= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DavidLS comments on Fixing Moral Hazards In Business Science - 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 (96)
Thank you for posting this!
Getting a list of LessWrong approved questions would be awesome. Both because I think the LW list will be higher quality than a lot of what's out there, and because I feel question choice is one of the free variables we shouldn't leave in the hands of the corporation performing the test.
I am confused. Shouldn't the questions depend on the content of the study being performed? Which would depend (very specifically) on the users/clients? Or am I missing something?
I am hopeful that at minimum we can create guidelines for selecting questions.
I also think that some standardized health & safety questions by product category would be good (for nutritional supplements I would personally be interested in seeing data for nausea, diarrhea, weight change, stress/mood, and changes in sleep quality).
For productivity solutions I'd be curious about effects on social relationships, and other changes in relaxation activities.
Within a given product category, I'm also hopeful we can reuse a lot of questions. Soylent's test and Mealsquares' test shouldn't require significantly different questions.
I'm not sure whether Lesswrong approval is the way to go. In the outside world few people care about Lesswrong.
I think if the project is in a later stage it might make sense to mail a bunch of domain experts and ask them for guidance.
I could also imagine using biology.stackexchange as a platform to discuss which tests should be used for a specific issue.