Posts
Comments
"Read Sorry I'm Late, I didn't want to come; it will make you laugh, it might make you cry, and it will make you a better person (and a better friend)."
Strangely, when I click the link, it links me to this very post. I think this is an error.
EDIT: This is also true of the "How to Make Friends and Influence People" link.
I interpreted it to mean that uncontent characters change things in the words (i.e. that character stories are likely to lead to event stories).
I personally do not visualize whenever learning or reading STEM material. I think mostly in words. Weirdly, I do find that diagrams and graphs help make things clearer for me, but I don't (or sometimes can't) visualize them myself in my mind's eye (even though I understand the concept).
I hereby pre-commit to finishing and uploading my post on Lojban by 2359h Thursday, my local time. It will cover the basics of Lojban grammar, as well as what I like and dislike about the way it is designed.
I am strongly in favor of this new name you propose. I especially like the alliteration. It is my belief that a good and nice-sounding name is a prerequisite to having something be accepted by Society™. I have long disliked the term "rationalist" to refer to this community for several reasons, but you lay them all out clearly here. Thank you for that.
The concept is amusing to me, but I wonder where exactly this would be useful. I agree with Rana Dexsin's comment that it seems less about "intelligence" and more about culture warring.
Aside: That I had to look up what "Eternal September" made me really confront my youth, hah. I do relate with the sadness that comes with your group's culture being diluted, but I think there are better ways to maintain cultural norms in the face of influxes of newcomers than this.
The fact that the author is advertising here is a little flattering, ignoring the fact that I only passed the test after two wrong tries. Oops. (I did the differentiation by hand and I checked that it was correct -- I got the wrong Matrix answer, apparently.)
I'm convinced too, and also don't have any Apple devices.
With regard to how prediction polls are displayed on LW, the predictions made by others should be hidden until a.) you yourself make a prediction or b.) you press a button (or something like that) to display the results without predicting.
Since the prediction polls aren't trying to be a prediction market, I would much rather they be hidden first to avoid being influenced.
I am curious about how RVs manage waste and wastewater. I have heard people using rainwater collection and filtration for their water needs, and then using dry peat toilets for urine and feces. However, I have not considered the wastewater generated by showers. I read that there are septic tank stations where RV users can dump wastewater in, but I am curious whether there exists some way for them to manage it on their own (without relying on such stations).
I read KatjaGrace's "Sleep math: red clay blue clay" post. In it, people used either spoiler blocks or ROT13 to obfuscate their answers. Which of the two approaches do you prefer? Personally, I like spoiler blocks more, since LessWrong doesn't have native support for ROT13 en/decryption.
I am a high school student currently living in Singapore. I was brought here from reading Scott Alexander's blog. I am particularly interested in the practice of rationality as a "martial art", and how to apply techniques from it.
I was interested in rationality because I had a quarter life crisis as to what to do with my life. My parents and I are planning to immigrate to the US sometime this year, and I am planning to attend college there. I am interested in how learning rationalist techniques could help me navigate making complex life choices.
Minor typos: "are viable cites of collective action in which toe people could organize to overthrow the regime ", "the Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP). despite a well-funded patronage systme", "the same people who murdered their friends get to keep a their stolen gold, jade and oil"
I especially liked your game-theoretic analysis to explain why the Tatmadaw decided to launch a coup. It's quite refreshing to see it laid out clearly like that (without extra padding some news sites usually do). I look forward to reading your future installments.
Something interesting I noted: you list a 55% chance Min Aung Hlaing becomes head of state and 35% chance that the NLD recovers power. There is 10% of the probability space remaining. What other unlikely options could there be, in your opinion?
The biggest disadvantage of this that I could see is that it prevents you from seeing the entirety of the map at once. This is reflected in the article linked, ""Our map is actually more like the globe than other flat maps," Gott said. "To see all of the globe, you have to rotate it; to see all of our new map, you simply have to flip it over."".
I would say that comparing rationalism and utilitarianism is comparing apples to oranges. Rationalism is concerned with forming accurate models about the world. Essentially, it's a set of tools used to find "truth". It only deals with positive aspects. Meanwhile, utilitarianism is an ethical system. It only deals with normative aspects. It just happens that many rationalists here are also utilitarians, thus making lots of writing concerning rationalism be couched in utilitarianism.
The two are related in the sense that, since utilitarianism is a form of consequentialism, you need to have accurate models of the world to make sure what you do will lead to the most utility. But you could be a rationalist and have a value ethics system.
With regard to your example, the scope of rationalism would be assessing the effect on your friend of you saying those things, and that is where it ends. What you choose to do will depend on your value system. If you're a utilitarian, maybe you'd tell the truth so they can pick out better gifts for you, or because you know they value honesty. Maybe you won't if you believe the negative feelings they would feel outweigh the benefit of them knowing. If you're a Kantian, you would definitely say it was ugly.
I'm one of the purely prudent hedonists you mention, and yes, I would stay in the simulated world with little hesitation. I think it's because I don't value "truth" or contact with reality as an end goal, but only instrumentally.
Aside: It's kind of funny when I talk about hedonism to other people because they're horrified when I say I would willingly enter an experience machine (in the original set-up Nozick described), or that I would be fine with wireheading. But to me, I feel no such revulsion.