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

Comment author: dropspindle 06 May 2017 02:56:31PM 0 points [-]

It doesn't seem like there's been any discussion on caloric restriction or intermittent fasting since 2014, and even then it didn't seem like any consensus was achieved. Have there been any more studies in the intervening years? Has anyone else started or stopped or failed or whatnot?

Here's Gwern's write up: https://www.gwern.net/intermittent-fasting

(I just noticed that their post was modified in May 2017, so SOMETHING new must have happened...)

Comment author: michaelkeenan 29 April 2017 06:44:41PM 1 point [-]

All the handymen I know are extremely intelligent

This is google-able - I found this chart. It's probably imperfect, but from a brief glance at the source I'd trust it more than anecdote or my own experience.

Comment author: dropspindle 30 April 2017 01:29:32PM 0 points [-]

Even in your chart, the top 25% of janitors (the lowest IQ occupation) are smarter than the bottom 25% of college professors (the second highest IQ occupation). IQ ranges within an occupation are MUCH bigger than IQ ranges between occupations.

Comment author: gilch 29 April 2017 01:39:52AM *  2 points [-]

All it tells us is that our intuitions about the relative difficulty of specific problems were incorrect.

What it tells us is that the nervous system is doing a lot of processing subconsciously. The kind of cognition we're most aware of, the linguistic, step-by-step, system 2, frontal lobe stuff, is what we can program a computer to do by thinking through the steps and constraints. I think we need to be careful about using the word "difficulty" in this context. We figured out the system 2 stuff first not because it was easier, but because we knew more about it. The algorithms structuring the human brain are encoded in the genome, which is way simpler than the connectome it eventually builds. I don't expect building general intelligence to be particularly difficult. I expect figuring out how it works to be the hard part. The question isn't "How hard?", but "How obscure?".

we shouldn't expect all blue-collar jobs to be taken by robots before all white-color jobs.

That's not quite what I meant. But what a typical human considers difficult isn't aligned with what an AI programmer considers difficult to teach robots. They are separate axes, though there is probably some correlation. I wasn't suggesting a perfectly even distribution would magically emerge. We should expect some of both blue- and white-collar jobs to be lost to AI early on, and some of both to hold out for a long time, right up until the singularity.

but I think you imply that we won't need to worry about human jobs eventually only being available to a cognitive elite, where people who have lower cognitive ability find themselves unemployed and their jobs being automated out.

Oh we should be worried. Mass automation has already been disruptive. Those factory jobs are never coming back. But the disruption might not go the way you expect.

Yes, those with high IQs will be better able to retrain to do other high-IQ jobs. But that can take years! I agree that expecting low-IQ people to retrain for high-IQ jobs is not realistic. (Unless some kind of brain-computer interface is developed soon enough to change the playing field.)

But studies indicate a significant inverse correlation between g and conscientiousness. The kind of people you want for Turing-test-complete service, or intimate, in-home maid/handyman/nanny jobs are exactly the obedient, dutiful, vigilant, lower-IQ, blue-collar, conscientious-type people. Your so-called "cognitive elite" aren't that. The blue collar workers might actually be more flexible.

(Those who are both lower-IQ, and not conscientious don't make good employees even now. Robots are not going to make this problem go away.)

I'm honestly not sure which group will get hit hardest. But let's consider base rates. Are there more blue- or white-collar workers? Narrow AIs will probably have to be trained for each task. Is there more diversity of tasks in blue- or white-collar work?

Comment author: dropspindle 29 April 2017 01:12:29PM 2 points [-]

in-home maid/handyman/nanny jobs are exactly the obedient, dutiful, vigilant, lower-IQ, blue-collar, conscientious-type people.

Your stereotypes are both inaccurate and harmful. All the handymen I know are extremely intelligent. Electrical systems, plumbing systems, etc. are both complex and require reasoning to work with. A lot of fix-it stuff is a mix of puzzles, and figuring out how to do things on the fly.

I myself am a nanny (if you do a SAT to IQ conversion, my IQ is 144, which I am only saying because that seems to be of particular importance to you). Nannies tend to be of about average intelligence, and if I were to think of the most common trait it's that they were pioneering enough to either immigrate or leave their entire family behind to come to America to work.

Comment author: Ritalin 26 April 2017 01:08:39PM 2 points [-]

Why do you get up in the morning?

Comment author: dropspindle 27 April 2017 03:01:23AM 1 point [-]

I have four roomies and one bathroom.

I set my first alarm half an hour before I NEED to get up, which also happens to be right before anyone else gets up. If I get up with my first alarm (or within a minute or two), then I am very likely able to get the bathroom. (And if someone is already in there, I am guaranteed that they will be out before I need to leave.) I tell myself that if I get up and do everything I need to do in the morning besides getting dressed, I can go back to bed and turn off all my other alarms except for the one 5-10 minues before I have to leave.

If I don't get up with my first alarm, there's a possibility that I don't get to use the bathroom before I need to leave for work.

Ahh, the joys of NYC life.

Comment author: Alicorn 17 March 2017 01:46:56AM 21 points [-]

If you like this idea but have nothing much to say please comment under this comment so there can be a record of interested parties.

Comment author: dropspindle 17 March 2017 03:07:32AM 3 points [-]

I want this, but somewhere like Appalachia where land and such is insanely cheap and you can do some homesteading too

Comment author: lifelonglearner 22 January 2017 02:16:59AM 2 points [-]

I've been trying to learn programming (but not in a very disciplined / systematic fashion). Would you recommend the Odin Project? (Everyday Utilitarian recommended it, IIRC, but I was turned off by the cross-linking to different places.)

How goes your self-hacking? I've played around w/ it for math, and the results were pretty good (If we're talking about the generally same thing, that is.)

Comment author: dropspindle 22 January 2017 03:14:01AM 0 points [-]

The self-hacking is going pretty well, considering that I started out absolutely hating programming. A problem that arises is that I don't currently like it enough for it to be self-motivating just through personal enjoyment. I actually got a lot more accomplished when the motivation was "Do the thing that I hate (and learn to like it/ change my self-identity of hating it) so that I can get a better job (...Eventually. I like my current job, so no rush)." Now I like it well enough that the motivation is "Do that thing you like because you like it", but there's usually something else to do that I like better.

I've also done self-hacking for math and mathy subjects, but it was before I would have known of the term. It worked rather well!

Odin Project is more of a slog, but it seems like it will get you where you need to go. I had a lot more FUN on sites like Codewars, which was more useful for the self-hacking part.

Comment author: dropspindle 21 January 2017 11:22:54PM 1 point [-]

I've been:

1) Self-hacking into liking programming

2)Learning programming (primarily using Odin Project)

Comment author: calef 18 January 2017 05:53:26AM 4 points [-]

Hi Flinter (and welcome to LessWrong)

You've resorted to a certain argumentative style in some of your responses, and I wanted to point it out to you. Essentially, someone criticizes one of your posts, and your response is something like:

"Don't you understand how smart John Nash is? How could you possibly think your criticism is something that John Nash hadn't thought of already?"

The thing about ideas, notwithstanding the brilliance of those ideas or where they might have come from, is that communicating those ideas effectively is just as important as the idea itself. Even if Nash's Ideal Money scheme is the most important thing in the universe, if you can't communicate the idea effectively, and if you can't convincingly respond to criticism without hostility, no one will ever understand that idea but you.

A great modern example of this is Mochizuki's interuniversal Teichmuller theory, which he singlehandedly developed over the course of a decade in near complete isolation. It's an extremely technically dense new way of doing number theory that he claims resolves several outstanding conjectures in number theory (including the ABC Conjecture, among a couple others). And it's taken over four years for some very high profile mathematicians to start verifying that it's probably correct. This required workshops and hundreds of communications between Mochizuki and other mathematicians.

Point being: Progress is sociological as much as it is empirical. If you aren't able to effectively communicate the importance of an idea, it might be because the community at large is hostile to new ideas, even when represented in the best way possible. But if a community--a community which is, nominally, dedicated to rationally evaluating ideas--is unable to understand your representation, or see the importance of it, it might just be because you're bad at explaining it, the idea isn't all that great, or both.

Comment author: dropspindle 18 January 2017 06:29:25PM 0 points [-]

I am nearly certain Flinter is just Eugene's new way of trolling now that there aren't downvotes. Don't feed the troll

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 01 January 2017 03:07:06PM 0 points [-]

TV and Movies (Live Action) Thread

Comment author: dropspindle 03 January 2017 04:35:21AM *  4 points [-]

I love the BBC's Ruth Goodman series because they answer questions about historical daily life that I never even thought to ask. For example, in Victorian and Edwardian times, a common way to clean a chimney was to climb to the roof and throw a chicken down it. As it flapped and scratched on its way down it would knock down all the debris and buildup. If you want to know the start-to-finish process of how to build a lime-ash floor, or a pig sty, or the details of how things were cleaned, cooked, gathered, farmed, or used, these shows will have it.

ETA- These are also probably pretty interesting if you are into survivalism

Links go to the first episodes of the series on YouTube, where they are all available.

Secrets of the Castle- Guedelon Castle is a current 20 year project in France where they are building a 13th century castle, using 13th century techniques. They show the entire process of building the castle. One thing I found interesting is that castles would have been limewashed, rather than left as the bare rock we see today. And one interior decoration was to paint the limewash as if it were exposed marble. So you cover up the rock to paint it to look like a more expensive rock. The human-powered hamster wheel that they would use to raise the stones up is also pretty nifty. This is a good one if you're interested in historic technology

Wartime Farm- Before the second World War, British farming was on a decline since 60% of their food was imported, but at the start of the war Germany started blockading British vessels. British farms had to double their production at a time when young men were gone, leaving women to do heavy labor. To do this, they had to completely switch focus from raising livestock (which were culled) to growing cereal crops. Manufacturing was focused on war goods so farming equipment had to be jerry rigged from scrap metal. Already crowded farms had to find ways to host the women and children that had been evacuated from cities. If your farm wasn't productive enough, it would get taken away from you

(I don't feel like typing much more but don't take that as evidence that the ones below are less interesting)

Tudor Monastery Farm- This is one of my favorites. Ruth and company live as tenant farmers, leasing their land from the monastery. One thing I enjoy about this series is how different their various holiday celebrations are from modern ones.

Victorian Farm- 1880s

Edwardian Farm- This one takes place on a Devon port, so there's also information about life by the sea (fishing, gathering algae and shrimp, boating, etc)

Victorian Pharmacy- How people attempted to cure common ailments in the 19th C. I haven't watched it yet, but I hear it's wonderful

Full Steam Ahead- About engineering and building the railway system, and how that changed daily life in the early 19th century. I haven't watched this one yet but it seems really good. TRAINS!

Tales from the Green Valley- This was an early series, and not as well done. I don't recommend this one unless you've already watched all the others and want more. It's a 1620's/ Stuart era farm

Comment author: dropspindle 22 December 2016 06:32:26AM 10 points [-]

Random Note: Since the push to put more content on here, I actually have been checking more frequently. I'm looking now maybe every three weeks instead of every three months, which is nothing compared to the daily checking when I was active and the site was active, but is at least more on my radar.

Just some positive reinforcement for all yall.

View more: Next