All of Adele_L's Comments + Replies
Worth noting that you can easily obtain N-Acetyl Cysteine (e.g. from Amazon), which is an effective antidote to paracetamol toxicity (and the mechanism suggests it can be taken preventatively).
Based on some experiences that transgender people I know have had, it seems like a change in sex hormones can change their d/s orientation. Also, age seems to push people more towards sexual dominance.
I would be especially curious to know about groups with high conscientiousness and openness to experience.
Possibly startup-culture people?
The part that's going to really get to Hermione is the fact that someone (original Quirrell) was killed for her sake.
I don't think there are enough people who have tried it and then gone back to being monogamous for there to be a consensus - but there are a few people who have, for example, Patri Friedman.
I would guess that these people will find monogamy more satisfying after going back to it.
Vitamin K2. Vitamin K1 is produced by plants, and K2 is produced by animals and bacteria. They have very different functions in the human body, and you need them both. Supplements and fortified food are almost always K1, unless you look for K2 specifically.
Vitamin K2 is necessary for some proteins which modulate calcium in your body. Supplementing it has been found to protect both against osteoporosis and heart/artery calcification.
I'm in a similiar situation - been studying math, but looking to get a programming job. I've been using the well-accliamed Cracking the Coding Interview book to prepare for interviews. If you're interested, I would be happy to trade advice, review, or questions.
Right now, I think the main thing I need to work on is building up my network. I've done most of djm's suggestions already.
Yeah, it fills up to fast - it starts feeling uncomfortably full after just one or two days for me.
So having it every other day might be worth a try. I guess the main issue is that if we have them too often, it will clutter up /r/discussion.
It might also be worth talking to David Zureick-Brown (co-founder of MO) about this (and maybe other things). He's already interested in MIRI's work.
Mormons don't practice polygamy anymore, and they haven't for a long time (except for small 'unofficial' groups). Most Mormons I know feel pretty weird about it themselves.
Maybe that is true in many cases, but even so, it still is a bad thing to optimize for. The outside view says that most of the time, having your percentage of positive karma steadily decreasing means the quality of your comments are getting worse. If you want to be controversial and still be taken seriously, you need to signal your competence in less controversial areas.
According to the CDC, the leading causes for death for children aged 5-9 (in 2012 in the United States) are:
- Unintentional injury
- Malignant neoplasm (aka cancer)
- Congenital disorders
- Homicide
- Heart disease
If we solved aging, it seems likely we could eliminate or significantly reduce deaths from cancer, congenital disorders and heart disease.
Once we look at the 10-14 age bracket or above, suicide makes it into the top five causes of death until age ~50 and above.
We can also look at the leading causes of unintentional injury. For the 5-9 age bracket, w...
Generally, dark arts should be avoided for decision theoretic reasons - essentially you are defecting on the prisoner dilemma.
I wouldn't be too surprised if the hypothesis is true for unmodified humans, but for systems in general I expect it to be untrue. Whatever 'understanding' is, the diagonal lemma should be able to find a fixed point for it (or at the very least, an arbitrarily close approximation) - it would be very surprising if it didn't hold. Quines are just an instance of this general principle that you can actually play with and poke around and see how they work - which helps demystify the core idea and gives you a picture of how this could be possible.
I got one this year! I didn't get one last year, and someone else ended up getting very sick as a direct consequence... :(
Seems unlikely, given the existence of things like quines), and the fact that self-reference comes pretty easily. I recommend reading Godel Escher Bach, it discusses your original question in the context of this sort of self-referential mathematics, and is also very entertaining.
What was the string that generated the hash, then?
ETA: See Lumifer's link above.
Thanks for catching the error, and I think the rest of your suggestion is good, but unfortunately 32 people have taken it now (wow!) and I don't think I can change it without breaking it.
It's well known that men are better at mental rotation and other forms of spatial reasoning than women. I've always been pretty good at it - my default technique is to carefully check the relations (i.e. count the number of cubes in the segment, note the relative angle of the joint, and make sure they match). It was only recently that I realized that some people actually just rotated it in their head, and 'looked' to see if it was the same.
Anyway, I was wondering if maybe the technique used was correlated with gender.
What sex were you assigned at birth? [p...
When I need to be 95% sure I count the cubes (which is what I answered), but when being 70% sure suffices I visualize the rotation.
I visualise the rotations up until the point where it's too complex, after which I resort to checking relations
I'm not really sure how to answer this question. I can do pretty well at these simply by visualizing the rotation, and in a casual setting, where not much hinged on getting it right, I would probably just use that method because it's a lot faster and easier. But consciously checking relations does improve my performance (or at least feels more reliable), so if I was in a context where it was important to get the answers right, that's what I would do.
It's like asking whether I add up three-digit numbers in my head or work it out on paper. Depends on the context.
Almost everyone has a downvote again. What's more interesting is the short list of people who don't...
That still doesn't help for the purposes of calibration, when you have uncertainty over whether these are all the same.
The article talked about endless contrarianism, where people disagree as a default reaction, instead of because of a pre-existing difference in models. I think that is a problem in the LW community.
Yes, Yvain will write a post about the results here once it is finished. I think historically that has been around the start of the new year.
Did it! Even the digit ratio question! (which is why I am taking it relatively late)
Unsurprisingly, my digit ratio is pretty feminine (0.969 averaged over both hands).
I think for pro-abortion it is more about letting the woman decide to undergo an intervention over something which will affect her health/well-being significantly. So killing a fetus/baby might still be a certain amount of bad (maybe ramping up continuously with age), but it is more bad to not allow this choice (but this is de-emphasized by the pro-abortion movement for the obvious political reasons). I think this also explains why lots of people are ok with early-term abortions, but not late-term abortions.
Holden Karnofsky in the comments of the linked article:
I’ve discussed these sort of thing before and have an impression that the Gates Foundation is interested in it. Whether we look into this sort of thing would depend on whether we select malaria control/elimination as a priority area for GiveWell Labs, a determination that will probably be made in 2015. My off-the-cuff guess is that this sort of work is being adequately explored with support from BMGF.
1) There are a lot of LWers in the SF area. I think Ozy Frantz might be doing App Academy then.
3) Here is a Google Doc for finding LW roommates in the SF bay area.
I'll be moving there around the same time - look forward to seeing you there!
A futures contract is one where you agree to buy a specific quantity of an asset today for a specific price, but you don't pay until a specified time in the future.
If you predict it will have future value $100, and it only costs $10 now, it's worth buying, hence there will be more demand, driving the price of the futures contract up. On the other hand, if it costs $100 today, but you expect it will cost $10 in the future, then the futures contract won't be worth as much, driving the price down.
We still expect the price to be about as good of an approxima...
The first NGDP futures market is getting started based on the ideas of economist Scott Sumner. The idea is that the expected U.S. NGDP (nominal gross domestic product) is the single most important macroeconomic variable, and that having a futures (prediction) market will provide valuable information into this variable (Scott estimates that if it works, it will be worth hundreds of billions of dollars).
Unfortunately, due to US gambling laws (I think), the market will be based in New Zealand and U.S. citizens will not be allowed to participate.
Just for fun, here is how Google does:
Where is Ascension Island? --> Shows a map centered around Ascension island (worked even when I misspelled 'ascension')
What is the specific heat capacity of water? --> 4.179 S (J/g 0C), 417.9 C (J/0C) for 100 g.
When did the second world war begin? --> World War Two in Europe began on 3rd September 1939, when the Prime Minister of Britain, Neville Chamberlain, declared war on Germany. It involved many of the world's countries. The Second World War was started by Germany in an unprovoked attack on Poland.
I think Via Librum is the best, and the phrase seems to occur in actual Latin. However, it is already in use which may or may not be a problem for you.
This seems really similar to the problem Knightian uncertainty attempts to fix.
I think So8res's solution is essentially your option 3, with the strength of the disagreements being taken into account in the utility function, and then once you really have everything you care about accounted for, then the best choice is the standard one.
I think it's still a problem relative to LW.
Meta
I think LW is already too biased towards contrarian ideas - we don't need to encourage them more with threads like this.
I think this thread is for opinions that are contrarian relative to LW, and not to the mainstream.
e.g. my opinion on open borders is something that a great majority of people share but is contrarian here, shown by the fact that as of the time of writing it is currently tied for highest-voted in the thread.
Treated as a "contrarian opinion" and upvoted.
You can consider it, but conditioned on the information that you are playing against your clone, you should assign this a very low probability of happening, and weight it in your decision accordingly.
This is how I read too, usually. I think it's one of those things that works better for some people but not others. I've tried reading things the standard way, and it works for some books, but for other books I just get too bored trudging through the boring parts.
BTW, I've also been reading HoTT, so if you want to talk about it or something feel free to message me!
My guess is that someone with a similar political ideology to you upvoted forty of your comments on the recent political post.
ETA: Well I've been struck by the mysterious mass-upvoter as well! I'm pretty sure the political motivation hypothesis is wrong now.
Also, having other good partners while dealing with a bad partner can make it a lot easier, and help you recognize and get out of it faster.
...It always seemed to me that this strategy had the fatal flaw that we would not be able to tell if the AI was really already superintelligent and was just playing dumb and telling us what we wanted to hear so that we would let it loose, or if the AI really was just learning.
In addition to that fatal flaw, it seems to me that the above quote suggests another fatal flaw to the "raising an AI" strategy—that there would be a limited time window in which the AI's utility function would still be malleable. It would appear that, as soon as part of the A
Sounds good. Guess I should request to be on it before then!
I haven't read it yet, but I think that the bright dilettante caveat applies less strongly than usual given that it is disclaimed with: "My talk is for entertainment purposes only; it should not be taken seriously by anyone," and I think it's weird you felt it was necessary to bring it up for this post specifically. Do you want people to take this more seriously than Scott seems to? Anyway, I feel more suspicious going in to the post than I would otherwise because of this.
I think Scott is being overly (possibly falsely) modest here. He calls his untestable speculations "entertainment", whereas a philosophy department would call a similarly deep speculation a PhD thesis. He is a complexity theory expert, and from this point of view anything that is not a theorem or at least a mathematical conjecture is "entertainment".
Here is the newest version of the rationalist masterlist I know of, thought it's still a few months out of date. Also people who follow you (looks like we are following each other now, yay!). Also it can be fun to follow blogs for fandoms or things you think are cute, or whatever random things you are interested in.
Here is the quote in context:
So when you give to the poor, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, so that they may be honored by men. Truly I say to you, they have their reward in full. But when you give to the poor, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving will be in secret; and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you.
In my Christian upbringing, this was interpreted as colorful imagery making the point that you should not let attention ...
I think it's supposed to be a unit of sin.
Not suggesting anything like that at all, just a good and interesting thing to be aware of. Especially good to have on hand if you have kids, and I think it's probably good to take it with normal doses of paracetamol.