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

Writing Style Guide

-4 b1shop 11 February 2015 07:14PM

Write like a freight train.

Try to remove “that,” “had” or any of its derivatives. “You’ll find that you can often live without them.” vs. “You’ll find you can often live without them.”

Actually, remove every word you can. You can live without them.

When possible, place adjectives and adverbs before the words they modify. Be on a continuing mission to boldly split infinitives which have never been split before.

A colorful word is better than a colored word. When possible, replace adjectives with meaningful nouns and adverbs with meaningful verbs. “It a big mess.” vs. “It’s a debacle.” “Fournette ran hard through the line.” vs. “Fournette muscled through the line.”

Deliberately use adverbs. Long, descriptive, meaningful chains of modifiers can subtly and delightfully overwhelm the reader’s working memory. If you want your readers to process with abundant attention, dutifully remove adverbs. If you want your readers to be gleefully hypnotized, happily unpack your favorite adjectives and adverbs.

continue reading »
Comment author: b1shop 05 August 2014 02:41:01PM *  2 points [-]

Statistical point: the variance of forecast error for correctly specified simple regression problems is equal to:

Sigma^2(1 + 1/N + (x_o - x_mean)^2 / (Sigma ( x_i - x_mean) ^2))

So forecast error increases as x_o moves away from x_mean, especially when the variance of x is low by comparison.

Edit: Sub notation was apparently indenting things. I'm going to take a picture from my stats book tonight. Should be more readable.

Edit: Here's a more readable link. http://i.imgur.com/pu8lg0Wh.jpg

Comment author: b1shop 17 June 2014 01:14:34PM 0 points [-]

"Instead, every time you arrive at a decision point, evaluate what action to take by checking the utility of your constituents from each action. I propose that we call this "delta utilitarianism", because it isn't looking at the total or the average, just at the delta in utility from each action."

Perhaps we could call it "marginal utility."

In response to Meetup : Houston, TX
Comment author: b1shop 20 May 2014 06:21:07PM *  1 point [-]

All, Isaac_Davis, dvasya and myself had a pleasant chat at Ikea. Looking forward to the next meetup. Hopefully we'll have enough people next time to play paranoid debating.

In response to Meetup : Houston, TX
Comment author: dvasya 07 May 2014 04:05:03AM *  0 points [-]

So how did it go?

Comment author: b1shop 07 May 2014 01:17:59PM 1 point [-]

Unless I'm missing something, it hasn't occurred yet.

In response to Meetup : Houston, TX
Comment author: b1shop 06 May 2014 04:55:22AM 0 points [-]

I'll likely be there. Looking forward to it.

In response to comment by b1shop on Tell Culture
Comment author: Creutzer 21 January 2014 09:38:33PM 1 point [-]

If there are multiple equilibria, you should expect to see all of them in different cultures. The apparent tendency for general Guessiness is then left unexplained.

In response to comment by Creutzer on Tell Culture
Comment author: b1shop 21 January 2014 10:50:37PM 2 points [-]

I'm not sure that's true. From the original LW post on ask vs. guess:

Apparently East Asia is more "guess-based" than the US.

I've also heard that Russia is more ask-based, and the U.S. is somewhere in the middle with stereotypical differences between urban and rural environments.

In response to Tell Culture
Comment author: b1shop 21 January 2014 02:56:54PM *  3 points [-]

A lot of the comments are ignoring the fact that this game has multiple equilibria. Saying "humans evolved into X, so therefore there must be a logic to X" makes as much sense as saying "Americans drive on the right side of the road, so therefore there must be a logic to using the right side of the road."

Also, when traveling outside the monastery, our first priority should be to figure out how the other people drive.

In response to Tell Culture
Comment author: b1shop 21 January 2014 02:52:36PM 1 point [-]

If you’re occasionally dishonest and tell people you want things you don't actually care about--like their comfort or convenience--they’ll learn not to trust you, and the inherent freedom of the system will be lost.

Maybe I'm only thinking of trivial examples, but I haven't noticed this. If I have guests over at my house, of course I care about their convenience, as I want the social capital that comes with throwing a good party. I want my co-workers slaving at the same project as me to be comfortable as it will make them more productive. There are tons of truly selfish reasons to be superficially selfless, and I don't think most have an aversion to superficial selflessness.

Perhaps a major exception should be made for early-stage romantic interactions.

Comment author: Gunnar_Zarncke 25 November 2013 08:24:58AM -1 points [-]

Gung vf cerpvfryl gur ernfba jul guvf xvaq xvaq bs ernfbavat qbrfa'g jbex. Unira'g lbh ernq hc ba gur cevfbaref qvyrzn? Be qb lbh vzcyl gung YJref jvyy zber yvxryl pbbcrengr guna abg. Gung znl or pbeerpg - ohg bayl vs lbh pubbfr cebonovyvfgvpnyyl. Gur engvbany nccebnpu urer vf gb ebyy n qvr naq qrsrpg jvgu $c= 25%-rcfvyba$ (rcfvyba orvat n ohssre sbe gubfr abg fzneg rabhtu). Gung jvyy znkvzvmr birenyy cre crefba.

Comment author: b1shop 08 December 2013 05:41:36PM 0 points [-]

Thanks for picking cooperate.

View more: Next