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.

ArisKatsaris comments on February 2016 Media Thread - Less Wrong Discussion

3 Post author: ArisKatsaris 02 February 2016 12:20AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (46)
Tags: resources media_thread recommendations books movies community media monthly

Comments (46)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 02 February 2016 12:21:24AM 1 point [-]

Short Online Texts Thread

Comment author: gwern 02 February 2016 01:33:05AM 9 points [-]

Everything is heritable:

Politics/religion:

Statistics/AI/meta-science:

Psychology/biology:

Technology:

Economics:

Philosophy:

Fiction:

Comment author: buybuydandavis 03 February 2016 10:49:46AM 2 points [-]

"Bayesian Belief Polarization", Jern et al 2009

I'm pretty sure that Jaynes covered this. Yep. Chapter 5. Converging and Diverging Views.

http://www-biba.inrialpes.fr/Jaynes/cc05e.pdf

Comment author: MrMind 04 February 2016 08:20:26AM 0 points [-]

And I would say did a better job at clarifying the issue.

Comment author: [deleted] 02 February 2016 02:47:15AM *  2 points [-]

"The Star Gauge" of Su Hui

Whoa. Everything old is new again; there's nothing new under the sun -- even the garden of forking paths.

EDIT: A translation probably due to David Hilton, but the publisher locked it away behind a paywall.

Comment author: Clarity 07 February 2016 05:53:37AM 0 points [-]

Why did the author of the Be Happy post delete herLessWrong account?

Comment author: James_Miller 04 February 2016 03:04:07AM *  2 points [-]

What really happened when NASA faced a "The Martian" like situation.

Comment author: [deleted] 04 February 2016 04:45:04AM *  1 point [-]

A better title would have been "what a jaded ex-academic with no relevant domain knowledge thinks happened at NASA during the last Columbia mission."

Yes, they didn't launch Atlantis on short notice, which was probably in hindsight a mistake. But Greg's not even wrong when he asserts that "(the combined Atlantis/Columbia crew) could have sat on the (expletive) floor and been alright." The shuttle went through a complicated sequence of re-entry maneuvers to land safely. It's not just 3g in one direction until touchdown.

Comment author: James_Miller 04 February 2016 04:56:03AM *  2 points [-]

Is Greg's core point true?

The NASA honchos decided that even if there was damage (caused by a chuck of foam breaking off the external tank during launch and hitting the wing) nothing could be done, so decided not to check for damage (which could have been done with an EVA, or sophisticated ground-based imaging systems, or recon sats).

Comment author: [deleted] 04 February 2016 05:11:06AM 0 points [-]

Sure. But almost everything else is a fractal of tripe.

Comment author: James_Miller 04 February 2016 05:40:55PM *  0 points [-]

OK, but doesn't that make NASA's actions evil, as in the people in charge deserved to spend the rest of their lives in prison.

Comment author: [deleted] 04 February 2016 11:35:21PM 0 points [-]

Legally? No. They were not negligent. The Atlantis rescue mission would have been a heroic measure that could have easily killed yet more astronauts.

Morally? It depends on all this background evidence that we ourselves don't know and Greg merely speculated toward.

Comment author: James_Miller 05 February 2016 12:12:51AM 0 points [-]

Morally? It depends on all this background evidence that we ourselves don't know and Greg merely speculated toward.

Greg's core point, which you agreed was true, seems sufficient to morally dam them.

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit