I reinvented this method, except using a coin flip, during an urban economics class. We were going to actually conduct surveys in the Detroit area and thus had to learn about the problems with surveys. However my professor didn't seem very excited and pointed out some incentive shortcomings (I was too disappointed to listen too closely), and I got the impression that this is a known method with known limitations.

Is there such a thing as human-friendly decorating which is gender non-specific?

I strongly suspect there is. The men's setup was specifically full of masculine-coded adornments (wood, leather), and the women's setup was full of slightly feminine-coded adornments (plants, lots of light).

But I think that there's considerable overlap, and there are also environments that are considered conducive to specific kinds of activities.

For example, most people seem to like dimly lit spaces for romantic activities or "night life" (though personally I hate dimly lit places; light is cheap, why should I struggle to see things?).

OTOH most people like to work in environments with lots of natural light, the "window office," because of the cumulative effect of sunlight on mood. (Being inside and away from the sun all day wears you down. I never noticed this when I was in school because I never spent long periods of time away from the sun. Now that I work in an office it's obvious.)

Russell and Norvig do seem to have the only general A.I. textbook out there that I can find...

I did send in an application to the Center for Modern Rationality but I haven't heard back

Please email me (elcenia@gmail.com) and tell me which types of work you wanted. There has been a spreadsheet-tracking issue, and I'm not sure who I have and haven't reached yet. (I'm considering just mass-mailing everybody on the list with "if you haven't heard from me before, please let me know and I can give you sample work". Thoughts on whether this would be more obnoxious than helpful?)

They un-retracted the offer at the last minute, and I was able to go.

Yes, I'll be going. We should chat!

(No idea why someone would downvote this.)

ETA - Nope! "Offer" of a full stipend not honored 24 hours after it was made. Not cool, Spooks, not cool.

ETA2 - Yup! They came through in the end, I went and it was extremely interesting.

I registered and bought air tickets, but some of the details are confusing me. I'm calling them tomorrow to straighten it out.

Interested, though 10-12 hours seems quite short.

I interned at Quixey this summer (though not as an engineer) and found some of the most skilled rationalists I'd ever met there. It was an excellent experience and comes highly recommended.

Hello!

I'm a 32 year old physics PhD, working (so far) on the oh-so-fashionable subfield of graphene and carbon nanotubes. I took Quantum field theory, which is a little unusual for an experimentalist (though not positively rare). I have a background in programming, and a moderate degree of interest in AI.

I came here by way of the Methods of Rationality. After reading that, and upon seeing that there was a sequence on quantum mechanics, I had a suspicion that it wouldn't be terrible. This suspicion was vastly exceeded. I never encountered the slightest technical flaw, which is better than many physicists can produce on the subject, let alone philosophers and amateur physicists.

I began wandering and seeing what else there was, and it is good. The atmosphere also seems quite good around here, so I thought I'd join the community rather than treating it as a collection of essays and comments.

So here I am.

~~~~ Edited to add: ~~~

I am not sure how this got so many upvotes. Was it the praise? The brevity? That I'm a physicist? The score just stands out on the page a bit, and I'm not at all sure why.