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

Comment author: Mitchell_Porter 19 October 2017 09:31:45PM 3 points [-]

A voice tells me that we're out of time. The future of the world will now be decided at Deep Mind, or by some other group at their level.

Comment author: Kawoomba 22 October 2017 09:15:10AM 0 points [-]

... and there is only one choice I'd expect them to make, in other words, no actual decision at all.

Comment author: Lumifer 03 May 2017 03:45:43PM 2 points [-]

That's... pretty bad.

If this were my introduction to LW, I'd snort and go away. Or maybe stop to troll for a bit -- this intro is soooo easy to make fun of.

I'd recommend to nuke this text from orbit and start anew.

Comment author: Kawoomba 03 May 2017 08:42:41PM 2 points [-]

If this were my introduction to LW, I'd snort and go away. Or maybe stop to troll for a bit -- this intro is soooo easy to make fun of.

Well, glad you didn't choose the first option, then.

Comment author: Kawoomba 09 December 2016 05:05:40PM 0 points [-]

The catch-22 I would expect with CFAR's efforts is that anyone buying their services is already demonstrating a willingness to actually improve his/her rationality/epistemology, and is looking for effective tools to do so.

The bottleneck, however, is probably not the unavailability of such tools, but rather the introspectivity (or lack thereof) that results in a desire to actually pursue change, rather than simply virtue-signal the typical "I always try to learn from my mistakes and improve my thinking".

The latter mindset is the one most urgently needing actual improvements, but its bearers won't flock to CFAR unless it has gained acceptance as an institution with which you can virtue-signal (which can confer status). While some universities manage to walk that line (providing status affirmation while actually conferring knowledge), CFAR's mode of operation would optimally entail "virtue-signalling ML students in on one side", "rationality-improved ML students out on the other side", which is a hard sell, since signalling an improvement in rationality will always be cheaper than the real thing (as it is quite non-obvious to tell the difference for the uninitiated).

What remains is helping those who have already taken that most important step of effective self-reflection and are looking for further improvement. A laudable service to the community, but probably far from changing general attitudes in the field.

Taking off the black hat, I don't have a solution to this perceived conundrum.

Comment author: Lumifer 19 April 2016 06:05:16PM 5 points [-]

Thanks for the feedback about other InIn participants.

Sigh. They are not InIn participants. They are people you pay to "manage" social media and they are bungling the job in a rather spectacular fashion.

Call them off.

Comment author: Kawoomba 19 April 2016 08:24:45PM 3 points [-]

The scarier thought is how often we're manipulated that way when people don't bungle their jobs. The few heuristics we use to identify such mischief are trivially misled (for example, establishing plausibility by posting on inconsequential other topics (at least on LW that incurs a measurable cognitive footprint, which is however not the case on, say, Reddit), and then there's always Poe's law to consider). Shills man, shills everywhere!

As they dictum goes, just cuz you're paranoid ...

Reminds me of Ernest Hemingway's apparent paranoid delusions of being under FBI surveillance ... only eventually it turned out he actually was. Well, at least if my family keep playing their roles well enough, from a functional blackbox perspective the distinction may not matter that much anyways. I wonder how they got the children to be such good actors, though. Mind chip implants?

As an aside, it's kind of curious that Prof. Tsipursky does his, let's say "social engineering", under his real name.

Anyways, good entertainment. Though on this forum, it's more of a guilty pleasure (drama is but a weed in our garth of rationality).

Comment author: Kawoomba 14 March 2016 07:54:24PM 2 points [-]

Disclaimer: Only spent 20 minutes on this, so it might be incomplete, or you may already have addressed some of the following points:

At first glance, John Lowe authored 2 pubmed-listed papers on the topic.

The first of which in an open journal with no peer review (Med. Hypotheses) which has also published stuff on e.g. AIDS denialism. From his paper: "We propose that molecular biological methods can provide confirmatory or contradictory evidence of a genetic basis of euthyroid FS [Fibromyalgia Syndrome]." That's it. Proposing a hypothesis, not providing experimental evidence, paper ends.

The second paper was published in a somewhat controversial low impact journal (at least peer-reviewed). However, this apparently one and only peer reviewed and published paper actually contradicts the expected results, Lowe pulls off a somewhat convoluted move to save his hypothesis:

"TSH, FT3, or FT4 did not correlate with RMR [Resting Metabolic Rate] values. For two reasons, however, ITHR [Inadequate Thyroid Hormone Regulation] cannot be ruled out as the mechanism of FM [Fibromyalgia] patients’ lower RMRs: (1) TSH, FT3 , and FT4 levels have not been shown to reliably correlate with RMR values, and (2) these tests evaluate only pituitary-thyroid axis function and cannot rule out central HO and PRTH."

Yea ...

In addition, lots of crank signs: Lowe's review from 2008, along with his other writings, is "published" in a made-up "journal" which still lists him (from beyond the grave, apparently) as the editor-in-chief.

No peer review, pretending to be an actual journal, a plethora of commercial sites citing him and his research ... honi soit qui mal y pense!

Comment author: CellBioGuy 09 March 2016 08:19:41AM *  5 points [-]

AlphaGo system won first game. Not a go player, but the commentary I've seen suggests it was quite close until the very end.

Hypothesis 1: The cluster plays to maximize odds of a win, not magnitude of a win, and is exploiting a class of close wins that humans have a hard time with. Expect sweeping near wins.

Hypothesis 2: The cluster and the champion are indeed evenly matched. Expect wins and losses. May imply that the game saturates at high levels of analysis, and that there is no such thing as a 'superhuman' go player because the best humans hit the point of diminishing returns.

*EDIT: evidence accumulating in favor of #1.

*EDIT2: final results suggest something between the two.

Comment author: Kawoomba 09 March 2016 10:09:06AM 0 points [-]

I wonder if / how that win will affect estimates on the advent of AGI within the AI community.

Comment author: Lumifer 12 November 2015 10:33:02PM 1 point [-]

Please don't spam the same comment to different threads.

Comment author: Kawoomba 15 November 2015 08:56:01PM 1 point [-]

Please don't spam the same comment to different threads.

Comment author: Lumifer 05 October 2015 03:16:32PM 4 points [-]

That seems extremely dangerous.

LOL. Word inflation strikes again with a force of a million atomic bombs! X-)

Are you really arguing for keeping ideologically incorrect people barefoot and pregnant, lest they harm themselves with any tools they might acquire?

Comment author: Kawoomba 05 October 2015 04:04:21PM 1 point [-]

Hey! Hey. He. Careful there, a propos word inflation. It strikes with a force of no more than one thousand atom bombs.

Are you really arguing for keeping ideologically incorrect people barefoot and pregnant, lest they harm themselves with any tools they might acquire?

Sounds as good a reason as any!

maybe we should shut down LW

I'm not sure how much it counts, but I bet Chief Ramsay would've shut it down long ago. Betting is good, I've learned.

Comment author: Kawoomba 04 October 2015 05:18:59PM 1 point [-]

As seen in the first episode series Caprica, quoth Zoe Graystone:

"(...) the information being held in our heads is available in other databases. People leave more than footprints as they travel through life; medical scans, dna profiles, psych evaluations, school records, emails, recording, video, audio, cat scans, genetic typing, synaptic records, security cameras, test results, shopping records, talent shows, ball games, traffic tickets, restaurant bills, phone records, music lists, movie tickets, tv shows... even prescriptions for birth control."

I, for one, think that the meme-mix defining our identity in itself could capture (predict) our behavior in large parts, foregoing biographical minutiae. Bonesaw in Worm didn't need precise memories to recreate the Slaughterhouse Nine clones.

Many think we can zoom out from atoms to a connectome, why not zoom out from a connectome to the memes it implements?

Comment author: Inyuki 28 September 2015 05:20:36PM *  0 points [-]

I did try to look. My browser said "Secure Connection Failed".

Ha:) Is that because we use self-signed SSL cert? Try again. We'll upgrade cert later.

So, all of hyper-equity can be controlled by 1,000 - 10,000 people?

No, as many people as there are problems (Goals). Potentially infinite.

Comment author: Kawoomba 28 September 2015 08:16:48PM 2 points [-]

If you're looking for gullible recruits, you've come to the wrong place.

Don't lease the Ferrari just yet.

View more: Next