= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
TimS comments on Shit Rationalists Say? - 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 (116)
The "confidence interval" line should have a percentage ("What's your 95% confidence interval?").
"You make a compelling case for infanticide."
"Can you link me to that study?"
"I think I'm going to solve psychology." ("I think I'm going to solve metaethics." "I think I'm going to solve Friendliness.")
"My elephant wants a brownie."
"Is that your true rejection?"
"I wanna be an upload!"
"Does that beat Reedspacer's Lower Bound?"
"Let's not throw all our money at the Society for Rare Diseases in Cute Puppies."
"I have akrasia."
"I'm cryocrastinating."
"Do that and you'll wind up with the universe tiled in paperclips."
"So after we take over the world..."
"I want to optimize for fungibility here."
"This looks like a collective action problem."
"We can dissolve this question." ("That's a dissolved question.")
"My model of you likes this."
"Have you read Goedel, Escher, Bach?"
"What do the statistics say about cases in this reference class?"
Could someone explain this reference?
It's a metaphor used in Jonathan Haidt's book The Happiness Hypothesis: the rider is the conscious or deliberative mind and the elephant is everything underneath.
More to the point, the analogy is used in one of Luke's posts.