Can Gifto gift better versions of Gifto?

Hello all.

I've been lurking around here and devouring the sequences for about two years now. I haven't said much because I rarely feel like I have much that's useful, or I don't feel knowledgeable about the subject. But I thought I might start commenting a bit more.

I'm 19, in Florida and studying engineering. I really want to do something that will bring the world forward in some way, and right now that has me pointed at trying to put my personal effort towards nanotechnology. For now though I'm just trying to win classes and learn as much as I can.

Not too much more than 'hi', but there it is.

The little thing at the top about how this post is part of a sequence says it's the third. Seemed like the second, and it is, but I still it still made me go check to make sure I hadn't missed anything.

Also, (since just pointing out a little error isn't really much of a comment, and neither is just saying I liked it) I found that this did really make me want to draw, at least temporarily. I'll see if I can keep that going long enough to actually do it.

I probably took an odd route to get here. About two years ago I was just happily reading some Dresden Codak, and saw he went to a Singularity Summit. He commented briefly on some of the things presented, and I followed links to the websites of various speakers. Really though, Eliezer Yudkowsky's site caught me the most. I started with The Simple Truth and over the next few months read through the sequences.

Haven't really posted much here, though I come back and read a few things from time to time.

We already have too much lesswrong-exclusive jargon. "OFT" is unnecessary.

I took the survey and was annoyed to realize that I didn't have a strong enough background to have informed answers to several questions.

Your link to dualism early on is missing a closing parenthesis. I had to click a whole extra button. Thought I might let you know and save others from this taxing ordeal. Also, in the second block quote, there might be a typo, "philosophy close to the hone," instead of "bone".

Just a little error I saw in the Neoclassical Economics section:

If you are risk averse you might choose the blue box because it has higher expected subjective value even though it has higher expected objective value.

Should be "even though it has lower expected objective value." Also, I've really enjoyed the post so far.

Also not showing up in some urls, like this.