I have a hard time with the goal setting phase. Do I really want the goal? Would doing X really achieve the goal? Even if doing X achieves the goal would the cost be too high? Sometimes I think this is akrasia other times I think it is being accurate that the goals are wrong.

On spaced repetition / Anki:

When I started to work after college I was surprised when people asked "How comes you don't know X? Haven't you read the manual?" I was surprised because in college it take more than one reading, a form of repetition, to learn, know and remember things. I would replay "I have read it, but have not yet memorized it."

Interestingly, later on, I managed to remember things after one reading, not details, but the general idea.

I wonder about the popularity of Anki and spaced repetition here. I am experimenting it for conditioning, but for learning, do you really need to remember things in more detail than a single reading allows, if you aren't preparing for college exams anymore?

Note: I think the remembering after one reading worked later on, because it was more of the which of the options to choose. Like where do you find the inventory cost report? Obvious candidates are warehouse menu and finance menu. I think in college I needed to memorize things when the answer was not choosing from known options but something I could not even imagine.

Are you using spaced repetition because you have more of the second type?

The good thing about becoming an expert in a narrow field is that sooner or later you know all the options, which means you are a lightning fast learner. You just look at something, take a not of which of the known options it has, and know all about it. Like a doctor making a diagnosis. Checkmark checkmark checkmark.

What could LW contribute to these?

I'd like to see more discussion of the problems with the scientific approach. It would show that LW is up to speed with current developments , rather than laboriously reinventing logical positivism. The approach up to now has been more about cheerleading.

How do you get a high verbal IQ, boundary-testing, 10-year-old child not to swear? Saying "don't swear" causes him to gleefully list words asking if they count as swear words. Telling him a word counts as profanity causes him to ask why that specific word is bad. Saying a word doesn't count causes him to use it extra amounts if he perceives it is bad, and he will happily combine different "legal" words trying to come up with something offensive. All of this is made more difficult by the binding constraint that you absolutely must make sure he doesn't say certain words at school, so in terms of marginal deterrence you need the highest punishment for him saying these words.

So I agree 100% with 1 and 3, primarily because the profit margins on those insurances are huge, and the losses are so small.

Renters insurance and homeowners insurance on the other hand is quite inexpensive relative to what they cover, and the typical loss rates for insurers are a high percentage of premiums + float, what you are paying in premiums beyond your expected loss rate is very small but reduces the potential volatility of your wealth dramatically.

I guess it depends on what you mean by "rich", if you mean merely "financially independent" and not having wealth far beyond your lifestyle requirements, I'd still generally decide to carry home/renters/health insurance, and most wealthy people do. Note that these cover more than simply your stuff/home, they also have liability clauses that protect your from various claims including personal injury, which can be very expensive and have little or nothing to do with your residence. If you have wealth, it's actually a good idea to carry higher limit car insurance and a personal umbrella to protect your legal liability exposure.

I used to analyze insurance using a pure linear EV with catastrophic check. i.e. always better to self insure, as long as the worst case scenario isn't a financial catastrophe.

Now I think of it more like portfolio balance. It makes sense to do things which give up a little bit of expectation in order to reduce the overall volatility of your net worth. Having exposure to a huge risk like your home being destroyed and you having to rebuild it adds a lot of volatility. And you can insure against it for a very small amount relative to your exposure. Also note that the actual linear -EV from buying most common insurance is a relatively small percentage of the premium cost. For typical home/auto/life/health insurance, the expected loss rate is 80-90% of the premiums.

Compare to electronics insurance or travel insurance, or credit card life insurance, where you are typically paying 5-10 (sometimes 100) times the actual expected loss rate.

I'm not sure what you mean by cryonics insurance, but if you mean life insurance to fund a cryonics contract, I don't see how you can avoid it until you have enough assets to cover the cost. I can see possibly recommending term + aggressive savings over various kinds of permanent life insurance, but there are some significant tax advantages and creditor protections to permanent life insurance that may tip the scale.

Disclaimer: I am licensed to sell life and health insurance in MI and CT, but nothing said here should be construed as a particular recommendation of any kind of insurance -- everyone's individual needs are different.

Other trigger points should be when to self-insure. The usual guidance is when you could easily pay the replacement costs. Insurance is always a low odds bet. The only economic reason for it is when losing the bet would devastate you financially.

• electronics insurance (self insure only)
• cryonics insurance (self insure only)
• travel insurance (self insure only)
• renters insurance (self-insure as soon as you have enough savings to easily cover your essentials)
• car insurance (I don't think you can legally self insure all of it)
• house insurance (self insure if rich and no mortgage)
• health insurance (self insure if super rich)

From a quality of life POV, I would think that joint replacement (knee, hip, elbow) would be a huge improvement for many people. Outside of organ growing is there any progress on growing joints?

I'm guessing stuff like dropping off dirt or running out of battery could be solved without any AI improvements, so they are probably problems iRobot has decided aren't worth solving at the moment.

When Roomba came out I expected vast progress by now. Some company would actually make one that works all the time for the whole house. Now I am not second guessing the the IRobot corporation - maybe they could do it but the market is happy now. How hard is it with today's know how to make one that

• doesn't get stuck on rugs, cords, clothes, or under things ever
• can remember where it needs to clean and you don't have to use virtual walls
• can remember how to get back to its docking station before its battery runs out every single time
• make a docking station where it can drop off its dirt so I don't have to check it more then once a month

Its stuff like this that makes me wonder how much progress we are actually making. Is it a solved problem with no market (at the price point) or is it a problem in robotics?