Posts
Comments
by saying their name aloud: [...] …but it’s a lot more difficult to use active recall to remember people’s names.
I'm confused, isn't saying their name in a sentence an example of active recall?
Finding two bugs in a large codebase doesn't seem especially suspicious to me.
I don't think I understand, what is the strawman?
I think the AI gave the expected answer here, that is, it agreed with and expanded on the opinions given in the prompt. I wouldn't say it's great or dumb, it's just something to be aware of when reading AI output.
It looks like you are measuring smartness by how much it agrees with your opinions? I guess you will find that Claude is not only smarter than LessWrong, but it's also smarter any human alive (except yourself) by this measure.
Entries 1a and 1b are obviously not not relevant to the OP, which is mainly about the sense in 3b (maybe a little bit the 3a sense too, since it is "merged with or coloured by sense 3b").
Entry 3b looks (to me) sufficiently broad and vague that it doesn't really rule anything out. Do you think it contradicts anything that's in the OP?
The OED defines ‘gender’, excluding obsolete meanings, as follows:
Okay? Why are you telling us this?
Maybe if you solve for equilibrium you get that after releasing the tool, the tool is defeated reasonably quickly?
I believe it's already known that running the text through another (possibly smaller and cheaper) LLM to reword it can remove the watermarking. So for catching cheaters it's only a tiny bit stronger than searching for "as a large language model" in the text.
Why release a phone with 5 new features when you can just R&D one and put it in a new case?
In the ideal case of a competitive market, you don't release just one new feature, because any of your competitors could release a phone with two new features and eat your lunch. But the real-world smartphone market is surely much closer to oligopoly than perfect competition.
The costs of the competition of the market are almost invisible, but we have been seeing them over decades get more and more obvious.
How sure are you that this isn't rather the costs of lack of competition?
Maybe, although what is "sufficient" depends a lot on the rate of catching the evaders. I don't have a good guess as to what that rate is.
Yes, currently very few companies report paying ransom payments. When this tax is introduced the motivation for hiding payments will be even higher, and go up with the tax rate. So when you say "With each increase in tax rates, a market equilibrium will be reached where the funding of ransomware is significantly reduced" I would guess instead that reporting will go down.
You didn't say anything about tax evasion in this post, which seems like an important thing to consider. Most ransomware payments are made secretly, right?
Worsening housing and rent problems in California, Canada, major metropolitan areas, Japan, China, and other places that are facing housing shortages could ignite support for Georgism.
Do Japan and China have housing shortages? I thought Japan was the canonical "zoning done right" example. And doesn't China have some sort of over-supply sitatution due to government subsidies?
slatestarcodex being contra hanson on healthcare
That case (I didn't follow the others) seemed like it was mostly about confusion over what Hanson's position even is. Maybe because Hanson and/or people misunderstanding him tried to compress it into short tweets.
There was a correction: this should be half a million gallons.
But how can you know that? Couldn't there be actual insider sources truthfully reporting the existence of such discussions?
Yes, I perhaps should have said "I think there is a 99% chance this is made up". As a general rule, I think any politically charged story based on "anonymous insider sources" should be considered very low credibility, and if there is no other support, then a 90+ chance of being made up is about right. More credibility points lost in this case for the only source being a tweet from a guy who seems to be advertising some kind of passport acquisition service.
There can simultaneously be an crisis of immigration of poor people and a crisis of emigration of rich people.
The tweet's screenshot doesn't seem to be talking about rich people in particular being the ones leaving (which I think is usually termed "capital flight"; that is, the money leaving is more important than the people).
Canada also is looking to impose a $25k penalty and double its ‘exit fee’ for citizens who leave the country, to ‘curb the emigration crisis.’
This is made up, apparently.
https://thezvi.substack.com/p/monthly-roundup-18-may-2024/comment/56269684
https://www.yahoo.com/news/users-spread-unfounded-claims-impending-163724801.html
Recent headlines are about too much immigration (e.g., https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/article-canada-stuck-in-population-trap-needs-to-reduce-immigration-bank/), so 'emigration crisis' doesn't make much sense.
Unless you also think the United States is an outlier in terms of spouses who don't unconditionally love each other, I guess you have to endorse something like Kaj_Sotala's point that divorce isn't always the same as ending love though, right?
Hmm, they changed it yesterday.
probably the majority of spouses unconditionally love their partners.
How do you square this with ~50% of marriages ending in divorce?
a good trade for immunity to cavities and gum disease.
If you throw in immunity to bad breath
FYI, https://www.luminaprobiotic.com/faq says used to say
This strain doesn't do anything to protect against gum disease, or bad breath.
And he thinks Hermes 2 Pro is ‘cracked for agentic function calling,’
I don't understand what the word 'cracked' means here; "broken" or "super awesome" or ...?
persuade/inspire/motivate/stimulate etc is just the politically correct way of saying what it actual is, which is manipulation.
Persuade has a fairly neutral connotation for me, that is "I was persuaded to give 10k to a scammer" and "I was persuaded by a friend to quit my day job" both seem correct to me. I would nominate that as the word for describing what it "actually" is, rather than "manipulation" which seems overly negative/cynical.
Might be this one: https://feelinggood.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/evaluation-of-therapy-session-v-1-for-article.pdf
I think anorexia is in a different category because the patient often doesn't want to get better. David Burns talks about it a little on https://feelinggood.com/2019/11/25/168-ask-david-the-blushing-cure-how-to-heal-a-broken-heart-treating-anorexia-and-more/, where he mentions that some sort of therapy with a 50% success rate is good.
The rapid cure stuff is mainly about depression and anxiety disorders, I guess agoraphobia should count (with the caveat that the patient has to be well enough to reach the therapist's office). Certainly whether it "could take years" is the crux of the matter; David Burns very much denies it should ever take nearly that long.
David Burns also has his own podcast, many episodes of which are example live sessions of this rapid cure (see https://feelinggood.com/list-of-feeling-good-podcasts/ and search for "live therapy", or https://feelinggood.com/podcast-database/ which has a fancy Javascript interface allowing filtering on tags).
He does often make the explicit claim on his podcast, that 90% of patients can be cured in one or two sessions (plus one more for "relapse prevention"). It's a bit hard to know how much of this is from a selection effect on the patients though. I'm pretty sure I recall him also mentioning that he only treats (people studying to be) therapists for liability reasons now that he doesn't have an active clinical practice with insurance. And I think when he had on one of the app developers, they mentioned in passing that they had discussed some social anxiety issues, but it sounded like there wasn't any dramatic breakthrough on that.
Anyone knows a psychologist like that?
I don't personally, but you could check out https://www.feelinggoodinstitute.com/, they say "Expect meaningful change within five therapy sessions"; I assume that means five 1 hour sessions and probably one 2 hour session is more effective than two 1 hour sessions (due to time wasted on recalling previous context, breaking flow, etc).
A big part of understanding the culture of futility is understanding how traumatic it is when the bad guys win. When SBF, the Luke Skywalker of crypto, and CZ, the Darth Vader of crypto, go head to head and CZ emerges victorious. Then CZ says "Ha! serves you right for being an idiotic do-gooder" and everyone cheers.
Didn't we actually learn that they were both bad guys? I find this example confusing.
I was kind of surprised by this too; I found this study which seems to support it though: https://theconversation.com/we-studied-what-happens-when-guys-add-their-cats-to-their-dating-app-profiles-144999
In our study, we recruited 1,388 heterosexual American women from 18 to 24 years old to take a short anonymous online survey[...] Most of the women found the men holding cats to be less dateable. This result surprised us, since previous studies had shown that women found men with pets to have higher potential as partners. They also thought the men holding cats were less extroverted and more neurotic, agreeable and open. Importantly, they saw these men as less masculine, too. [...] Women who self-identified as “cat people” were more inclined to view the men pictured with cats as more dateable or say they had no preference.
The NYT paywall doesn't didn't do anything if Javascript is disabled.
EDIT: I've noticed recently that NYT articles are cut-off before the end now, even without JavaScript. I wonder if the timing of this paywall upgrade is related to the lawsuit?
No particular reason why we can only have 42 chromosomes
Isn't having extra chromosomes usually bad? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trisomy
(PS the usual number is 46)
What is an example where two negative numbers multiply to give a negative number?
Since you didn't specify real numbers, it seems like -i * -i = -1 should fit?
We know roughly how to achieve immortality
Isn't the assumption that once we successfully align AGI, it can do the work on immortality? So "we" don't need to know how beyond that.
then you could spread the pesticide (and not other pesticides) in the region
This would affect other insects in addition to the targeted mosquitoes, right? This seems strictly worse than the original gene drive proposition to me.
A survey shows that gay male teenagers are several times more likely to conceive girls than straight male teenagers.
Does "conceive" mean "have sex with" here? Because according to what I think of as the standard definition of that word, you would be saying that gay male teenagers are more likely to produce female offspring (which sounds pretty silly). Did the survey use that word?
Also asked (with some responses from the authors of the paper) here: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/khFC2a4pLPvGtXAGG/how-to-catch-an-ai-liar-lie-detection-in-black-box-llms-by?commentId=v3J5ZdYwz97Rcz9HJ
Testing with PortAudio's demo paex_read_write_wire.c [2]
It looks like this uses the blocking IO interface, I guess that adds its own buffering on top of everything else. For minimal latency you want the callback interface. Try adapting test/patest_wire.c or test/pa_minlat.c.
Humans have lived during one of Earth's colder period, but historically it's been a lot hotter. Our bodies are well adapted for heat (so long as we can cool off using sweat)
This doesn't seem very reassuring? For example, https://climate.nasa.gov/explore/ask-nasa-climate/3151/too-hot-to-handle-how-climate-change-may-make-some-places-too-hot-to-live/
Since 2005, wet-bulb temperature values above 95 degrees Fahrenheit [35 C] have occurred for short periods of time on nine separate occasions in a few subtropical places like Pakistan and the Persian Gulf. They also appear to be becoming more frequent.
If it's been hotter historically, such that dinosaurs would have been totally fine with these higher temperatures that doesn't exactly help humans...
Let me just quote Wikipedia: "A seahorse [...] is any of 46 species of small marine fish in the genus Hippocampus." Because I spent a few confused minutes trying to figure out how males could face more intense competion in a brain part.
He says non-programmers; I guess you misread?
Theoretically capitalism should be fixing these examples automatically
Huh? Why?
If you want to get a job working on machine learning research, the claim here is that the best way to do that is to replicate a bunch of papers. Daniel Ziegler (yes, a Stanford ML PhD dropout, and yes that was likely doing a lot of work here) spent 6 weeks replicating papers and then got a research engineer job at OpenAI.
Wait, a research job at OpenAI? That’s worse. You do know why that’s worse, right?
I don't know why, and I'm confused about what this sentence is saying. Worse than what?
I don't think anyone is proposing to offer this deal to Putin; it's not like the rank and file soldiers are able to make the "invade your neighbor" decision in a bid to get EU citizenship.
Low confidence generally means questionable or implausible information was used, the information is too fragmented or poorly corroborated to make solid analytic inferences, or significant concerns or problems with sources existed.1
I haven't voted at all, but perhaps the downvotes are because it seems like a non sequitur? That is, I don't understand why Richard_Kennaway is declaring his preferences about this.
I don't understand what's the point of all the swearing? It's just kind of annoying to read.
I've read (I don't have any first hand knowledge of it though) that in sign language dialogues both signers can be signing to each other at the same time (full-duplex) as opposed to each speaker having to wait for the other to stop (half-duplex). Might be another thing to file under "neat features".
They also talk about the protestors entering government buildings, but never about any people working in those buildings being afraid or hurt, so according to Zvi's rules this would imply that the buildings were empty or something.
I don't know about the other stuff, but https://www.vox.com/world/2023/1/9/23546507/brazil-bolsonaro-lula-capital-invasion-january-8 says
Congress was in recess at the time, leaving the building mostly empty.
Huh. I literally have no idea what feeling this is referring to.
Also, any reason you swapped the friend for a stranger? That changes the situation somewhat – in degree at least, but maybe in kind too.
Yes, the other examples seemed to be about caring about people you are close to more than strangers, but I wanted to focus on the ethical reasoning vs internal motivation part.
examples of when it is right to be motivated by careful principled ethical reasoning or rule-worship
Thanks, that's helpful.
Okay, I think my main confusion is that all the examples have both the motivation-by-ethical-reasoning and lack-of-personal-caring/empathy on the moral disharmony/ugliness side. I'll try to modify the examples a bit to tease them apart:
- Visiting a stranger in the hospital in order to increase the sum of global utility is morally ugly
- Visiting a stranger in the hospital because you've successfully internalized compassion toward them via loving kindness meditation (or something like that) is morally good(?)
That is, the important part is the internalized motivation vs reasoning out what to do from ethical principles.
(although I notice my intuition has a hard time believing the premise in the 2nd case)