[Link] GiveWell: A case study in effective altruism, part 1

0 philh 14 October 2016 10:46AM
Comment author: DanArmak 08 October 2016 09:44:11PM *  4 points [-]

These six principles are true as far as they go, but I feel they're so weak so not to be very useful. I'd like to offer a more cynical view.

The article's goal is, more or less, to avoid being convinced of untrue things by motivated agents. This has a name: Defense Against the Dark Arts. And I feel like these six principles are about as effective in real life as taking the canonical DADA first year class and then going up against HPMOR Voldemort.

With today's information technology and globalization, we're all exposed to world-class Dark Arts practitioners. Not being vulnerable to Cialdini's principles might help defend you in an argument with your coworker. But it won't serve you well when doubting something you read in the news or in an FDA-endorsed study.

And whatever your coworker or your favorite blog was arguing probably derives from such a curated source to begin with. All arguments rest on factual beliefs - outside of math anyway - and most of us are very far from being able to verify the facts we believe. And your own prior beliefs need to be well supported, to avoid being rejected on the same basis.

Comment author: philh 09 October 2016 07:56:56PM 2 points [-]

The article's goal is, more or less, to avoid being convinced of untrue things by motivated agents.

I think the article is trying to help groups set up discourse norms that help people find the truth. (The update uses the phrase "socioepistemic virtue".) It's not so much about helping individuals defend against other individuals, as about helping groups defend their members against bad agents.

[Link] Six principles of a truth-friendly discourse

4 philh 08 October 2016 04:56PM
Comment author: CellBioGuy 04 October 2016 10:00:49PM *  11 points [-]

Advice solicited. Topics of interest I have lined up for upcoming posts include:

  • The history of life on Earth and its important developments
  • The nature of the last universal common ancestor (REALLY good new research on this just came out)
  • The origin of life and the different schools of thought on it
  • Another exploration of time in which I go over a paper that came out this summer that basically did exactly what I did a few months earlier with my "Space and Time Part II" calculations of our point in star and planet order that showed we are not early and are right around when you would expect to find the average biosphere, but extended it to types of stars and their lifetimes in a way I think I can improve upon.
  • My thoughs on how and why SETI has been sidetracked away from activities that are more likely to be productive towards activities that are all but doomed to fail, with a few theoretical case studies
  • My thoughts on how the Fermi paradox / 'great filter' is an ill-posed concept
  • Interesting recent research on the apparent evolutionary prerequisites for primate intelligence

Any thoughts on which of these are of particular interest, or other ideas to delve into?

Comment author: philh 05 October 2016 10:40:48AM 2 points [-]

I'd find all of these interesting, particularly the first three and the last.

I'm glad you're back.

Comment author: username2 04 October 2016 08:33:17PM 0 points [-]

Maybe? But consider that the opposite of what you just claimed sounds just as plausible to an outside observer. "Do what I mean" doesn't sound all that complicated -- even to someone with a background in computer science or AI specifically. "Do what I mean" translates as "accurately determine the principles which constrain my own actions and use those to constrain the AI's, or otherwise build a model of my thinking which the AI can use to evaluate options." Sub-goals such as verifying that the model matches reality fall easily out of this definition.

It's not at all clear, even to a practitioner within the field, that this expansion doesn't work, if in fact it does not.

Comment author: philh 05 October 2016 09:25:15AM 0 points [-]

It's not necessarily that the AI would have difficulty understanding what "do what humans mean" means, even before being told to do what humans mean.

It just has no reason to obey "do what humans mean" unless we program it to do what humans mean.

"Do what humans mean" is telling the AI to do something that we can currently only specify vaguely. "Figure out what we intend by "do what humans mean", and then do that" is also vaguely specified. It doesn't solve the problem.

Comment author: philh 13 September 2016 07:29:28PM 3 points [-]

As I understand it, if I buy a chicken in a supermarket, this causes approximately one chicken to be killed; and similar for beef etc, adjusting for the amount of meat versus the size of the animal.

Does anyone know how this number changes with discounts? I'm specifically thinking of the thing where my local supermarket reduces the price of things when they're approaching their expiry date.

Comment author: DataPacRat 10 September 2016 02:30:07AM 3 points [-]

Matrix multiplication

Could somebody explain to me, in a way I'd actually understand, how to (remember how to) go about multiplying a pair of matrixes? I've looked at Wikipedia, I've read linear algebra books up to where they supposedly explain matrixes, and I keep bouncing up against a mental wall where I can't seem to remember how to figure out how to get the answer.

Comment author: philh 12 September 2016 10:44:49AM *  3 points [-]

Low confidence that this will help, but my approach: I mentally move the right-hand matrix up, so that the space "in between" them (right of the first, below the second) is the right shape for the result. Each value of the result is the dot product of the vectors to the left and above it. (I don't have a trick for dot products, I just know how to calculate them.)

. . . . g h i
a b c * j k l
d e f . m n o

"becomes"

. . . g h i
. . . j k l
. . . m n o
. . . -----
a b c|S T W
d e f|X Y Z

and e.g. S is (a b c) dot (g j m), Y is (d e f) dot (h k n).

Comment author: James_Miller 06 September 2016 11:45:26PM 0 points [-]

I'm having trouble sending a text message with an ipad and iphone? The recipient isn't receiving the text. What are the sources of error other than wrong number? Also, are you supposed to input the 1 before the 10 digit number? It's U.S. to U.S.

Comment author: philh 08 September 2016 10:31:23AM 2 points [-]

What's the recipient using, and did they previously use something else? If they switched from iPhone to not-iPhone, there's a bug with Apple's iMessage that could prevent them from receiving texts. https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT204270

Comment author: ChristianKl 27 August 2016 08:45:17PM 0 points [-]

I feel it's important to note that he was talking about writing styles, not philosophy.

Do you think how one reasons in writing about a subject has nothing todo with philosophy?

Comment author: philh 30 August 2016 09:12:32AM -1 points [-]

I don't think I need to make a claim that strong.

I think that "Yvain's writing style was significantly influenced by Moldbug" is an importantly different claim to "Yvain's philosophy was significantly influenced by Moldbug"; the second claim is the one under discussion; and if someone wants to turn the first into the second, the burden of proof is on them.

Comment author: Good_Burning_Plastic 25 August 2016 09:42:43PM 1 point [-]

I don't think any of the thought leaders of either group were significantly influential to the other.

Yvain did say that he was influenced by Moldbug.

Comment author: philh 26 August 2016 11:51:54AM 3 points [-]

I feel it's important to note that he was talking about writing styles, not philosophy.

View more: Next