Posts

Comments

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Feb. 01 - Feb. 07, 2016 · 2016-02-03T17:23:38.537Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Let's say I make six predictions or statements that I believe to be true about someone I've never met and I say the statements taken as a whole are true with P = 0.7. Note that I do not claim to be psychic.

The P of each statement must then lie between 0.7 and 1.0, and if they are equal then the P of each statement is 0.7 ^ (1/6) = 0.94. Let's say 0.9 because I doubt any statement about this type of probability should be reported with two significant figures, and perhaps even one significant figure without an attached tolerance band is a bit of a stretch.

I'd say that a P this high for each statement, given this example, is well nigh impossible.

Agreed?

Maybe I'm not so underqualified as to be unable to enjoy this forum.

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Feb. 01 - Feb. 07, 2016 · 2016-02-03T17:10:42.294Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Thanks, I bookmarked that, and will be more specific.

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Feb. 01 - Feb. 07, 2016 · 2016-02-03T02:01:24.118Z · score: 0 (2 votes) · LW · GW

"Dark arts" =

http://www.google.com/search?q=sophists+%22spin+doctors%22&client=safari&rls=en&oe=UTF-8&oq=sophists+%22spin+doctors%22&gs_l=heirloom-serp.3...12685.18540.0.19253.23.6.0.17.0.0.123.547.5j1.6.0....0...1ac.1.34.heirloom-serp..19.4.346.PCO-t7RQTfg

?

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Jan. 25 - Jan. 31, 2016 · 2016-02-03T01:19:56.856Z · score: 0 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Don't quit your day job.

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Jan. 25 - Jan. 31, 2016 · 2016-02-02T15:01:45.021Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Welcome back.

Can you be specific, without paraphrasing? And no ad hominem, please.

At this point you might as well let the cat all the way out of the bag, if there is a cat to be let out.

Am I in physical danger? If yes, from whom?

BTW, this is about the strangest thread I've ever participated in. I guess it's an opportunity to learn, which is what I hope I'm doing on this forum.

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Jan. 25 - Jan. 31, 2016 · 2016-02-01T13:53:58.428Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

We've gotten derailed.

All we need do is ask O. Wilde what his or her intentions were in those posts.

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Jan. 25 - Jan. 31, 2016 · 2016-01-31T23:11:11.405Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Note to readers: I never said it was hypothetical.

And, the textbooks written about my personality type say I have a sensitivity to other people's issues.

And, I'm not starting from zero; over the years I've had office mates and others who acted in a similar way and so I know what works.

Strangely, some of these people may actually have wanted my approval or recognition. Very few get that, even those who are well-behaved. I think I know what causes this, but that info is classified - sorry.

They may have spotted ways that we two are similar. Of course, the idea that I am similar to these verbal bullies is repugnant to me but it's very likely accurate. In my whole life maybe a half dozen people fit this pattern.

Also, there are books on "Verbal Judo" but they are hard to come by from my local library. I scoop up what I can. As long as all I do is counterpunch, block-then-strike, I feel I have the moral high ground.

But, that aside, if this is a false positive for a mind/head/word game, what do you make of this exchange? Is the literal meaning the only thing going on?

In your whole life, have you ever met someone who "put one over on you", left you with the feeling that you've been "had" and you couldn't even verbalize how? If yes, in retrospect, what really went on? Did you act optimally? What would you change for future encounters of this type?

Thanks for reading. :)

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Jan. 25 - Jan. 31, 2016 · 2016-01-30T23:11:26.548Z · score: -3 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Analysis of a mind game.

Any comments as to the internal workings of A and B are welcome.

Note that, in the US, a person has the right to confront his/her accuser. In the exchange below, B has done that but the specific accusation has never been clarified by A. Very tricky. I have definitely learned from this exchange.

B: ". . .women are biologically superior. . ."

A: This says far more about you than you could possibly imagine. I suggest being more cautious going forward.

At this point it is not clear how exactly B can guard against whatever beliefs he holds that are dangerous. In any case A has decided that B is incapable of comprehending the problem. Note that "defining" someone is a form of verbal abuse according to Satir, and possibly others. "Going forward" makes me think that A is a Brit. Since the Brits "invented" English I may be at a disadvantage here. But I'll go forward anyway.

B: It says that I take for fact what people say who study this type of thing. I suggest that your conduct in this post is offensive.

So B challenges A.
If A is a "sniper" (one who hides behind double or ambiquous meanings), the antidote is to smoke them out, just like a real sniper. Apparently that is what B instinctively did.

A: If that is all it says, you have nothing to be offended about.

A still has not said exactly what is wrong with B's thinking and tells B how B should feel. This is now framed as A the parent and B the child.

B: It's not your call. Who are you?

It's not up to A to decide how B should feel. Then B asks for ID, see "smoke them out", above.

TIA for reading. :D

Comment by whyask on The Charity Impact Calculator · 2016-01-29T20:30:50.885Z · score: -1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

It's not your call.

Who are you?

Comment by whyask on The Charity Impact Calculator · 2016-01-29T00:34:53.767Z · score: -1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

It says that I take for fact what people say who study this type of thing.

I suggest that your conduct in this post is offensive.

Comment by whyask on What's wrong with this picture? · 2016-01-28T18:00:37.052Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Alice should avoid at all costs being drawn onto Bob's turf. There are several ways to avoid this.

Comment by whyask on [Link] AlphaGo: Mastering the ancient game of Go with Machine Learning · 2016-01-28T14:36:55.512Z · score: -8 (8 votes) · LW · GW

" Guardian/Colossus then arranges a worldwide broadcast. The supercomputer proclaims itself "the voice of World Control" and declares its mission is to prevent war, as it was designed to do so. Mankind is given the choice between the "peace of plenty" or one of "unburied dead". It also states that it has detected the attempt to disarm the missiles. It detonates two in their silos "so that you will learn by experience that I do not tolerate interference".

Guardian/Colossus informs Forbin that "freedom is just an illusion" and that "In time you will come to regard me not only with respect and awe, but with love". Forbin angrily replies, "Never!" "

This ^ is where we're headed.

Comment by whyask on What's wrong with this picture? · 2016-01-28T14:24:15.582Z · score: -6 (8 votes) · LW · GW

People need this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom

in order to avoid "paralysis" and go further.

Comment by whyask on The Charity Impact Calculator · 2016-01-27T22:35:52.605Z · score: -1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

She didn't provide her reasoning and I was not able to pull up this particular answer to her readers from the Web.

I guess she wants to remove the middleman costs & admin costs from your "donation." And you get direct feedback on "the fruits of your labor". There might also be psych benefits in that you can see your troubles might not be so bad in the big picture view of things.

For the class of people who think their troubles are better than anyone's (e.g., the "inverse pride" of paranoids) I guess I recommend the monetary contribution route.

Am I putting too much stock in Marilyn's high IQ and that women are biologically superior in any case?

Comment by whyask on The Charity Impact Calculator · 2016-01-27T17:23:27.891Z · score: -2 (2 votes) · LW · GW

IIRC, Ms. Vos Savant says don't give money, just go in person to the soup kitchens or whatever and put in your own labor.

Comment by whyask on "Why Try Hard" Essay targeted at non rationalists · 2016-01-27T00:48:45.010Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Some people hold on more strongly to their original beliefs if someone tries to convince them otherwise. This might have been in the book "On Being Certain."

I think this kind of persuasion is a lost cause but I am still sometimes drawn into trying, against my better judgement.

Even if you don't convince the non-rationalists you may learn some new mindgames, based on what they throw at you, their wacky justifications for their illogical ideas and their non-sequiturs.

On the other hand, I might just be off on a tangent. :(

Comment by whyask on "Why Try Hard" Essay targeted at non rationalists · 2016-01-26T18:27:01.404Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

If the person you're persuading makes a swatting motion, it means you're not getting through and your persuadee is annoyed.

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Jan. 18 - Jan. 24, 2016 · 2016-01-25T19:41:17.591Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

A lot of what I was sure of, I'm not any longer. . .:D

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Jan. 18 - Jan. 24, 2016 · 2016-01-24T17:36:04.427Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Why does my Karma score keep increasing when I don't do anything? It's a disincentive to post. . .?

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Jan. 18 - Jan. 24, 2016 · 2016-01-20T21:15:17.495Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

:D

The textbooks written about my personality type say I'm "eccentric".

Comment by whyask on How did my baby die and what is the probability that my next one will? · 2016-01-19T15:43:58.347Z · score: 12 (12 votes) · LW · GW

LW should make this unique thread widely known. Many couples facing similar decisions can be helped.

I am sorry for your loss.

EDIT: This association to your post won't leave me alone, so here it is: APACHE II software gives the odds of an adult leaving an ICU alive. Perhaps there is, or will soon be, an intrauterine version of this using blood values & other metrics that can prompt preventive measures early in a pregnancy.

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Jan. 18 - Jan. 24, 2016 · 2016-01-19T01:40:41.163Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

That's one reason I'm here, but in the limited time the mortality tables give me I'd like to find a way to present myself favorably to almost any crowd.

In the past, very few have cheered me on and a more vocal few have fervently hoped I'd fail.

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Jan. 18 - Jan. 24, 2016 · 2016-01-18T19:45:53.634Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Cost of being less wrong: increased cognitive load?

Benefit oblw: longer life expectancy?

Risk oblw: becoming a pariah in most crowds?

Comment by whyask on Thinking About a Technical Solution to Coordination Problems · 2016-01-17T20:28:00.278Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

So in this case it's the Little People against two large orgs and the LP are the enemy of both.

The orgs are above the law and it is in their interest to punish people who don't like them, but they can possibly be embarrassed.

Stay out of it unless you can help anonymously and your odds are good for the risk you are taking; this from a whistleblower.

Comment by whyask on Thinking About a Technical Solution to Coordination Problems · 2016-01-17T14:27:29.876Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Has this problem been solved in any country?

Comment by whyask on Open Thread, January 4-10, 2016 · 2016-01-10T21:17:23.996Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

The decision tree for this gets complex even after the split for concealed or open carry.

Also, shot through the heart, a person has about 10 seconds left to act (to return fire, I hope).

Comment by whyask on Open Thread, January 4-10, 2016 · 2016-01-09T03:23:54.149Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

What are then appropriate payoff models for carrying or not carrying, concealed or open?

Comment by whyask on Open Thread, January 4-10, 2016 · 2016-01-07T22:05:14.869Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Thanks, it'll take me some time to digest this link. Can you suggest a better definition and would this anecdote be included or excluded? If excluded, how would you define this odd exchange?

Comment by whyask on Open Thread, January 4-10, 2016 · 2016-01-07T21:47:58.211Z · score: -2 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Game Theory (Nalebuff, Avinash) says carrying a gun is a dominant strategy. Does it favor concealed, or open carry? TIA.

Comment by whyask on Open Thread, January 4-10, 2016 · 2016-01-06T04:27:27.435Z · score: -2 (6 votes) · LW · GW

Two people were lamenting the state of affairs of the world.

A bystander said, "When I become 'King of the World' I will fix things."

One of the two said, "Can I trust you?"

The bystander said, "Of course not."

The retort was, "In that case, I trust you."

Is this a

par·a·dox/ˈperəˌdäks/ noun

1.    a statement or proposition that, despite sound (or apparently sound) reasoning from acceptable premises, leads to a conclusion that seems senseless, logically unacceptable, or self-contradictory.

?

Comment by whyask on A note about calibration of confidence · 2016-01-04T16:31:23.816Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Related:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scoring_rule

Comment by whyask on "The Difference Between Medicine and Poison is Dosage" Shirts and Bags · 2015-12-29T16:46:02.112Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Not to get all medical on you, but. . .

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=LD50&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

and

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=ed50&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Dec. 14 - Dec. 20, 2015 · 2015-12-20T17:15:56.508Z · score: 0 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Here's a letter to an editor.

"The Dec. 6 Wonkblog excerpt “Millions and millions of guns” [Outlook] included a graph that showed that U.S. residents own 357 million firearms, up from about 240 million (estimated from the graph) in 1995, for an increase of about 48 percent. The article categorically stated that “[m]ore guns means more gun deaths.” How many more gun deaths were there because of this drastic increase in guns? Using data from the FBI Uniform Crime Reports, total gun murders went from 13,673 in 1995 to 8,454 in 2013 — a decrease in gun deaths of about 38 percent resulting from all those millions more guns. I’m not going to argue causation vs. correlation vs. coincidence, but I can say that “more guns, more gun deaths” is wrong, as proved by the numbers."

Getting into lurking variables is one way of handling this but I'm wondering why the author just didn't "go all the way" and declare that more guns = less deaths rather than just more guns <> more deaths.

Maybe making false statements or lying while sounding credible is not so easy. Maybe the statement can't be too counterintuitive to too many people.

E.g., I complained to a chain store about customer service via their e-mail link, and the cust. service rep. said he couldn't help me because he works the night shift and the store in question is open in the daytime.

Also see https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/extreme-fear/201005/top-ten-secrets-effective-liars

Comment by whyask on Open thread, December 7-13, 2015 · 2015-12-20T17:00:53.479Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Good point.

Comment by whyask on The Art of Lawfare and Litigation strategy · 2015-12-18T16:55:32.547Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Besides cognitive biases and logical fallacies, the 20 or so defense mechanisms should be added to the ways people become more wrong. Russell is using rationalization.

Comment by whyask on Open thread, December 7-13, 2015 · 2015-12-18T16:45:21.730Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

So we are locked into a stable, nowhere-near-optimum equilibrium. :(

Comment by whyask on The Art of Lawfare and Litigation strategy · 2015-12-17T20:19:53.285Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

"blaming of victims"

See Lerner's book, The Belief in a Just World. . ." It's really bad when judges have it. Many people have it and they don't know it, hence "delusion."

Having viewed the video, I'm disappointed in the 3rd Earl Russell.

Comment by whyask on Open thread, December 7-13, 2015 · 2015-12-12T19:14:40.641Z · score: -1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

I don't know how to reply to this thread as a whole, so I defaulted to this.

Like the Veiled Statue at Sais, I'm thinking this drama is revealing some truth about the US society and the US government. Some people recoil and want the veil restored, some want to see more and some don't know what to do, but no one is neutral.

What does Game Theory suggest in this situation? Is a tie the best that can be done? I don't think the "have you no decency?" retort will work here.

Also see DSM-IV, Narcissistic Personality Disorder, the first choice for any world leader according to Jerrold Post.

Comment by whyask on Open thread, December 7-13, 2015 · 2015-12-11T16:44:04.235Z · score: -1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Why can't seasoned politicians handle a windbag millionaire?

Is it because he is a caricature of them?

Comment by whyask on Linguistic mechanisms for less wrong cognition · 2015-11-29T22:55:02.790Z · score: 0 (2 votes) · LW · GW

If you're really ambitious, solve the problem of http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=complementary+schismogenesis&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8 so men and women (which is cross-cultural communication) can communicate unambiguously.

I've read both of D. Tannen's books on thIs and I still get sucked into traps but at least I know now that women are most likely not playing Bait and Switch with me.

Dunno' if women on this site have a problem with this since this site is not a random sample.

BTW, by reading some of my own posts, I'd think that I have or had a problem with women. :(

Know thyself, what else can I tell you?

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Nov. 23 - Nov. 29, 2015 · 2015-11-27T22:08:45.958Z · score: 1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

That's been my experience, and any questions about "How much more is this going to cost me?" are not received well.

Almost every lawyer I've hired or dealt with gave me almost nothing for my money. And good luck trying to get a bad lawyer disbarred.

What I should probably do is solicit bids for a particular legal problem.

Comment by whyask on Creating lists · 2015-11-27T00:37:44.181Z · score: -1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=OCD+lists&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Nov. 23 - Nov. 29, 2015 · 2015-11-27T00:35:50.918Z · score: 0 (0 votes) · LW · GW

Your post reminds me of something.

If there is a huge disparity of power between the lawyer and you, Game Theory kind of "goes out the window".

Right?

Comment by whyask on Mark Manson and Rationality · 2015-11-27T00:32:07.453Z · score: -3 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Love may be a narcotic.

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Nov. 23 - Nov. 29, 2015 · 2015-11-24T23:44:55.091Z · score: -1 (5 votes) · LW · GW

Any US lawyers here?

A woman who once worked in a law office told me that clients come and go (she used the word e·phem·er·al) so the real allegiance for a lawyer is to other lawyers. Because they will see them again and again.

And Game Theory has something to say about how to treat a person that you are not likely to see again.

Please, folks, do not ask me to justify this "hearsay". I found her credible, so please take this woman's word as gospel, as an axiom, and go from there.

Please confirm, deny, explain or comment on her statement.

TIA.

Comment by whyask on Stupid Questions November 2015 · 2015-11-20T22:56:35.590Z · score: 2 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Thanks for your answer.

Comment by whyask on Stupid Questions November 2015 · 2015-11-19T23:48:46.708Z · score: 0 (6 votes) · LW · GW

Is there a button somewhere on this site that allows me to ignore certain posters?

TIA.

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Nov. 09 - Nov. 15, 2015 · 2015-11-19T17:57:11.342Z · score: -1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Considering castration seems to indicate that you believe you are the monster, under the bed or wherever.

This may be a reasonable viewpoint for you or for others, or you may view sexual urges of any kind as deviant.

Get other opinions. For the outlying opinions, visit Provincetown, MA [either in person or virtually].

Good luck with what you are struggling with.

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Nov. 09 - Nov. 15, 2015 · 2015-11-18T22:08:04.813Z · score: -1 (3 votes) · LW · GW

See above.

Comment by whyask on Open thread, Nov. 09 - Nov. 15, 2015 · 2015-11-18T00:53:31.727Z · score: -1 (1 votes) · LW · GW

I give up.