Posts
Comments
What do the "Required unnominated" and "Required frontpage" filters do? In particular, unchecking "Required frontpage" seems to filter out frontpage posts rather than including both frontpage and non-frontpage as expected.
If you include the implied (0,0) point, then the quadratic still fits.
At least one of the rot13 questions has a title P(X and Y) that doesn't match the X and Y described in the question.
I think most of these are "secretly adaptive/reasonable" in certain contexts.
-
Fundamental Attribution Error: Reduces computational load when predicting the behavior of strangers in short interactions.
-
Conjunction Fallacy: It's harder to tell a complex lie without getting caught, so complexity is evidence for honesty.
Nuclear fusion fuel (also hydrogen) can get to 6×1014 J/kg, which is less than 3 OOMs off from the maximum.
We can even produce small amounts of anti-hydrogen, but not as a fuel.
It was probably thinking of sodium hydroxide rather than elemental sodium.
Although possibly the red candidate would care more about CATXOKLA red issues and the blue about CATXOKLA blue issues, so it just increases variance rather than expected satisfaction?
The advantage comes from having the parties care about your particular issues rather than those of the current swing states. This would look like both candidates being more favorable to you even if it's still 50-50 which of them wins (and even if they're still in roughly the same places on the left-right axis).
I remember there was a movement a while back to have states agree to award their electors to the national proportional vote winner, but I'm not sure what came of that.
The problem statement says it's true (Omega did indeed send the message, and the problem statement says that only happens when the message is true).
I think, in effect, this boils down to Omega telling you "This stranger is a murderous psychopath. You'd better not give them the opportunity."
Windows 10. I have a large HD monitor, and the default UI is really small, so I use the "make everything bigger" display setting at 150% to compensate. There is a separate "make text bigger" setting, and the problem goes away when I set that to 102%. I'm guessing there's a slight real difference that was being exaggerated by pixel rounding.
I think this was caused by my OS-level UI scale setting. I didn't notice anything with the previous font, but I can adjust it a bit to work around this I think.
Something weird is happening for me where 'e' and 'o' in italic text appear to extend below the line (wrong vertical size or position) so that the whole looks jumbled. It's very noticeable at 100% zoom, but at much higher zoom levels it goes away.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua.
The fact that Bob has this policy in the first place is more likely when he's being self-deceptive. Sure, some people will glomorize even when they have nothing to hide, but more often it will be the result of Bob noticing that he's the sort of person who might have something to hide.
It's a general rule that if E is strong evidence for X, then ~E is at least weak evidence for ~X.
I think this is mostly about how weak air is against dielectric breakdown.
it's not information about whether I'm secretly trying to two-box
It's still Bayesian evidence. Someone with a different policy (always deeply investigating themselves), could get Omega-C to have a higher credence of them one-boxing. We'd have to specify how sure Omega has to be to offer the large payment (and what priors Omega has) to know if the choice of policy matters.
If you're reading this direct, this text is the last one that is wise like what's written between.
This sounds like it tried to encode something steganographically in the message? Maybe that accounts for some of the bizarre language.
If you’re going to get one of those, then may I suggest that the same weight is given by almost exactly 4.5 Statues of Liberty?
How many chimps though?
I separately think though that if the actual outcome of each coin flip was recorded, there would be a roughly equal distribution between heads and tails.
Importantly, this is counting each coinflip as the "experiment", whereas the above counts each awakening as the "experiment". It's okay that different experiments would see different outcome frequencies.
I have a copy. [https://drive.google.com/file/d/1nuoPaQM4Ufc4LaCJ47wPavt-bACxlbMp/view]
There should be a dropdown menu at the left side in the input box (opposite the "submit" button).
Did you switch to the markdown editor?
Congrats everyone!
Kudos to "GeneralAnderson" for the suggestion that generals report if their own side launches to help mitigate the unreliable report channel.
To be clear, I wasn't trying to suggest that citizens could break the rules without getting caught. I was suggesting that they could disincentivize nuking without breaking the rules. If coordinated, distributed, mass downvoting is also disallowed, then we would have to come up with some other incentive.
It doesn't have to be mass-downvoting in the sense of one user downvoting a mass of post/comments. Rather a mass of users downvoting a few comments each. 150 citizens * 10 downvotes each more than wipes out the 1000 karma victory bonus.
Where is the Diplomatic Channels dialogue located?
no longer possible
did you mean "no longer impossible"?
This seems similar to the ant larvae situation where they reflectively argue around the hardcoded reward signal. Hurting people might still be considered a value the sadist has, but it trades off against other values.
Consumer behavior is otherwise mostly unchanged.
Do consumers change their platform-level behavior because of (lack of) such cancelations? If not, why do platforms do this?
I must also note that it's incredibly disappointing that I will likely never taste apple juice in that way again, it was probably one of the best drinks I've ever had.
You could repeat the taste suppression/recovery process if you wanted.
After all, do we not generally hold to the principle that someone who has moral and legal right to money, also has the right to choose how to allocate that money? What else could the idea of property mean? If something is your property, you may do as you wish with it: use, sell, destroy.[6] Why should this stop at giving it to someone?
Doesn't this apply to other forms of income too? If my employer chooses to compensate me at a certain level, or if my customers choose to buy my products/services at a certain price, don't I have a right to that income via their right to free allocation of their money?
No one would use it if not forced to?
It's pretty horrible. It doesn't even fit on one screen
Obvious suggestion would be to reduce the font size of the headers so that the dropdowns below can be moved to the same line, but maybe that's irrelevant if more substantial changes are being made.
We (i.e. "reasoning beings in computable universes") can influence the UP, but we can't reason about it well enough to use that influence. Meanwhile, we can reason about things that are more like the speed prior -- but we can't influence them.
Did one of these can/can't pairs get flipped?
My guess is starting with the minimal resolution pixel art mean you can control the upscaling process and don't have to deal with any artifacts introduced in previous upscaling.
Unlimited evaluation can never get to BB(6) so that is the limit of evidence from evaluation.
The value of BB(6) is not currently known, but it could in principle be discovered. There is no general algorithm for calculating BB numbers, but any particular BB(n) could be determined by enumerating all n-state Turing machines and proving whether each one halts.
Also worth trying: Replace the water/milk with coffee. I first tried this while camping (to avoid having to boil additional water), and I found it surprisingly good.
Or here’s a call for ‘militant democracy’ which means shutting down the opposition’s media entirely.
link missing
Not to mention that in canon, the rebel base in question was on Yavin IV. The droids with the stolen plans were indeed on Tatooine, but the empire already knew that.
If I want an AI to get me a sandwich, I don't want the AI to get itself a sandwich.
You solve this problem when you recognize your foot as part of yourself without trying to feed it a sandwich.
Was it intended that the "Lighter Side" section be empty, or did the post get cut off?
Jenny Chase: Some bad things about Switzerland: low tax rates and high salaries act as a brain drain on surrounding countries (hi). This is how a poor country has become a very rich one in less than a hundred years.
Rob Henderson: I like to imagine the Bizarro universe of opposites when I see tweets like this. “Some good things about Switzerland: high tax rates and low salaries motivate skilled citizens to flee (hi). This is how a rich country has become a very poor one in less than a hundred years.”
These could both be bad if viewed as zero-sum disruptions (with negative second-order effects).
Mostly this seems like
Did the sentence get cut off, or is this an intentionally implied "seems like [nothing.]"?
It's unclear whether the 48% is 48% of all applicants or 48% of White liars. I'm still not sure where the 5.8% number came from.
Women are smarter than men. They avoid academic PhDs and OpenAI.
If 18% of graduates are women, then OpenAI is hiring proportionally.
But it got me wondering: does it happen that there are any textual uses of the six basic land types [1] that are not intended to be about a basic land? For example, if a card happened to use the word "forestall", perhaps you could do something fun with it?
Unfortunately, the Comprehensive Rules has anticipated your "cool hack" and is one step ahead of you:
612.2. A text-changing effect changes only those words that are used in the correct way (for example, a Magic color word being used as a color word, a land type word used as a land type, or a creature type word used as a creature type). An effect that changes a color word or a subtype can’t change a card name, even if that name contains a word or a series of letters that is the same as a Magic color word, basic land type, or creature type.
Rate my ex's poem.
You might precommit to fairness if you don't know which side of the game you'll be playing or if you anticipate being punished by onlookers, but I don't know if I want my AI to be "fair" to an alien paperclipper that can't retaliate.
The typical algorithm I've seen for enforcing fairness is to reject unfair offers randomly with some probability such that the counterparty's EV decreases with increasing unfairness of the offer. This incentivizes fair offers without completely burning the possibility of partial cooperation between agents with slightly differing notions of fairness.