Posts
Comments
Salafi support will decrease tremendously no matter what you say, Syria is too important, it defeats all other concerns and is preeminent not only right now, but for history. Syria has greco-roman heritage too. Only white people would obscurantly try to say Trump is not a great candidate.
I don't think that the world would give a president Trump prestige even if he ends the Syrian war.
They gave some random ass president prestige for destroying 3 countries and accomplishing nothing significant. My race is the race of the anti-mohammeans, and such are my metaphysical biases, that will remain this way.
I blocked Eliezer for gossiping too much and doing everything he can via gossip to manufacture support for his views, such as saying he knew Peter Thiel and Thiel wans't going to support Trump, I support both but he did not correct himself afaik and I blocked him because of excessively propagandizing their own views he did it to take the edge off Mr.Thiels endorsement. Julia Galef is another one that cannot stop the excessive posturing fashion show.
The situation in Syria is too important you guys, nothing else matters if we bring that one home we get our prestige back, the rest of the world has to deal with Salafi support, Saudi Arabia backed HRC with a lot of money, HRC works favor to favors, Trump hates Salafi/Saudi's , next the oil price is lower than is good for Saudi Arabia so much that ARAMCO oil had to go public and sell of 10% of their shares, this was no doubt a very bitter moment for the House of Saud, anyways because the oil price is low this is the perfect time that everyone get's their vengeance for the mess that Saudi Arabia has generated, who is actually funding ISIS, but is also responsible for AQ and all other extremist islamic ideologies.
There's no other time that's better than now, shut up, we gotta do it.
- I know he knows Peter Thiel he just didn't correct himself but used his privileged position to say he didn't to manufacture support for his own views
First i've heard of this, super interesting. Hmm. So what is the correct way to highlight the differences while still maintaining the historical angle? Continue w/ Riemannian geometry? Or just say what you have said, Lorentzian.
I'm not sure I understand claims are supposed to be ) Universal ) not spatio-temporally restricted right? I thought pseudo-statements were a good example....?
I'm not even sure what he is asking for..
Wikipedia lists the "all swans are white" as an example for a falsifiable statement, but it is not practical enough. To prove that all swans are white would require to observe all the swans in the world. I'm searching of a simple example which uses the scientific method to determine the workings of an unknown system, starting by forming a good hypothesis.
Falsifiability was created for non spatio-temporally universal statements right? The point is that those are unverifiable. So OP saying "all swans are white" is not verifiable is part of the point for why falsifiability was introduced and cannot be merely taken out.
OP seems to say he wants a statement where you could verify all claims(?) Or hints towards that (by expressing displeasure against the all swans are white example) but the point is that claim is not verifiable, but falsifiable. So why is that example unsatisfactory? He seems to want to make falsifiability something other than what it is.
again > To prove that all swans are white would require to observe all the swans in the world.
Help me out here?
Falsifiability is used to separate science vs metaphysics, as a criterion of demarcation, so how is the OP's example of the 2-4-6 game even make sense? I'm not quite sure I understand what any one is asking.
"We must clearly distinguish between falsifiability and falsification. e have introduced falsifiability solely as criterion for the empirical character of a system of statements. As to falsification, special rules must be introduced which will determine under what conditions a system is to be regarded as falsified. "
So the flying spaghetti monster example or my example does work, doesn't it? Ok fine I see this line was the critical one here.
"A good working example would be one, where we want to study a familiar concept, but by forgetting to take falsifiability into account, we arrive to an obviously wrong (and preferably humorous) conclusion."
And it's written by val so I assume it's for CFAR?
h
g
Something tells me Gigerenzer is misquoting Kahneman, he is just saying any deviation from that counts as irrational and measuring that as his baseline, i'm more than sure he would be happy to use ecological rationality as a baseline as well.
He liked Bostrom's new institute dedicated to existential risks. He doesn't think AI is a ruin-style risk, saying it requires "risk vigilance" but isn't a ruin type risk yet, and that he would be willing to reconsider later.
He has his own risk initiative called the "Extreme risk initiative".
Excellent piece of epistemology from Yudkowsky, someone put this in main right now.
https://www.facebook.com/yudkowsky/posts/10154067130774228
AllLivesMatterButBlackLivesAreEspeciallyLikelyToBeEndedByPolice AndItsOkayForNationalPoliticsToFocusOnThatPartForAWhile
Running this through my parser I was able to extract the statement "All live matter but black lives are especially likely to be ended by police and it's okay for national politics to focus on that part for awhile".
=/ We should tell him the opportunity cost of this stuff is too large, don't run down the clock on your life. Eugine_Nier go get a more productive way to channel this frustration.
What's going on in his thought process? Is he still downvoting people? What is he doing that's this bad? I mean i'm sure there's a good reason, but it's sort of strange he keeps coming back and not changing his behavior or not moving on to one of our tangent communities.
I've not dealt with him, so can someone explain to me what he is doing?
This is the exact sort of community that would delude themselves in exactly this department and would never stop arguing(not saying you do this), but if someone told me "Can you have fun/meet people without drinking", I would say "sort of, but you're better of just participating anyways".
When you drink with friends you learn why you were wrong, there's always going to be just that "one guy" who thinks he knows better though.
This is just what nerdy types tell themselves and they come up with all these rationalizations for it, most peoples skillsets don't lend themselves for that type of socialization. These people just realize they were wrong years later when it's much too late.
I did not have sleep apnea or tested negative for it and narcolepsy.
It's an incredibly good indicator of poor sleep quality for me. I have to take phenibut to get good sleep quality nowadays though.
Yes I have. I notice it has to do with body position or when my head is on a tilt.
Drinking alcohol is very necessary for connecting with people. People who are against alcohol don't know much they miss out at times.
Do you guys know how you can prevent sleep paralysis?
Alright so how do we keep these people away then while lowering prices?
There's already too much of a pull towards the consensus opinions here, would punish us Nrxer's quite a bit.
Effective Altruists & Consequentalists tend to be vain with plausible deniability, always making a show of their set of beliefs, coming into the room loudly and attracting attention always repeating "effectiveness" "consequences". It gets annoying. I wish some would have taste.
Thank god I've seen someone else that thinks this! I was so infuriated by people saying "stop playing into their hands" as if this is supposed to be some silver bullet in this discussion.
yes please
You quoted him saying he did not shake hands, that to a lot of us seems a bit excessive. Tem42 tells us that it is more plausible to carry antibacterial wipe for hygiene concerns as opposed to a blanket bank on shaking hands, which to us, is rather strange.
If the cost/benefit is vs . It seems like the latter is more plausible, especially cause the article also said he shook hands and left.
Don't buy these comments too much. i'm glancing through them, they're much too critical. Listen to Nancy if anyone.
"Bostrom had little interest in the cocktail party. He shook a few hands, then headed for St. James’s Park, a public garden that extends from the gates of Buckingham Palace through central London. " - Article
Just buy high quality stuff from black markets. It's pretty simple. If you ask around you should be able to find a local hook who has some, just stay updated with the scene.
Might want to take a look into the library google just open sourced http://tensorflow.org/
How are you all doing today? I'm having a pretty good start of my day(it's 11:42 am) here :P
I have found Krushke's bayesian data analysis & Gelman's text to be pretty good companions to each other and I'm glad I bought both. Personally I also found that building a physical personal library was much better for my person development than probably any other choice I made throughout the last year and a half. Libraries are definitely antifragile.
Also http://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/0471257095/ref=dp_olp_all_mbc?ie=UTF8&condition=all Feller vol 2 paperback is 8 dollars used.
I think most people are in it to learn programming though, if we redefine comp sci like this then it sort of changes what it means.
I don't think it would return to its current status and would most certainly decrease. You're in the wrong forum to discuss this accurately, too many sheltered kids.
Love this, Luke is actually well read so maybe it's a bit tough on him, but the casual dismissal and elitist posturing is pretty dumb and cringe inducing. Philosophy is underrated around these parts.
You are right in your sentiments in this thread.
I don't think I said that. Lol. Very few people would use it without the current stigma, do you know how I know? Because I do coke and most of the culture is influenced by its illegality by a significant degree. It would just reduce to a baseline number, and it's hard to imagine people destroying their lives due to cocaine if you're not living in a world of mythology.
Where's gwern when you need him?
Do you really think it has that much of a benefit? I think it increases consumption if anything by making it cooler. It's hard to imagine anyone would do coke if it wasn't illegal and cool because of it's legal status.
edit: im not sure if your'e serious mr.miller, maybe i've misinterpreted something
Cocaine is not even close to as dangerous as heroin, the physical debilitation from alcohol and cannabis is far more extreme than anything with coke, in fact most are underwhelmed and cannot see the point.
A lot of people here are haters to this idea so I don't think you will get a warm welcome to this, believing it is a "dangerous formalism".
Sup friends, suggest books on subjective probability, statistical inference, or decision theory that are good buys. I have a lot but want to furnish my collection a little. Let's go on a spending spree!!
Also anyone know how to get good deals on used books? Recommend me books in general to purchase as well. De Finetti's textbooks are quite expensive....
Just to be clear, when reading any of Charles Sanders Pierce i have never gotten a hint of "Charlatanism". Including Peirce among those names amounts to blasphemy.
We know that religion is false but it does something extremely difficult to do which makes it difficult for the atheists(such as myself) to continue, that it is the solution to the extended family. It increases trust among heterogeneous population bases and increases trust among unrelated peoples. Trust is a very scarce resource. Many people forgot to consider this and this is something that I have had to do a complete 180 on. I can no longer continue anti-religiousness as it is anti-civilization and anti-cohesiveness for a society.
I hope this makes you happy.
Start here:
http://www.propertarianism.com/reading-list/ or http://moldbuggery.blogspot.com/ start with open letter to progressives or gentle introduction
no, we're not all necessarily racists, only some.
http://www.propertarianism.com/ just browse around.
Thanks, i'm going to buy this.
Girard's original texts concerning this is magnificent. Everyone needs to know more about Girard.
It's hard to explain, i'll edit it in later if I think of a good explanation.
It's just the overly pedantic style complimented by a lovely personality and the passive framing. It has to do with the organizational style as well, maybe a bit too spruced up? Don't let me get you down though, I didn't mean it like that.
I would say that one of the biggest things that changed is the fact that there are too many posts like the one i'm responding to. I'm not sure what it is, but i think most others can see it.
The wrong thing to link to is the "typical mind fallacy".
Bishop built real analysis constructively right? Jayne's probability theory is from finite sets as well.
I agree with this, they saved the west.
I think if we just added a table for synonyms and have and a few more we would be good.
Part of the reason it is losing steam is there is a small quantity of posters that post wayyyy too much using up everyone's time and they hardly contribute anything. Too many contrarians.
We have a lot of regular haters that could use some toning down.
Now that's interesting! Discussing governance structures capable of resolving these kinds of situations when they come up? Also very interesting. Discussing the current problem? Not really very interesting at all.
Then just start talking about it. I'm very happy to respond and talk about stuff like that, it definitely does sound interesting.
How come we can talk about fiction threads and risk in far mode but not this? Even if it is a political situation we can still discuss it. We talk about all sorts of x-risk this and that, I think it's more than alright to discussion a drought affecting where the most of us live.