= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
GLaDOS comments on Let's all learn stats! - 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 (37)
Do you have good reason to believe everyone on LW is a human?
More or less, yes.
This is a very skewed demographic. LessWrong rationality would benefit greatly from the participation of a larger sample of mindspace.
Ask yourself what have we done to be more inclusive of non-humans lately? They are constantly excluded from the intended audience for example.
No, most of mindspace would either be incapable of communicating with us in our manner of communicating or they would destroy us utterly before we had a chance to respond. Almost none of them just want to waste time chatting on internet forums.
Sure. I engage in conversations about decision theory frequently. Within those discussions I consistently advocate a policy of cooperating if doing so will secure the cooperation of the other unless said cooperation could be secured without having to cooperate. Non-humans that gained access to records from humans either directly or through analyzing the space of possible worlds will be able pay heed to that if there is ever a situation in which cooperation between us is possible and desirable.
"larger sample of mindspace" != "random sample of mindspace"
That said, though, it's certainly true that we want a skewed demographic relative to mindspace in general.
And probably even relative to human mindspace.