= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Nick_Roy comments on SIAI - An Examination - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (203)
In what way do you consider "calories in - calories out" complete bullshit? (My guess as to your answer: knock-on effects w.r.t. a Seth-Roberts-style set point of some kind.)
Probably in the same sense that people mean, under generous interpretations, when they say "The Laffer Curve is bullshit" -- which is to say, it's technically true, but not a relevant insight for this part of the problem space, given more significant factors in success.
Sure. I'm curious about what EY sees as the specific "more significant factors in [why sweet things are obstacles to] success [in excess of their stated calories]".
Oh, okay. Probably should have known I couldn't provide what you were looking for, but I wanted to get in a jab at confused critiques of the Laffer Curve and confused applications of conservation of energy to weight loss. :-)