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

In response to comment by tut on LW 2.0 Open Beta Live
Comment author: Elo 21 September 2017 05:51:13PM 0 points [-]

What os, browser and add-ons are you using?

In response to comment by Elo on LW 2.0 Open Beta Live
Comment author: tut 21 September 2017 06:28:28PM *  1 point [-]

Firefox 55.0.2 32 bit, on Linux Mint KDE. No relevant add ons (adblock thing, EFF badger thing, greasemonkey but not with any scripts that should load for this page, pop up blocker thing).

In response to comment by tut on LW 2.0 Open Beta Live
Comment author: Dustin 21 September 2017 04:39:01PM 0 points [-]

What, specifically, is the problem you're having that requires patience? It's not using any notably weird/esoteric/advanced technology...

Comment author: tut 21 September 2017 05:37:31PM *  7 points [-]

I don't know. What it looks like on my end is that scrolling takes time. It is as though my browser has to do some shit to figure out what the text is, instead of just displaying it like on a normal page.

So I read a line, hit down arrow, nothing happens, I start reading the next line etc. After a while the page starts jumping around like it's doing all the down arrows at irregular intervals. Ok, that's annoying, so I stop hitting down arrow and instead read the 1-2 paragraphs that are on the top of the screen, then hit page down. Nothing happens, hit page down again etc. So I scroll back up to where I was, hitting page up once at a time and waiting for the page to scroll like it's twenty years ago and I just downloaded a large picture. Then I read the part of the text that I can see, hit page down again, sit and wait until it reacts, notice that I don't understand what I'm reading, notice that that's because I skipped a paragraph because it was behind the hoverboard, hit page up to find where I was and then try to scroll down part of a screen using the scrollbar. Nothing happens. I wait a while. The text starts to jump around again, because getting no feedback I scrolled a long way. Then I gave up.

I don't remember what the article was about, I didn't actually get to the meat of it. On most sites I would have given up and forgotten it ever existed after the first time that page down didn't work instantly.

Comment author: tut 21 September 2017 04:24:08PM 6 points [-]


I do not have the patience to read anything on that site. Or alternatively, my computer is too old and my screen too low res. But I am not sufficiently committed to LW to buy new hardware just to maybe be able to see it. Is there any possibility that the old site might remain up, maybe as some kind of accessibility thing for people who can't use the new one?

Comment author: Elo 04 September 2017 10:50:42AM 0 points [-]
Comment author: tut 04 September 2017 04:03:41PM *  0 points [-]

You tried to access the address https://lbry.io/news/20000-illegal-college-lectures-rescued, which is currently unavailable. Please make sure that the web address (URL) is correctly spelled and punctuated, then try reloading the page.

Edit: So that's weird. The above is what I got in Opera. But in Firefox I get a page that says (among many other things) that lbry isn't available to the public

Comment author: Elo 02 September 2017 09:07:33PM 0 points [-]


Comment author: tut 04 September 2017 10:26:24AM 0 points [-]

The link is 404 enabled. Or at least it was the two times I clicked on it.

Comment author: Viliam 21 March 2017 04:36:35PM 0 points [-]

An interesting way of solving the chicken-or-egg problem of a new content-publishing service.

Comment author: tut 02 September 2017 01:56:31PM 0 points [-]

Apparently it didn't last

Comment author: Dagon 27 June 2017 03:05:44PM *  0 points [-]

I think there are close to zero humans who make this tradeoff. Scope insensitivity hits too hard.

The first question, though, is "compared to what?" If I reject the deal, what's the chance intelligence will attain utopia at some point, and what's the chance of extinction? The second question is "why should I believe this offer?"

Comment author: tut 28 June 2017 08:24:08AM 0 points [-]

Whereas I would take it at 50/50. Scope insensitivity looks to me like it would hit both sides (both are all humanity forever), and so it is not clear which side it favors.

Comment author: Viliam 29 March 2017 12:08:02AM 0 points [-]

Well, Mensa sucks at numbers since its very beginning. The original plan was to select 1% of the most intelligent people, but by mistake they made it 2%, and when they later found out, they decided to just keep it as it is.

"More than two sigma, that means approximately 2%, right?" "Yeah, approximately." Later: "You meant, 2% at both ends of the curve, so 1% at each, right?" "No, I meant 2% at each." "Oh, shit."

Comment author: tut 29 March 2017 11:51:26AM 0 points [-]

What? 2 sigma means 2.5% at each end.

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.

View more: Next