Posts
Comments
worth
> right after you double text people often stop responding.
could be the upstream thing that caused you to double text is the cause, but that just means that the feeling of wanting to double text is an equally good indicator.
> One friend described herself as constantly dating jerks because of her childhood issues, but it was cheaper to believer she subconsciously preferred aloof and unavailable men.
This "but" is nonsensical. Try "My friend has childhood issues that cause her to only semi consciously prefer aloof and unavailable men."
As for the rest, potential apophenia on raw numbers of plausible candidates. being around more candidates makes you get less target focused, sure, but it also gives you many more lottery tickets on every other dimension whether legible, illegible, optimized or no.
Edit: this comment sounds more critical than intended. I enjoyed the writeup and am glad you posted it.
+1 most books are bad
Good points!
That works if things are conscious and X is well defined enough that that is actionable.
All universal claims have, at least, non-central objections (have fun with that one ;)
Most communities I've participated in seem to have property X. Underrated hypothesis: I am entangled with property X along the relevant dimensions and am self sorting into such communities and have a warped view of 'all communities' as a result.
Novel and obviously some good ideas/directions. Thanks.
being much larger it often makes sense to pay more attention to the state by state breakdown for comparison to, say, EU countries.
if by some malicious people you're including people at the NYT who view controversy as a good thing as a proxy for clicks, yes.
I think this is especially great for rapid development of technical jargon in nascent fields.
Prediction = Compression
Compression = Exploiting symmetries
Which is the short (compressed even) version of why predictive coding is most of the way to our guess at QRI that we should be hunting for symmetry in the brain's signal processing.
I think at will attainment of nirodha samapatti is probably the only plausible counter.
My anchor for this is that most frameworks are descriptive, and not functionally prescriptive. i.e. most such systems are just the author describing something that seemed to work for them for awhile. The version they describe is probably a lot more systematic than what they actually do.
We use comparison, which is itself a strategy. We do the same when we investigate an Is or an Ought.
>The only way in which we don’t have direct access to Is or Ought is a fairly philosophical one
Sounds like maybe you're not an indirect realist and if so it would take a bunch to reconcile on this.
If Is considerations are like Aristotle's Material Cause
Ought considerations like Final Cause
Language considerations like Formal Cause (if we extend language to include non-verbal but still symbolic representations of other sorts as well)
Then we only need to add Efficient Cause.
Like posting a picture of yourself in a luxury resort. There are now companies offering to fake this for you since it is so commonly used as currency on social media/dating apps.
High trust networks usually use shibboleths of shared vocabulary plus some basic litmus tests.
I'd chase citations+check connected papers from these two high level reviews:
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rsif.2012.0997
Signaling frontier moves. Movement speed depends, as you note, on how rapidly the noisy channel becomes a sexual or survival impediment. There is some research on this in game theory but only rudimentary simulations of populations forming high trust networks using unfakeably costly signals to out compete the free riders since they can internalize the benefits of their network.
People who agree on Is and Ought can disagree on strategy. Disagreement about strategy takes two broad categories: disagreement about the vocabulary of relationships to represent the strategy, and disagreement about the specific construction and execution of the strategy.
Now you can say that this is secretly just is and ought problems all the way down. but this is like Objectivists being able to come up with a selfish interpretation for everything, it says more about the flexibility (degrees of freedom) in their explanatory schema than it is actually predictive. I can equally claim that Is and Ought are just two different kinds of data that strategies can return. Which I do think is more reasonable since we have direct access to neither Is nor Ought but can compare strategies' performance to one another.
My take on CHAIs research agenda in 21 words, having read your take.
One compression: assistance in partitioning the hypothesis space. As opposed to finding the correct point in the search space from one shot learning.
I want to see public goods games simulations that take this into account.
+1 I want at least one parameter slider even if it's just a black box rather than controlling anything directly.
It's a sarcastic response to if the defense mechanisms for the equilibrium of leaving these things unexamined were a person you could talk to.
Debates are costly in terms of time and effort and might demonstrate your position to be untenable, better not to risk it.
Lossless compression scales arbitrarily. Lossy compression requires metadata about domain within which the compression remains valid.
You may find this of interest: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1705.07161.pdf
Parts of it are similar enough to pain killers that some meditators occasionally get into trouble with not going to the hospital soon enough. So the amelioration side of things seems pretty straightforward. We (QRI) recently spoke with Daniel Ingram about this. We still have some followup questions but he's very good at jhanas (incl 4th which is high equanimity) and claims to be an arahant and said that kidney stones (which he has experienced ~14 times) still caused suffering. This is particularly interesting because using deference networks showed us that people report kidney stones as multiple orders of magnitude worse than the next closest thing, which Daniel also claimed unprompted from us.
This doesn't address the core of your concern about utility, but since suffering and utility are both under-specified I'm not sure what a definitive answer looks like.
There are at least a few cases where people later entered a (now empty) room that covid positive people had been in recently and later got covid with no other obvious transmission mechanism. Now, they could of course gotten it some other way, so this is only suggestive. The cases I heard about were elderly people who may contract covid with a smaller viral load.
Edit: I did not see if those cases looked into whether there was air being circulated in said locations, which would provide a different vector than surfaces.
This seems neglected given that it is impacting the behavior of billions of people right now, perhaps needlessly.
I would 100% subscribe for a pro version and recommend it to others FYI.
We blew past the cautious optimism state of affairs that held for a good few weeks and now things are looking bad again. That tail risk where every single new case is a russian roulette for a mutation that makes it much worse isn't going anywhere.
Found it! Minute 13
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YmQicNmhZmg
Anti-social punishment
This is amazing. A particular publisher used to have a similar tool and it was the best thing ever, now I have it for a much wider subset of papers.
What would lead to this tool no longer working and how can people contribute to making those things not happen? e.g. can I donate money for server costs?
Opening the Heart of Compassion outlines the Buddhist model of 6 deleterious configurations that people tend to fall into. On top of this I would add that much of the negative consequences of this come from our tendency towards monism: to find one thing that works and then try to build an entire worldview out of it.
+1 and the parent's role comes in the form of helping to make complicated and noisy feedback for decision quality more legible since the meta skill of doing that for yourself is something even many adults don't have.
We internally bounce between over/under updating on top down priors/bottom up data, and the pendulum swing is not optimally dampened. As below, so above.
The sense of ungroundedness sine waves over time afaict. The old strategies for connection had untenable foundations (e.g. tacit shared metaphysical assumptions), so you'll need to learn new ones. The Charisma Myth and NVC are good for bootstrapping some of the skills. Motivation in the new regime can't arise because you don't have even the proto-skills necessary to get a rewarding feedback loop going yet.
>there is nothing in consciousness that is not an analog of something that was in behavior first
The Buddhists also have a take on this (afaict) which is that the mind, as such, is 'sterile.' It merely decomposes and recombines things it has already seen. This is in opposition to the intuitive sense that the mind seems 'generative.'
Something about 'braver' strikes me here in a good way. Something like asking yourself if bravery is a bottleneck. Alternately a more triggering construction: ' what would your life be like if you weren't a coward? ' Or alternately: You generally see obstacles and say to yourself you don't have the money or connections or time to develop skills, you don't say to yourself/notice you lack the courage and persistence to try.
Scary thought that either actions requiring bravery are pre-pruned from conscious awareness, or immediately replaced via attribute substitution (I want X, getting X would be easy if I had Y, I don't have Y, ignore X, maybe this could be called the Munchkin's Curse. Similar to Paul Graham's Schlep Blindness).
An attempted aphorism:
Better strategy can redeem a poor army, but only if you get to choose the battlefield.
AP, Reuters, Bloomberg, Pew Research, Bureau of Investigative Journalism.
FT and Economist have degraded somewhat but still good.
Feedback loop. Truth isn't free, so you buy as much of it as you can afford and then try to leverage it to get more money. In the lucky cases this winds up as a self-sustaining feedback loop, though many such loops become degenerate over time due to goodharting.
I uploaded a torrent with the parts of my library I found most worthwhile around 9 years ago and it's still active (Sci-Fi/Fantasy library in .mobi)
Never wrote any posts about sci-fi. Was thinking of writing one for the sub-genre Q-fi, qualia fiction where the main theme is exploring the state space of consciousness.
Anti-tolerance drugs seem neglected, tractable, and scalable. We've done some shallow investigation at QRI and think it is pretty promising. Have been keeping it as a bullet point as we ask around in funding and academic circles. It's an area that could use a dedicated effort for sure.
We can fund the search for analogs to ibogaine with no side effects. We can figure out if microdosing ibogaine works (some promising but weak evidence it does).
Typical mind fallacy: people with good lives underestimate drastically how important low dose opiates can be for helping people with unlivable chronic pain.
This sounds interesting to me.
Video games and porn don't have any essential quality to them though we might like to come up with stories about them and their impact on society/evo-psycho implications, but they're literally just the lowest $:hedons trade currently available.
Multiple people (some of whom I can't now find) have asked me for citations on the whole 'super cooperation and super defection' thing and I was having trouble finding the relevant papers. The relevant key word is Third Party Punishment, a google scholar search turns up lots of work in the area. Traditionally this only covers super cooperation and not the surprising existence of super defectors, so I still don't have a cite for that specific thing.
Some examples:
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature16981
http://sjdm.cybermango.org/journal/91001/jdm91001.pdf
H/t Paula Wright for posting awesome papers.
Endorphins feel vibrationy without any additional investigation, my guess is that the normal sample rate on pleasurable sensations is just higher. you get more sensory clarity with pleasurable sensations which is part of what makes them pleasurable in the first place.
Puzzle tangent: this was an enjoyable watch