AnnaSalamon comments on Experiment Idea Thread - Spring 2011 - Less Wrong

28 Post author: Psychohistorian 06 May 2011 06:10PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (53)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: AnnaSalamon 08 May 2011 11:42:57PM *  12 points [-]

Louie, I don't remember the details of this. I thought folks ended up with a very small and not-very-powerful study (such that the effect would have had to be very large to show up anyhow), with the main goal of the "study", such as it was, being to test our procedures for running future potential experiments?

Could you refresh my memory on what tests were run?

Also, speaking about how "the folks at SIAI believe X" based on small-scale attempt run within the visiting fellows program last summer seems misleading; it may inaccurately seem to folks as though you're speaking for Eliezer, Michael Vassar, or others. I was there (unlike Eliezer or Michael) and I don't recall having the beliefs you mention.

Comment author: Will_Newsome 10 May 2011 11:47:20AM *  1 point [-]

This definitely agrees with my memory, too...

I mostly felt compelled to actually sign in and comment because I wanted to point out that designating something as "[t]he opinion of folks at Singularity Institute" or the like is often an annoying simplification/inaccuracy that allows people to thenceforth feel justified in using their social cognition to model a group roughly as they would a person.

Comment author: gwern 11 May 2011 02:34:28PM 0 points [-]

When I asked back in September 2010, you said

They're ad hoc, we've used one for a dual n-back study which ended up yielding insufficient data....We didn't study long enough to get any statistically significant data. Like, not even close....really, there's no information there, no matter how much Bayes magic you use

So at least your memory has been consistent over the last 9 months.