As a function of how long the universe will exist?
This reminds of a website where you can check if the Earth has been destroyed.
Trying posting here since I don't see how to post to https://agentfoundations.org/.
Recently sphere packing was solved in dimension 24, and I read about it on Quanta Magazine. I found the following part of the article (paraphrased) fascinating.
Cohn and Kumar found that the best possible sphere packings in dimensions 24 could be at most 0.0000000000000000000000000001 percent denser than the Leech lattice. Given this ridiculously close estimate, it seemed clear that the Leech lattice must be the best sphere packings in dimension 24.
This is clearly a kind of reasoning under logical uncertainty, and seems very reasonable. Most humans probably would reason similarly, even when they have no idea what the Leech lattice is.
Is this kind of reasoning covered by already known desiderata for logical uncertainty?
As a function of how long the universe will exist?
This reminds of a website where you can check if the Earth has been destroyed.
Rather than fixing hypothetical future problems, I would rather have work spent on fixing things that cause problems now, for example:
when you click on a permalink to a single comment (like those you find in your mailbox, or in the recent comments), the whole thread it's in is marked as read (and won't be in green any more)
There is no way to see the upovote / downvote split on posts and comments, only upvotes minus downvotes (though I'm not sure that would be such an improvement, it's just something a lot of people ask for; there recent "poll" feature may be a better way)
(unless of course you were planning on implementing, testing and submitting the fix yourself!)
I disagree strongly.
We don't want to encourage people to create superfluous accounts, do we?
Why? Because we will run out of bits?
Therefore I think LessWrong codebase should be patched so that karma does not go below zero even with lots of downvotes.
I disagree. There is a useful distinction to be made between someone starting out at 0 karma or just breaking even and someone running a negative score.
There is a useful distinction to be made between someone starting out at 0 karma or just breaking even and someone running a negative score.
There is, but my point was that you can't make this useful distinction usefully.
It came to my attention that when you receive downvotes for your comments, your karma goes negative and you need to "pay back" to be able to post to Discussion or to Main.
Since new users start with zero karma, having negative karma seems to just encourage those with negative karma to create a new account. We don't want to encourage people to create superfluous accounts, do we? Therefore I think LessWrong codebase should be patched so that karma does not go below zero even with lots of downvotes.
What do you think?
The "income" question doesn't state pre- or post-tax — you should say you intend one or the other.
I interpreted the question as pre-tax, individual income.
Took the survey. Does the "Do you intend to have children" question refer to the immediate future, or in your lifetime?
I interpreted that question as "in your lifetime".
I took the survey. I did Political Compass for the first time, and I found its questions and results rather baffling. Political Compass themselves admit it is culturally biased and mainly for western democracies.
View more: Next
I don't know if this is the LW hug or something but I'm having trouble downloading the xls. Also, will update with what the crap my passphrase actually means, because it's in Lojban and mildly entertaining IIRC.
EDIT: Felt like looking at some other entertaining passphrases. Included with comment.
sruta'ulor maftitnab {mine! scarf-fox magic-cakes!(probably that kind)}
Afgani-san Azerbai-chan {there... are no words}
DEFECTORS RULE
do mlatu {a fellow lojbanist!}
lalxu daplu {and another?}
telephone fonxa {and another! please get in contact with me. please.}
xagfu'a rodo {indeed! but where are all you people coming from, and why don't I know you?}
zifre dunda {OH COME ON WHERE ARE YOU PEOPLE]
eponymous hahanicetry_CHEATER {clever.}
fart butt {I am twelve...}
FROGPENIS SPOOBOMB {... and so is a lot of LW.}
goat felching {good heavens}
I don't want the prize! Pick someone else please!
I dont care about the MONETARY REWARD but you shoudl know that
Irefuse myprize
No thanks
not interested
{a lot of refusers!}
I'm gay
john lampkin (note: this is not my name)
lookatme iwonmoney {nice try guy}
mencius suckedmoziwasbetter
mimsy borogoves {repeated!}
TWO WORD {repeated, and try harder next time}
octothorpe interrobang
SOYUZ NERUSHIMIY {ONWARD, COMRADE(note: person is apparently a social democrat.)}
TERRORISTS WIN
thisissuspiciouslylike askingforourpasswordmethodologies {I should think not.}
zoodlybop zimzamzoom {OH MY GODS BILL COSBY IS A LESSWRONGER.}
AND THAT'S ALL, FOLKS.
You missed lalxu daplu.