Comment author: Lumifer 22 June 2016 05:14:30PM 2 points [-]

to their benefit

You assert this as if it were an axiom. It doesn't look like one to me. Show me the benefit.

And I still don't understand why would I want to become an ideal utility maximizer.

Comment author: JEB_4_PREZ_2016 25 June 2016 03:50:56PM 0 points [-]

And I still don't understand why would I want to become an ideal utility maximizer.

If you could flip a switch right now that makes you an ideal utility maximizer, you wouldn't do it?

Comment author: Vaniver 24 June 2016 06:57:10PM 5 points [-]

This is summed up by the question: "if you're so smart, why aren't you rich?"

For many LWers, the answer is "I'm young," but I think there are also a lot of people where the answer is "I am rich."

Comment author: JEB_4_PREZ_2016 25 June 2016 03:37:18PM *  3 points [-]

Also worth noting: LWers should be extracting more utility from their money than non-LWers.

Comment author: pjeby 30 October 2015 05:41:30PM *  0 points [-]

Given how you were talking about pains, it seems to be a noticeable issue for you

Yes -- it happens a few times a week, depending on circumstances.

Your advice would totally make sense if the baseline issue were that I'm not consuming enough water. But on a baseline day I consume between 1 and 1.5 gallons of water alone, not counting any water in the food I eat, or any other beverages such as almond milk. (I don't consume sodas, fruit juice, coffee, tea, alcohol, or really anything else.)

The problem is that sometimes, that 1-1.5 gallons isn't enough, and there are occasionally days where it's been not enough for a few days in a row, such that I end up running "a few quarts low". (I actually use my scale as another clue: if I've lost a pound or two from one day to the next, and my fat % is higher, then I know I'm dehydrating. But an hour or so difference in time spent sleeping can do the same thing to my weight, so it's not a very precise measurement.)

I don't know, sip 50ml every half an hour or something?

What makes you think I'm not doing that now? As pointed out elsewhere in this thread, my rate of water need is not constant. If I have a couple of days in a row where I underestimate how much I need to raise my intake to compensate for losses like having more conversations or physical exertion than usual (or the air conditioner running more to maintain the temperature inside!), then I will fall behind and experience dehydration symptoms. But if I try to consume more water as a matter of course, then that also disrupts my digestion, makes me feel cold, keeps me running to the bathroom, and so forth.

So, if you don't have some method for actually changing my body's regulation of water, I'm not interested. AFAICT I'm already doing everything that is doable with respect to changing my behavior around water consumption, given the lack of any reliable means for determining my precise water need, in a situation where both under- and over-consumption create health problems.

I'm going to tap out of this discussion now, as my original post was not a request for advice; it was an expression of curiosity about someone saying they experienced headache relief from both placebos and painkillers, making me wonder if it was water-related (since I have some experience of that).

Comment author: JEB_4_PREZ_2016 30 October 2015 11:50:04PM *  2 points [-]

But on a baseline day I consume between 1 and 1.5 gallons of water alone, not counting any water in the food I eat, or any other beverages such as almond milk.

That's an absurd amount of water (not from food) to be consuming every day.

Comment author: Bound_up 13 October 2015 11:51:04PM 2 points [-]

I've been through the free will sequences a second time now, and I'm trying to figure out how to apply it to my life.

See, even that sounds weird, because applying to my life...trying...figure out...whether I do or not is inevitable, right?

Speaking from the naive standpoint, how does the determinist viewpoint affect your decisions? How do you think about it, incorporate it? Do you compartmentalize and pretend you're in control, or what?

Comment author: JEB_4_PREZ_2016 14 October 2015 02:39:36AM *  4 points [-]

I think my "no free will believing self" causes me to model my future self more pessimistically, albeit more accurately, than my "free will believing self" used to.

More specifically, I now pretty much by default see my future self as destined to fail at achieving my current goals due to hyperbolic discounting and, among other things, unexpectedly low willpower striking at random times and lasting for random periods. So, my focus is mainly on continual massive upfront investment during the good times (the rare days when I've got an abundance of willpower) in order to mitigate these willpower failure risks and keep my productivity much more stable and higher in the long-run.

This probably isn't necessary for most people, but I suspect it is a good tactic for those who, like me, are extremely volatile in terms of day-to-day willpower stores and who fail miserably at achieving their goals if they try to just "power through" at all times and 'believe in the belief' of free will.

Comment author: drethelin 02 September 2015 09:11:15PM 1 point [-]

What is best in life?

Comment author: JEB_4_PREZ_2016 03 September 2015 12:27:22AM *  0 points [-]

Wireheading seems like a perfectly reasonable answer to me.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 02 September 2015 01:08:34AM *  0 points [-]

I'm not going to the gym because of the tragedy of the commons? I really don't think that's it.

Comment author: JEB_4_PREZ_2016 02 September 2015 01:30:11AM *  0 points [-]

Well, you value whatever you're doing instead of going to the gym more than you value saving the world is what I was getting at. People value their own expected utility more than they value societal expected utility, even if most individuals in society would be better off if everyone somehow valued societal expected utility. Seems reasonably likely to me anyways.

Perhaps I misunderstood you; now it seems like you were saying "why do we hyperbolic discount?" or something to that effect.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 01 September 2015 09:41:42PM 5 points [-]

The first question was why isn't everyone trying to change the world, with the underlying assumption that everyone should be.

Not everyone cares that much about "the world", and that's likely a good thing.

I would generalize the question, because the generalization applies broadly - whatever we profess to value, whatever we believe we value, why aren't we expending more time and energy actually creating that value?

One answer that pops to mind runs against encouraging people to "save the world" - that caring about things beyond your control largely only prevents you from caring about, and thereby having the motivation to act, on things in your control.

Comment author: JEB_4_PREZ_2016 01 September 2015 10:39:31PM *  0 points [-]

"I would generalize the question, because the generalization applies broadly - whatever we profess to value, whatever we believe we value, why aren't we expending more time and energy actually creating that value?"

Okay I'll bite.

Comment author: Brillyant 01 September 2015 04:25:34AM 1 point [-]

The "programmed" bit is where I see a problem. It's humans' ability to think and reason outside the replicator-level lizard brain urges that makes immortality problematic. We are able to recognize the fight to live, live to fight cycle of life.

I don't think life in general is that different from any specific "good" thing—given enough time, the novelty will wear off.

The option of immortality seems okay. Though it seems a bit arbitrary whether someone lives to 80 or 800 or 80 million. The more life = more utilons math never makes sense to me.

I've always thought it was interesting to think what you would actually do with eternity... You could have kids...like 1,000 kids. And fall in love every week. And win Nobel Prizes in everything. And travel to the edge of the Universe. Or create your own Universe and be the God of it. Etc. Etc. There might be thousands of years of novelty in that. Maybe millions. But the returns are diminishing. Just think of all the amazing stuff we completely ignore and are bored with already.

Comment author: JEB_4_PREZ_2016 01 September 2015 10:23:48PM 0 points [-]

I've always thought it was interesting to think what you would actually do with eternity... You could have kids...like 1,000 >kids. And fall in love every week. And win Nobel Prizes in everything. And travel to the edge of the Universe. Or create >your own Universe and be the God of it. Etc. Etc. There might be thousands of years of novelty in that. Maybe millions. >But the returns are diminishing. Just think of all the amazing stuff we completely ignore and are bored with already.

I understand that boredom is an issue for many people, but I never really get bored so it's difficult for me to relate. 1,000 years of various things like the ones you mention seems like it would be a lot of fun to me.

Comment author: ChristianKl 01 September 2015 09:51:55PM 1 point [-]

An example where it does not: a high-roller in a Vegas casino orders half a dozen hookers to his room.

How many of the people who engage in that behavior do you think would like it if it would be public knowledge? In many cases I don't think that those high-rollers want publicity for the action which suggests that their general status doesn't benefit from it.

Comment author: JEB_4_PREZ_2016 01 September 2015 10:11:56PM -1 points [-]

If a dude's ordering half a dozen hookers to his room, he doesn't mind publicity for it.

Comment author: Lumifer 27 August 2015 03:26:51PM 0 points [-]

I would probably say that some very old people are ready to die. I wouldn't call it "wanting to die", it's not an active desire, but I also wouldn't call it "apathetic" because it's more than just not caring.

Comment author: JEB_4_PREZ_2016 28 August 2015 01:20:41AM *  0 points [-]

The question is, how much of this sentiment among the elderly is based on it being improbable that there will be affordable replacement organs or other "anti-aging" technologies in their lifetimes?

Some of us 20-somethings are trying to decide whether to (A) go into YOLO mode or (B) sacrifice utility for the next 60 years in order to maximize expected utility for the next 1,000.

View more: Next