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

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 01 March 2017 10:54:59PM 0 points [-]

Online Videos Thread

Comment author: MaryCh 26 March 2017 05:47:30PM *  0 points [-]

A New Year Song about the Hirsch Index, on the joy of reciprocal citing (funnier if you know Russian, but should be clear enough even if you don't. Unfortunately, no subtitles. Ends with 'Happy New Year! Happy New Hirsch! I'm off to write an article.')

Comment author: Lumifer 24 March 2017 03:25:34PM 0 points [-]

seems to me that many revolutions are caused not by consistent suffering

The issue is not the level of suffering, the issue is what do you have to lose. What's the downside to burning the whole system to the ground? If not much, well, why not?

That is when people explode

Middle class doesn't explode. Arguably that's the reason why revolutions (and popular uprisings) in the West have become much more rare than, say, a couple of hundred years ago.

Comment author: MaryCh 24 March 2017 04:43:47PM 0 points [-]

(Yes it does.)

Comment author: Oscar_Cunningham 15 March 2017 02:35:50PM 0 points [-]

They had two conflicting vaues and made a choice, but I would hope that the groom still support her goals within constraints, like "Thank you for agreeing to stay in Crimea with me, lets plan together how you can achieve success while staying here."

Comment author: MaryCh 15 March 2017 02:51:50PM 0 points [-]

From what I heard of him he's wonderful and probably does that:)

Comment author: MaryCh 15 March 2017 02:50:47PM 0 points [-]

...and since there is apparently such a thing as algicolous fungi, leaving on and in (maybe only marine) algae, and not always causing detectable disease;

we now have a situation where A&B (lichen) is more than A&B (algicolous fungi living on algae) in most cases, and the reverse is true for some special cases (like water content).

I get that A&B can be more than A+B, but I don't think we can get away with having the same thing be A&B or A+B whenever we feel like it and still be doing science.

Comment author: Oscar_Cunningham 14 March 2017 10:19:30PM 0 points [-]

Obviously a husband who supports your goals is better than one that doesn't. But if your potential husband doesn't support your goals then they must not value your happiness and fulfilment, in which case your relationship has already failed. There's no possible potential husband who it's a good idea to marry except for the single factor that they don't support your goals. Such a person can't exist. So it's just not a useful decision criterion to ask whether they support your goals; there are other criteria which are strictly better.

Comment author: MaryCh 15 March 2017 11:57:36AM 0 points [-]

I think I understood the place, and I almost agree with you, but

There's no possible potential husband who it's a good idea to marry except for the single factor that they don't support your goals. Such a person can't exist.

I think it happens. I know a person in Crimea who wanted to live and work according to her specialty in Ukraine, but her groom did not want to leave his (and hers) homeland, the Crimea, and they married and live there. If there are people who decided to marry, and (hypothetical, but I think probable) people who decided not to, doesn't it show that some of them decided 'not sharing my goals' is enough of a reason?

[stub] Soliciting help for experimental design

4 MaryCh 15 March 2017 11:49AM

TL;DR: I ask for help, either entirely theoretical or more concrete, with design of a quick-and dirty independent survey. In particular, I need to know how to estimate the sample size, number of questions and some other things. I expect to see an effect, but 1) a small one, 2) there are going to be undercurrents & sources of heterogeneity that I cannot right now predict, 3) the whole business is money-constrained, and 4) the relevant (professional) people here have too much skin in the game.

In case this appears too involved for you, please regard it as a purely armchair exercise. Examples of such things done elsewhere are also much appreciated.

continue reading »
Comment author: username2 15 March 2017 08:29:58AM 1 point [-]

I mean, why would I not want a man who agreed to this? It seems so obvious.

Why? Genuine question because no, it is not obvious to me.

Comment author: MaryCh 15 March 2017 11:15:28AM 0 points [-]

Because I have (I think) low leves of carnal desires, and a desire for external validation of my cleverness and justness. And I certainly don't want a marriage with a man who cannot respect me.

Comment author: MaryCh 14 March 2017 08:02:17PM *  2 points [-]

I'm reading The Last Psychiatrist's 'Don't hate her because she's successful' and having trouble with:

'No, she just means when you get married, to pick someone who supports your goals."  In other words, a business relationship?  Arranged marriage, only this time by Match.com's algorithm?  "No, a marriage based not on passion but on mutual respect and shared values--" Stop, listen to what you are saying.  Why would you want a man who agreed to this?  Why would a man want a woman who thought like this?'

I mean, why would I not want a man who agreed to this? It seems so obvious.

Edit - I am speaking as a woman of low lust levels (I think - at least some of my friends seem to have higher lll), so I don't value 'passion' highly (either that, or I misread 'passion' and it includes something of what I would classify as 'shared values' - it is also possible.)

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 01 March 2017 10:54:51PM 0 points [-]

Nonfiction Books Thread

Comment author: MaryCh 10 March 2017 09:54:53AM *  0 points [-]

Robert Dick, baker of Thurso, geologist and botanist (the Internet Archive page). Abouth the book:

'This man, a baker who started work around 3 am would set off around 7 am and walked fantastic distances to see a small fern before returning home in time to start work again at 3 am. In another letter he says: 'I got home around 3 am Wednesday morning having walked with little halt, for about twenty four hours' - T. Munyard, 'Pteridologist' v. 4 (2), 2003. p. 41

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 01 March 2017 10:55:04PM 0 points [-]

Short Online Texts Thread

Comment author: MaryCh 10 March 2017 09:19:42AM 0 points [-]

In this issue of ' Pteridologist' (pdf warning), there are two short communications (pp. 12-15) on the difficulties of identifying British species of Dryopteris (male ferns) and Polypodium, with a note on the inconstancy of morphological features of plants in the field. (I mean, okay, some species hybridize, but what the heck does it mean when a probably hybride plant has a frond or two looking just like one of the parents? somatical mutations?..)

'Pteridologist' as a whole is a 'nice' magazine - easy language, cultural/biogeographical/anatomical forkfuls, lots of photoes. Enjoy!

View more: Next