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.

Michaelos comments on Creating a Text Shorthand for Uncertainty - Less Wrong Discussion

6 Post author: ozziegooen 19 October 2013 04:46PM

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

Comments (29)

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

Comment author: [deleted] 21 October 2013 07:00:55PM 0 points [-]

I like the relation to this system to bits of evidence and I agree that having some form of short hand would potentially be a lot more useful then having to add a large number of verbal ticks and caveats. ~i1.

I am concerned that a possible flaw in this shows that condensing all of the evidential certainty into a single number makes it easier to cause a typo in it, which would change the entire tone of your post. Example: ~i1: ~i11. While that is one character, it is the difference between "I'm just sort of spitballing this, based on a quick gut feeling." And "This is very self evident to me." However, you can have the same problem with emoticon typos, such as :) :(, so it isn't as though this is exclusive to the proposed system. ~i1r1

That being said, I find the general idea very helpful, because I could note someone replying to one of my posts, showing its flaws, and seeing "Oh, I didn't believe that all that firmly anyway, so I should update to the other side." In general, I think this would make me feel less defensive when given counter evidence, which would be a good thing. ~i2.