Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

Comment author: tut 21 September 2017 05:37:31PM *  0 points [-]

I don't know. What it looks like on my end is that scrolling takes time.

So I read a line, hit down arrow, nothing happens, I start reading the next line etc. After a while the page starts jumping around like it's doing all the down arrows at irregular intervals. Ok, that's annoying, so I stop hitting down arrow and instead read the 1-2 paragraphs that are on the top of the screen, then hit page down. Nothing happens, hit page down again etc. So I scroll back up to where I was, hitting page up once at a time and waiting for the page to scroll like it's twenty years ago and I just downloaded a large picture. Then I read the part of the text that I can see, hit page down again, sit and wait until it reacts, notice that I don't understand what I'm reading, notice that that's because I skipped a paragraph because it was behind the hoverboard, hit page up to find where I was and then try to scroll down part of a screen using the scrollbar. Nothing happens. I wait a while. The text starts to jump around again, because getting no feedback I scrolled a long way. Then I gave up.

I don't remember what the article was about, I didn't actually get to the meat of it. On most sites I would have given up and forgotten it ever existed after the first time that page down didn't work instantly.

In response to comment by tut on LW 2.0 Open Beta Live
Comment author: Dustin 21 September 2017 04:39:01PM 0 points [-]

What, specifically, is the problem you're having that requires patience? It's not using any notably weird/esoteric/advanced technology...

Comment author: tut 21 September 2017 04:24:08PM 0 points [-]

:-(

I do not have the patience to read anything on that site. Or alternatively, my computer is too old and my screen too low res. But I am not sufficiently committed to LW to buy new hardware just to maybe be able to see it. Is there any possibility that the old site might remain up, maybe as some kind of accessibility thing for people who can't use the new one?

Comment author: kgalias 21 September 2017 04:21:10PM 0 points [-]

For me it just returns "invalid email", though I can see my email in http://lesswrong.com/prefs/update/.

Comment author: Dustin 21 September 2017 02:26:17PM 2 points [-]

I'm a little confused about how to use my current LW account over there.

If I click "forgot my password" I never get an email, even though I have an email address tied to my LW account.

Comment author: korin43 21 September 2017 01:37:43PM 1 point [-]

Agghhh I can't leave this tab open because it does this:

https://media.giphy.com/media/VXND9U858tCH6/giphy.gif

Comment author: korin43 21 September 2017 01:32:26PM *  0 points [-]

For anyone else who finds intercom the most annoying feature in existence, you can add an Adblock / UBlock rule to block: ###intercom-container

Although it will still screw with the page title.

Comment author: Zvi 21 September 2017 11:55:45AM 1 point [-]

Congrats on going live. I hope to have time this weekend to experiment with the site and attempt porting over at least some of my Blog's more LW-aligned content. Hopefully I can coordinate that with people who have been more involved. I have high hopes!

I do worry about 4. Since there's no reasonable expectation for another attempt if this one fails, at least not soon, it will be very difficult to vote no given that means the site will be fully archived. I worry in turn that this is a Copenhagen problem: I would have been not concerned if users had not been given a vote, whereas now that we DO have a vote, I'm worried it feels a little rigged.

Comment author: rkyeun 20 September 2017 07:47:01PM *  0 points [-]

Cameras make a visible image of something. Eyes don't.

Your eyes make audible images, then? You navigate by following particular songs as your pupils turn left and right in their sockets?

Comment author: rkyeun 20 September 2017 07:42:40PM 0 points [-]

Anti-natalist here. I don't want the universe tiled with paperclips. Not even paperclips that walk and talk and call themselves human. What do the natalists want?

Comment author: MathieuRoy 19 September 2017 09:24:04PM 0 points [-]

FYI: I use this Chrome extension to gender-neutralize what I read: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/the-ungender/blfboedipjpaphkkdoddffpnfjknfeda?hl=en

Comment author: DragonGod 18 September 2017 07:29:42PM 1 point [-]

I find using she exclusively offensive.

Comment author: Lumifer 18 September 2017 04:58:35PM 0 points [-]

SPAMMITY SPAM SPAM

Comment author: Lumifer 18 September 2017 04:58:30PM 0 points [-]

SPAMMITY SPAM SPAM

Comment author: nyeven 17 September 2017 02:32:46PM 0 points [-]

Wulky Wilkinsen is a “post-utopian.” What does this mean you should expect from his books? Nothing. The belief, if you can call it that, doesn’t connect to sensory experience at all.

I don't believe this is a good example. That information actually can change your anticipation.

By knowing that information you can expect the book will be set in a post-utopian world. By anticipating that you can maybe take better notice at the setting and how exactly the world is post-utopian.

But a great article nevertheless.

Comment author: Morendil 16 September 2017 02:58:34PM 1 point [-]

By now this looks rather unlikely in the original time-frame, even though there are still encouraging hints from time to time.

Comment author: ESRogs 15 September 2017 07:34:48AM *  0 points [-]

When I read a comment. I may have a vague sense of not-worth-more-time-ness. So I don't respond.

I expect actually resolving that sense into a concrete reason to be effortful. It seems like it'd be worth it to do in many cases, but not always.

A version of this feature that sounds more likely to succeed to me, would be if it takes a mouse-click to request a reason for end of argument. I'd expect that to dramatically cut down on the number of times I'd have to resolve a vague sense into a concrete reason.

Comment author: dankane 14 September 2017 04:49:03PM 0 points [-]

Unless you can explain to me how prediction markets are going to break the pattern that two different shares of the same stock have correlated prices.

I'm actually not sure how prediction markets are supposed to have an effect on this issue. My issue is not that people have too much difficulty recognizing patterns. My issue is that some patterns once recognized do not provide incentives to make that pattern disappear. Unless you can tell me how prediction markets might fix this problem, your response seems like a bit of a non-sequitur.

Comment author: strangepoop 13 September 2017 10:14:19AM 0 points [-]

Is it unfair to say that prediction markets will deal with all of these cases?

I understand that's like responding to "This is a complicated problem that may remain unsolved, it is not clear that we will be able to invent the appropriate math to deal with this." with "But Church-Turing thesis!".

But all I'm saying is that it does apply generally, given the right apparatus.

Comment author: John_Maxwell_IV 06 September 2017 03:57:43AM *  3 points [-]

I made a post with ideas for what to do if you can't find a textbook in this thread that covers the subject you want to learn.

View more: Next