All of coyotespike's Comments + Replies

Me! Me! I totally took the survey!

This is an excellent post, which I'll return to in future. I particularly like the note about the convergence between Superforecasting, Feynman, Munger, LW-style rationality, and CFAR - here's a long list of Munger quotations (collected by someone else) which exemplifies some of this convergence. http://25iq.com/quotations/charlie-munger/

3RomeoStevens
There's also a pretty big overlap with the intelligence community which is briefly discussed in Superforecasting (the good judgement project was funded by IARPA).
0katydee
Excellent link.

Thanks to ScottL for writing this concise yet (apparently) thorough overview of systems theory. I've long been curious about systems theory, mostly because the term systems biology sounds interesting, and this helps scratch that itch.

I may "Ankify" it, at least for org-drill.

RichardKenneway's posts here also added a lot of value. Based on this introduction, I basically agree that systems theory is a map without much predictive value. But I'll add that a map, or a vocabulary if you will, is useful in that it lets us indicate what we're talking abo... (read more)

I applaud your thorough and even-handed wiki entry. In particular, this comment:

"One take-away is that someone in possession of a serious information hazard should exercise caution in visibly censoring or suppressing it (cf. the Streisand effect)."

Censorship, particularly of the heavy-handed variety displayed in this case, has a lower probability of success in an environment like the Internet. Many people dislike being censored or witnessing censorship, the censored poster could post someplace else, and another person might conceive the same idea... (read more)

8Houshalter
Examples of censorship failing are easy to see. But if censorship works, you will never hear about it. So how do we know censorship fails most of the time? Maybe it works 99% of the time, and this is just the rare 1% it doesn't. On reddit, comments are deleted silently. The user isn't informed their comment has been deleted, and if they go to it, it still shows up for them. Bans are handled the same way. This actually works fine. Most users don't notice it and so never complain about it. But when moderation is made more visible, all hell breaks loose. You get tons of angry PMs and stuff. Lesswrong is based on reddit's code. Presumably moderation here works the same way. If moderators had been removing all my comments about a certain subject, I would have no idea. And neither would anyone else. It's only when big things are removed that people notice. Like an entire post that lots of people had already seen.
-2rayalez
I'm new to the subject, so I'm sorry if the following is obvious or completely wrong, but the comment left by Eliezer doesn't seem like something that would be written by a smart person who is trying to suppress information. I seriously doubt that EY didn't know about Streisand effect. However the comment does seem like something that would be written by a smart person who is trying to create a meme or promote his blog. In HPMOR characters give each other advice "to understand a plot, assume that what happened was the intended result, and look at who benefits." The idea of Roko's basilisk went viral and lesswrong.com got a lot of traffic from popular news sites(I'm assuming). I also don't think that there's anything wrong with it, I'm just sayin'.

I thought your article on SRS in the classroom was one of the best articles produced on LW in recent years - it was a really useful case study. I'm similarly enthusiastic about this article. I'll write down and try these clever hacks, and let you know how it goes. Thanks!

"Thinking Physics is Gedanken Physics" is a brilliantly intuitive approach to physics from mechanics to relativity.

Hmmm. The fear of hell is a tough one: as I said above, I'd largely dealt with that fear before "leaving the fold." I suppose you somehow need to train your System 1 - to reprogram yourself, to experience that you have nothing to fear. For me, this happened over time as I gradually got more comfortable with increasing degrees of irreligion. Some other suggestions follow.

Hell and other people

For instance, it may help to think about the many non-Christians of superlative moral character. I mean, even the medieval Christians called Socrates a "... (read more)

0Aiyen
Actually, I don't have any of the community-based fears. Most of my friends are atheist or irreligious, and while my family would be concerned, I'm not especially worried about their reactions. The guide for the recently deconverted is nice, but I'm still having fears. Sorry-I'm not trying to drag things out! But this is taking a while, and I wish there was a way to just stop worrying.

Thanks for the paper, and that's a fantastic quote.

Sadly, you can no longer see the full version on Khan Academy.

https://khanacademy.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/203353750-Where-is-the-Knowledge-Map-Star-Map-math-overview-

The Exercise Dashboard is not as helpful for highlighting dependencies: https://www.khanacademy.org/exercisedashboard

You may be able to find other knowledge maps; Khan wasn't the first to have the idea. I like Kaj's idea as well. I compared the curricula of several majors at MIT to come up with a core curriculum, useful across engineering, computer science, and biology.

Thanks for the writeup, and an excellent article. Note that the students do still live together, in quasi-dorms - a smart move for motivation and for network-building. I believe the students are supposed to spend a significant amount of time in the other locations Minerva is opening around the world: a year here, a year there, and so on.

I find Minerva an exciting experiment. Law schools have a similar, if much lower-tech, philosophy about classes. In law school, ideally classes focus less on covering content (which you must do prior to class) and more on ... (read more)

1Natha
Hey, thanks for the comment! I have never had been in a law school classroom, but I remember reading about the law school experience in Shulman's (2005) signature pedagogies in the professions article; he argues that law school, medical school, clergy school, design school, etc, have unique educational approaches because these facilitate learning of the skills and dispositions valued by each profession (e.g., the back-and-forth, often harsh exchanges characteristic of a law school classroom train you to "think like a lawyer", to handle conflicting views/interpretations, and to make an abiding distinction between legal reasoning and personal moral judgements. I thought it was a cool article in general, but I especially liked how he pointed out the one thing they all have in common: "Pedagogies nearly always entail public student performance; without it, instruction cannot proceed. ...this emphasis on student's active performance reduces the most significant impediments to learning in higher education: passivity, invisibility, anonymity, lack of accountability. So much depends on student contributions... there is an inherent uncertainty associated with those situations (direction of discussion jointly produced by the instructor's plan and the students' responses), rendering classroom settings unpredictable and surprising, raising the stakes for both students and instructors. Learning to deal with uncertainty in the classroom models one of the most crucial aspects of professionalism, namely, the ability to make judgements under uncertainty."

I like this question, because I should get better at this myself. Since this sort of thing does require some time and effort, I'll focus on low-hanging fruit - the traits I most want to improve. While we're waiting for someone who has more experience with this, here are two nice articles I found:

http://quantifiedself.com/2011/04/how-to-self-experiment/

http://hplusmagazine.com/2012/11/14/quantified-self-how-to-designing-self-experiments/

How flattering; I've now done so. Also, I very much like your approach to learning math by grounding it in concrete subjects. Many people say they learned calculus best by learning it alongside physics, since calculus appears much more concrete when you look at the velocity and arc of, say, a fired cannonball.

Finally, here's an excellent article from Barbara Oakley, who learned math starting about age 26 after getting out of the Army. She's now an engineering prof, and teaches a MOOC called "Learning How to Learn" (I have not taken it, but I have... (read more)

I also agree with Ilya on the important algorithmic ideas, with one addition: algorithmic analysis. Just as you can describe the movement of the planets with a few simple equations, and that's beautiful, you can describe any sequence of steps to finish a task as an algorithm. And you can mathematically analyze the efficiency of that sequence: as the task gets larger, do the number of steps required to finish it grow linearly, quadratically, logarithmically (we hope)?

This is a broadly applicable and powerful idea, since pretty much everything (even learnin... (read more)

As Ilya recommended, a great choice for programming in general is the legendary Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs (aka SICP, aka "the wizard book"). Here is an interactive version: https://xuanji.appspot.com/isicp/. (You can find solutions to the problems here, but of course use sparingly if at all: http://community.schemewiki.org/?sicp-solutions)

If you benefit from more instruction than a solo journey through SICP, I cannot recommend highly enough MIT's Introduction to Computer Programming course, which remains one of the best ed... (read more)

+1 for Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs (aka SICP, aka "the wizard book") - this is a legendary programming book. Here is an interactive version: https://xuanji.appspot.com/isicp/.

I also agree on the important algorithmic ideas, with one addition: algorithmic analysis. Just as you can describe the movement of the planets with a few simple equations, and that's beautiful, you can describe any sequence of steps to finish a task as an algorithm. And you can mathematically analyze the efficiency of that sequence: as the task gets lar... (read more)

2Capla
and Will you make top level comments for both of these, so that people can vote on them? (I can do it, but I figure you should get any karma from the upvotes)

I'm just turning 30. I spent my 20s in education (undergraduate and law school) and the Army. I'm now interested in technology and entrepreneurship. For several years, I was extremely frustrated that I didn't know any math or programming: my humanities background felt like a huge waste of time. In other words - I really feel your frustration at being "behind the curve."

However, even a third of the way through life isn't too late to change course - remember, you and I are only a decade past the normal college years, when most people learn their tr... (read more)

As Dorikka ackowledges above, personal notes often use a hard-to-read shorthand (I know mine do). I have roughly translated this note to a form I can more easily understand, below.

"Mind-states are non-stable with respect to attributes valued by some agents." People change their minds and selves, in important ways.

"This is true not only with respect to death, etc but also biological/chemical changes that occur perpetually, causing behaviors in the presence of identical stimuli/provocations to differ substantially." People's minds chang... (read more)

0Error
Now what will be really interesting is third party pull requests for minds...

"Indoctrination seems to plant a seed that is (almost) immune to purely rational debunking...You have to find a way to examine the indoctrination itself, not its manifestations." I like this concise way of putting it a lot, and it's heartening to hear someone else had this same difficult-to-articulate experience.

BTW, I think the people downvoting may have mistaken which side these posts are on, due to skimming through the thread.

2ChristianKl
Hopefully posts don't get simply downvoted based on the side they are on. I haven't downvoted but I guess it's because the post isn't very clear.

I'm going to chime in here as well. I was also raised by an extremely devout family - they are pastors and Christian counselors, and have religious degrees. As an adult, I began the process of becoming a Catholic - this is not a very good Protestant move, but I was attracted by the relative sophistication of the theology, and a certain contemplative approach one can find there. So until I was 27, while I was finishing graduate school, I was a committed Christian.

You sound like you are already on the fence. You can put the arguments on both sides with great... (read more)

3Brillyant
Yep. I tried to articulate a similar point in an open thread not long ago. This became the lynchpin of my non-belief. It became unnecessary to debunk each individual claim, rather I came to better understand the psychology behind why people tend to believe in such claims, and religion writ large. Joseph Campbell, Ernest Becker, Michael Shermer (and a bunch of the "New Atheist" gang) have all been helpful to me. I'm curious what other belief, besides religion, you targeted? This is well stated, by the way. I've found it hard to articulate around here (and other places). Indoctrination seems to plant a seed that is (almost) immune to purely rational debunking. As long as God, hell, etc. are non-zero probabilities, there is a deep emotional, fear-filled urge to cling to the "what if?" of one's childhood religious upbringing. You have to find a way to examine the indoctrination itself, not it's manifestations...since there will always be theological gymnastics ready to thwart rational and logical arguments. God is mysterious. God requires faith. God knows your thoughts and motives. You need to look into the "why" God must exhibit these characteristics in order that the religion meme survives. A sufficiently evolved God meme will always survive rational attack—those gods who didn't are no longer feared or worshiped.
1Azathoth123
Well? Are you in a happy marriage? Have you had problems with drugs?

This is a very good point, actually. It'd be better to get an instant hit without destroying the ol' teeth, and Gwern's material through your link is fascinating. I'll report back if I try it out.

That's very interesting indeed.

I get one reward per pomodoro, unless I chain the pomodoros together, in which case the reward matches the number of pomodoros completed (so if I do three in a row, 75 minutes of work, then I get 3 M&Ms). If I want to take a break, then I accept that I'll only get 1 M&M, instead of 2 or 3, after the next pomodoro.

In practice, then, I'm using variable intervals. Based on your feedback, I'll experiment with eating all the rewards at the end of the time interval, instead of devouring them after each pom.

What Emile said, although I do have to make sure I don't cheat! (Also, the M&Ms are in a desk drawer where I can't see them) Before I tried this, every time I goofed off during a pomodoro, the mild buzz of surfing the internet served as a reward. Now, I tell myself, "don't goof off, or no M&M for you!"

There's a second reward as well, which may not apply to everyone equally. I work full-time, basically in legal research. I used to spread 10 pomodoros out over the day (okay, 8). Now I do 10 as fast as possible, and then switch to personal research. This makes the day much more pleasurable. The M&Ms reinforce this faster-moving, more engaging schedule.

Okay, here's a preliminary update. I dropped the R Programming course on Coursera because after a basic introduction to R, the first substantive assignment jumped a couple levels in difficulty. In other words, there was a gap between the instruction and the assignment. This was frustrating. So be aware that you will need a bit of extra time to invest in order to get past this gap, either before or during the course. (I contrast this with the Introduction to Programming with Python course I'm taking on EdX from MIT, which is simply a flawless course, with a smooth and sure conceptual slope.)

Also, I've heard the term "anti to-do list" used to mean a list you make of what you've actually accomplished, instead of what you planned to accomplish (and it's a very useful tool). So I got that term mixed up with your term.

I like your concept of trying to break the flow of time-wasting activities; it sounds like a situation for some sort of pre-commitment device. "Okay, I've got an implicit list of not-so-good activities putting itself together here...I'd better break the chain and commit to read only two more articles..." Or something. I realize that doesn't really solve your terminological difficulty!

0sixes_and_sevens
I've heard those described as "to-done lists", and yes, they're very useful. I've found pre-commitment to n more indulgences generally fails if the cost to one more indulgence is sufficiently low. The only workable solution I've found is forcible pre-commitment to zero more indulgences. In the case of a directory filled with Robot Chicken episodes, closing the window on that directory when I resolve to not watch any more has proven to be very effective.

I'll be taking the Coursera course, since I have no experience in R. It's part of the Data Science Specialization. Reviews online suggest the course may be somewhat disorganized, but also said Code School's introduction was easier. So I might check out Code School as well.

The Coursera course will repeat, as ShardPhoenix said, so I'll report back when finished.

0coyotespike
Okay, here's a preliminary update. I dropped the R Programming course on Coursera because after a basic introduction to R, the first substantive assignment jumped a couple levels in difficulty. In other words, there was a gap between the instruction and the assignment. This was frustrating. So be aware that you will need a bit of extra time to invest in order to get past this gap, either before or during the course. (I contrast this with the Introduction to Programming with Python course I'm taking on EdX from MIT, which is simply a flawless course, with a smooth and sure conceptual slope.)

This article has materially helped me over the past couple of weeks. Before, I believed that ego depletion occurred from physical, mental, or emotional effort, and I viewed it as a depletable resource. This gave me a massive excuse to slag off after I finished a task.

But the idea that willpower gets a boost as soon as the brain perceives a reward gave me a different way to look at it. Now, I focus on the reward/'hit' I get from achieving small goals. As long as I celebrate each finished task, I win, and my willpower should increase rather than decrease!

Thi... (read more)