Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

Comment author: ChristianKl 27 February 2017 12:08:42PM 1 point [-]

I'm not seeing how it's an issue if an algorithm isn't simple, so I'm interested in why you consider a certain simplicity to be desireable.

Comment author: tut 27 February 2017 03:51:52PM 0 points [-]

A simpler algorithm runs faster. Since these things occasionally get used for practical things that might matter. Then some people have an aesthetic preference for simpler models, maybe related to having learned Occam's razor too early.

Comment author: tut 31 January 2017 05:21:03PM 1 point [-]

I have it in my RSS reader. I read almost everything, but often more than a week after it's posted when I happen to want something to read. I vote more often than I comment, but not nearly a quarter of everything.

Comment author: tut 24 January 2017 10:00:33PM 1 point [-]

Has the password changed on the username2 account?

Comment author: Erfeyah 30 December 2016 10:52:58AM 2 points [-]

I am seeing an 'epistemic status' descriptor used in some posts. If I want to use it does the community have a standard vocabulary described in a post somewhere or is it up to the author to use it as they like?

Comment author: tut 30 December 2016 11:42:42AM 2 points [-]

I don't think there's any standardization. People just make it up as they go. Scott often uses the phrase epistemic status at slatestarcodex, I think that's where it come from.

Comment author: username2 14 December 2016 07:34:40PM 1 point [-]

I would not upvote an anonymous account whenever possible

That's a strange rule. Why?

Comment author: tut 15 December 2016 05:18:05PM 1 point [-]

By using the anon account you choose not to connect your own account to this comment. So the usual reason to upvote presumably doesn't apply. But if the common account gets a lot of karma somebody will use it for mass downvoting.

Comment author: Good_Burning_Plastic 21 November 2016 08:27:51AM 0 points [-]

how Islam is a "religion of peace"

Wait, I had always taken that to refer to etymology. Do people interpret it differently?

Comment author: tut 21 November 2016 12:23:15PM 1 point [-]

It's just a pun. Islam = SLM = salaam = peace. But yes, people do argue about it as though it was a real claim about the nature of Islam.

Comment author: turchin 19 October 2016 11:02:27AM 3 points [-]

The page http://lesswrong.com/r/discussion/new/ returns error for me for 12 hours, but other pages are fine. Is it only my glitch?

error text: "You have encountered an error in the code that runs Less Wrong. The site maintainers have been informed and will get to it is as soon as they can. In the unlikely event that you've bumped into this error before and think that no-one is paying attention, please report the error and how to reproduce it on http://code.google.com/p/lesswrong/issues/list'

If the error is localised you might still find awesome Less Wrong content in the Main article area or in the Discussion area.

Comment author: tut 19 October 2016 11:18:50AM 1 point [-]

I seem to have the same thing

Comment author: [deleted] 03 September 2016 05:48:04AM -1 points [-]

My girlfriend and I disagreed about focussing on poor vs richer countries in terms of doing good. She made an argument along the lines of:

'In poorer countries the consumer goods are targeted to that class of poor people so making difference in inequality in places like Australia is more important than in poor countries because they are deprived of a supply of goods because the consumer culture is targeted towards the wealthier middle class.'

What do you make of it?

In response to comment by [deleted] on Open Thread, Aug 29. - Sept 5. 2016
Comment author: tut 03 September 2016 07:45:37AM 1 point [-]

'In poorer countries the consumer goods are targeted to that class of poor people so making difference in inequality in places like Australia is more important than in poor countries because they are deprived of a supply of goods because the consumer culture is targeted towards the wealthier middle class.'

If that's your real reason, perhaps the best way to help poor Australians is to import stuff from Africa so that they get that supply of suitable goods. Or better yet invite some Kenyans to teach them how to make things themselves.

Comment author: Dr_Manhattan 07 August 2016 04:01:44PM 0 points [-]

I agree figuring out whether this might collapse ecosystems is important, (and what this collapse would entail, it would probably go beyond mosquitos and lead to some species rebalancing, but pretty darn sure not "destroy everything" either)

Comment author: tut 08 August 2016 06:03:26AM *  0 points [-]

There are mosquito populations that you shouldn't try to exterminate, because they are important to their ecosystem. If you get rid of them a bunch of birds have no food and so they are gone too etc. But they are up here in the arctic. Getting rid of all the tropical mosquitoes is good for everyone and does not have any great effects on any ecosystem. Everyone that eats mosquitoes there also has other insects that they prefer to eat.

Comment author: SquirrelInHell 28 July 2016 08:25:18AM 1 point [-]

Thanks a lot; I'll this it into account, and think how to improve this in next versions.

Though with the "next day" button, it would be a hard tradeoff - you might not have had this experience, but sometimes you travel and your timezone settings get messed up, or your phone's clock is reset etc. It's possible to design something that would avoid these problems, but it's a pretty big change in the internals of the app.

The temptation to delay clicking it and catch up the next day is strong.

This is surprising to me - the algorithm in the app makes it strictly easier to catch up when you click the button first, and then do the tasks rather than the other way around. Is it not enough incentive to make you want to click the button, rather than "cheat"?

Comment author: tut 28 July 2016 10:51:00AM *  1 point [-]

I think it is about the don't break the streak thing. Suppose that you decide to run every day, and you do it in the morning every day from Sunday to Thursday, then sleep in and don't have time for it on Friday. Now on Saturday you can either advance the day before your run and have a one day streak, or you can run twice, once before and once after advancing the day and have a seven day streak.

View more: Next