= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Eugine_Nier comments on LW Women Entries- LW Meetups - 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 (131)
Yes, but there is a limit to how much it can be improved. And to as Paul Graham points out here improving it to near it's potential maximum would come at the expense of other things, like rationality.
I would be a little bit surprised if a randomly chosen person in the reference class of the man in the OP had already picked so much of the low-hanging fruit that trying to get more wouldn't be worth it.
EDIT: In order to not appear one-sided, I'll point out that I also include Submitter C herself in that reference class -- reading too much into a joke is as much of a faux pas as making a joke that too much can be read into.