= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
GuySrinivasan comments on Case Study: Testing Confirmation Bias - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (61)
If I had the option to vote up multiple times, I would have voted up a post like gwern's about a prominent LWer more times than I would have this post of gwern's.
I now want to interact with gwern more but want people I know who are less accepting of abrasive social norm violations to interact with gwern less. I personally would be elated if my friends pulled this kind of thing on me with some (but not too much) regularity.
Edit: fivelier brings up a good point. My first thought was "I wish it was normal to expect someone might be performing this kind of test!", then "Really? Would I really be happy about that?" then "well, if my friends did it, yes, definitely". But I only wrote the final statement.
I marvel at the apparent certitude with which you introspect. Maybe doubt is supposed to be implicit in all such statements, but I'd throw some extra weaseling in sometimes to make it clearer. In any event, your analogy is horrible: "friends" means private, different reputation issues, etc.
Edit: I should add, my point has nothing to do with "abrasive" social norm violations, as I understand that term. I consider that typical LessWrongian self-congratulation.
I've edited to include a more full version of my thoughts, good point.
Please do me the favor of accepting my apologies for tone, even if you don't care. So, my original response was intended as a compatibility test. If I were a LessWrongian (I'm giving digs for fun), I would call it a literacy test or an intelligence test. So, if you think that -11 (as once it was) is surprising or not really sensible, we're possibly compatible (even though I think the score is fair; personal biases). Otherwise, less likely (is the intent). I was also considering forbidding people from downvoting me. Apologies: just amusing myself. I'll stop now.
I would love to test LWers more, but it's hard to find any good approaches. Suppose I wanted to test Eliezer - what field of new data exactly would I supply? If I had a time-machine, I could supply observations of the future's progress on AI and reverse them, but unfortunately I do not have one.
I suppose I could supply critical information on cryonics - claim there were new defrostings?, but when I've supplied good information on cryonics in the past, my posts and comments get upvoted!