Posts
Comments
Because when in doubt go with convention.
I think there is a lot we don't understand.
Now if my wife found it bothersome perhaps we would not follow convention, but so far it she likes doing it. From a fathers perspective it is vastly superior due to the ability to leave a bottle out of the refrigerator for 6 hours instead of 1.
If you told me I had a 35 percent chance of winning a million dollars tomorrow, I’d try to sell you my chance for 349 thousand dollars.
Very interesting, thanks.
I am pro-breast feeding but skeptical of the IQ claim. Can you link the study?
My guess is they compare the avg IQ to the average of a selection of people who breast feed.
I would expect this to be subject to selection bias.
I buy $50 melons all the time. In fact I have a few in my drawer at work, more at home.
My melons are non-perishable though. They come in various varieties, lush.com, sabonnyc.com, mariebelle.com, ect. If the melon skin is not aesthetic pleasing it is replaced with something from papyrusonline.com
The school of thought shminux represents, though not popular in the main stream, is one I ascribe to. Bryan Caplan and a few others have books on the subject.
Shminux, this though is exactly why I see this group to be of value. I don't want to spend a lot of time doing research. I want to examine three peoples strategies and trust that I can blindly go with the suggestions, or at least have a strong starting point.
Interesting read, thanks for the post.
"compliance costs vs. the risk of paying more taxes" -- This is why I use health savings accounts and commuter plans as an example.
"myopic" consumers -- There really are no individual consumers there are transactions. Myopic transactions perhaps would be a better description. On aggregate we have lots of myopic transactions. (bounded rationality) To answer you question -- I agree with you second part on myopic's but don't see how it is a problem for G&L. Sophisticateds are the ones driving the evolution of the system.
First thank you for the thoughtful response. This is more what I was hoping for when I posted... I don't agree with you signaling story but it is something I would not have considered.
"price discrimination" I don't think this is at all a story of signaling. I think it is a story of information/time costs.
My stories: If my wife picks up the circular at the store entrence and tells me that if I rip out this page an hand it to the cashier I will save a buck I do so. Most people don't do their health savings accounts or mail into NYC to have their metro cards mailed to them so they can save a few bucks by deducting the cost. Do you think most people pay more taxes then they need to because they are signaling? Tell me your signaling story.
To the paper being convincing. Be specific. I bet that your story will involve agents who can not defect or some external structure which alters incentives. My story is very close to that of the paper. That people who care "sophisticated" will prefer systems in which they can obtain an advantage.
I'm expanding the strict definition of price discrimination by including taxes ect but believe they are the same. By doing so I think it can be seen that price discrimination is a supply and demand side. In addition I would argue that because I am talking about systems that it is an emergent phenomena. Agents within a system shroud. Does your car mechanic or IT guy tell you the exact truth or do they pad things just a little. Do teammates working on a project ever slack but make it look like they are doing work?
made article more clear by adding /institution.
For the record I did not down vote that question. I think it is sad what is down voted. People wonder why LW is dying out.
In the first world people haggle by cutting coupons out of the newspaper. This is a form of price discrimination. It is also non-transparent pricing. Coupons also add to the asymmetry of information, ect,ect.
I would argue just the opposite, that we are way past our peak of transparent pricing and as time passes you will see a more byzantine maze develop.
As far as retail goes JC Penney recently failed in such a strategy be transparent.
Highlighted by MR
P.S. "You are trying to submit too fast. try again in 3 minutes." - Is this really needed?
All systems: A cities zoning board. The network of mortgage back securities. A large firm.
In all individual agents have incentive to shroud and prefer subscribing to a shrouded systems so as to extract rents.
Thanks for the comment. I use fragile because I am rifting off, and a bit against, what I expect is Taleb's idea for his new book antifragility.
I'm baffled as to why this was down voted.
very cool
Google negative income tax and read the article...
Naz I think you are a little off though. the negative income tax is an implementation of a few possible implementations of a basic income system. Friedman liked it because it was better then normal welfair or the progressive tax we have. He wanted a flat tax. He did not particuly want the NIT, he wanted less welfair overhead and a flat tax.
If you do not have an income tax you can not use a negative income tax to implement a basic income.
Falkvinge is coming from the other direction. He is saying we will be forced to have a flat tax (VAT) because of bitcoin and that in order to still have wellfair we will need to implement a basic income, his citizens income.
It is all crazy talk though.
"families patriarch"......"sacrifice for the greater good of the family that she would be coerced into making"
Is it not clear I am talking about group level dynamics?
"I'm also not sure that "short-term" and "long-term" are a good way of classifying things into near and far. For instance, ideals about improving and ennobling yourself in school are "far" and part of what motivates one to go to school, and this is a long-term objective. But the actual task of going to school in the present and actually attending the lectures and doing the exercises is "near". (And effectively studying is difficult because the near and far modes don't necessarily pull in the same direction.)"
umm yes that is what this is all predicated on.... and I am saying "coercion may be one of the mechanisms that have enabled humans to engage and execute long term plans."
Can you give me an example of short term coercion being of benefit at the group level?
"I thought about the cliche of a school kid being forced to give up his lunch money to bullies. I thought about how he'd need to go hungry while the bullies had a good time with his cash, and thought how it is easier to force others to sacrifice then to sacrifice yourself. I thought about the visceral way in which the threat of coercion is always be present in the lives of some people, and how they have to take into account in everything they do. I also thought of the way the bullies get constant sadistic pleasure out of it and a regular infusion of extra money. Coercion is near."
I like this, it was what I was looking for in a discussion board.
Question, do you think this short-term coercion is a common mechanistic used in our society? I would argue that most of the coercion you see in organized societies is used to force coordination (aka long-term)
(guess I have to wait 6 minutes to submit this..)
Thanks for the feedback.
On readability when I say the below what do you think? "I thought that coercion may be one of the mechanisms that have enabled humans to engage and execute long term plans."
I thought of the below as a continuation of the above thesis statement. "If the immediate short-term costs are what most often repress long-term action then those not saddled with the short-term costs of their long-term actions will be prone to engage in more long-term action."
To say it a different way. People often don't engage in long-term action that are good for them because they are unable to overcome their resistance to paying the short term costs. Leaders, those in a group able to exercise coercion, are no different but have the ability to coerce members into paying the short-term costs leading them to engage in more long-term action.
Love the down votes with no comments!
What is your theory of intra-group coercion? Is it near?
Thank you Anna.
Great one. I was thinking the same thing :)
It should be noted though that this is a significant programing project though and probably out of the scope of a re-design. It is a project in itself.
Still nice idea.
Interesting idea, I'll up-vote it though it is not a top wish of mine.
If implemented I would like to see it implemented as a rollover on the karma bubble. Though interesting I don't think it justifies taking up real-estate.
Thanks, did we ever raise the number to 50?
I think the probability of the above is slim and better served by a bright meetup button or some such solution.
I think whatever the probability that a first time stranger sees a meetup close to them geographically and goes is eclipsed by the probability that the user will not be presented with an article of interest and that they will never become interested in the site.
With only 2/10 articles promoted being articles a person is far less likely to see something accessible/of interest to them.
This said everything in moderation. If the ratio was reversed so that 2/10 were promotions for meetups this would not be an issue. If though you wish to post this many meetups to a prominent place on the website we need some sort of change to the structure of the website.
I second this question. I would like to know the list of people who promote. I also would love to see who promotes what. Is this already possible?
Thank you for the link.
I think the title "Site features" is not ideal for this topic. I am probably doing it wrong but only found it after I knew it existed in the wiki.
Zack thanks for the links. I notice they have the about header do they have a navigation path I missed. My site and wiki search was unable to show me any such pages. How did you find them.
Zack, Vlad, Other editors: 1) Can the above links have a description of the powers the positions hold? 2) Is there a answer to the below commented question of who has the power to promote articles? (It was the point of my post.) 3) Could the above articles es be combined and detailed in the wiki and indexed by keyword so a search on editor(s) moderator(s) lists it.
Thanks for the links Cyan. I searched meetups but did not go to the second page...
Non-NYCers. If you are playing make some noise.
"You're on notice, NYC LW."
JGWeissman is not one of us. We kicked him out long ago for dishonorable behavior.
The only meta gaming that we are doing is that there will be no meta gaming.
NO META GAMING.
Yes after we will compare notes.
Five of the NYC rationalists are starting a diplomacy game, we need two more.
http://webdiplomacy.net/board.php?gameID=42765
The passcode is streetlight
I agree,
Hayek, the knowledge problem man, himself makes the argument* that most often it is best to select the norm. That this norm is the product of lots of calculation that would be expensive for you to redo.
I think it was Thoreau who wrote a story about a man that each day on awaking would remember nothing from the day before; who would then have to rediscover the use of a chair and pencil. This man could only get so far in life.
The rational man knows that he can only get so far in life if he is always re-calculating instead of working off of what others have done.
One of the most important skills to develop is the skill of knowing when when you need to re-calculate.
- One reference would be in the first part of law legislation and liberty (v1)
Some of the MOO's programming is pretty easy. I think I used to use something called cyber.
You would create your world by creating rooms and exits. With just the to you could create some nice areas. Note an exit from a room could be something like 'kill dragon'
It got more complex with key objects and automated objects but even with simple rooms and exits a person could be very creative.
"only about the ones that are deficient in the current instance."
How do you know what is deficient A priori? Investigation / diagnosis takes resources and have an opportunity cost.
Oversimplification has it's uses.
In an environment where you get multiple chances to solve a problem and the cost of failure is small it is often efficient to use trial and error. In order to efficiently use trial and error it is best to fix all but one variable and confirm or eliminate possibilities.
The success of trial and error techniques influence the way we think about problems. We naturally seek to simplify the system to the point in which it can be tested. When something works we start with it next time but if next time it does not work we move on to the next variable we can isolate.
The problem is that this way of thinking can infect other areas of thinking. A person who has experience with his car not starting because his battery no longer can take a charge may first replace his battery before checking that his alternator is working.
The Aggregate pricing only contains a price signal when participation is voluntary.
In this case the aggregate price reflects how the participant group values the service.
When participation is not voluntary the aggregate price only informs how the controlling interest values the service.
The non-voluntary members suffer the injustice of paying more then they would like for a service.
The problem is forced participation.
I like how Robin Hanson points out that healthcare spending gets messed up by peoples need to signal loyalty to each other.
When you attach a price to medicine you are signaling a limit to you loyalty.
I agree, I think the system should be designed to handle trolls. Use mormon2 as a test.
If the system is not working perhaps it needs to be modified but should be modified for everyone. I like the part of the US constitution that restricts legislators from targeting individuals with legislation.
Single strength is related to:
1) Difficulty of producing the signal. (A collage degree vs high school degree)
2) The size of the handicap vs the positive signal (Not having a collage degree but making a lot of money.)
3) The difficulty in faking the signal.
Selfishness is a counter signal/handicap http://lesswrong.com/lw/1sa/things_you_cant_countersignal/
How it is interpreted based entirely on your positive singles. Counter signals at best enhance the underlining signal.
If you are high status despite being rude then you must have some trait that compensates for your flaw. If you are low status and rude then you have no trait to compensate for your rudeness.
Scrapheap Transhumanism:
"I’m sort of inured to pain by this point. Anesthetic is illegal for people like me, so we learn to live without it; I’ve made scalpel incisions in my hands, pushed five-millimeter diameter needles through my skin, and once used a vegetable knife to carve a cavity into the tip of my index finger. I’m an idiot, but I’m an idiot working in the name of progress: I’m Lepht Anonym, scrapheap transhumanist. I work with what I can get."
Here is more: http://hplusmagazine.com/articles/enhanced/scrapheap-transhumanism
HT:Tyler Cowen
“Still seems it strange, that thou shouldst live forever? Is it less strange, that thou shouldst live at all? This is a miracle; and that no more.” Edward Young
Strangers and counter-signaling:
You cannot counter signal with people who have no previous impression about the attribute you are counter-signaling.
Whether the person is a stranger or friend is irrelevant. A counter-signal is likely to work whenever the recipient already has a positive view of the attribute you are counter-signaling.
Note you can send a positive and negative (counter) signal at the same time. If the net is positive counter-signal will work.
Good friends don't signal:
I think that friends that know you well do not pay much attention to signals or counter-signals. Signals are used when a person has incomplete information about another person.
Friends who really know you will not be fooled by fake counter-signals while strangers may be fooled if primed correctly beforehand with a positive signal.
I think your and Eliezer's statements contain much more signaling then counter-signaling and is why they work with strangers.
Free the data!
The reporting engine they have created is impressive but it always better to have more people looking at the data. Who knows what mashups hackers on the side would make?
I applaud the idea of getting a large set medical data together though crowd sourcing. I just wish anyone could run there own statistics on the data.