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

Comment author: fowlertm 09 October 2017 03:36:07AM 0 points [-]

I gave that some thought! LW seems much less active than it once was, though, so that strategy isn't as appealing. I've also written a little for this site and the reception has been lukewarm, so I figured a book would be best.

Comment author: lifelonglearner 11 October 2017 04:20:15AM *  1 point [-]

We're now a lot more active at LW2.0! Some of my stuff which wasn't that popular here is getting more attention there.

Maybe you could try it too?

In response to Feedback on LW 2.0
Comment author: lifelonglearner 01 October 2017 03:43:36PM 6 points [-]

I feel like the site is not well laid-out. It's not easy to tell where to click to see the ongoing discussions. The grey font (as opposed to black, and also the post layout) and lack of clear demarcations is not visually pleasing (to me), and it's also not as readable as it could be.

Comment author: lifelonglearner 25 September 2017 11:37:15PM 2 points [-]
  • Open Philosophy should be Open Philanthropy.

Otherwise, thanks so much for the constant updates on this front!

Comment author: lifelonglearner 17 September 2017 01:07:29AM 5 points [-]

Quick summary:

Author Toby Green acknowledges that while others were bickering about other ways to sort of open up open-access-type journals, they are all already dwarfed by the fact that Sci-Hub pretty much already has all the articles.

Green then goes on an analogy involving how some airlines have "unbundled" their tickets, making consumers pay extra for add'l baggage, more seat room, drinks, food, etc. Green says that maybe publishers should switch to a similar approach, where journals are free to read, but additional premiums would cost money.

Comment author: Habryka 16 September 2017 11:59:18PM 0 points [-]

1) I think this would be great, but is also really hard. I feel like you would need to build a whole wiki-structure with conflict resolution and moderation norms and collaborative editing features to achieve that kind of thing. But who knows, there might be an elegant and simple implementation that would work that I haven't thought of.

2) Arbital-style greenlinks are in the works and should definitely exist. For now they would only do the summary and glossary thing when you link to LW posts, but we can probably come up with a way of crowdsourcing more definitions of stuff without needing to create whole posts for it. Open to design suggestions here.

Comment author: lifelonglearner 17 September 2017 12:59:10AM 0 points [-]

The easiest method for 1, I think, would just to have a section under every item in the glossary called "Examples" and trust the community to put in good ones and delete bad ones.

For 2, I was thinking about something like a page running Algolia instant search, that would quickly find the term you want, bolded, with it's accompanying definition after it, dictionary-esque.

Comment author: lifelonglearner 16 September 2017 04:17:57PM 2 points [-]

Two things I'd like to see:

1) Some sort of "example-pedia" where, in addition to some sort of glossary, we're able crowd-source examples of the concepts to build upon understanding. I think examples continue to be in short supply, and that's a large understanding gap, especially when we deal with concepts unfamiliar to most people.

2) Something similar to Arbital's hover-definitions, or a real-time searchable glossary that's easily available.

I think the above two things could be very useful features, given the large swath of topics we like to discuss, from cognitive psych to decision theory, to help people more invested in one area more easily swap to reading stuff in another area.

Comment author: John_Maxwell_IV 16 September 2017 07:37:18AM *  7 points [-]

Does anyone know the literature on intrinsic motivation well enough to comment on whether paying users to post is liable to undermine other sources of motivation?

The registration fee idea is interesting, but exacerbates the chicken and egg problem inherent in online communities. I also have a hunch that registration fees tend to make people excessively concerned with preserving their account's reputation (so they can avoid getting banned and losing something they paid money for), in a way that's cumulatively harmful to discourse, but I can't prove this.

Comment author: lifelonglearner 16 September 2017 03:14:17PM *  7 points [-]


See here and here

As one might expect, money is often a deterrent for actual habituation.

EDIT: Additional clarification:

The first link shows that monetary payment is only effective as a short-term motivator.

The second link is a massive study involving almost 2,000 people which tried to pay people to go to the gym. We found that after the payment period ended, gym attendance fell back to roughly pre-payment levels.

Comment author: pepe_prime 13 September 2017 01:20:21PM 10 points [-]

[Survey Taken Thread]

By ancient tradition, if you take the survey you may comment saying you have done so here, and people will upvote you and you will get karma.

Let's make these comments a reply to this post. That way we continue the tradition, but keep the discussion a bit cleaner.

Comment author: lifelonglearner 13 September 2017 09:06:53PM 21 points [-]

I took the survey!

Comment author: lifelonglearner 13 September 2017 09:06:40PM 5 points [-]

Re: The SAT question. The SAT's actually reverted back to a score out of 1600. Slight nitpick, given that you mention that the current status quo is out of 2400.

In response to Rational Feed
Comment author: lifelonglearner 09 September 2017 11:19:50PM 1 point [-]

Thanks very much for compiling, as usual!

View more: Next