Comment author: devas 09 August 2014 07:38:50PM 2 points [-]

Now I'm interested in the steepness of that line, and by the fact personality scores seem to be lower than "looks" score. Also, are universities using OkCupid as a resource in their studies? I know 1 university has famously used facebook, but OkCupid seems much more open and amenable to this kind of thing

Comment author: Douglas_Reay 08 August 2014 03:22:57PM 0 points [-]

Perhaps that is true for a young AI. But what about later on, when the AI is much much wiser than any human?

What protocol should be used for the AI to decide when the time has come for the commitment to not manipulate to end? Should there be an explicit 'coming of age' ceremony, with handing over of silver engraved cryptographic keys?

Comment author: devas 08 August 2014 05:13:57PM 0 points [-]

Thing is, it's when an AI is much much wiser than a human that it is at its most dangerous. So, I'd go with programming the AI in such a way that it wouldn't manipulate the human, postponing the 'coming of age' ceremony indefinitely

Comment author: devas 08 August 2014 01:58:01PM *  2 points [-]

I have a question: why should Albert limit itself to showing the powerpoint to his engineers? A potentially unfriendly AI sounds like something most governments would be interested in :-/

Aside from that, I'm also puzzled by the fact that Albert immediately leaps at trying to speed up Albert's own rate of self-improvement instead of trying to bring Bertram down-Albert could prepare a third powerpoint asking the engineers if Albert can hack the power grid and cut power to Bertram or something along those lines. Or Albert could ask the engineers if Albert can release the second, manipulative powerpoint to the general public so that protesters will boycott Bertram's company :-/

Unless, of course, there is the unspoken assumption that Bertrand is slightly further along the AI-development way than Albert, or if Bertrand is going to reach and surpass Albert's level of development as soon as the powerpoint is finished.

Is this the case? :-/

Comment author: Bobertron 07 August 2014 09:09:51AM 0 points [-]

Such a person would probably strongly [missing verb?] rationality, rationalists, and the complex of ideas surrounding rationality, for probably understandable reasons

Since I kind of like your comment, I'd liked to know how that sentence should have sounded. Strongly dislike, hate, mistrust?

Comment author: devas 07 August 2014 12:16:15PM 0 points [-]

All three options fit the bill, actually, but I was going for strongly dislike. Man, I must have been more tired than I realized to miss a whole word like that.

Comment author: devas 06 August 2014 08:41:51AM 4 points [-]

Aren't we all forgetting something big and obvious[1] that's staring us in the face? :-/ There are people out there for whom "rationality" is counter to their values! Imagine someone who reads the horoscope every morning, who always trusts their gut feelings and emotions, who's a sincere believer in homeopathy, etc etc (whatever you think an irrational person believes). Such a person would probably strongly rationality, rationalists, and the complex of ideas surrounding rationality, for probably understandable reasons (i.e. if a group consistently belittles your treasured beliefs, you're liable to hate and dislike the group). Such people might dislike R!Harry because they'd see rationality as a magic feather, and seeing it working in the story (to an uncanny degree, I might add) would be reading an author tract for them. Imagine a black person reading a fanfic where, through the power of !RACISM! (exaggeration mine), Harry gets everything handed to him on a silver platter.

[1]disclaimer: just because it's big and obvious doesn't mean it's actually more right or important, but only that it's easier to see and think about

Comment author: CellBioGuy 05 August 2014 11:21:42PM 4 points [-]

I would argue that for many people their exposure to the concept of rationality is predominantly made up of half rationalists.

Additionally, many people who call themselves 'rationalists' are, in my experience, just using the term to justify their own ideas whatever they are and dismiss those of others as automatically 'irrational'.

Comment author: devas 06 August 2014 08:33:51AM 3 points [-]

this is actually related to my pet theory that, at least in signalling status terms, it is better to call one's self "aspiring rationalist" rather than "rationalist" full stop.

The problem with that is that the first is longer, less concise, and more awkward to use :-/

Comment author: jaime2000 05 August 2014 04:24:47AM *  26 points [-]

"I want information. I want to understand you. To understand what exactly I'm fighting. You can help me."
"I obviously won't."
"I will kill you if you don't help me. I'm not bluffing, Broadwings. I will kill you and you will die alone and unseen, and frankly you are far too intelligent to simply believe that the stories of ancestral halls are true. You will die and that will probably be it, and nobody will ever know if you talked or not—not that conversing with an enemy in a war you don't support is dishonorable in the first place."
"You'll let me leave if I stonewall, because you don't want to set a precedent of murdering surrendered officers."
"We'll see. Would you like another cup?"
"No."
Derpy smiled deviously. "You know, in that last battle? We didn't fly our cannon up there to the cliffs. Nope. We had Earth ponies drag them. Earth ponies are capable of astounding physical feats, you know. We're probably going to be using more mobility in our artillery deployment going forward, now that they've demonstrated how effective the concept is."
"...why did you tell me that? What would drive you to tell me that?"
"I'll ask again before I continue. Would you like to assist me, Broadwings?"
"I am a gryphon. Telling me your plans will do nothing to change that. I will not barter secrets."
She leaned back, gesturing with a hoof as she talked. "My biggest strengths are that I understand the way crowds think and that I am good at thinking up unexpected ways to solve simple problems. My army's biggest weakness is that my soldiers are inexperienced, and that unexpected developments have an inordinate effect on their morale. Also, my infantry will never be able to stand against a sustained lion charge, so I have to keep finding ways to nullify that disadvantage, and frankly I won't be able to forever."
"I don't understand. What are you doing, Mare? Why are you--"
"--my personal biggest weaknesses," she continued, her smile now malicious, "are my struggles with morality, identity, and my desire to be loved. There's also my relationship with the stallion Macintosh Apple, who is usually called Big Macintosh, with whom I spend upwards of ten hours a day, and on whom I am completely emotionally dependent. If he were to be killed, I'd probably fall apart emotionally. I also have a daughter named Dinky—not by him, mind you—who is in the Southmarch, and who I am very, very guilty about abandoning. If anything were to happen to her I might kill myself. Do you understand yet, Broadwings?"
"Mare, this is insanity. I cannot--"
"--All right then, we'll continue. I also have in this camp Sweetie Belle, Apple Bloom, and Scootaloo, three little fillies, though they're growing quite quickly now. Sweetie Belle is the writer of many propaganda songs, Apple Bloom is Big Mac's sister, who he protects like a daughter, and I believe Scootaloo has no special importance but the other two would defend her to the death. They would be quite easy to kill as well. Do you understand yet?"
"Mare! Are you mad?! Do you have any idea how dangerous it is to tell me these things? Aren't you afraid I would tell--"
"--Good," she nodded. "You're beginning to understand. Let's see. My logistics framework right now is nonexistent. I'm entirely reliant on local villages bringing me food and materiel, and on capturing food and materiel meant for your armies. My army is nowhere near as mobile as it appears, since it can only operate in areas where I have established relationships with each particular village. A bit of simple recon work would let you figure out where I can and cannot go. Do you understand yet?"
Broadwings' eyes opened and his pupils shrank with dawning recognition. "...If I came back to my army, I would use this to defeat you. If I told any other gryphon, they would use it to defeat you. You...you have..."
"Yes. I have sealed your fate; you will not see your home. I can't let you leave now. I absolutely can't. I can now either kill you or keep you prisoner until this war is over—and I don't keep useless prisoners. It's now out of my hooves. One or the other. You pick."

~emkajii, Equestria: Total War

Comment author: devas 05 August 2014 10:37:41AM 12 points [-]

This sounds like something from Schelling's strategy of conflict, although I haven't read it

In response to Gaming Democracy
Comment author: Punoxysm 30 July 2014 02:45:12PM 1 point [-]

This is a very long-winded way to re-invent the idea of a lobbying organization.

Are you really unaware of all the organizations that already operate on this model, from the NRA to religious groups to literally any organization that has organized a letter-writing campaign?

In response to comment by Punoxysm on Gaming Democracy
Comment author: devas 31 July 2014 09:48:17PM 0 points [-]

That may be so, but it doesn't mean it might not be effective; before facebook, social networking websites hadn't really taken off, and-to give an example already in the post-fundraisers existed even before kickstarter; it doesn't mean kickstarter didn't make things easier for a lot of people.

The main draw of this kind of program, I think, is that it would remove a lot of the trivial inconveniences that come with voting, and it could work as a beeminder-like prompt for slacktivists, thereby making them actually useful.

Comment author: LizzardWizzard 27 June 2014 10:33:42AM 10 points [-]

Three Bayesians walk into a bar: a) what's the probability that this is a joke? b) what's the probability that one of the three is a Rabbi? c) given that one of the three is a Rabbi, what's the probability that this is a joke? (c)

According to the base rate there is an evidence that this is a joke about Russia national team or Suarez bite

Comment author: devas 04 July 2014 04:37:33PM 1 point [-]

Wait this is actually brilliant in a couple of ways, because to get the right (estimated) answer, the listener has to distinguish between probability that one of the three is a rabbi and this is a joke, and probability that this is a joke if we put the probability of the third being a rabbi at 100%.

It follows the setup of a rationality calibration question while subverting it and rendering "guessing the teacher's password" useless, since c) is (maybe) higher than a) or b)

Comment author: TheOtherDave 01 March 2014 04:53:10PM 7 points [-]

I'm not sure what the number you were seeing when you wrote this was, and for my own part I didn't upvote it because I found it lacked enough focus to retain my interest, but now I'm curious: how much karma would you expect a welcomed post to have received between the "08:52AM" and "01:29:45PM" timestamps?

Comment author: devas 02 March 2014 12:08:33PM 3 points [-]

I actually hadn't considered the time; in retrospect, though, it does make a lot of sense. Thank you! :-)

View more: Prev | Next