kilobug

Just a small nitpciking correction : the metric system wasn't invented in the 1600s, but in the late 1700s during French Revolution.

Replying toThe Moral Of The Story

kilobug8y

The Moral Of The Story

Just a small nitpicking correction : the metric system wasn't created in the 1600s, but in the late 1700s, during French Revolution.

Replying toCircles of discussion

kilobug9y

Circles of discussion

Interesting proposal.

I would suggest one modification : a "probation" period for contents, changing the rule "Content ratings above 2 never go down, except to 0; they only go up." to "Once a content staid for long enough (two days? one week?) at level 2 or above, it can never go down, only up" to make the system less vulnerable to the order in which content gets rated.

Replying toCircles of discussion

kilobug9y

Circles of discussion

The same as "Content ratings above 2 never go down, except to 0", once content as been promoted to level 3 (or 4 or 5) once, it'll never go lower than that.

Replying to2016: a year in review in science

kilobug9y

2016: a year in review in science

Something important IMHO is missing from the list : no new physics were discovered in LHC, even running at 14TeV, no Susy, no new particle, nothing but a confirmation of all predictions of Standard Model.

It's relatively easy to miss because it's a "negative" discovery (nothing new), but since many were expecting some hints towards new physics from the 2016 LHC runs, the confirmation of the Standard Model (and the death sentence it is to many theories, like many forms of SUSY) is news.

Replying toMismatched Vocabularies

kilobug9y

Mismatched Vocabularies

Answer 1 is not always possible - it's possible when you're answering on IRC or Internet forum, but usually is not in real life conversation.

As for #3, it is sometimes justified - there are people out there who will use unnecessarily obscure words just to appear smarter/impress people, or who will voluntarily use unnecessarily complex language just to obfuscate the flaws of their reasoning.

You're right than #1 is (when available) nearly always the best reaction, and that the cases were #3 is true (unless you're speaking to someone trying to sell you homeopathy, or some politicians) are rare, but people having mis-calibrated heuristics is sadly a reality we have to deal with.

Replying toThe 12 Second Rule (i.e. think before answering) and other Epistemic Norms

kilobug9y

The 12 Second Rule (i.e. think before answering) and other Epistemic Norms

Sounds like a good idea, but from a practical pov how do you count those 12 seconds ? I can count 12 seconds more or less accurately, but I can't do that as a background process while trying to think hard. Do you use some kind of a timer/watch/clock ? Or the one asking the question counts on his finger ?

I know the "12 seconds" isn't a magical number, if it ends up being "10" or "15" it won't change much, but if you give a precise number (not just "think before answering") you've to somehow try to respect it.

Replying toInverse cryonics: one weird trick to persuade anyone to sign up for cryonics today!

kilobug9y

Inverse cryonics: one weird trick to persuade anyone to sign up for cryonics today!

I expect that the utility per unit time of future life is significantly higher than what we have today, even taking into account loss of social network.

Perhaps, but that's highly debatable. Anyway, my main point was that the two scenarios (bullet / cryonics) are not anywhere near being mathematically equivalent, there are a lot of differences, both in favor and against cryonics, and pretending they don't exist is not helping. If anything, it just reinforces the Hollywood stereotype of the "vulkan rationalist" who doesn't have any feeling or emotion, and that basically fails to understand what makes life worth being lived. And that's pretty harmful from a PR point of view.

Of course

kilobug10y

Inverse cryonics: one weird trick to persuade anyone to sign up for cryonics today!

Hum, first I find you numbers very unlikely - cryonics costs more than $1/day, and definitely have less than 10% of chance of working (between the brain damage done by the freezing, the chances that the freezing can't be done in time, disaster striking the storage place before resurrection, risk of society collapse, unwillingness of future people to resurrect you, ...).

Then, the "bullet" scenario isn't comparable to cryonics, because it completely forgets all the context and social network. A significant part of why I don't want to die (not the only reason, by far, but definitely not a minor on either) is that there are people I care about and who either... (read more)

Replying toOpen thread, Jul. 18 - Jul. 24, 2016

kilobug10y

Open thread, Jul. 18 - Jul. 24, 2016

Well, I would consider it worrying if a major public advocate of antideathism were also publically advocating a sexuality that is considered disgusting by most people - like say pedophilia or zoophilia.

It is an unfortunate state of the world, because sexual (or political) preference shouldn't have any significant impact on how you evaluate their position on non-related topics, but that's how the world works.

Consider someone who never really thought about antideathism, open the newspaper the morning, reads about that person who publically advocate disgusting political/sexual/whatever opinions, and then learn in that article that he also "considers death to be a curable disease". What will happen ? The person will bundle... (read more)

Paris LW Meetup - LHC Exhibit - 17/01/2015

kilobug

11y

We'll be organizing a meetup of LW Paris at "Palais de la Découverte" in order to view the exhibit on LHC (link in French, sorry) and speak about it (and any related - or even unrelated - subject) between LWer.

The meeting is scheduled at 14h00 on Saturday 17th afternoon.

Map and location information available.

Hoping to see many Paris LWers !

Meetup : Paris LW Meetup - LHC Exhibit

kilobug

11y

Discussion article for the meetup : Paris LW Meetup - LHC Exhibit

WHEN: 17 January 2015 02:00:00PM (+0100)

WHERE: Palais de la Découverte, Avenue Franklin Delano Roosevelt 75008 Paris

We'll go see the LHC exhibit and speak about it (and any other related theme) between LWers.

Discussion article for the meetup : Paris LW Meetup - LHC Exhibit

The VNM independence axiom ignores the value of information

kilobug

13y

Followup to : Is risk aversion really irrational?

After reading the decision theory FAQ and re-reading The Allais Paradox I realized I still don't accept the VNM axioms, especially the independence one, and I started thinking about what my true rejection could be. And then I realized I already somewhat explained it here, in my Is risk aversion really irrational? article, but it didn't make it obvious in the article how it relates to VNM - it wasn't obvious to me at that time.

Here is the core idea: information has value. Uncertainty therefore has a cost. And that cost is not linear to uncertainty.

Let's take a first example: A is being offered a... (read 281 more words →)

How to tell apart science from pseudo-science in a field you don't know ?

kilobug

13y

First, a short personal note to make you understand why this is important to me. To make a long story short, the son of a friend has some atypical form of autism and language troubles. And that kid matters a lot to me, so I want to become stronger in helping him, to be able to better interact with him and help him overcome his troubles.

But I don't know much about psychology. I'm a computer scientist, with a general background of maths and physics. I'm kind of a nerd, social skills aren't my strength. I did read some of the basic books advised on Less Wrong, like Cialdini, Wright or Wiseman, but... (read 156 more words →)

Neil Armstrong died before we could defeat death

kilobug

13y

The sad news broke tonight : Neil Armstrong, the first human to ever walk another world, died today. We lost him forever. He died before we could defeat death.

Once again the horror of death strikes. This time, in addition from wiping from us forever a hero of humanity, he wiped from us forever a memory that will never exist again. Never again will a human being be able to experience being the first to walk another world. That beautiful experience is lost forever too, along with all the memories, dreams, desires and wishes that made Neil Armstrong.

But thanks to him, humanity made a giant leap. We'll fill the stars and conquer death. The spark of intelligence and sentience will not extinguish. That's the best we can do to honour him.

Source : http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/25/us-usa-neilarmstrong-idUSBRE87O0B020120825

-3

Why space stopped captivating minds ?

kilobug

14y

This article http://www.huffingtonpost.com/andrew-kessler/why-you-should-be-more-interested-in-mars-than-the-olympics_b_1712462.html -- ok, I admit, I read Slashdot sometimes, no one is perfect ;) -- made me wonder why the awesomeness of space conquest stopped motivating people.

I remember the tales of my parents at the time of the Apollo landing, it was indeed instilling awe and wonder in the minds of people. It was followed by people like the Olympics or the football competitions are. And nowadays, NASA about to send a nuclear-powered rover to Mars, in a very delicate mission requiring the best of human engineering and scientific skills, and not in line in most media, most people not even aware of it? How did we fall that low?

Sure... (read more)

Interesting rationalist exercise about French election

kilobug

14y

The newspaper "Le Monde" made an interesting exercise for rationalists in the context of the French election.

They first made a classical "which is your best candidate" poll, in which they ask multiple choice questions about various topics (for each question, you must select one answer, and how important the issue is for you), and at the end, they select the candidate that (according to them) is closest to your answers. Nothing new in that.

But then, they made a much more interesting (at least from a rationality training point of view) exercise : they asked the same questions, but not asking "what is your opinion on the topic ?" and "how is this... (read 161 more words →)

Is risk aversion really irrational ?

kilobug

14y

Disclaimer: this started as a comment to Risk aversion vs. concave utility function but it grew way too big so I turned it into a full-blown article. I posted it to main since I believe it to be useful enough, and since it replies to an article of main.

Abstract

When you have to chose between two options, one with a certain (or almost certain) outcome, and another which involves more risk, even if in term of utilons (paperclips, money, ...) the gamble has a higher expectancy, there is always a cost in a gamble : between the time when you take your decision and know if your gamble fails or succeeded (between the... (read 2632 more words →)

Less Wrong and non-native English speakers

kilobug

14y

Hello Less Wrongers.

I'm still relatively new to the LW community, but I would like to share with you a few comments and ideas for making LW a better place for non-native English speakers.

There are two classes of people among non-native English speakers (of course, those boundaries are fuzzy) :

People who, like me, are relatively fluent in English, but not who don't have the same fluency at English as natives do.
People who don't speak much English at all.

The problems are of course different between 1. and 2., but yet I can see ways to improve things to both categories.

Moderately fluent English speakers

Being a member of 1., here are my feelings after a few... (read 550 more words →)

Why would we think artists perform better on drugs ?

kilobug

14y

Introduction

It is common knowledge that many artists have used drugs (alcohol, opiates, cannabis, LSD, ...) and that this account for part of their creativity. This common knowledge is usually opposed to people advocating rationality in sentences like "but with only your rationality, we wouldn't have much art", "you need chaos to make art" or even "the best artists were that great because they were irrational".

Eliezer partly addressed the issue in the lawful intelligence Sequence. While this Sequence is very interesting, I feel it didn't completely address the issue (unlike most of the Sequences). My hypothesis is that it's mostly focused on what's important to building a Friendly AI (which is a worthy... (read 3104 more words →)

LESSWRONG
LW

LESSWRONG
LW

A few analogies to illustrate key rationality points

Is risk aversion really irrational ?

Less Wrong and non-native English speakers

How to tell apart science from pseudo-science in a field you don't know ?

kilobug

kilobug

Paris LW Meetup - LHC Exhibit - 17/01/2015

Meetup : Paris LW Meetup - LHC Exhibit

The VNM independence axiom ignores the value of information

How to tell apart science from pseudo-science in a field you don't know ?

Neil Armstrong died before we could defeat death

Why space stopped captivating minds ?

Interesting rationalist exercise about French election

kilobug

A few analogies to illustrate key rationality points

Is risk aversion really irrational ?

Less Wrong and non-native English speakers

How to tell apart science from pseudo-science in a field you don't know ?

kilobug

kilobug

Paris LW Meetup - LHC Exhibit - 17/01/2015

Meetup : Paris LW Meetup - LHC Exhibit

The VNM independence axiom ignores the value of information

How to tell apart science from pseudo-science in a field you don't know ?

Neil Armstrong died before we could defeat death

Why space stopped captivating minds ?

Interesting rationalist exercise about French election

Discussion article for the meetup : Paris LW Meetup - LHC Exhibit

Discussion article for the meetup : Paris LW Meetup - LHC Exhibit

Abstract

Moderately fluent English speakers

Introduction