Comment author: eirenicon 15 July 2009 02:34:00PM 16 points [-]

The universe is irrational and infinitely variable, we just happen to have "lucked out" with a repeating digit for the last billion years or so. There was no Big Bang, we're just seeing what's not there through the lens of modern-day "physics". Everything could turn into nuclear fish tomorrow.

Comment author: marchdown 17 July 2015 04:34:15PM 0 points [-]

So basically the whole universe is a Boltzmann brain.

Comment author: polymathwannabe 04 November 2014 12:41:32PM -2 points [-]

alternate history in which electronics and computers never took off

Please, no. The world already has a sickening amount of steampunk.

Comment author: marchdown 05 November 2014 01:07:52AM *  3 points [-]

Please, no. The world already has a sickening amount of steampunk.

Does it now? Care to recommend some?

Comment author: gattsuru 04 November 2014 04:39:45PM 2 points [-]

The high cost of access could well be the point : if you can easily hire a boat to get to your private island, it's pretty simple for governments or peoples to do the same, club you, and take your stuff. A hundred thousand bucks would cover invading you, and make good return on investment.

By contrast, you'd have to have something of very high value to cover a rocket launch, and that something must be mobile enough to send down easily. (Or in extreme cases, you might be the only people who retain full knowledge of the manufacturing necessary to make the rockets, in some way that isn't easy to reverse engineer -- see the difficulty we have reproducing several engine designs as a guide here.)

Comment author: marchdown 05 November 2014 01:07:18AM 1 point [-]

It may be hard to rob you, but easy to shoot you down.

Comment author: FiftyTwo 04 November 2014 02:41:51PM 2 points [-]

Such as?

Comment author: marchdown 05 November 2014 01:06:06AM *  1 point [-]

It would be fun to have corporations build space stations, ostensibly for technological benefits, but not disclosing details, so that your question would remain unanswered inside the story.

Comment author: fubarobfusco 04 November 2014 11:13:16PM 4 points [-]

Two standard texts are Easton and Hardy's The Ethical Slut and Taormino's Opening Up.

Comment author: marchdown 05 November 2014 01:03:51AM *  2 points [-]

I would also mention Deborah Anapol's "Polyamory: the new love for the 21st century". I think about it as a survey of polyamorous practices, struggles, communities. It was crucial for me to get the sense of normality. Haven't read Taormino.

Comment author: sixes_and_sevens 03 November 2014 01:21:38PM *  16 points [-]

Person A is an Olympic-level athlete. He can perform amazing physical feats. The limits of his ability can be scored against some sort of metric (lap time, distance jumped, etc.), and since he's working to improve on them, his own personal limits are known to him.

Person B is of average physical fitness.

Person C has a moderate chronic illness. He struggles to perform basic physical feats, but can function independently with some difficulty.

If all three of these people were secretly transplanted into an environment with lower oxygen levels and began to experience mild hypoxia, it seems that Persons A and C would both be more sensitive to this change than Person B. Person A would notice it because he would no longer be able to perform outstanding physical feats to the level he's accustomed to. Person C would notice it because he'd struggle to carry out basic activities.

[Edit for clarity: I'm not saying that Person B would never notice this, but that he would be less sensitive to it, because his performance is higher-variance and subject to less of a "state change", and doesn't have a fine, frequently-scrutinised boundary between what he can and can't do.]


Alternatively:

Person D is a voracious infovore with high reading comprehension. She's used to grappling with precise language.

Person E is an average-level reader.

Person F has some sort of reading-related disability.

It seems that Persons D and F will be more sensitive to badly-punctuated writing than Person E. For example, Person D might be able to parse a sentence in two or three plausible ways, while Person F might not be able to parse the sentence at all.

Both of these cases involve both ends of an ability distribution being more sensitive to degradation of the environment than central cases. Are there better examples? Is this a phenomenon we actually see in the real world? If so, does it have a name?

Comment author: marchdown 05 November 2014 12:57:16AM 0 points [-]

This may be a case of regression to the mean, with the thing which parameters regress being conscious and not caring about these particular parameters.

Comment author: marchdown 04 November 2014 11:31:51PM *  24 points [-]

And... done. I would like to point out that X-Risk question may be confusing when skimming. P(X-Risk) looks as if it were asking for probability of catastrophe coming to pass, but the explanations spells out that the probability of humanity successfully avoiding catastrophe should be entered.

Comment author: gwern 23 October 2014 02:35:10AM 89 points [-]

Done. Too bad the basilisk question wasn't on it; I hope that will one day be possible.

Comment author: marchdown 04 November 2014 11:28:39PM *  2 points [-]

It would have been a nice insurance agains possible future PR shitstorms. Was that your primary reason for suggesting it?

Comment author: [deleted] 24 October 2014 03:05:08PM 8 points [-]

I'm a bit confused about the accuracy of my BSRI because my true answer was frequently 'only towards my SO',

Same here. And in some cases it was ‘except towards my parents’ or ‘only when I'm very tired’. I still tried to take some kind of weighed average.

In response to comment by [deleted] on 2014 Less Wrong Census/Survey
Comment author: marchdown 04 November 2014 11:26:40PM 3 points [-]

This is weird. I haven't noticed that until you've pointed it out, but I believe that my masculinity score was only a little lower than all the benchmarks and not extremely low only because I've considered how my partner would gauge BSRI questions. They seem to push me towards expressing masculine traits. Isn't it interesting that a sex-role inventory doesn't make allowances for situations priming different sex roles in people?

Comment author: marchdown 31 October 2014 12:28:51PM 1 point [-]

Ooh, missed the announcement. I won't make it in time now. Anyhow, I'll keep it in mind to get in touch with you next time I'm there. Have a blast!

View more: Next