= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
If you don't mind me asking, is the proofreading/editing being done in-house, or did you get a professional editor to handle it?
As far as I understand it was done via the MIRI volunteer platform.
IIRC, we were doing it as an initial pass-through, but that plan might have changed.
Regarding non-medical counselors: They can be plenty helpful, but they are not allowed to prescribe drugs; and drugs often make a huge difference.
I don't think that there any good evidence that on average drug interventions do better than non-drug interventions.
Having talked with the efim myself yesterday for 40 minutes I don't think the main issue for writing this post is solved with drugs.
Perhaps not, but there is good evidence for drugs+therapy doing better than either alone.
In response to
What are you learning?
Math
I'm trying to learn Linear Algebra and some automata/computability stuff for courses, and I have basic set theory and logic on the backburner.
I am describing an actual device; those are its limitations. Hence this post. What would you feel safe using it for, and how would you protect yourself?
An actual device?!?
according to this website (http://ravallirepublic.com/news/opinion/viewpoint/article_876e97ba-1aff-11e2-9a10-0019bb2963f4.html) it is part of 'aphorisms for leo baeck' (which I think is printed in 'ideas and opinions' but I don't have access to the book right now to check)
Thanks! I didn't fine it with my minute of googling, good to know it's legit.
In response to
Rationality Quotes August 2014
Few people are capable of expressing with equanimity opinions which differ from the prejudices of their social environment. Most people are even incapable of forming such opinions.
I don't suppose you have a source for the quote? (at this point, my default is to disbelieve any attribution of a quote unknown to me to Einstein)
So, "people shouldn't be assholes" is a minor political point? If this is such minor point, why did EY write an entire article on the point, and why is this article one of the most prominently linked-to article?
but that's his noble phantasm
Being an asshole is noble?
'noble phantasm' is probably a reference to Fate/Stay Night, wherein a noble phantasm is a weapon or object of unusual reknown which a certain class of beings have that grants them signature powers.
In response to
Open thread, July 21-27, 2014
Do we have a "How Have You Helped Save the World" thread and, if not, why not?
We have the Group Rationality Diary, which is very useful for personal accountability, and the Bragging Thread, which helps encourage brag-worthy behaviors, but as far as I am aware, we do not have a "How You've Helped Save the World" thread.
Does this seem useful? A way to encourage people to recognize how their actions make the world a better place. Not every post need be about "invented friendly AI," "cured an illness," "created a new math." It could be something as simple as "fed a homeless person," "helped someone overcome a bad habit," "went to a CFAR workshop." Just as long as the action is a real step towards improving the world and fixing real problems.
Maybe this isn't a worthwhile thing, but I'd like to hear others' opinions on it.
I would put such things in the bragging thread - why the separation?
In response to
comment
by
on
Consider giving an explanation for your deletion this time around. "Harry Yudkowsky and the Methods of Postrationality: Chapter One: Em Dashes Colons and Ellipses, Littérateurs Go Wild"
Because you underestimate how off-putting it is to people when things are deleted with no clear accountability or visibility. It's way worse than having an off-topic lousy post sitting on the page for a few days. It is like a hundred times worse.
You have to provide transparency (e.g. a "see deleted" section or a list of moderator actions) or rationale (e.g. Metafilter's deletion reasons and MetaTalk) or people get paranoid that there is weird, self-interested censorship and that the moderators aren't acting in the interests of the community. This is an Ancient Internet Feeling.
In response to
comment
by
on
Consider giving an explanation for your deletion this time around. "Harry Yudkowsky and the Methods of Postrationality: Chapter One: Em Dashes Colons and Ellipses, Littérateurs Go Wild"
I don't think it's a good idea to write things expressing opinions like this as if you're presenting the majority view, even when you think it is. I for one completely disagree with the first paragraph, and would only like transparency wrt deletions if it was unobtrusive.
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Less intelligence can render you immune to a lot of the anti epistemology running around out there. A lot of very stupid ideas take some intelligence to consume.
I like the concept of cognitive miserliness, though I've thought of it as cognitive aversion.
While I'm cognitively compulsive, and expect most people to have a greater aversion to thought than I do, they do seem compulsive in their aversion, paying huge costs to avoid putting out even the most trivial cognitive effort. "No, I don't wanna think, and you can't make me!"
I'd note the guy's "rational analysis of the Jack->Anne->George problem left much to be desired. Just list out the options and test them. Notation matters.
JackM->AnneM->GeorgeNM
JackM->AnneNM->GeorgeNM
Similarly, the bat and ball prices are trivial if you just write out the equation.
The way to be a cognitive miser is the use the right tools and notation. He might have demonstrated effective "mindware" in these problems.
The author also needs to work on his own rationality. The car example is just bad start to finish. You need a lot more information to even estimate net deaths from the car in question.
His gratuitous imposition of his own moral assumptions are worse.
Preferring your side is not necessarily dysrational. What rationality has to do with moral judgments is a non trivial topic.
Which has nothing to do with the point being made.