Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

Elo comments on Open thread, Nov. 23 - Nov. 29, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

5 Post author: MrMind 23 November 2015 07:59AM

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

Comments (257)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Elo 24 November 2015 10:13:01PM 1 point [-]

This week on the slack: http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/mpq/lesswrong_real_time_chat/

  • AI - language/words as a storage-place for meaning.
  • art and media - MGS V, Leviathan, SOMA, Undertale, advertising methods,
  • Business and startups - CACE (Change Anything Chances Everything) with respect to startups and machine learning. prediction.io , ,meetings: [each person speaks, so the length of meeting of the meeting is O(n) and there are n people, so the total meeting cost is O(n^2). On the margin, adding one person to the standup means they listen to n people speak, and n people listen to them speak.] and how they cost businesses money. machine speech ability, data wrangling is tedious, data processing resources: data source, computing power and blidness. "the whole world is simpler if greed is the primary motivator for everything". "People talk a lot about market failure but government failure is a thing too.". VC's and extortionary practices. what is the intention of implementing UBI? (unanswered). "if the game-plan (the economy) changes - i.e. by automation; or basic income. The people with more resources will be able to adapt to it faster..." wealth distribution.

  • Debating and rhetoric - we break apart the discussions and arguments from other places... We analysed where the first statement of an argument elsewhere shifted from discussion to disagreement. (surprisingly early) a two-pronged approach to offence. in regards to:

  • a statement could be taken the offensively
  • it was taken offensively by someone.

1: clean up the statement so that it is harder to take offensively (steelman) 2: encourage less personal offence from the original statement both sides are needed to make discussions more productive.
Grice's Maxims of communication - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative_principle this is also interesting: http://www.smart-words.org/linking-words/transition-words.html

  • Effective altruism - EA Global have started hosting videos from this year's conference on their site. Duplicates of what is already up. Nothing at all from the Oxford conference yet. http://eaglobal.org/videos

  • goals of lesswrong - raising the sanity waterline, and before we extinct the planet of humans. how could the sanity waterline be raised:

    • Changing the education system
    • Getting enough influential writers
    • Getting enough famous people to be rationalists so that people want to emulate then
    • Creating a movie or TV series about rationalists
    • Get enough rationalists within the population that everyone gains some understanding of rationalist ideas asking a few teachers about how you might go about teaching the LW ideas to the average person...
  • human relationships - living in different places and different cultures of doing so. driving vs public transport and safety concerns. "youthful optimism" and it's contrasting "aging pessimism" as an exploration-exploitation problem. If we make a rough assumption that both things exist and at some point a youthful optomist transitions to an aging pessimist; what can we learn about that and how can we benefit from knowing that as a natural process.

  • lingustics - the phrase; "If I understand you correctly; you were saying..." followed by what you are saying next. it slows down a conversation; but keeps it clear.

  • Open - so many things! IQ/ the sports gene, (re: parable of talents), Accountability groups, A Big disagreement about a thing about this thing http://lo-tho.blogspot.com/2014/12/epistemic-trust.html , http://www.informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/rhetological-fallacies/ , QS data, Case law and it's influence on the law and an analogy to Edge testing in programming. Some discussions on the layers of the state of our facebooks post-paris-events. some online courses, fighting death, advice about how to think about motivated cognition (clever-arguer) vs intellectual honesty (by which I just mean the lack of motivated cognition) in the case where one person has a really high probability for X and honestly believes that the argument is very one-sided?.

The quotation you’re looking for is from Chesterton’s 1929 book, The Thing, in the chapter entitled, “The Drift from Domesticity”:

In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a principle which will probably be called a paradox. There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.

  • Parenting - (uncharacteristically quiet) some talk about video games that we let kids play

  • philosophy - is there's a fundamental difference in the peer relationships among men as compared to the peer relationships among women. I've heard often that men by default are indifferent to each other while women by default are adversaries.

    response: sounds like an armchair philosophy. what evolutionary characteristics or behaviours did we or did we not pick up. even if you found a population with that to hold true; I doubt it would hold true everywhere. it may have temporarily been true for some people at some point. but evolution is all about gaming the rules. as soon as anything becomes a "rule" in the sense of being a regularly repeated behaviour; some individual who was not winning at the rule would try to generate a different win-condition so that they can continue to win.

in summary: how could we know? and also if it was true for a temporary time and place I doubt it would last more than a handful of generations. by generate I mean: randomly evolve a different pattern of behaviour.

"how should we feel, emotionally, about the real world when the real world kind of sucks, and is there anything we should do about it?" [various ideas; not completely answered]

Feel free to join us. Active meetup time: A time to try to get lots of people online to talk about things is going to be chosen soon, probably a 12 hour window or so.

We have over 130 people who have signed up. Not nearly that many people are active, but each day something interesting happens...

last month on slack: http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/lw/mwt/open_thread_oct_26_nov_01_2015/cuq5