ciphergoth comments on New Singularity.org - Less Wrong

14 Post author: lukeprog 18 June 2012 02:29PM

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

Comments (100)

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

Comment author: Jayson_Virissimo 19 June 2012 07:38:48AM 3 points [-]
Comment author: ciphergoth 02 July 2012 07:16:36AM 1 point [-]

It turns out that correct answers don't win as much karma as predictions that correct answers will win karma.

Comment author: Jayson_Virissimo 02 July 2012 09:16:47AM *  3 points [-]

It is somewhat puzzling to me that my PredictionBook evangelizing is well received here, but the fraction of LessWrongers that actually use PredictionBook is vanishingly small. Frankly, it is a scandal to Less Wrong that its high-karma members don't bother to publicly record their own predictions and yet continue to expect others to believe in the efficacy of the techniques taught in its core texts, like The Sequences.

If you want us to believe your beliefs pay rent, why not show us the receipts?

Comment author: bcoburn 06 July 2012 04:29:47AM 1 point [-]

So I don't know about anyone else, but as far as I can tell my own personal true rejection is: It's just too hard to remember to click over to predictionbook.com and actually type something in when I make a prediction. I've tried the things that seem obvious to help with this, but the small inconvenience has so far been too much

Comment author: [deleted] 03 July 2012 01:12:29AM 0 points [-]

PredictionBook is a horrible piece of software that had major features that didn't even properly work until a couple weeks ago. Is it any surprise it isn't well-received when it sucks so badly?

Comment author: gwern 03 July 2012 02:50:13AM *  1 point [-]

The email has worked longer than it has not worked and is, in fact, currently working. There were no discernible differences in usage of it...

PB has very consistently not been popular on LW. "Major features not working" is not peoples' true rejection of it.

Comment author: [deleted] 03 July 2012 03:29:58AM 0 points [-]

The email has worked longer than it has not worked and is, in fact, currently working.

I really don't think this is correct. The first e-mail I ever received from them was last week. It also sent the exact same e-mail twice. Therefore I still claim that their e-mail system doesn't work.

In addition to that, the UI is awful, the site is often quite slow, and their statistics package is quite rudimentary. There is no filtering mechanism for determining which predictions are "serious" -- the result is that many people post public predictions that should be private, but aren't.

Comment author: gwern 05 July 2012 02:14:18AM 2 points [-]

The first e-mail I ever received from them was last week. It also sent the exact same e-mail twice.

Eh. Gmail collapses the duplicates for me, so I barely noticed. And you are being notified...

(Also, you've only used PB since last June or so, while it's been running since October 2009.)

the UI is awful

It seems pretty straightforward to me.

the site is often quite slow

That was much improved after Trike did the SQL profiling.

and their statistics package is quite rudimentary.

Yes, because varying proper scoring rules are why no one is using it?

There is no filtering mechanism for determining which predictions are "serious" -- the result is that many people post public predictions that should be private, but aren't.

This only affects Happenstance, not recording your own predictions.

All of these are annoying to various extents, but do they really explain the near-zero uptake?

Comment author: wedrifid 02 July 2012 09:39:46AM 0 points [-]

It is somewhat puzzling to me that my PredictionBook evangelizing is well received here

This particular shame based instance of evangelism isn't well received.

Frankly, it is a scandal to Less Wrong that its high-karma members don't bother to publicly record their own predictions and yet continue to expect others to believe in the efficacy of the techniques taught in its core texts like The Sequences.

Eliezer frequently makes predictions and even bets. Luke makes predictions from time to time as well. Not sure about Yvain. Your complaint seems to be that they don't happen to personally use your preferred website.

As far as I'm concerned you would have struggled to have come up with a more powerful way to persuade us to not use prediction book.

Comment author: gwern 03 July 2012 12:52:12AM 2 points [-]

Eliezer frequently makes predictions and even bets.

Frequently? The http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Bets_registry lists just 3 bets by Eliezer (full disclaimer: 1 involving me), which even dating just from 2008 (the first listed one) represents less than 1 a year.

(If we want to bring in the AI box experiments as involving money and so being bets, it's still less than 1 a year since that pushes the interval back to the early 2000s while only adding in like 4 bets.)

Comment author: wedrifid 03 July 2012 08:35:51AM -1 points [-]

Frequently?

Translation from human: "I can think of multiple instances without trying hard."

Comment author: gwern 03 July 2012 02:53:17PM 1 point [-]

Terrorists frequently attack us.

Comment author: Jayson_Virissimo 02 July 2012 09:54:49AM *  1 point [-]

This particular shame based instance of evangelism isn't well received.

Perhaps. We'll see.

Eliezer frequently makes predictions and even bets. Luke makes predictions from time to time as well. Not sure about Yvain. Your complaint seems to be that they don't happen to personally use your preferred website.

Maybe I am being too tough on them, but I don't think so. Yes, Eliezer makes bets now and then; Luke has even used PredictionBook before (he currently has 2 public predictions on his userpage). On the other hand, what would you think of a martial artist who claimed to have techniques superior to those used by the pros (Bayes versus Science), yet refused to spar publicly (let alone fight) more than a few times a year?

As far as I'm concerned you would have struggled to have come up with a more powerful way to persuade us to not use prediction book.

Upon reconsideration, I now see that I was following a poor strategy of increasing PredictionBook usage. I won't retract my comment, but I probably won't make one like that again.

Comment author: wedrifid 02 July 2012 10:02:43AM *  0 points [-]

On the other hand, what would you think of a martial artist who claimed to have techniques superior to those used by the pros (Bayes versus Science), yet refused to spar publicly (let alone fight) more than a few times a year?

If Luke, Yvain or Eliezer claimed that they were superior at achieving predictionbook status than others and refused to demonstrate then I would see your point. As it happens nothing they have said indicates that they ought to be able to dominate on predictionbook (although I would expect them to be better than average).

I also note that predictionbook represents a lost purpose. If you orient your thinking and what predictions you make according to what will make you most impressive on predicitonbook you will not necessarily think the best thoughts or subject your belief's actual weak points to testing. This means I'd say it is more useful for those whose status is not tied up with their performance.

Upon reconsideration, I now see that I was following a poor strategy of increasing PredictionBook usage. I won't retract my comment, but I probably won't make one like that again.

Thankyou.