LESSWRONG
LW

All of edge_retainer's Comments + Replies

Orienting to 3 year AGI timelines
edge_retainer90

I've seen this take a few times about land values and I would bet against it. If society gets mega rich based on capital (and thus more or similarly inequality) I think the cultural capitals of the US (LA, NY, Bay, Chicago, Austin, etc.) and most beautiful places (Marin/Sonoma, Jackson hole, Park City, Aspen, Vail, Scotsdale, Florida Keys, Miami, Charleston, etc.) will continue to outpace everywhere else. 

Also the idea that New York is expensive because that's where the jobs are doesn't seem particularly true to me. Companies move to these places as m... (read more)

Reply
I would have shit in that alley, too
edge_retainer10

its a public externality, you don't need a government division to run bathrooms, you just need to do 1. + provide a subsidy

Reply
Why I don't believe in the placebo effect
edge_retainer41

Yea, the Cochrane meta-study aggregates a bunch of heterogenous studies so the aggregated results are confusing to analyze. The unfortunate reality is that it is complicated to get a complete picture - one may have to look at the individual studies one by one if they truly want to come to a complete understanding of the lit. 

Reply
2transhumanist_atom_understander
Yes, and I did look at something like four of the individual studies of depression, focusing on the ones testing pills so they would be comparable to the Prozac trial. As I said in the post, they all gave me the same impression: I didn't see a difference between the placebo and no-pill groups. So it was surprising to see the summary value of -0.25 SMD. Maybe it's some subtle effect in the studies I looked at which you can see once you aggregate. But maybe it's heterogeneity, and the effect is coming from the studies I didn't look at. As I mentioned in the post, not all of the placebo interventions were pills.
Arjun Panickssery's Shortform
edge_retainer34

Betting against republicans and third parties on poly is a sound strategy, pretty clear they are marketing heavily towards republicans and the site has a crypto/republican bias. For anything controversial/political, if there is enough liq on manifold I generally trust it more (which sounds insane because fake money and all). 

That being said, I don't like the way Polymarket is run (posting the word r*tard over and over on Twitter, allowing racism in comments + discord, rugging one side on disputed outcomes, fake decentralization), so I would strongly consider not putting your money on PM and instead supporting other prediction markets, despite the possible high EV. 

Reply
OpenAI: Fallout
edge_retainer21

As a trust fund baby who likes to think I care about the future of humanity, I can confidently say that I would at least consider it, though I'd probably take the money. 

Reply
OpenAI: Fallout
edge_retainer123

Is anyone else shocked that no one before Daniel refused to sign? 
 

  • Someone who left on bad terms and was incredibly pissed at open ai
  • Interested in AI but has low marginal utility of money (academic, trust-fun baby, otherwise already rich)
  • Ethical grounds 

I guess I shouldn't be coming to this conclusion in 2024 but holy cow are people greedy. 

Reply
2silentbob
That seems like a rather uncharitable take. Even if you're mad at the company, would you (at least (~falsely) assuming this all may indeed be standard practice and not as scandalous as it turned out to be) really be willing to pay millions of dollars for the right to e.g. say more critical things on Twitter, that in most cases extremely few people will even care about? I'm not sure if greed is the best framing here. (Of course the situation is a bit different for AI safety researchers in particular, but even then, there's not that much actual AI (safety) related intel that even Daniel was able to share that the world really needs to know about; most of the criticism OpenAI is dealing with now is on this meta NDA/equity level)