You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

SarahC comments on Leveling IRL - Less Wrong Discussion

33 Post author: cousin_it 05 August 2011 09:35PM

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

Comments (125)

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

Comment author: [deleted] 07 August 2011 12:37:20PM 0 points [-]

Agreed on substituting Project Euler problems. (God, I should really be doing those at some point...)

Maybe 2 and 4 need to add a frequency requirement? Let's say, in a month, 4 invites and 2 days a week that involve a 2-hour sprint of work. (BTW, I think meeting strangers is less important than initiating conversations with people you've already met; my "social" criterion was about the latter. Can you ask that guy you know from class if he wants to meet up and study? People who can't arrange to meet are at a disadvantage, and I've struggled with that for a long time.)

5 and 8 are too vague. The trouble with LessWrong is that there's a very wide range of math abilities. I think calculus is conceptually important, though; maybe it should be something like "complete a Khan academy course," "complete a Schaums Outlines calculus book," or "Pass the AP calculus test."

I honestly don't know what to do for empiricism.

Comment author: cousin_it 07 August 2011 02:47:02PM *  1 point [-]

Great idea about frequency for 2 and 4! It adds an element of grind (leveling is now guaranteed to take time), but that sounds like an okay tradeoff to me if we can't think of anything better. Also I agree that talking to people you know is a better idea for level 1 than talking to strangers.

I have set up a wiki page with our current draft. I think you should be able to edit it :-) And let's commit to finalizing the requirements for level 1 within the next couple days - do you agree?

Comment author: Pavitra 08 August 2011 03:00:58AM 0 points [-]

Could this link be edited into the article? I missed it before.

Comment author: atucker 07 August 2011 03:56:17PM 0 points [-]

Awesome job starting us off! Sorry I forgot to mention that earlier.

I honestly don't know what to do for empiricism.

Maybe a minimum level is realizing that you don't know something, and being willing to update on information related to the fact that you're curious about?