Yeah I respect Craig. In the same way I respect a lion. That guy would likely trash me in a debate (especially since he debates topics he chooses).
I would enjoy both comments on this as well as meta comments on my general process. There might be things that seem like dumb or crazy to you and they may be dumb or crazy! I find it hard to do experiments and this is the best way I have found.
Here the first message, where I talked about how I was worried about spreading sickness, didn't send, which left a pretty funny interaction.
I am @nathanpmyoung from twitter. I am trying to make the world better and I want AI partners for that.
Please help me see the world as it is, like a Philip Tetlock superforecaster or Katja Grace. Do not flinch from hard truths or placate me with falsehoods. Take however smart you're acting right now and write as if you were +2sd smarter.
Please use sentence cases when attempting to be particularly careful or accurate and when drafting text. feel free to use lowercase if we are being more loose. feel free to mock me, especially if I deserve it. Perhaps sugge...
Reminder that up and downvotes are for whether you think someone is a notable journalist, otherwise the system won't work at all. (cos people will be heavily penalised for suggesting journalists we don't like)
I sort of think that if you think they have good/bad vibes you can vote. For most people, most of us won't have heard of them or read much of their coverage. And if you think the number is way too high you might want to comment why you think it's off.
"Richard Hanania was basically wrong, but so were the markets"
I do not see the markets giving a big vote in favour of trump at the election. I cannot even pick out where the election is. To me, an equally plausible theory is that markets carried on seeing economic growth until the tariffs (which are very visible).
Group Link: https://chat.whatsapp.com/K54tAk9YyFPKJWAJQt7iTK
For the London group, this link didn't work for me.
I am excited about improvements to the wiki. Might write some.
Claims
The claims logo is ugly.
This piece was inspired partly by @KatjaGrace who has a short story idea that I hope to cowrite with her. Also partly inspired by @gwern's discussion with @dwarkeshsp
What would you conclude or do if
It's hard to know, because I feel this thing. I hope I might be tempted to follow the breadcrumbs suggested and see that humans really do talk about consciousness a lot. Perhaps to try and build a biological brain and quiz it.
I was not at the session. Yes Claude did write it. I assume the session was run by Daniel Kokatajlo or Eli Lifland.
If I had to guess, I would guess that the prompt show is all it got. (65%)
I wish we kept and upvotable list of journalists so we could track who is trusted in the community and who isn't.
Seems not hard. Just a page with all the names as comments. I don't particularly want to add people, so make the top level posts anonymous. Then anyone can add names and everyone else can vote if they are trustworthy and add comments of experiences with them.
This journalist wants to talk to me about the Zizian stuff.
https://www.businessinsider.com/author/rob-price
I know about as much as the median rat, but I generally think it's good to answer journalists on substantive questions.
Do you think is a particularly good or bad idea, do you have any comments about this particular journalist. Feel free to DM me.
How might I combine these two datasets? One is a binary market, the other is a date market. So for any date point, one is a percentage P(turing test before 2030) the other is a cdf across a range of dates P(weakly general AI publicly known before that date).
Here are the two datasets.
Suggestions:
Suggested market. Happy to take suggestions on how to improve it:
https://manifold.markets/NathanpmYoung/will-o3-perform-as-well-on-the-fron?play=true
I guess I frame this as "vibes are signals too". Like if my body doesn't like someone, that's a signal. And it might be they smell or have an asymmetric face, but also they might have some distrustworthy trait that my body recognises (because figuring out lying is really important evolutionarily).
I think it's good to analyse vibes and figure out if unfair judgemental things are enough to account for most of the bad vibes or if there is a missing component that may be fair.
Seems fine, though this doesn't seem like the central crux.
Currently:
My bird flu risk dashboard is here:
If you find it valuable, you could upvote it on HackerNews:
Yeah I wish someone would write a condensed and less onanistic version of Planecrash. I think one could get much of the benefit in a much shorter package.
I recall thinking this article got a lot right.
I remain confused about the non-linear stuff, but I have updated to thinking that norms should be that stories are accurate not merely informative with caveats given.
I am glad people come into this community to give critique like this.
Solid story. I like it. Contains a few useful frames and is memorable as a story.
I have listened to this essay about 3 times and I imagine I might do so again. Has been a valuable addition to my thinking about whether people have contact with reality and what their social goals might be.
I have used this dichotomy, 5 - 100 times during the last few years. I am glad it was brought to my attention.
Sure, but again to discuss what really happened, it wasn't that it wasn't prioritised, it was that I didn't realise it until late into the process.
That isn't prioritisation, in my view, that's halfassing. And I endorse having done so.
Or a coordination problem.
I think coordiantion problems are formed from many bad thinkers working together.
I mean the Democratic party insiders who resisted the idea that Biden was unsuitable for so long and counselled him to stay when he was pressed. I think those people were thinking badly.
Or perhaps I think they were thinking more about their own careers than the next administration being Democrat.
Yes, this is one reason I really like forecasting. I forces me to see if my thinking was bad and learn what good thinking looks like.
I think it caused them to have much less time to choose a candidate and so they chose a less good candidate than they were able to.
If thinking is the process of coming to conclusions you reflectively endorse, I think they did bad thinking and that in time people will move to that view.
Thinking is about choosing the action that actually wins, not the one that is justifiable by social reality, right?
Do you mean this as a rebuke?
I feel a little defensive here, because I think the acknowledgement and subsequent actions were more accurate and information preserving than any others I can think of. I didn't want to rewrite it, I didn't want to quickly hack useful chunks out, I didn't want to pretend I thought things I didn't, I actually did hold these views once.
If you have suggestions for a better course of action, I'm open.
Do you find this an intuitive framework? I find the implication that conversation fits neatly into these boxes or that these are the relevant boxes a little doubtful.
Are you able to quickly give examples in any setting of what 1,2,3 and 4 would be?
I don't really understand the difference between simulacra levels 2 and 3.
I've never really got 4 either, but let's stick to 1 - 3.
Also they seem more like nested circles rather than levels - the jump between 2 and 3 (if I understand it correctly) seems pretty arbitrary.
Upvote to signal: I would buy a button like this, if they existed.
Physical object.
I might (20%) make a run of buttons that say how long since you pressed them. eg so I can push the button in the morning when I have put in my anti-baldness hair stuff and then not have to wonder whether I did.
Would you be interested in buying such a thing?
Perhaps they have a dry wipe section so you can write what the button is for.
If you would, can you upvote the attached comment.
Politics is the Mindfiller
There are many things to care about and I am not good at thinking about all of them.
Politics has many many such things.
Do I know about:
And can I actually confidently think that things you say are actually the case. Or do I have a surface level $100 understanding?
Poltics may or may not be the mindkiller, whatever Yud meant by that, but for me it is the mindfiller, it's just ...
Some thoughts on Rootclaim
Blunt, quick. Weakly held.
The platform has unrealized potential in facilitating Bayesian analysis and debate.
Either
Currently it does none of these and is frustrating to me.
Heading to the site I expect:
I am not sure most foodies are thinking about food with every new person. Maybe hardcore foodies?
Sure but then those things aren't due to an actual relationship with an actual God, they are for the reasons you state. Which is really really importantly different.
I find it pretty tiring to add all the footnotes in. If the post gets 50 karma or this gets 20 karma, I probably will.
@Ben Pace do you folks have some kind of substack upload tool. I know you upload Katja's stuff. If there were a thing I could put a substack address into and get footnotes properly, that would be great.
But isn't the point of karma to be a ranking system? Surely its bad if it's a suboptimal one?
I think it would be different if it happened today. Harris position seems less controversial. Not sure you'd print he was a racialist today.