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.

Jiro comments on Personal story about benefits of Rationality Dojo and shutting up and multiplying - Less Wrong Discussion

7 Post author: Gleb_Tsipursky 26 August 2015 04:38PM

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

Comments (27)

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

Comment author: Gleb_Tsipursky 27 August 2015 05:15:16PM 0 points [-]

We had a 3-point system of value for each part of the house "1=low, 2=moderate, 3=high" and the same for use, with use averaged year-round.

So for the backyard example: the backyard for house 170 was high value, 3, and high use for half of the year, so 1.5. Its total value was 4.5. The backyard for house 450 was moderate value, 2, and high use for half of the year, so 1.5. Its total value was 3.

Comment author: Jiro 27 August 2015 07:29:02PM 0 points [-]

I was thinking of something that is only used occasionally, but for which you value the option to use it even if you aren't going to use it much. Because going from no-X to X adds the option, the first use has a high value, but the second use does not have as high a value.

Comment author: Gleb_Tsipursky 27 August 2015 08:40:51PM 0 points [-]

This can be calculated by estimating the probability of use times enjoyment, for example a formal dining room and table. Such a feature was not so important to us, so we left it out of our calculations. It's only salient things that matter :-)