the COVID-19 Pandemic - Rootclaim Blog 2020-09-18T17:07:22.953Z
The Peter Attia Drive podcast episode #102: Michael Osterholm, Ph.D.: COVID-19—Lessons learned, challenges ahead, and reasons for optimism and concern 2020-04-04T05:19:38.304Z
"Preparing for a Pandemic: Stage 3: Grow Food if You Can [COVID-19, hort, US, Patreon]" 2020-04-03T17:57:58.826Z
How much do we know about how brains learn? 2020-01-24T14:46:47.185Z
[Link] "Doing being rational: polymerase chain reaction" by David Chapman 2019-12-13T23:54:45.189Z
Link: An exercise: meta-rational phenomena | Meaningness 2019-10-21T16:56:24.443Z
Paper on qualitative types or degrees of knowledge, with examples from medicine? 2019-06-15T00:31:56.912Z
Flagging/reporting spam *posts*? 2018-05-23T16:14:11.515Z


Comment by Kenny on Winnipeg, MB – ACX Meetups Everywhere 2021 · 2021-09-16T14:56:49.546Z · LW · GW

How was the meetup?

Sadly, I wasn't able to fly there to attend :)

Comment by Kenny on Winnipeg, MB – ACX Meetups Everywhere 2021 · 2021-09-16T14:56:03.187Z · LW · GW

I didn't make it. Was it worth the cost of a plane ticket, in your estimation, and based on what you (don't) know about me? :)

Comment by Kenny on O2 Curve Review: Well Worth the Money · 2021-09-16T14:54:34.339Z · LW · GW

I got one of these, based on this post, and think it's great.

Sadly, O2 industries is apparently dead. From their home page just a few minutes ago:

Notice on Store Closure

After a court-appointed receivership and effective immediately, O2 Industries Inc. has ceased operations and will no longer be selling the O2 Curve and all O2 Curve related accessories including filters.  Any orders placed after July 30, 2021 that have not yet been fulfilled have been canceled and refunded.

Even more sadly, they also broke links to their support info.

I just asked a question about how to clean the respirator (NOT the filters):

Comment by Kenny on O2 Curve Review: Well Worth the Money · 2021-09-16T14:52:52.047Z · LW · GW

I didn't have any problems once I found the right 'seat' to have it on my face.

Comment by Kenny on Winnipeg, MB – ACX Meetups Everywhere 2021 · 2021-08-25T15:11:06.252Z · LW · GW

I was wondering why I have an event on my Google Calendar calendar named "Reservation at The Forks"!

I don't live anywhere near Winnipeg and don't have any plans to visit. Maybe LessWrong users were somehow automatically RSVP-ed?

Comment by Kenny on Covid 7/29: You Play to Win the Game · 2021-08-13T21:37:04.446Z · LW · GW

My understanding is that the larger point, apart from any comparison between the AZ and Pfizer vaccines, is the "blood clot question" seemed to ignore the general population baseline. I interpreted Zvi's point about the new study as being evidence that there's no extra risk from the vaccines above the baseline risk.

Comment by Kenny on Do we have a term for the issue with quantifying policy effect Scott Alexander stumbled on multiple times? · 2021-08-12T23:03:07.003Z · LW · GW

Arnold Kling has written a bit about 'causal density', which seems pretty relevant.

Comment by Kenny on Come Build Affordable Housing! · 2021-08-11T17:36:28.736Z · LW · GW

Care to express some kind of numerical confidence and a timeline?

Comment by Kenny on A Contamination Theory of the Obesity Epidemic · 2021-08-11T17:14:53.186Z · LW · GW

the general alleviation of poverty and famines, the presence of "hyper-processed" foods like Oreos are certainly part of the reason and are largely ignored

Ignored by this paper or this post? The blog posts the paper is supposedly based on explicitly considers it tho this post doesn't mention it. Other commenters do mention this.

But more widely, I've seen those reasons mentioned very frequently.

Maybe you think these are largely ignored because they have been investigated and they didn't (and don't) seem promising?

Comment by Kenny on Covid 7/15: Rates of Change · 2021-08-04T21:58:00.049Z · LW · GW

I'm pretty skeptical that this analysis applies to the specific example you mentioned – or not particularly strongly anyways.

But I didn't interpret your original comment as, or even notice the possibility of it, directly linking the 'doing something you want' with 'seizing more power'. aphyer's comment helpfully clarified that.

Comment by Kenny on Covid 7/15: Rates of Change · 2021-08-04T21:54:08.514Z · LW · GW

That is better! I didn't think that the original comment directly linked the 'doing something you want' with 'seizing power' – that makes a lot more sense to me.

Comment by Kenny on Reflecting on building my own tools from scratch and 'inventing on principle' · 2021-07-30T21:06:01.518Z · LW · GW

This line of thinking is why I can't fully endorse (otherwise entirely reasonable) exhortations by others for yet other people to 'NOT think for themselves' (about everything, or anything). I mostly think it's fine for some people (e.g. statistically) to decide to 'think for themselves' about anything.

And there's an interesting 'fractal tree' among the 'combinatorially explosive' set of possibilities all along the spectrum between 'thinking for oneself' (about everything) and 'repeating the teacher's password'.

Interestingly, specifically for your examples with software, this is a rather common behavior – so much so that the opposite advice is very common, i.e. to not fall prey to 'Not Invented Here syndrome'. As usual, you should often consider reversing any advice you find (or are given)!

I agree with so many of your other points – this is a great post!

Comment by Kenny on What are some examples from history where a scientific theory predicted a significant experimental observation in advance? · 2021-07-30T17:57:24.411Z · LW · GW

That's one of my favorite demonstrations! It was easy enough to know that this is true, but seeing it with one's own eyes is shocking, or at least was for me.

Comment by Kenny on Covid 7/15: Rates of Change · 2021-07-30T17:55:39.238Z · LW · GW

Meh – there seems to me to be a lot of ambiguity about what 'applauding' is, or what purposes it serves (or is intended to serve), but still, I'm confused why you wrote:

don't applaud when a growing potential tyrant does what you want

instead of just:

never applaud a growing potential tyrant

Certainly the rule isn't:

only applaud when a growing potential tyrant does what you do NOT want

As for your reply:

If a potential tyrant did something like relinquishing power, then by definition they wouldn't be growing.

Okay – but a "potential tyrant" could be growing at some point and then, after relinquishing (some) power, either no longer growing, or growing slower, or even shrinking. I don't understand why a 'by definition' argument clarifies this.

But still – why even bother to posit a rule about 'applauding' the actions of a potential tyrant at all? What's your theory about the efficacy of such a rule? What's the point? And why qualify such a rule to only those occasions when the potential tyrant "does what you want"?

Comment by Kenny on Covid 7/15: Rates of Change · 2021-07-30T17:37:04.046Z · LW · GW

2/ Strangely, 1) does not seem to have led policy/opinion makers to shift their bets on other horses or mellow their speech. Actually, pro-vaccination speakers have greatly radicalized this year, now advocating more and more openly shaming and punishment of unvaccinated people.

That looks something like Evaporative Cooling of Group Beliefs if the cult was so powerful it could punish dissenders. And I'm honestly frightened by that.

I agree that this is a Sad own-goal – politicizing the vaccination efforts – but that's because I'm convinced that the vaccines are pretty effective.

But I don't think it's actually 'strange' that this happened; Sad, yes, but not strange (or thus unexpected).

Comment by Kenny on Covid 7/15: Rates of Change · 2021-07-29T18:46:34.094Z · LW · GW

don't applaud when a growing potential tyrant does what you want

So, don't "applaud" anything a "growing potential tyrant does", beyond maybe something demonstrating that they're not (or no longer) interested in 'growing their tyranny'?

Comment by Kenny on Covid 7/15: Rates of Change · 2021-07-29T18:41:47.040Z · LW · GW

I don't think it helps classifying everybody concerned about covid vaccines as anti-vaxers. Maybe we need a better term.

The better phrase would be 'people with concerns about COVID vaccines'. (Hopefully these people would also have specific, and reasonable, concerns too.)

'Anti-vax' seems to reasonably cover people skeptical of, or hostile to, vaccination generally.

Comment by Kenny on Covid 7/15: Rates of Change · 2021-07-29T18:36:33.664Z · LW · GW

we have no hindsight on its long-term side effects

That's going to be true of any new vaccine too, which isn't helpful for deciding whether to create or use any new vaccine. (But we do have "hindsight" on every other vaccine.)

it does not offer as strong a protection as expected from a typical vaccine

We could play some reference class tennis with this one as I don't think we've ever had a vaccine for a virus similar to this one. And it seems arguably reasonable to consider the 'flu vaccine' as 'typical' and that (those) seem to offer even less protection than these.

the potential market has never been this huge, thus increasing the incentive for foul play.

What do you mean by this exactly? That the "potential market" possibly includes everyone? That doesn't seem to be that different than for other vaccinations, tho maybe you do have a point given that we're all in the middle of a global pandemic, whereas more 'typical vaccinations' only have a 'market' for some narrow age cohort.

This is not a typical get-1-shot-go-carefree-for-10-years vaccine.

Yes, this, sadly, seems to be very much the case.

Comment by Kenny on Essentialness of Data · 2021-07-28T18:48:20.630Z · LW · GW

I do not consent to companies collecting data about me. In a nice society, the discussion should end here.

I'm assuming your first sentence isn't literally true.

Your second sentence makes me think that you think no one else should be allowed to enter into a relationship with a company/organization that does 'collect data about them', which seems excessively restrictive to me. I don't consent to you imposing your ideas about "nice society" on me!

(I sympathize with this and your other comments on this post, but I hope I don't come across as hostile. I think you might have very strong feelings about this. My own are much weaker. But I am curious about the details of some of the things you describe in these comments.)

Comment by Kenny on Essentialness of Data · 2021-07-28T18:42:04.166Z · LW · GW

AFAIK, there are plenty technical difficulties too, e.g. anonymization is very hard.

Comment by Kenny on Essentialness of Data · 2021-07-28T18:38:40.544Z · LW · GW

Your analogy seems pretty inflammatory and greatly exaggerated.

I certainly sympathize with the practical constraints involved in, e.g. not using Windows or macOS, but there are practical alternatives available, many of them free, and operating systems, or even software more generally, are very recent economic goods and thus, to me, it seems pretty understandable why there aren't 'perfect' conventions/rules/regulations regarding how they should work.

And, if anything, some of the existing 'folk' conventions, e.g. that a company/organization that provides an operating system 'should' continue to support it indefinitely, makes your analogy (or a more sensible version of it) a lot more reasonable.

I get that the relevant tradeoffs feel painful to navigate, but you seem to be claiming that they're so onerous that they're effectively coercive, and I think it's important to point out that that's not true.

Comment by Kenny on Essentialness of Data · 2021-07-28T18:29:11.499Z · LW · GW

This is a strange discussion – to me!

Do you think that people 'deserve' free television (i.e. the content, e.g. shows, movies, etc.)? Do you think that ideally it would be publicly financed, e.g. via government taxation?

Personally – and, I think, charitably – all of this looks like a lot of different entities trying to solve an extremely complex set of economic problems, i.e. funding (and ideally profiting-from) the production of 'television' content. And I suspect a lot of the particular features, both now and in the recent path, are due to path dependence, e.g. because of the initial medium (radio) by which this kind of content was distributed.

Comment by Kenny on Essentialness of Data · 2021-07-28T18:21:17.848Z · LW · GW

The companies involved have, as a general group, already shown that they will act maliciously

I don't feel/think the same. Do you consider tracking generally to be the 'malicious' activity of the companies/organizations in the "general group"?

Assuming we're even thinking about the same things, which might not be true, I'm struggling to think of what activity was intentionally intended to harm anyone. I'm much more sympathetic to the idea that the relevant people are and were negligent (e.g. in pro-actively protecting people's privacy).

Comment by Kenny on Covid 7/8: Delta Takes Over · 2021-07-15T20:33:17.141Z · LW · GW

I've also seen some outdoor dining that did make walking on the sidewalk very annoying – enough for me to walk on the street around it – and I certainly understand (and even sympathize a little) with a very NYC-kind of exaggeration to (sincerely) ask 'Where are people supposed to walk?'. Carefully weaving thru what is effectively an outdoor restaurant does seem very different than walking on a sidewalk. And some blocks have much higher numbers of restaurants than most.

(I have a friend that's very upset about it, but then they're very upset about a lot of things that I tend to mostly ignore.)

Comment by Kenny on Is it true that most studies in Kahneman's 'Thinking fast and slow' are not replicable and the book is largely not supported by evidence? · 2021-07-01T19:03:45.796Z · LW · GW

This is a good question!

One quibble – "not replicable" seems like a much stronger criticism than "not replicated" – I imagine you might have meant the latter, i.e. attempted replications failed to find similarly 'significant' effects and not 'the effect(s), if real, can not be replicated in principle'.

(And now I'm wondering whether "not replicable" is common and I've never noticed it before.)

Some thoughts about your question itself:

replicability [of all studies in this book] is somewhere between 12% and 46%.

That's a pretty wide range!

It would probably also, significantly, matter as to which specific studies were not be replicated (and whether the attempted replications themselves were well done) and then which parts of the book depend on those studies, or cite them as evidence. Ideally, one would want to consider something like the entire 'graph' of claims/beliefs made or argued for in the book and both the specific and overall updates one would reasonably make based on the (non-)replication of the cited/referenced studies. That would be an interesting, tho costly (if only in time), project itself!

Comment by Kenny on [Letter] Imperialism in the Rationalist Community · 2021-06-25T18:52:41.668Z · LW · GW

Sure, but this is a pretty weak chain of evidence.

The relevant part of the post (as it is currently):

It frustrates me when people say "I don't see people in terms of race". I empathize with where they're coming from. Talking about race isn't any fun when you belong to the ethnic majority. Racial pride slips easily into prejudice. It is risky even to tell jokes.

The "people" saying (or, presumably, writing) the phrase in question aren't obviously even members of "the rationalist community".

"The rationalist community" is itself an extremely nebulous category.

And this post is ostensibly about '(harmful) generalizations of (individual) people based on their group membership', so it seems sad that the post itself seems to be engaging in that same kind of behavior. (And the post title seems even more inflammatory, given that it starts with "imperialism"!)

Comment by Kenny on Covid 6/24: The Spanish Prisoner · 2021-06-24T22:11:24.072Z · LW · GW

With respect to [1], "now" would be a good time for someone to kill him given that it might have been much easier to do while he was in custody. (Your un-numbered follow-up about locals being responsible for killing him seems as plausible as anything else!)

Comment by Kenny on Covid 6/17: One Last Scare · 2021-06-24T22:09:13.834Z · LW · GW


I'm still not sure what to think as an outsider, but I appreciate the details you shared.

With respect to the "extortion" specifically, I'd (charitably) expect that MIRI is somewhat constrained by their funders and advisors with respect to settling a (potential) lawsuit, i.e. making a "pay out to extortion".

I still think all of this, even if it's true (to any significant extent), isn't an overwhelming reason not to support MIRI (at all), given that they do seem to be doing good technical work.

Is there another organization that you think is doing similarly good work without being involved in the same kind of alleged bad behavior?

Comment by Kenny on Covid 6/17: One Last Scare · 2021-06-22T17:54:41.868Z · LW · GW


Do you know the person that wrote that post? Or anyone else supposedly involved in the events it describes? I'm not sure I could adjudicate the claims in that post, for my own judgement, given my remove from everyone supposedly involved.

I'm also still unsure how any of that, assuming it's true, should be weighed against the 'official' work MIRI has done or is doing. Surely AI safety has to be balanced against those (unrelated) claims somehow, as terrible as they are (or might be), and as terrible as it is to think about 'balancing' these 'costs' and (potential) 'benefits'.

Some of the claims in that post also aren't obviously terrible to me, e.g. MIRI reaching a legal settlement with someone that 'blackmailed' them.

And if the person "Ziz" mentioned in the post is the same person I'm thinking of, I'm really confused as to what to think about the other claims, given the conflicting info about them I've read.

The post quotes something (about some kind of recollection of a conversation) about "a drama thing" and all of this seems very much like "a drama thing" (or several such 'drama things') and it's really hard to think of any way for me, or anyone not involved, or even anyone that is or was involved, to determine with any confidence what's actually true about whatever it is that (may have) happened.

Comment by Kenny on Covid 6/17: One Last Scare · 2021-06-18T23:35:13.476Z · LW · GW

Why do you think support MIRI isn't a good use of money?

Comment by Kenny on Who wants to run a B2B SaaS startup? · 2021-06-18T20:30:44.184Z · LW · GW

I am (weakly) interested, but more curious than seriously intrigued.

I've found I have pretty strong personal preferences about, e.g. which types of businesses make for satisfying customers, what technology is interesting and satisfying to work with, and what other kinds of demands/needs are required or warranted for the business itself.

I'd also be more interested in a 'slow burn' (like a 'lifestyle' business) than a 'SV/VC-backed hockey stick trajectory to unicorn heaven' business.

Comment by Kenny on Which rationalists faced significant side-effects from COVID-19 vaccination? · 2021-06-17T14:52:03.302Z · LW · GW

Which vaccine did you get?

Comment by Kenny on Which rationalists faced significant side-effects from COVID-19 vaccination? · 2021-06-17T14:51:42.474Z · LW · GW

it made me relatively lethargic and very eager to do things

Lethargic and eager or did you mean "not very eager"?

Comment by Kenny on Which rationalists faced significant side-effects from COVID-19 vaccination? · 2021-06-16T20:11:58.349Z · LW · GW

I received the Moderna vaccine.

I didn't note any side effects after the first shot, except maybe some mild soreness around the injection site, and, if that, delayed about a day from when I received the shot.

But I had pretty noticeable side effects from the second shot – significant fatigue/lethargy, muscle aches, and general 'crumminess', and for about two days afterwards.

But, per your criteria, I had no "significant side-effects".

Comment by Kenny on Which rationalists faced significant side-effects from COVID-19 vaccination? · 2021-06-16T20:11:01.472Z · LW · GW

I received the Moderna vaccine.

I didn't note any side effects after the first shot, except maybe some mild soreness around the injection site, and, if that, delayed about a day from when I received the shot.

But I had pretty noticeable side effects from the second shot – significant fatigue/lethargy, muscle aches, and general 'crumminess', and for about two days afterwards.

But, per your criteria, I had no "significant side-effects".

Comment by Kenny on Problem Solving with Mazes and Crayon · 2021-06-03T17:17:17.902Z · LW · GW

This is totally cruel nerd sniping by-the-way :)

Comment by Kenny on Problem Solving with Mazes and Crayon · 2021-06-03T16:22:19.202Z · LW · GW

Does "reach orbit" mean put something in orbit or put a human being (and not kill them)? The latter seems pretty hard to do, practically, with current technology, without using rockets (to at least setup an 'efficient' system initially).

(Would you link to some spoilers? I'm curious what you have in mind as solutions!)

Comment by Kenny on Is anyone else frustrated with 'un-informative' post titles? · 2021-06-02T05:46:01.258Z · LW · GW

Thanks for the data!

Comment by Kenny on Problem Solving with Mazes and Crayon · 2021-06-01T22:55:20.005Z · LW · GW

This reply is several years late, but what's a specific real-world problem (tho maybe one closer to a 'toy' problem like the mazes in this post) that you think would serve as a good example for which to (try to) apply the strategies described in the post?

Comment by Kenny on Is anyone else frustrated with 'un-informative' post titles? · 2021-05-30T22:19:49.997Z · LW · GW

Thanks! I'm sorry I singled you out :)

Comment by Kenny on Is anyone else frustrated with 'un-informative' post titles? · 2021-05-30T22:19:06.989Z · LW · GW

It does seem like the ("All Posts") RSS feed includes the author as a child element of the feed item elements, ex.:

      <dc:creator><![CDATA[Steven Byrnes]]></dc:creator>

That doesn't seem to be a part of standard RSS tho so I imagine it'd be difficult to convince feed reader authors/maintainers to support it.

Comment by Kenny on Is anyone else frustrated with 'un-informative' post titles? · 2021-05-29T03:02:14.977Z · LW · GW

Sorry! My post (question) title could have been clearer! (Oh the irony!)

This problem is particular to me scanning post titles in another app, a feed reader. I can actually see some of the first bit of the post body too (at least sometimes, e.g. when I'm using the desktop web version of the app). I don't usually 'browse' LessWrong itself; just scan new posts by title usually.

I just wish the titles themselves 'stood out' better as it's much easier to scan them, especially interspersed with items from many other feeds.

Thanks for the feedback tho! I'm definitely thinking this is more of a minor issue mostly specific to myself and how I'm following new posts here.

Comment by Kenny on Is anyone else frustrated with 'un-informative' post titles? · 2021-05-29T02:53:45.301Z · LW · GW

Yes, I noticed that Paul Christiano was the author, and immediately had a much clearer idea about what the title meant – but only after clicking-thru. The RSS feed, or maybe my feed reader (Feedly). doesn't show the author of posts.

My problem is that I regularly can't tell if I'm in the target audience just based on the titles.

I also don't think Christiano's post is the best example because it was a cross-post. I'm assuming that cross-posting to LessWrong is not particularly important to authors that do so. That's a big reason why I suggested an automatic solution like including tag(s) in the feed entry title. Including the author in the title would also be very helpful I'd expect.

I'll check if the author is included in the RSS feed data as there are other feeds (e.g. blogs) for which that would be helpful/useful to see in my feed reader.

Comment by Kenny on Re: Fierce Nerds · 2021-05-24T23:12:03.277Z · LW · GW

I don't think the "stereotypical Gifted Kid" did work hard at all through high school and/or college.

But you make a good point about a fixed expectation about performing at a high level. I know I get frustrated when I can't do so (for a variety of reasons).

Comment by Kenny on [deleted post] 2021-05-24T21:29:26.660Z

'Guilt by association' is a pretty terrible moral and ethical principle.

It's not entirely terrible as 'association' is some evidence, e.g. that someone associating with a 'bad person', or a person that committed a 'bad' act, might themselves be guilty of similar bad acts. But my prior is that this is very weak evidence.

Imagine that you – by yourself, via 'magic' – could 'destroy' Microsoft immediately and erase all of their products in the world. Do you think that would be warranted, morally and ethically, even if there was extremely strong evidence that Bill Gates himself had committed the same terrible acts of which Jeffrey Epstein had committed? I don't!

Comment by Kenny on [deleted post] 2021-05-24T21:21:28.420Z

We all know that Sex Offenders are the worst people in the world

I don't know that. Were you including me in that "We"?

Comment by Kenny on [deleted post] 2021-05-24T21:19:53.321Z

I didn't downvote it, but the question seems to 'beg' (assume) some implicit 'principles' that don't seem defensible, i.e. that Bill Gates being 'linked' to Jeffrey Epstein is a significant component in any decision to use or continue to use products made by (some subset) of a very large organization that was founded and originally run by Bill Gates.

GitHub is also owned by Microsoft now. Are you also considering not using it? Or also considering opening an issue on every project hosted there and either requesting or demanding that they do the same? Is every project hosted on GitHub tainted by this association too?

Is there any kind of ethical, or even practical, limit to being 'linked' to Jeffrey Epstein or anyone else as bad (or even some fraction thereof)?

Comment by Kenny on Zvi's Law of No Evidence · 2021-05-22T21:48:33.170Z · LW · GW

I think you're right that there's an interesting connection to the "heap paradox" (sorites paradox, where 'sorites' is derived from the Greek word for 'heap').

Absence of evidence is always (to some degree) evidence of absence, but you're right that there's no context-free cutoff where one can always 'safely round down' from some arbitrarily small probability to 'effectively zero'.

But the main point is that claims of "no evidence" are technically incorrect (based on the understanding of 'evidence' shared by many/most of the users of this site, and similarly inclined people).

A more charitable interpretation of "no evidence" might be 'no good evidence', but as Zvi points out, even that's almost always false – because there's no cutoff between 'good' and 'bad' evidence.

Comment by Kenny on Zvi's Law of No Evidence · 2021-05-22T21:40:40.320Z · LW · GW

The mere fact that people claim A is not in itself evidence for A, because people are not pure truth-seekers, and if I acknowledge any claim as itself constituting evidence, they will proceed to claim lots of things without evidence behind them.

Technically, this would only be true if claims for A were perfectly independent of the truth of A. Your argument, as written, seems to imply radical skepticism, at least for some topics.

And you seem to be falling into the trap of thinking of things as being members of a simple binary set of mutually exclusive categories of 'evidence' or 'not evidence'. The generally held view of the users of this site tho is that it's better to expand the size of the set of 'evidence' categories, e.g. standard probabilities. (I don't think it's particularly necessary to use real numbers (versus your implied '0' or '1' binary values), but it sure is useful to use at least more than two categories.)

It's not true that there's literally no evidence of Bigfoot, it's that the evidence is very weak.

As another commenter pointed out, a big part of this 'disagreement' is really people 'talking past each other' and a big part of that is the 'evidence' means different things to different people.

Comment by Kenny on There’s no such thing as a tree (phylogenetically) · 2021-05-21T01:15:30.560Z · LW · GW

As an additional data point, I thought it was fine and my interpretation matched pretty well to the intentions you described.