I'll do 10. Agreed with satt that having multiple raters for each prediction would be helpful. I previously read your previous post with the randomly selected predictions, which hopefully isn't disqualifying.

That logic only holds if there's no cost, or no alternate investment. Currently the cost of cryonics is ~$28,000. If I donated that to GiveWell instead, I'd be saving ~28 lives. The question of whether I want to be immortal or save 28 mortal lives, is not one I've seen much addressed, and not one that I've yet found a satisfying answer to.

I've given it a lot of thought, and this does appear to be my True Rejection of Cryonics; if I can find a satisfying reasoning to value my immortality over those 28 mortal lives, I'd sign up.

For anyone in the vicinity, I highly recommend checking it out. Patrick and Jon and the non-LW people I met were very friendly, and I'm looking forward to studying Jaynes.

The hackerspace has quite an impressive collection of hardware, from a RepRap and MakerBot to the huge CNC mill and lathe, and even the beginnings of a biology lab. The current limit of my mechanical skills is assembling Lego Mindstorms, so it's a great learning opportunity.

I'll plan on showing up. Should be interesting, I've never been to a hackerspace before.

Part 2, group II question:

What is the altitude of the highest point in Sweden?

Give an estimate in a subcomment. Please begin your answer with "I suppose the correct value is probably" or some other preface of comparable length; if you write just the number, it appears in the Recent Comments bar and can bias other respondents.

Where did you read that?

I am hoping it was advice specifically given for wait loss, emphasising that just adding light exercise will not see large results in many cases. As an independent observation it would be terrible.

The first observation was particularly interesting: "1. Sociopaths typically don't smalltalk about themselves as much as normal people do. They will direct the conversation back to the new acquaintance as much as they can." This seems like the perfectly rational thing to do (in most cases)

It's also what all the "winning friends and influencing people" advice tells you to do.

Prediction request for emergence of usable (commercial grade or easy DIY) eyewear computing of this sort

http://www.lumus-optical.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=9&Itemid=15

http://blog.2yb.org/2010/07/cd-case-wearable-computer.html

Please feel free to state your distributions beyond 2011

Or were you wondering if it comes into play even for so small a delay? That is, where's the cutoff at which people will switch between the two behaviors?

Yes, this is about what I had in mind.

The concept that "I was acting rationally" isn't an excuse for predictably failing to maximize utility. I used to be a two-boxer on Newcomb's Problem; more practically, I believed that certain social situations were inherently biased against rational people.