Hi there.

I used to comment once in a while, but I find myself less and less interested in the topics of conversation around here. For a short while, people were going on a lot about dating (wtf?) and then more recently there's been a fair amount of what is essentially self-help for the scientifically inclined. I dunno, I guess I was just more into thought experiments and Yudkowsky posts.

While I'm at it, here are links to a bunch of other games that require some degree of thinking outside the box and adapting to changing rules:

Factory Balls and Factory Balls 2

Easy. Each level introduces new puzzle pieces, but no dramatic changes in the rules. The solutions are all inside the box, once you figure out what the rules are.

Aether

Easy. Requires solving some puzzles without any hints what the puzzle is or what a solution would look like. Solvabe just by trying random things until something happens.

Duck, think outside the flock

Medium. A series of puzzles, each of which has different rules.

me and the key

Medium. A series of puzzles, each of which has different rules.

Electric Box

Medium. Each level introduces new puzzle pieces, but no dramatic changes in the rules. The solutions are all inside the box, but you have to figure out how to put them together.

Dynamic Systems

Medium. Each level introduces new puzzle pieces, but no dramatic changes in the rules. The solutions are all inside the box, but you have to figure out how to put them together.

Casual Gameplay Escape

Hard! A series of puzzles, connected by other puzzles, each of which have different rules, and most of which have a counterintuitive solution. Hints about the solutions are cleverly hidden in the game. Hint: Gur cevagfperra ohggba vf lbhe sevraq. (rot13'd)

Take Something Literally

Hard. A series of puzzles, each of which has a deliberately counterintuitive, and often malevolent, solution. Don't worry if you can't solve all of them, some of the solutions require specific computer hardware or softwae to win.

The Impossible Quiz and The Impossible Quiz 2

Almost Impossible. A series of quiz questions and other challenges that have deliberately counterintuitive solutions. Some of the quiz questions are solvable only by trial and error. Some of the challenges require extremely fast reflexes. Many of the puzzles are blatantly evil. Do not expect to win this. You have been warned.

The rest of these games don't really fit with the theme of thinking outside the box and adapting to changing rules, but are unique enough to include in the list anyway:

Closure

Medium. A unique game, but the rules don't change much, except when new puzzle elements are introduced. The solutions are mostly inside the box.

Time Kufc

Medium. This game doesn't really belong in this list. The rules don't change much, except when new puzzle elements are introduced. The solutions are mostly inside the box.

Red Remover

Medium. This game doesn't really belong in this list. The rules don't change much, except when new puzzle elements are introduced. The solutions are mostly inside the box.

Shift, Shift 2, Shift 3, and Shift 4

Medium. This game doesn't really belong in this list. The rules don't change much, except when new puzzle elements are introduced. The solutions are mostly inside the box.

Exploit

Medium. Actually, this doesn't belong in this list at all. The rules don't change, and the solutions are all quite literally inside the box.

There are plenty of other good puzzle games I could link to, but they didn't really fit with the theme of thinking outside the box and adapting to changing rules.

Question: Would it be inappropriate to put this list somewhere on the Less Wrong Wiki?

I don't like this paper. It's wholly scathing for no reason other than to justify ignoring all of philosophy. Some philosophy is valuable and some is not, and of his 40 statements about three, I'd say 6 of them are claims I would take seriously and would hear arguments for, were I interested in the nature of three.

Generally, continental philosophy is trash, but I wouldn't throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Then what is it that makes people jump the metaphorical fence?

The internet is full of atheists who grew up Christian.

As someone who took way too many whacks to the head to come around, I can tell you, it's doing good.

QualiaSoup has some great videos, although many of them are in the excessively tired "trying to convince Christians that their religion isn't right" genre.

edit: Perhaps that's not the best name for the genre; it's more a kind of rational argumentation against ideas floating around the Christian memeosphere. But I'm still skeptical that it does very much good.

I often find that there's not any satisfactory way to calibrate my expectations for things like this anyway. I was once emailed by someone who wanted to buy a domain name from me. He refused to give an offer, asking me to provide a price. I found it impossible to gauge what it was actually worth to me, or what I thought it would be worth to him, so I said I wouldn't sell it unless he made an offer. I never heard from him again.

So, sure. My future self can be convinced of a new minimum, for all I care. I apparently hold my ideas about this very lightly anyway. I'm not even sure he'd (I'd) be "wrong," even if I currently think of it as a lie.

I don't think "Not sending in your $200 rebate" and "not writing in an article to Overcomingbias" are the same phenomena at all.

It's not that people who are now writing all these LW posts felt like it was too much of a hassle to send an email to Overcomingbias; it's that deliberately and unusually sticking your neck out to contribute has a different social connotation than simply participating in the expected community behavior.

Contributing to Overcomingbias is like getting on stage: walking up to the stage is a socially loaded act in and of itself. "Hey, everyone, I'm going to stand out here and say something." Lesswrong, since the entire site is built around community posting, practically invites you to post as you please. There's nothing out of the ordinary about it. How could there be? The tools to do so are right there, embedded into the infrastructure of the site. It must be expected for me to do that!

If you pose someone the Monty Hall Problem, and their response is "It doesn't matter whether I switch doors or not! They're going to move the prize so that I don't end up getting it anyway!" Do you think they've understood the point of the exercise?

Hi everybody. I'm a student who keeps changing fields. I have background in philosophy, psychology, cognitive science, and statistics. I grew up with a passion for knowledge, and independently rejected religion for naturalism at an early age, so I guess being a rationalist just came naturally. I'm a transhumanist; to be more precise, I think we'll have smarter-than-human cyborgs/bioborgs/uploads by about 2070, and I'd like to become one. I'm also optimistic about nanotechnology and the continued advancement of computing machinery.

I found Overcomingbias months ago after coming across Robin Hanson's talk about intelligent machines and the economy. The more I read of his work, the more it struck me that Robin is a very smart and admirable person, so I stuck around. Of course, this meant I read a lot of Eliezer's stuff as well, which I found I wrestled with a lot more (not to say I disagree with him all the time, just that his perspective is often quite different).

I'm interested in most of the topics that get thrown around in this community, although I profess to feeling that I don't have much to add in many cases. I'll see if I can't maintain a bit of activity, though. Nice meeting you all.