Comment by zvi on Disadvantages of Card Rebalancing · 2019-01-16T13:54:13.510Z · score: 6 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Thanks, this is very helpful feedback. Request for more such notes from readers.

A lot of the motivation for writing it was, in fact, to figure out what my own opinions actually were.

I do think a lot of this has implications outside game design, and I was sad that I couldn't efficiently write this in a way that didn't bog it down in a lot of game-design-specific detail, which means it will be hard for those not into the detail to extract the implications unless I come back to them in another form.

Comment by zvi on Subsidizing Prediction Markets · 2019-01-16T13:50:33.698Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Paying in some reasonable investment is an improvement, and in a world with different 'right' investments would be a bigger one, but tying up the money that long in a sufficiently safe investment is still pretty expensive.

It would be interesting if one could bet, say, shares of SPY US plus associated dividends, so you were leaking a lot less alpha. Of course, that changes the odds on long bets quite a bit if they are correlated with SPY US, which most of them will be.

Disadvantages of Card Rebalancing

2019-01-06T23:30:08.255Z · score: 33 (7 votes)
Comment by zvi on Two More Decision Theory Problems for Humans · 2019-01-04T20:24:34.027Z · score: 6 (3 votes) · LW · GW

I agree strongly that, as a problem for humans, assuming that the consequentialist model has all our real values is not a safe assumption.

I would go further, and say that this assumption is almost always going to be importantly wrong and result in loss of important values. Nor do I think this is a hypothetical failure mode, at all; I believe it is common in our circles.

Advantages of Card Rebalancing

2019-01-01T13:10:02.224Z · score: 9 (2 votes)

Card Rebalancing and Economic Considerations in Digital Card Games

2018-12-31T17:00:00.547Z · score: 14 (5 votes)
Comment by zvi on Card Collection and Ownership · 2018-12-29T14:55:24.944Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

It remains to be seen whether they're going to go full blast on making lots of changes, and whether the changes they do make will be good going forward - while these changes were net positive by most accounts, even with the giant crater they left in the color green, they do suggest a trap I'll be describing in my next post that I worry about.

Comment by zvi on Card Collection and Ownership · 2018-12-29T14:53:51.849Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · LW · GW

There are a lot of hints in this series, some of them quite explicit.

I have a whitepaper, but it's not currently public.

Of course, part of designing a game is finding out that you're wrong, and changing it to make it better.

Comment by zvi on Card Collection and Ownership · 2018-12-29T14:31:37.713Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · LW · GW

I don't think that's right.

I do think that it helps with some confusion, but there is a core important set of issues here regarding what is actually going on and which systems are better and worse in which ways.

Comment by zvi on Card Balance and Artifact · 2018-12-29T14:26:59.213Z · score: 3 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Looking forward to the follow-up; you may wish to post it on the original blog post since it's going deep into such matters.

I totally get that there's another perspective but have not heard a strong case for it.

Card Balance and Artifact

2018-12-28T13:10:00.323Z · score: 9 (2 votes)

Card Collection and Ownership

2018-12-27T13:10:00.977Z · score: 19 (5 votes)

Artifact Embraces Card Balance Changes

2018-12-26T13:10:00.384Z · score: 12 (3 votes)

Fifteen Things I Learned From Watching a Game of Secret Hitler

2018-12-17T13:40:01.047Z · score: 13 (8 votes)

Review: Slay the Spire

2018-12-09T20:40:01.616Z · score: 14 (9 votes)

Prediction Markets Are About Being Right

2018-12-08T14:00:00.281Z · score: 81 (26 votes)
Comment by zvi on Conversational Cultures: Combat vs Nurture · 2018-12-03T15:45:21.985Z · score: 19 (7 votes) · LW · GW

An outright "You're dumb" is a mistake, period, unless you actually meant to say that the person is in fact dumb. This rounding is a pure bad, and there's no need of it. Adding 'being' or 'playing' or 'doing something' before the dumb is necessary.

Part of a good combative-type culture is that you mean what you say and say what you mean, so the rounding off here is a serious problem even before the (important) feelings/status issue.

Comment by zvi on If You Want to Win, Stop Conceding · 2018-11-22T23:22:50.669Z · score: 3 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Curious for your take on this question (I have my own answers but I want to not anchor you): Why do we frequently see sports teams in (e.g. basketball or football) effectively concede games by taking approaches with 0% win rate, when they have strategies that have non-zero (but very low) win rates?

Comment by zvi on If You Want to Win, Stop Conceding · 2018-11-22T23:21:19.681Z · score: 15 (8 votes) · LW · GW

There is a special case where these thoughts are actually useful. If you are playing at less than full capacity, you should consider avoiding complex positions and long chains of reasoning, and seek variance slash try to get lucky in various ways. Simplify the game, or force the decisions onto the opponent. If you're on the clock, don't count on being able to operate quickly later on.

The other special case is, regardless of why, noting you are not focused can be a good motivation to actually focus, whereas you won't fix it if you don't realize you have a problem.

And of course between rounds is often a great time to hydrate, grab a bite, get a few minutes of rest or what not, and it can very important to your success in the tournament to become aware of your needs going forward. Then, after the tournament, you do what Richard says and prevent it from happening again.

Comment by zvi on Review: Artifact · 2018-11-22T23:15:15.446Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

I haven't played. I think it is a cool idea and I have a lot of faith in Richard, so I am optimistic. I should try it at some point, hard to say more without giving it a shot.

Review: Artifact

2018-11-22T15:00:01.335Z · score: 21 (8 votes)
Comment by zvi on Preschool: Much Less Than You Wanted To Know · 2018-11-21T18:31:43.061Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · LW · GW

I would have as well. This suggests that their problems run deeper slash the difficulty lies elsewhere. Alternatively, they are helped, but others are actively hurt.

Comment by zvi on Preschool: Much Less Than You Wanted To Know · 2018-11-21T17:02:49.593Z · score: 10 (2 votes) · LW · GW

And of course two more things: That taking the better short-term of the two sides is the best way to interact with such a supremely broken system, despite the fact that it strengthens the system and makes it that much less likely to improve, and that you prefer a hugely inefficient transfer (that likely leads over time to even less efficient similar things) to doing nothing - transfers are most certainly not free even in the best of cases, and this is not that.

Preschool: Much Less Than You Wanted To Know

2018-11-20T19:30:01.155Z · score: 65 (21 votes)
Comment by zvi on Fat People Are Heroes · 2018-11-13T20:18:34.508Z · score: 6 (5 votes) · LW · GW

This is definitely not my experience. Once I got thin, I had to keep working hard every day to keep it that way. Knowing it was worth it made it easier, but I work way harder on it now than I ever did in the past.

Octopath Traveler: Spoiler-Free Review

2018-11-05T17:50:00.986Z · score: 12 (4 votes)

Linkpost: Arena’s New Opening Hand Rule Has Huge Implications For How We Play the Game

2018-11-01T12:30:00.810Z · score: 13 (4 votes)
Comment by zvi on The Art of the Overbet · 2018-10-22T12:45:13.789Z · score: 6 (4 votes) · LW · GW

Mumble mumble "not investment advice" mumble mumble!

So there's at least *a little* deliberately avoiding being clear and explicit on exactly what to do, because legally one can't give investment advice safely, especially if the advice would be something riskier than standard. There's also 'what to actually do comes later and is a distinct and complex and heavy topic'.

You are correct that this series is in part a response / building upon "Against the barbell strategy." Not a coincidence there. I certainly am pointing out that choosing a weird form of "safety" as measured in dollars under 'normal' world conditions as represented by bonds is, even under the best of assumptions, a false security not worth sacrificing much for in expected value terms under most circumstances.

Comment by zvi on The Kelly Criterion · 2018-10-22T12:39:57.879Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Consider the parallel to the AI whose goal is to bring you coffee, so it takes over the world to make sure no one can stop it from bringing you coffee: The fact that one might need or want more money makes it nonzero.

The more serious issue here is something I call the Uncanny Valley of Money, which I hope to write about at some point soon, where you have to move from spending on yourself (at as little as 1:1, in some sense) to spending on everyone (at up to 7000000000:1, or even more if you count the future, in some sense), in order to actually make any progress even for yourself.

The Art of the Overbet

2018-10-19T14:00:00.518Z · score: 58 (25 votes)
Comment by zvi on The Kelly Criterion · 2018-10-16T10:47:24.953Z · score: 10 (6 votes) · LW · GW

Being linear in utility is insufficient to make betting it all correct, you also need to be able to place bets of unlimited size (or not have future opportunities for advantage bets). Otherwise, even if your utility outside of the game is linear, inside of the game it is not.

And yes, some of these points are towards being *more* risk-loving than Kelly, at which point you consider throwing the rules out the window.

The Kelly Criterion

2018-10-15T21:20:03.430Z · score: 60 (28 votes)
Comment by zvi on Additional arguments for NIMBY · 2018-10-13T14:52:35.944Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

I can believe a model where there's a budget for some amount of weird ES, and there's a potential tragedy of the commons if that budget is overused where it then becomes something different and less useful, and also a similar thing within a given blog/writer since it's clear that DWATV ESs aren't going to usually be 'confident', 'uncertain' or what not.

One possibility, given that ES isn't used that much right now (e.g. I looked at all other front page LW posts on 'all posts' plus the 3 curated, and there were no other ESs), is I accept that I'm doing a different thing and call it 'vibe' or something.

Comment by zvi on You Play to Win the Game · 2018-10-12T19:52:41.309Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

In Diplomacy I've never heard the 1/(2n) argument from that sentence. All it's saying is that if you are part of the draw, the person who survived with 1 supply center gets the same result as the one with all 17 on the other side of the line. Whether players actually treat it that way is up to them, of course.

But of course, my natural instinct is that winning alone is a special thing, and that winning outright is more than twice as good as a 2-way draw. When thinking about whether a 2-way draw is more or less than twice as good as a 4-way draw, I'm not sure.

In Castle Panic I think part of the fun is deciding how much you care about the title versus winning the battle, where the right answer is not zero but not enough to *seriously* risk losing the battle over that...

Comment by zvi on Eternal: The Exit Interview · 2018-10-12T19:47:30.354Z · score: 5 (2 votes) · LW · GW

I played some L5R back in the day, I found it fun but didn't take it seriously, to the place where collections were complete and decks started to look the same. Felt like a game that used tricks to avoid players getting too ruthless and breaking the game. Which is fine!

Some Magic decks and matchups will always be positional, as is limited, and yes it is something I'd like to do more often in constructed (but far from all the time).

There are some really cool mental games you can play with tiny decks. Have you played three-card Magic? It is exactly what it sounds like, and the metagame can keep you amused for at least hours.

Comment by zvi on Additional arguments for NIMBY · 2018-10-12T19:42:28.319Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

I think most of most arguments about any given area building are indeed about building in general, and mostly the general question interests me more here anyway. SF is just the number-one-with-a-bullet example.

Comment by zvi on Additional arguments for NIMBY · 2018-10-12T19:41:13.694Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

When writing here, I thought it was clear that price wasn't included, but clearly that's not true. Adding the words 'of goods' to the sentence to make things more clear. If other people chime in that it's still not clear I will reword more.

On Epistemic Status: On reflection I like the weird poetry angle, and I think it's true to the concept, as it's telling the viewer in what vein to take what is to come. If I had consistent feedback that people dislike it or it was doing real damage to an important norm, I would stop, but as usual feedback on such things is very sparse.

Additional arguments for NIMBY

2018-10-11T20:40:05.547Z · score: 35 (11 votes)
Comment by zvi on The funnel of human experience · 2018-10-11T19:46:47.072Z · score: 18 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Let's assume that this is true, and the majority of 'scientific' thought is happening now. Given the observed rate of scientific progress, what explanation should we consider?

1) Today's problems really are that much harder than old problems and/or no really, we're making great progress! I kid.

2) Scientific thought today is so terrible that it doesn't produce much scientific progress.

3) What we're calling scientific thought never was what produced scientific progress.

4) Scientific thought today isn't aimed at producing scientific progress, so it doesn't.

Comment by zvi on Modes of Petrov Day · 2018-09-24T00:52:31.111Z · score: 4 (2 votes) · LW · GW

I still don't understand, in the context of the ceremony, what would cause anyone to push the button. Whether or not it would incinerate a cake, which would pretty much make you history's greatest monster.

Comment by zvi on Advice Wanted; Reconcile with religious parent · 2018-09-23T18:34:40.385Z · score: 4 (3 votes) · LW · GW

As I understand reform Judaism, it's largely cultural and the technical requirements are pretty light. Yom Kippur is kind of a huge deal, but there aren't many others, and it boils down to a day in which to fast and contemplate what you've done and done wrong over the past year. There are perfectly good secular reasons to spend a day on that once a year. He likely has some other similar asks (e.g. passover Seder) but overall they don't add up to much and if you live in different cities it's not like he can check. Nor does it seem like he was trying to.

What he actually cares about, de facto, is you explicitly rejecting what he's trying to pass on to you. It's hurtful, it's insulting, it makes him feel like a failure to himself and his people. So... don't do that? One is stuck with one's family. Sometimes you gotta whistle and pretend everything is fine, especially when getting financial support but also cause you care about each other.

Apply for Emergent Ventures

2018-09-13T21:50:00.295Z · score: 45 (17 votes)
Comment by zvi on On Robin Hanson’s Board Game · 2018-09-10T03:34:23.008Z · score: 12 (6 votes) · LW · GW

What types of players did you test the game on, and how many games did they each play?

I can think of many other games where this distortion effect doesn't happen with new players, as they don't think about the game ending or the strategic layer, then picks up as players gain experience and improve. So this result isn't that surprising for players on their first game, especially if they're not hardcore game players. But it would be surprising if it was a stable equilibrium.

Comment by zvi on On Robin Hanson’s Board Game · 2018-09-10T03:30:03.372Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

I like it, that works well, so long as we have an airtight definition in advance of when this counts. Alternatively, we can know from our guide that the result won't be ambiguous.

Comment by zvi on On Robin Hanson’s Board Game · 2018-09-09T12:06:35.296Z · score: 11 (3 votes) · LW · GW

That's some strong praise there. It's great to hear and I hope I can live up to it. I think I'm one of the strongest at some aspects of analysis, and this task here plays into a lot of my strengths including my trading and market making experience. In other ways, I'm not as strong. I

really enjoy doing this type of analysis not only on games but on real world situations, problems, mechanisms, business opportunities, and so forth. If I could get fairly compensated for that type of consulting I'd love to do it, but alas the consulting business is mostly a self-selling business and the internal corporate politics business as far as I can tell - you get advice like "never improve things more than 10%, and if you do improve it more make sure to hide it."

In much more promising news, I'm exploring a potential game design opportunity, but it's too early for me to say more than that yet.

I'll check out the guide, looks cool at first glance.

Comment by zvi on On Robin Hanson’s Board Game · 2018-09-09T11:58:53.731Z · score: 7 (4 votes) · LW · GW

Robin explicitly said "the person with the most money wins" and that's the most natural way of viewing it as a game. Of course, there's nothing *wrong* with doing it the other way, and it creates more accurate (realistic?) prices and markets, as I note. But it's important to note that *as a game* it's more interesting to try and get the most money, than it is to simply make good trades. If it's normal trading you're all tactics and no strategy. This way you get both, plus the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat.

Comment by zvi on On Robin Hanson’s Board Game · 2018-09-09T11:56:22.598Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

You don't need to know that one and only one contract pays. However, if you don't know that, then you can't allow people to exchange $100 for a set of contracts (or vice versa). So you could have contracts on each person surviving, although you'd need to clarify carefully what did and didn't count, in advance. And the strategy would be different, since there's the chance no one survives, or multiple people survive. You could also have contracts on other stuff (e.g. who dies first, then second, etc, or what kills them, or what not).

Although in most slasher movies the virgin would just trade at $90 and everyone else super cheap...

But yeah, the logic expands.

On Robin Hanson’s Board Game

2018-09-08T17:10:00.263Z · score: 55 (17 votes)

You Play to Win the Game

2018-08-30T14:10:00.279Z · score: 26 (10 votes)

Unknown Knowns

2018-08-28T13:20:00.982Z · score: 105 (46 votes)
Comment by zvi on Subsidizing Prediction Markets · 2018-08-23T00:31:01.030Z · score: 17 (5 votes) · LW · GW

I've seen it, and my reaction was "that's very interesting and clever, I'm glad someone figured that out and wrote it up, but man is that way too complex to actually work."

Chris Pikula Belongs in the Magic Hall of Fame

2018-08-22T21:10:00.448Z · score: 28 (17 votes)
Comment by zvi on Subsidizing Prediction Markets · 2018-08-19T16:12:35.067Z · score: 14 (4 votes) · LW · GW

Experience both as a participant, and as someone who has run prediction markets in the past. This is people's revealed preference. Quick resolution is important to people on a different order of magnitude than you'd expect - people would happily pay much higher fees in order to not have to wait.

Subsidizing Prediction Markets

2018-08-17T15:40:00.653Z · score: 98 (26 votes)

Tidying One’s Room

2018-08-16T13:50:00.303Z · score: 39 (13 votes)
Comment by zvi on Prediction Markets: When Do They Work? · 2018-07-30T12:42:58.001Z · score: 3 (2 votes) · LW · GW

Full reply would be its own post, which is in my drafts folder in an early stage. I thought I was clear that subsidy is V, in its own way, so that won't be a problem. It can help with the other problems either by subsidizing those solutions directly in some cases (e.g. if the market doesn't resolve, you pay everyone for the time value of their money with the subsidy) or by simply offering a sufficiently big prize that people disregard the other factors.

You can, of course, throw money at the problem, and a sufficient amount will get people to go for it anyway, although solving or minimizing the problems here makes that much cheaper. A more interesting question is how to efficiently do that.

Non-anonymous trading is very different, and is not robust to cheating.

Comment by zvi on Prediction Markets: When Do They Work? · 2018-07-30T12:41:22.374Z · score: 2 (1 votes) · LW · GW

Seems like linking to the wiki is a good thing to do here, then? Seems about right.

Comment by zvi on Prediction Markets: When Do They Work? · 2018-07-29T01:26:54.057Z · score: 6 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Agreed that I could (and probably still should) work on the formatting a bit, and consider adding references to other posts; if people have suggestions for what we should link to, I'll consider adding that.

Comment by zvi on Prediction Markets: When Do They Work? · 2018-07-27T23:30:31.095Z · score: 7 (4 votes) · LW · GW will give you the money at stake (unless people are doing wash trades to make the site or market look better, which would of course never ever happen in crypto land, no sir) and current bid/offer. That gives you a good idea of what's available. Beyond that, you can try to install the app if you like, but commentary in such places? Good commentary? I don't have anything for you, sorry.

Prediction Markets: When Do They Work?

2018-07-26T12:30:00.565Z · score: 116 (43 votes)

Simplicio and Sophisticus

2018-07-22T13:30:00.333Z · score: 42 (19 votes)
Comment by zvi on Announcement: AI alignment prize round 3 winners and next round · 2018-07-16T17:15:50.894Z · score: 3 (2 votes) · LW · GW


Why Destructive Value Capture?

2018-06-18T12:20:00.407Z · score: 40 (19 votes)
Comment by zvi on On the Chatham House Rule · 2018-06-15T01:03:35.487Z · score: 44 (8 votes) · LW · GW

I've attended one event under Chatham House rules. Not only was keeping who was there a secret costly, but people reliably considered it unreasonable that I actually kept that secret. "Oh, come on" and variants were used often, because actually keeping to the rule was annoying and they didn't see the point.

People treating it as unreasonable does make keeping the rule even more expensive, and raises the probability it will be ignored - I believe others took the information part seriously but not the who was there part. But that also makes it really important we find a way to do the full no-one-knows-you-are-there thing when you need to do it, without it giving away that there was true need for it. If you say who attended until the moment you really can't say, you're doing Glomarization / Meta-Honesty wrong...

Comment by zvi on Front Row Center · 2018-06-12T00:25:53.553Z · score: 11 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Amazon to me is a great example of not trying to exploit your customers for short term profits, instead choosing to give them the best possible experience, and now because of that, they are Amazon - that means both finding a way to not charge for shipping by refactoring their prices and offering prime, even if some customers cost them money, to avoid looking like they charge for shipping, and also to actually offer a good deal and a great interface and so on. They're not trying to get you to buy overpriced stuff, or waste your time or maximize clicks.

Comment by zvi on Front Row Center · 2018-06-12T00:22:20.868Z · score: 4 (5 votes) · LW · GW

The goal should be to provide the best customer experience, so you get people to come back, without making too many sacrifices on revenue per customer. The ads are chump change, I'd even argue having them at all is an error, but intentionally making your product worse to pitch them is a clear disaster. The snacks are more relevant, but the rush to get a seat (and the risk of losing it) cuts both ways, and goodwill towards the theater is likely a big factor in whether people are willing to shell out that much.

Making an actual different-price auction makes people make hard decisions, as you note, so it's a bad customer experience, same as getting put in a bad spot. So the goal is to design a system avoiding both; encouraging advance purchase of tickets to pick seats is a reasonable compromise, as is avoiding having terrible choices.

Comment by zvi on Front Row Center · 2018-06-12T00:13:18.553Z · score: 8 (6 votes) · LW · GW

Short term thinking; destroying value like that kills you in the long run. But sure.

Any frequent goer returns to the same location multiple times, so even if we consider each one in isolation, this is a very bad plan.

Front Row Center

2018-06-11T13:50:00.237Z · score: 32 (19 votes)

Simplified Poker Conclusions

2018-06-09T21:50:00.400Z · score: 63 (19 votes)
Comment by zvi on Simplified Poker · 2018-06-06T23:52:54.828Z · score: 8 (1 votes) · LW · GW


Simplified Poker Strategy

2018-06-06T11:10:00.636Z · score: 44 (9 votes)
Comment by zvi on Simplified Poker · 2018-06-05T00:01:38.430Z · score: 6 (1 votes) · LW · GW

It's worth noting that against the actual field I faced, you can do much better than Nash.

Comment by zvi on Simplified Poker · 2018-06-04T23:59:07.676Z · score: 14 (3 votes) · LW · GW

Against this opponent, yes. Against other opponents, no.

Simplified Poker

2018-06-04T15:50:00.299Z · score: 68 (17 votes)
Comment by zvi on Duncan Sabien: "In Defense of Punch Bug" · 2018-06-01T12:42:04.903Z · score: 23 (5 votes) · LW · GW

Noting that my salience for Ender's Game (which I like a lot, but not like Duncan likes it) wasn't about kids treated with respect and given agency. It's about a system that ruthlessly manipulates and exploits and lies to those kids, especially Ender, despite it taking a huge toll on all concerned, because the world needs saving and it's time to be the SOBs that do what it takes to get them ready and motivated, and get results. And then the sequels are about him dealing with the consequences of that, plus some Mormonism.

Comment by zvi on Monopoly: A Manifesto and Fact Post · 2018-06-01T12:27:29.069Z · score: 12 (2 votes) · LW · GW

I appreciated the GDP-to-gold graph exactly because it's not doing the thing the OP thinks it is doing, but rather showing the extent to which gold is a favored store of value slash the growth rate of wealth as opposed to income/production (GDP), and what that implies about the value of gold as an investment and the forward interest rate. It's much cleaner than how I'd been thinking about it before, and the logic likely extends (amusing graph: GDP-to-Bitcoin, world is clearly ending).

Same with the hypothetical GDP-to-land, here, since that seems to have important implications worth thinking about, as well.

GDP-to-oil is going to have a lot of idiosyncratic movement as oil supply changes and our energy sources evolve.

GDP-to-corn is going to capture some idiosyncratic movement from agriculture, as Paul notes, and also for corn in particular - I'm guessing its subsidies make it a special case? So it's kind of like we're multiplying GDP-to-CPI by CPI-to-corn for some smart thing in the CPI slot, but the question of how much food our stuff is worth does seem like a good sanity check. How much food a worker can buy with their labor, better still.

Comment by zvi on Monopoly: A Manifesto and Fact Post · 2018-06-01T12:14:45.744Z · score: 10 (2 votes) · LW · GW

My experience moving is that the annoyance cost of moving - prioritization, search, negotiation, moving and changing your stuff, relearning your surroundings, making new friends, dealing with the kids, and so forth - towers over things like real estate commissions, even if you own a relatively expensive house, especially now that the internet is (finally!) driving them down. When recently considering a move, at first I thought the round-trip commission cost was an issue until I realized it was missing a zero versus other concerns.

Comment by zvi on Meta-Honesty: Firming Up Honesty Around Its Edge-Cases · 2018-05-31T19:03:50.303Z · score: 13 (3 votes) · LW · GW

I felt bad about using it as the example in my comment, feeling the OP should have picked a different example, but did it anyway because the OP did it. Agreed this was an error, we should use Nazis if and only if we actually mean Nazis, and find a better go-to example. Thoughts on what this should be? Kant's literal 'murderer at the door' feels arbitrary and lame to me.

Comment by zvi on Meta-Honesty: Firming Up Honesty Around Its Edge-Cases · 2018-05-31T18:06:47.504Z · score: 13 (2 votes) · LW · GW

I wonder how much of the problem is exactly this. Claiming someone is lying is by default, claiming that someone is doing something wrong. So if something isn't wrong, it must not be lying - thus saying things 'aren't really lying' rather than biting the bullet and saying that lying is OK in a situation.

This does seem to break down in sufficiently clear circumstances (e.g. the Gestapo searching for Jews in the attic) but even then I think there's a strong instinctual sense in which people doing this don't consider it lying.

Comment by zvi on Epistemological Weight Class · 2018-05-31T13:46:08.218Z · score: 16 (3 votes) · LW · GW

There seems to be an assumption here that the point of debate is to win. Sometimes it is, but most of the time, the goal should be for the goal to be to learn about the world, and to get the right answer, and generally to grow stronger.

Which makes me love getting to debate people who are 'out of my league' when there's a safe opportunity to do so, the same way that I love playing games against superior opponents.

I mean, Sir Patrick Stewart wants to debate acting methods with me? Sign me up. Highlight of my year!

The Third Circle

2018-05-21T12:10:00.168Z · score: 40 (10 votes)

The Second Circle

2018-05-20T13:40:00.181Z · score: 72 (17 votes)

The First Circle

2018-05-18T14:40:00.359Z · score: 55 (19 votes)

The Sheepskin Effect

2018-05-05T12:10:00.437Z · score: 29 (5 votes)

Inefficient Doesn’t Mean Indifferent

2018-04-29T11:30:01.467Z · score: 79 (22 votes)

The Case Against Education: Foundations

2018-04-21T14:30:00.454Z · score: 49 (11 votes)

The Case Against Education

2018-04-15T12:30:01.133Z · score: 135 (44 votes)

AI Alignment Prize: Round 2 due March 31, 2018

2018-03-12T12:10:00.676Z · score: 71 (19 votes)

Sacred Cash

2018-03-03T13:20:00.382Z · score: 46 (17 votes)

Categories of Sacredness

2018-02-27T02:00:00.403Z · score: 55 (16 votes)


2018-01-23T00:10:00.214Z · score: 48 (14 votes)

Book Review: The Elephant in the Brain

2017-12-31T17:30:00.501Z · score: 62 (23 votes)

More Dakka

2017-12-02T13:10:00.319Z · score: 118 (45 votes)

The Darwin Results

2017-11-25T13:30:00.351Z · score: 73 (31 votes)

The Darwin Pregame

2017-11-21T01:10:00.372Z · score: 57 (27 votes)

The Darwin Game

2017-11-15T23:20:00.294Z · score: 59 (28 votes)

Zeroing Out

2017-11-05T16:10:00.760Z · score: 74 (30 votes)

Leaders of Men

2017-10-29T18:10:00.369Z · score: 85 (41 votes)

Seek Fair Expectations of Others’ Models

2017-10-17T14:30:00.989Z · score: 100 (47 votes)


2017-09-30T11:10:00.135Z · score: 146 (83 votes)