Comment author: Will_Newsome 05 May 2013 11:54:03PM *  6 points [-]

I/E is obviously a thing. S/N has big correlations with g so it's obviously tracking something. F/T is perhaps less obvious statistically(?) but introspectively and anecdotally-observationally still pretty clear, and P/J is the most questionable and confusing part of MBTI so I won't defend it. Hypotheses and conceptual frameworks shouldn't be pet causes.

Comment author: Sarokrae 06 May 2013 12:25:34AM *  3 points [-]

Data: Wikipedia claims E/I is very correlated with E, S/N is very correlated with O, F/T fairly correlated with A, J/P fairly correlated with C and somewhat correlated with O, and Neuroticism isn't measured in MBTI. So this backs up your claim that P/J doesn't measure any concrete "thing".

Clicking through the citation gives that N is not well-correlated with anything in men (a tiny bit with E/I), and somewhat correlated with the F/T in women. Also F/T has a small effect on extraversion in men, but it's S/N and J/P which has the effect on women.

Comment author: Manfred 05 May 2013 08:18:18AM 5 points [-]

My current top-of-the-head list.

Exercise is good, sitting is bad, moderate consumption of alcohol is probably good, smoking is bad, fresh vegetables are good, refined sugar is bad, family and friends are good, stress and disrupted sleep are bad. You may have noticed a trend, which is that all of these (except for the alcohol one, maybe) , are thoroughly mainstream. If this trend represents the state of research, I'd suggest a national public health agency's website for the really good interventions.

Comment author: Sarokrae 05 May 2013 09:32:23PM *  2 points [-]

Also on the "mainstream/obvious list":

Being obese is bad. Being overweight probably bad. Being underweight is probably also bad. Vitamin D good. Getting enough micronutrients in general good. Excessive red meat consumption probably bad. Excessive processed meat consumption bad. Laughter good.

(That's all I can think of off the top of my head that's not yet been mentioned.)

Edit: Oh! Forgot one. Sunburn bad.

Comment author: jaibot 05 May 2013 08:11:37PM *  7 points [-]

Understanding other girls is hard.

Understanding people is hard.

Comment author: Sarokrae 05 May 2013 08:18:02PM 20 points [-]

The post does seem to imply that she finds understanding men easier.

Comment author: DaFranker 29 April 2013 02:34:52PM 3 points [-]

If that's how you actually say it, I'd be a little concerned about how you were coming across.

Replace Viliam_Bur with a pretty girl. Are you still concerned about how she's coming across? What if it's two people of the same gender? What if one of them is secretly attracted to the other but pretends to be a friend, yet the other knows about said supposedly secret attraction?

I think you were assuming a certain context and tone and approach that have been more closely associated with that phrasing in your personal experience, perhaps without realizing it.

Comment author: Sarokrae 29 April 2013 03:52:37PM 3 points [-]

Good point. I checked by visualising a selection of people in my head asking this, male and female, with various characteristics. I had the same reaction to about equal numbers of men and women. Usually some something along the lines of "erm, can we add each other on facebook first?"

...Then again, I'm probably just particularly not-keen on giving people my phone number, and as such was reading the situation exclusively in terms of "which way of asking makes the certainty of me saying "no" less awkward?"

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 28 April 2013 10:09:51PM 11 points [-]

In a situation like this I usually say something like "let's exchange our phone numbers".

Comment author: Sarokrae 28 April 2013 11:57:10PM 4 points [-]

If that's how you actually say it, I'd be a little concerned about how you were coming across. "Let's exchange our phone numbers" doesn't lend itself to a polite "no" in the same way as, say, "Do you want to exchange phone numbers?"

Comment author: Sarokrae 24 April 2013 03:39:45PM 8 points [-]

and by an elementary reasoning known in physics as "dimensional analysis", dividing a number of issues by another number of issues cannot give us an ROI

This is just being nit-picky, but from a dimensional analysis point of view, both "dollars per dollar" and "issues per issue" are dimensionless figures, and are thus in fact the same dimension.

Comment author: bogus 13 April 2013 06:06:30PM 2 points [-]

Also caused by Autonomous sensory meridian response which is ironically linked to non-threatening behaviour and altruistic, caring attention. (It can also be linked to deep emotional arousal, such as when listening to engaging music.) Identifying this reflex with "unwanted sexual arousal" is simplistic to the point of being just wrong.

Comment author: Sarokrae 20 April 2013 11:06:08PM 2 points [-]

Didn't see this reply as it wasn't directly to one of my posts, but I would like to reassure anyone reading that I can tell the difference between "skin crawling" and "scalp tingling", and no they are not the same thing at all.

Comment author: Sarokrae 16 April 2013 05:38:15PM *  0 points [-]

Some of my recent forays into reinforcement learning have been very helpful. I should point out that my life is made a whole lot easier by having a very co-operative OH who is willing to reward me or withhold reward as appropriate, so I've not needed to resort to building a robot!

Things that have been successful:

  • Every time I think about {thing I enjoy obsessing about}, I go and do the washing up. I used to have a massive ugh field around washing up, but this has quickly diminished (within days!) via association with the nice thoughts. We're thinking of applying this method to other things I have ugh fields around, since it was so quick and effective.
  • I've been doing a similar thing to D_Malik with regards to Anki cards. However, it was impractical for me to withhold a reward I would be having on a daily basis, so my OH is implementing "withhold {nice thing} unless I have reviewed my Anki cards for the previous 5 days". It's not as immediate as not eating, but seems to be sufficiently encouraging thus far.

But yeah, having a person help me do it means I avoid any sort of precommitment failure, and generally makes things much easier!

(Side note: Curly brackets clearly denote euphemisms, but I didn't want to be too crude.)

In response to comment by [deleted] on Solved Problems Repository
Comment author: [deleted] 28 March 2013 07:35:25PM 3 points [-]

IME (YMMV)

That's basically the point.

The Hacker's Diet

Places way too much focus on losing weight. See parent; losing weight by losing muscle mass isn't desirable.

Second-order effects exist, but they're second-order effects.

Your claim here hinges on the presumption that CI and CO are the only first-order effects, which is almost certainly false. Age, body fat proportion, maximal oxygen uptake, etc., are plausible candidates that I've seen in mathematical weight models.

In response to comment by [deleted] on Solved Problems Repository
Comment author: Sarokrae 12 April 2013 11:36:18PM 1 point [-]

Age, body fat proportion, maximal oxygen uptake...

In my experience, these tend to be taken into effect when calculating the "calories out" part of the equation. By what mechanism were you thinking that these mattered, that's not "calories out"?

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 12 April 2013 02:06:31PM 2 points [-]

That's very interesting. Did you turn up anything else that surprised you? After you found that "skin crawling" was unwanted sexual arousal, did that affect your ideas and/or behavior?

Comment author: Sarokrae 12 April 2013 03:41:29PM 4 points [-]

Well this is in the context of a long period of introspection on the theme of "When it comes to moral considerations, how much is my system 1 me?" The conclusion is "not very", which is one of the things I changed my mind about fairly recently. (If instinct wants to sleep with someone but reason doesn't, it is preferable for me to not sleep with them. This probably doesn't sound like a surprising conclusion, but I was confused for a long time.)

This observation was basically consistent with the way my ideas were developing, since I developed those ideas concurrently to developing luminosity. I'm afraid I can't tell the direction of causation between the two things, or whether there is any.

View more: Prev | Next