All of Timothy Johnson's Comments + Replies

when we're talking about our influence on future generations, we're almost always talking about the former, Bob-instead-of-Alice, type case.


I admit I haven't read Parfit yet, but can you give a concrete example of what type of influence you mean here?

I think Lewis would disagree with this claim, or at least that type of influence is not what he has in mind. The example that he uses at the beginning of Abolition of Man is about a particular school textbook, and public education is the prototypical example of "changing a particular person's values."

For a more realistic example, this phenomenon of a more accurate model being worse is a common issue in database query optimization.

When a user runs a SQL query, the optimizer uses statistics about the data to estimate the cost of many different ways to execute the query, then picks the plan with the cheapest estimate.

When the optimizer misestimates the cost and chooses a bad plan, the typical solution is to add more detailed statistics about the data. But occasionally adding more statistics can cause the optimizer to choose a plan that's actually worse.

Answer by Timothy Johnson30

For your second question, this paper describes the square root law, though in a somewhat different setting: Strong profiling is not mathematically optimal for discovering rare malfeasors | PNAS. (Incidentally, a friend of mine used this once in an argument against stop-and-frisk.)

It doesn't give a complete proof, though it describes it as a "straightforward minimization with a Lagrange multiplier".

1delton137
Very cool, will take a look. This basically solves question 1. It seems the original Solomonoff work isn't published anywhere. By the way, the author, William H. Press, is a real polymath! I am curious if there is any extension of this work to agents with finite memory..  as an example, the same situation where you're screening a large number of people, but now you have a memory where you can store N results of prior screenings for reference. I'm going to look into it.. 

This distinction reminds me of the battles in Ender's Game.

As I recall, Ender was the overall commander, but he delegated control of different parts of the fleet to various other people, as most modern militaries do.

The bugs fought as a hive mind, and responded almost instantly across the entire battlefield, which made it challenging for the humans to keep up in large-scale battles.

9lsusr
Ender's Game is about the transition from classical warfare to modern warfare. The formation-based strategies are copied from when European armies stood in a line with muskets. The later bits where Ender delegates decision making to his officers come from modern warfare doctrine.

You might be interested in reading this paper, which tries to build a vision for just such a tool: Towards a Dynamic Multiscale Personal Information Space (mit.edu).

As far as I know, nothing like it exists yet.

2[comment deleted]
1sumeetkd
"our experiences too often remain difficult, awkward, and frustrating." I'm hooked

As I understand it you've split this idea into two parts:
1. Good - People can develop their intuition to make correct predictions even without fully understanding how they can tell.
2. Bad - People frequently make mistakes when they jump to conclusions based on subconscious assumptions.

I'm confident that (2) is true, but I'm partly skeptical of (1). For example, Scott reviewed one of John Gottman's books, and concluded that it's "totally false" that he can predict who will get divorced 90% of the time: Book Review: The Seven Principles For Making Marriage W... (read more)

Did you really mean 6 AM? I was thinking of joining, but I don't usually go anywhere on Saturdays before 10. :P

2CitizenTen
No. For whatever reason, on the backend it says 1:00 pm.  It just says GMT and either you can't change that, or I haven't found out how.  (So it's at 1 pm, a more sane time )

I understood this sentence to mean that animals are intelligent insofar as they can pick up subtle body language cues.

4Collisteru
Exactly. Horses are intelligent enough to understand involuntary body language, but they still can't create societies. Harari argues that this is a point in favor of the idea that communication alone is not sufficient for mass cooperation.

There's a few one-star Amazon reviews for the book that suggest McAfee's data is incorrect or misleading. Here's a quote from one of them, which seems like a solid counterargument to me:


"However, on the first slide on page 79, he notes that the data excludes impact from Import/export of finished goods. Not raw materials but finished goods. He comments that Net import is only 4% of GDP in the US. Here he makes a (potentially) devastating error – (potentially) invalidating his conclusion.

While Net imports is indeed around 4% of GDP, the gross numbers are Exp... (read more)

2DirectedEvolution
Thanks very much for pointing this out. I hadn't seen these rebuttals before.

Thanks for the review - I appreciate that you spent the time to sift through these ideas.

When you say that we need to "be willing to make uncomfortable, difficult changes," do you have some specific changes in mind?

That depends what you mean by "computational problems". In its usual definition, a Turing machine takes a single input string, and provides a single bit as output: "Accept" or "Reject". (It may also of course run forever without providing an answer.)

For example, the question, "What is the shortest path through this list of cities?" isn't possible to encode directly into a standard Turing machine. Instead, the Turing machine can answer, "Is there a path through this list of cities with length at most k?", for some constant k.

If you don't like this, there are ways to modify the definition of a Turing machine. But for the purposes of studying computational complexity, all reasonable definitions seem to be equivalent.

2Slider
I think the machine halting can be interpreted as accepting and you mgiht be allowed to leave a number on the tape. I was wondering whether cases like the halting problem might be intedresting edgecases but TMs are not especially inferior. Church-turing thesis is about there not being anything interesting missed by what is captured by machines.

I actually think SQL is not so easily composable. For me the gold standard is the Kusto query language: Tutorial: Kusto queries in Azure Data Explorer & Azure Monitor | Microsoft Docs.

Kusto is a replacement for SQL, with syntax based on the Unix command line. I think it combines the best of both.

For example, if you want to take a SQL query and adjust it to join with another table and add another column or two, you may have to make changes at several different locations. This isn't just annoying to write - if your queries are in a version control system... (read more)

2DanB
Thanks for the tip about Kusto - it actually does look quite nice.

Turing machines can only have a finite number of states. So you can do all computation in a single step only if the problem has a finite number of possible inputs. At that point, your program is basically a lookup table.

Nontrivial computational problems will have an infinite number of possible inputs, so this strategy won't work in general.

2Pattern
Can you actually produce a look up table for perfect chess play?
2Slider
Are there computational problems that can' t be represented with turing machines?

Sorry, you misunderstood my point. Perhaps I'm being a little pedantic and unclear.

For the cities example, the point is that when the problem domain is restricted to a single example (the top 100 cities in the US), there is some program out there that outputs the list of cities in the correct order.

You can imagine the set of all possible programs, similar to The Library of Babel - Wikipedia. Within that set, there are programs that print the 100 cities in every possible order. One of them is the correct answer. I don't need to know which program that is to... (read more)

1deepthoughtlife
If that's what you meant, it is rather unclear in the initial comment. It is, in fact, very important that we do not know what the sequence is. You could see it as the computation is to determine which book in the library of Babel to look at. There is only one correct book [though some are close enough], and we have to find that one [thus, it is a search problem.] How difficult this search is, is actually a well defined problem, but it simply has multiple ways of being done [for instance, by a specialist algorithm, or a general one.] Of course, I do agree that a lookup table can make some problems trivial, but that doesn't work for this sort of thing [and a lookup table of literally everything is basically is what the Library of Babel would be.] Pure dumb search doesn't work that well, especially when the table is infinite. Edit: You can consider finding it randomly the upper bound on computational difficulty, but lowering bound requires an actual algorithm [or at least a good description of the kind of thing it is], not just the fact that there is an algorithm. The Library of Babel proves very little in this regard. (Note: I had to edit my edit due to writing something incorrect.)
Answer by Timothy Johnson10

One problem with quantifying computation is that any problem with only a single instance can be trivially solved.

For example,

  • How much computation does it take to write a program that computes the one millionth digit of pi? Easy - the program just immediately prints "1".
  • How much computation does it take to compute the shortest path passing through the 100 largest cities in the US? Again, it's easy - the program does no "real work" and instead outputs the list of the 100 largest cities in the correct order. (I don't know the correct order, but such a program
... (read more)
1deepthoughtlife
Your comment about cities is not actually true. It is (if I recall correctly), an NP-complete problem. It is quick to check, but unless all NP problems are quick to solve, this one will take a long time [100 is relatively large for the problem] unless you exploit very specific parts of the problem's structure [usually via A* search which uses a very particular kind of heuristic], and even then, you have to be willing to calculate for a long time, or accept an approximate answer if things don't line up just right. Each extra path between them that needs to be checked adds time, and there are a lot of paths. You could not even store a lookup table for this kind of problem easily unless you were certain of getting this exact problem [and creating this lookup table would not be easy.]   Your other example seems suspect as well [unless you actually checked the millionth digit of Pi]. A lookup table would work for this problem though [and lookup tables are trivial for Pi.] It is in fact useful to think about the scaling on small problems as well [mostly because some algorithms are very difficult, and become infeasible well before large sizes.] Sometimes it is correct to use an algorithm that doesn't scale well when the input size is small. For instance, hybrid quicksorts are superior to pure ones, despite using algorithms that don't scale well when sizes are small.

Working for a salary is also fundamentally a form of trade. In my case, I trade my time and expertise in writing software, and my company pays me.

Purchasing items is also trade - I trade the money I earned to buy goods and services from others.

To completely eliminate trade, I think people would need to be able to magically wish anything they desire into existence. (If you've watched The Good Place, I'm imagining something like what Janet is capable of.)

At that point, scarcity no longer exists. And since the main point of economics is to solve problems of scarcity, economics doesn't have much purpose either.

Also, note that the UK recently decreased the time range from 12 weeks to 8 weeks: UK reduces gap between two covid vaccine doses from 12 weeks to 8 weeks (livemint.com).

I'm not clear on the reason, but they have vaccinated 80% of adults with 1st doses, so perhaps they've decided that the need for 1st doses is dropping:  Vaccinations in the UK | Coronavirus in the UK (data.gov.uk).

jimv100

I think the switch to 8 weeks was at least in part driven by the different characteristics of the Delta variant. Whereas for the previous variants the two doses of the vaccine did something like 70% and 90% protection, for the Delta variant it's more like 35% and 80% (vague hand wavey numbers). So now there is similar marginal benefit to getting second doses into people, and because the roll out has been by age category, getting (say) 60-year olds from 1 dose to 2 might well be more beneficial than getting 20-year olds from 0 to 1.

2Eli Tyre
That was my impression.

Thanks for writing this so clearly - I've bookmarked it to my list of favorite software engineering posts to share with others.

3Adam Zerner
That's awesome to hear, thank you!

Isn't this just a normal consequence of scale? If you had to maintain 500 cars, you'd probably be more systematic. With just one car, the chances of it breaking down on any given day are pretty low.

My own strategy is that I take my car to get inspected every time the maintenance light comes on, which is about 5,000 miles. The rest of the time, I don't worry about it.

1Ilemauzar
Well yes, it a consequence of scale, but my purpose here is to question the incentives behind maintaining 500 cars vs. one car. Taking your car maintenance example, I would expect a vehicle fleet administrator to apply the same schedule he uses for the fleet to his daily driver. If he applied the strategy that you describe (which is essentially reactive maintenance) to the fleet, there is a higher probability of one car failing than if he only applied it to his car. Using the same checklist he uses for the fleet for his personal car (let’s assume preventative maintenance) would result in increased reliability. 

I've also played a cooperative version of this for two people, which we called Contact. It's entertaining for long road trips.

  • There's no category/question given - the game can go in any direction.
  • In each round, the players simultaneously pick words, then say them at the same time.
  • The game continues until there is a round in which the two players say the same word. The goal is to match as quickly as possible.
  • Words cannot be re-used in multiple rounds.

In theory, you could extend this to more than two people, but my guess is that it would become significantly more difficult in a larger group to get everyone to match.

3Yoav Ravid
Heh, I also know a road trip game called contact which, though similar in style, is quite different. * One player picks a word, and tells the other players the first letter of that word. * The other players need to say together words that start with the letters they have been given. They can use clues, and when one of the players thinks they have they're both thinking of the same word he'll say "1, 2, 3 contact" and then the two players will say it together.  * If any player says a word alone (including the player who picked the first word) that word is burned and cannot be used again in the round, if two players say a word together that starts with the letters they've been given, the first player reveals the next letter of the word they picked.  * The round continues until that word is guessed, and then another round starts.

I think this post would benefit from having at least one real-world example, as well as your fictional example. I can't tell what actual situations you're pointing to.

One high-level summary that occurs to me is that "trying to solve problems sometimes makes them worse" - but I think you meant something more specific than that.

I think most of the examples with any juice to them would make the post worse by dint of distraction. Examples relating to moral frontiers we no longer care about might work.

7ACrackedPot
Yes. Consider "value" as meaning "moral value" for convenience in the following scenario: Imagine a straw-environmentalist, who values reduced CO2, and who also values regulation on industry (for its own sake).  From this straw perspective, regulations which reduce CO2 are a total win.  Supposing you value reducing CO2 and disvalue regulation, this is a trade-off between two values. With respect to a proposal to regulate CO2, the straw environmentalist is in a position of relative moral privilege to you.  In a Democracy, the majority moral position confers a specific privileged position - whereas in a monarchy, those who share the moral values of the monarch may enjoy a specific privileged position, in that their moral values are expressed in society, and they can reasonably expect to not have to make any meaningful trade-offs in terms of their values, and any suggestion of such may seem outrageous from their perspective.

I used Wirecutter for this: The Best Air Purifier for 2021 | Reviews by Wirecutter (nytimes.com). I picked their top choice, the Coway AP-1512HH Mighty, about a month ago.

So far, it seems to work pretty well, and it's very quiet in standby mode - roughly similar to the fridge. But every time I fry anything on the stove, the fan automatically speeds up to the highest level, which is much louder, roughly similar to a typical conversation. On the bright side, though, at least that proves that it works.

1JohnGreer
Yes, I had the exact same experience. I was happy to see it works but it can be kind of annoying because it's the loudest right when we're going to eat or watch something.
Answer by Timothy Johnson10

I don't know if this is a complete answer, but maybe it has something to do with the average age?

India's population pyramid looks a lot different from the US or Europe:

Population of India 2020 - PopulationPyramid.net

Answer by Timothy Johnson50

What kind of constraints do you have?

There are many constraint solvers for different kinds of equations. I enjoyed using pySMT, which provides a Python wrapper for several different libraries: pysmt/pysmt: pySMT: A library for SMT formulae manipulation and solving (github.com).

Sorry, let me try again, and be a little more direct. If the New Center starts to actually swing votes, Republicans will join and pretend to be centrists, while trying to co-opt the group into supporting Republicans.

Meanwhile, Democrats will join and try to co-opt the group into supporting Democrats.

Unless you have a way to ensure that only actual centrists have any influence, you'll end up with a group that's mostly made up of extreme partisans from both sides. And that will make it impossible for the group to function as intended.

2abramdemski
Here is another possible solution (which might be bad in other respects): Maybe a formal declaration of membership only serves to increase the visibility of the group (by boosting numbers on their website). The actual position on issues cannot be "influenced". Instead, the New Center platform preforms imperial surveys of the general population to find issues on which there is broad agreement. Or: official bloc membership might get you a voice in determining which issues get put on the surveys. But ultimately the surveys determine the New Center position. This would make it difficult to take over the New Center and make it a mouthpiece for non-moderates (albeit not impossible).
2ryan_b
The short answer is the same thing that prevents the target audience from joining the reds or the blues and influencing them in the direction they would prefer: too much work. But based on the idea so far, I claim this is a requirement for effectiveness. In order to get either party to change their behavior, they need to have a good understanding of what this group of swing voters want, and that requires getting an inside view. It is much, much harder to persuade a group of people than it is to simply tell them what they want to hear.  You will be encouraged to know that this is the formal position of virtually all political operatives, because their unit of planning is an election campaign and research shows that is too short a time to effectively persuade a population of voters. It would also be super weird if when targeting disaffected voters in the middle there were no converts from the disaffected margins of either major party (who presumably will still naturally advocate for the things that drew them to the party in the first place, which is almost the same as a true believer in the party advocating). This too is a desirable outcome.

I see a few other failure points mentioned, but no one has mentioned what I consider the primary obstacle - if membership in the New Center organization is easy, what prevents partisans from joining purely to influence its decisions? And if membership is hard, how do you find enough people willing to join?

The key idea that makes Bitcoin work is that it runs essentially a decentralized voting algorithm. Proof-of-work means that everyone gets a number of votes proportional to the computational power that they're willing to spend.

You need something similar to proof-of-work here, but I don't see any good way to implement it.

4Alexei
Not sure I follow. What prevents republicans from joining democrats? I think the point is that you get peoples opt into the party and then show during elections that this party can indeed swing votes. That’s the proof of work.

Your suggestion of moral ensemble modeling sounds essentially the same to me as the final stage in Kegan's model of psychological development. David Chapman has a decent summary of it here: Developing ethical, social, and cognitive competence | Vividness.

I don't think I had noticed the relationship with statistical modeling, though. I particularly like the analogy of overfitting.

2Erich_Grunewald
Thanks for the suggestion; I wasn't aware of Robert Kegan or his work.

Yes, I fully agree that using a grammar to represent graphics is the One True Way.

There's a lab at UW that's working to extend the same philosophy to support interactive graphics:
UW Interactive Data Lab | Papers (washington.edu). I haven't had a chance to use it yet, but their examples seem pretty cool!

2dmolling
Said this in a separate comment but wanted to add here that there is a python library wrapper for this which is pretty nice also: https://altair-viz.github.io/getting_started/overview.html
3philh
That's awesome, thanks for the pointer! I've sometimes idly wondered if that would be possible.

For step-throughs, the best tool I know of is Philip Guo's PythonTutor: Python Tutor - Visualize Python, Java, C, C++, JavaScript, TypeScript, and Ruby code execution. (As you can see, it's been extended to a few other programming languages - I can only vouch for the Python version.)

To save you a click, I've copied the example visualization on the homepage below. It shows all of the variables in the entire stack at the specified point in the execution.

It's all auto-generated, so it doesn't support more complex visualizations like your Container With Most W... (read more)

Answer by Timothy Johnson50

Cal Newport is a CS professor who has written about productivity and focus for a long time. I'd recommend starting with the productivity section of his blog: Tips: Time Management, Scheduling, & Productivity - Study Hacks - Cal Newport. He's also known for his book Deep Work, which I plan to read soon.

His advice is somewhat helpful for me as a software engineer, but I think it's particularly aimed at people in research fields.

1Pablo Repetto
Appreciated. To my rss it goes.

Edit: As others have pointed out, this is not the best strategy.

___________________________
 

Nice problem! The best strategy seems to be to mix the red clay with the blue clay in small infinitesimal steps. Every bit of red clay then becomes as cold as possible, meaning that as much energy as possible is transferred to the blue clay.

Here's what we get with two steps:

  • Mix 1/2 red at 100 degrees + 1 blue at 0 degrees => 33.33 degrees.
  • Now remove the red clay, and add the other half.
  • 1/2 red at 100 degrees + 1 blue at 33.33 degrees => 55.55 degrees.

Now ... (read more)

I'm looking forward to following this!

If your analysis of the game theory of the situation is correct, we would expect that the military occasionally makes concessions to share power, but also violently reasserts their full control when they thinks it's necessary. Do you see any way for the country to break out of that cycle?

For example, how effective do you think new international sanctions will be at curbing the violence?

US: U.S. To Impose Sanctions On Myanmar Military Officials Over Coup : NPR

UK: UK announces further sanctions against Myanmar generals -... (read more)

4Tim Liptrot
There are a couple of ways out. There's an unusual cohesion in the military currently, which allows the military to pull this off. Normally military regimes are unstable because even a small faction can threaten a civil war and force a regime change. So if the current generation dies -or- becomes dependent on their intelligence agency -or- a new officer faction things change. The new faction may prefer a return to the barracks, and change the whole system. The western sanctions do not matter. Western investment, aid and loan forgiveness do matter, but no enough to stop the violence.

On wearing glasses: Do you think contacts would also be helpful?

I've noticed, for example, that my eyes aren't nearly as affected by chopping onions when I'm wearing contacts. That seems vaguely similar to COVID transmission by aerosols.

4Zvi
Nonzero helpful almost certainly, also almost certainly much less effective than glasses.

"...and that’s why you can’t haggle with store clerks."

That is the norm, at least in the US. But a friend of mine worked at Macy's, and she said customers would occasionally try to negotiate prices. They were often successful.

A quick search online found that it's possible to haggle at a lot more places than I had realized: 11 Retailers Where You Can Negotiate a Lower Price (wisebread.com).

I consider this somewhat ethically dubious, though. If the clerks are paid hourly, they don't have their own "skin in the game," so there's no way to have a fair negotiation.

When my little sister was very young, we told her that the ice cream truck was a "music truck" - it just went around playing music for people.

I don't necessarily recommend lying, but it may have prevented some tantrums...

Google is the prime example of a tech company that values ethics, or it was in the recent past. I have much less faith in Amazon or Microsoft or Facebook or the US federal government or the Chinese government that they would even make gestures toward responsibility in AI.

I work for Microsoft, though not in AI/ML. My impression is that we do care deeply about using AI responsibly, but not necessarily about the kinds of alignment issues that people on LessWrong are most interested in.

Microsoft's leadership seems to be mostly concerned that AI will be biased ... (read more)

8magfrump
I think this makes sense, but I disagree with it as a factual assessment. In particular I think "will make mistakes" is actually an example of some combination of inner and outer alignment problems that are exactly the focus of LW-style alignment. I also tend to think that the failure to make this connection is perhaps the biggest single problem in both ethical AI and AI alignment spaces, and I continue to be confused about why no one else seems to take this perspective.

Scott Alexander wrote a post related to this several years ago: Should You Reverse Any Advice You Hear? | Slate Star Codex

I wonder whether everyone would be better off if they automatically reversed any tempting advice that they heard (except feedback directed at them personally). Whenever they read an inspirational figure saying “take more risks”, they interpret it as “I seem to be looking for advice telling me to take more risks; that fact itself means I am probably risk-seeking and need to be more careful”. Whenever they read someone telling them about

... (read more)

I understand your argument that there's a systematic bias from tracking progress on relatively narrow metrics. If progress is uneven across different areas at different times, then the areas that saw progress in the recent past may not be the same areas in which we see progress today.

You don't seem to make any suggestions on what would be a better metric to use. But to me it seems like the simplest solution is just to use broader metrics. For example, instead of tracking the cost of installing solar panels, we could measure the total cost of our electric g... (read more)

2Aaron Bergman
Basically agree with this suggestion: broader metrics are more likely to be unbiased over time. Even the electric grid example, though, isn't ideal because we can imagine a future point where going from $0.0001 to $0.000000001 per kilowatt-hour, for example, just isn't relevant.  Total factor productivity and GDP per capita are even better, agreed.  While a cop-out, my best guess is that a mixture of qualitative historical assessments (for example, asking historians, entrepreneurs, and scientists to rank decades by degree of progress) and using a variety of direct and indirect objective metrics (ex. patent rates, total factor productivity, cost of energy, life expectancy) is the best option. Any single or small group of metrics seems bound to be biased in one way or another. Unfortunately, it's hard to figure out how to weight and compare all of these things. 

Yeah, I forgot to mention, I actually tried that too! I at least visited one of my teacher's other students and tried performing on her piano.

It's harder for me to tell how much it helped, but I think it was useful, at least for my own confidence.

3DirectedEvolution
One challenge in understanding your own memory slips is determining their cause. For piano performance, is it insufficient practice? Leaning too hard on muscle memory? Not playing on enough different pianos/environments? Playing in front of an audience? Or maybe you just had a bad day that day for some completely unrelated reason, like some other stressor prior to the recital? There are lots of things you can do to avoid memory slips, and the more the better. But I think it's also good for people to be skeptical/open-minded about inferring cause and effect. Better just to do the virtuous actions and assume they'll all work together to give a benefit.

Thankfully, toasters don't often burn houses down, and so this cost is low (under 1%) for most products. (I'm interested in examples of physical goods for which this is not the case.) 


The first example that I thought of is the "wedding tax" - that is, anything that's purchased specifically for a wedding is significantly more expensive than the same item purchased for a different event. This includes both services (e.g., photography) and physical items (e.g., a cake).

This site validates that this is a real thing, and provides several reasons: Why are w... (read more)

2Darmani
To clarify: You're not saying the wedding tax is because of insurance costs, as the article is asking about, right?

On memorizing piano pieces: I took several years of piano lessons. I once learned to play a piece from memory, only to forget the opening chord at the recital. I was completely stuck, so after a minute of trying I had to just apologize and sit down again. It was likely the most embarrassing experience of my childhood.

I learned the hard way that just playing the piece every day was enough for my "muscle memory" to know what to do. At some point, during practice, my hands would just play the piece correctly without any conscious thought or effort. But that w... (read more)

3DirectedEvolution
Another thing that might have helped would have been to practice the same piece on many different pianos, ideally with strangers in the room. When you play the same piece on the same piano, you're not only immersing yourself in a specific piece, but in a specific instrument/environment/social context. When you keep the piece the same but change the context, the memory risks falling apart.

I mostly agree with your thesis, but I noticed that you didn't mention agriculture in the last section, so I looked up some numbers.

The easiest stat I can find to track long-term is the hours of labor required to produce 100 bushels of wheat [1].

1830: 250 - 300 hours

1890: 40 - 50 hours 

1930: 15 - 20 hours

1955: 6 - 12 hours

1965: 5 hours

1975: 3.75 hours

1987: 3 hours

That source stops in the 1980s, but I found another source that says the equivalent number today is 2 hours [2]. That roughly matches the more recent data on total agricultural productivity f... (read more)

2hamnox
More dependencies tho
8[anonymous]
So for the 2 hours, realize that the reason it's not zero is there is a 'residual' human labor input where currently shipping control systems are not robust enough to replace the human.  To summarize the problem (it's the same problem repeated everywhere): there is a near infinite number of rare 'edge cases' that a tractor can experience.  Current computer software is not feasible to engineer for all the edge cases, so the tractor has an autopilot that handles the 90-99% or so 'main happy case' of driving the tractor, and the person onboard watching netflix has to be ready to take over when it hits an edge. This is pretty much the same problem repeated for packing boxes at Amazon and all the rest.  Too many varied items on the shelves.  (the 'picking' problem).  Or for manufacturing the goods that are being shipped - robots can make the injection molded main pieces, and be hand set up for commonly made goods, but there are all these little 'edge' cases where a factory worker has to do some of the steps by hand, making the human labor input more than zero.

On the format: Since you asked for feedback, I found this format a little harder to follow than other LessWrong posts. For me, short paragraphs are great when used sparingly to make a particular point punchier. But an entire post like that feels like someone is talking too quickly and not giving me time to think. (I also don't read Twitter, so perhaps it's just not well-suited for me.)

On the content: Robert Kegan's "Immunity to Change" framework addresses some of this, especially the "shadow values" (which he calls hidden commitments). I learned the framew... (read more)

3Matt Goldenberg
Yeah, I think Immunity to Change is another way to get at this same framework, and definitely recommend it. I'll try to combine sentences into longer paragraphs in the next post and see if it helps.

I like the example of the Apollo mission. But I think an even more direct parallel to faith as surrender is EY's definition of lightness in Twelve Virtues of Rationality - LessWrong:

The third virtue is lightness. Let the winds of evidence blow you about as though you are a leaf, with no direction of your own.

If you are strongly committed to one belief, and then find evidence to the contrary, and actually change your mind - then you've just surrendered to the superiority of something outside yourself.

Perhaps changing your mind doesn't provoke the same mysti... (read more)

I don't have the philosophical sophistication to explain this as clearly as I would like, but I think fiction is valuable to the extent that it can be "more true" than a literal history.

Of course, fiction is obviously false at the most basic level, since the precise events it records never actually happened. But it can be effective at introducing abstract concepts. And except for trivia competitions, the abstract patterns are usually what's most useful anyway.

The best analogy I can think of is lifting weights. Fiction is an artificial gym that trains our m... (read more)

Several months ago, some people argued that trying to develop a vaccine for COVID-19 was pointless, because the "common cold" includes several types of coronaviruses, which have never had a successful vaccine.

Now that we have multiple successful vaccines for COVID-19, could we use the same methods to produce a vaccine for the common cold?

Five minutes of research suggests to me that it would be worth it to try. (Caveat: I picked the first numbers I found from Google, and I haven't double-checked these.)

  1. The common cold costs $40 billion per year in the US al
... (read more)
3romeostevensit
looks like we're getting an mrna vaccine for HSV out of all this, so there's that.

No war before WWI ever had a large enough number of combatants or was deadly enough in general to make a real dent in the population.

 

I think that's fairly inaccurate. Just to pick the first example that came to mind:

By all accounts, the population of Asia crashed during Chinggis Khan’s wars of conquest. China had the most to lose, so China lost the most—anywhere from 30 to 60 million. The Jin dynasty ruling northern China recorded 7.6 million households in the early thirteenth century. In 1234 the first census under the Mongols recorded 1.7 million h

... (read more)
2jmh
What about people just going somewhere else? I would think migrations would play a role here but not sure just how much to expect.

1. Thanks, I've had much better experiences with my landlord, but your experience might be more typical. Lack of adequate insulation is a clear problem, and one that's potentially worsened by the current system in which landlords pay for installing insulation but tenants generally pay for electricity. It's also the kind of issue that wouldn't become known to the tenants until after they've already moved in. So it makes sense to me that this would require legislation.

The process you propose for maintaining quality sounds reasonable enough. It might even be ... (read more)

3mako yass
2. This turns out to be interesting I think. I do think almost everything in the city is obviously overpriced, but it becomes devilishly hard to identify it as overpriced because it has incorporated its high prices into its defining functionality. Luxury clothes stores say "it's a good thing that we charge six or seven times the cost of production because it makes us a positional good", cafes say "It's a good thing we charge so much because it keeps people from loitering", nightclubs say "it keeps out the riff-raff". There's a sense in which, the thing that they are is "supposed to be that way", they truly couldn't be better priced and so it's hard to call them overpriced. We end up with services like that because that's all that survives. A solution here wouldn't look like cheaper versions of these things, because those things wouldn't work if they were cheaper. A really livable megacity would mostly have different things instead of them, things that only start to become economical at the lower price ranges. Instead of assorting by class, social clubs would select on more targeted personal characteristics. Instead of luxury there would be genuine finery included under the craft designation, to an extent that couldn't have been funded before. Instead of cafes there would be mostly unstaffed bookable spaces where you could meet people, that are quiet enough to have conversations in, because lingering is the point of them. They all earn little money but increase the total value of the city far beyond their opportunity cost.   Related observation: Nothing can be said to be overpriced if you submit deeply to the necessity of the overhead. Gold-plated audio cables can't be called overpriced if you believe that you need them to be gold-plated. They're only overpriced if you can accept the possibility of having audio cables that don't need to be gold-plated. So, a lot of people will say things like, "bitcoin's proof of work mechanisms aren't wasteful because they're n
  1. One of the main drawbacks I see in this system is that it provides little incentive for anyone to improve the value of their own property, or even to maintain it. The benefit of a market system is that it does provide this incentive, which I think is much more important than you admit here.

    High housing costs at least lead to "skin in the game." Without that, you probably need regulations to ensure that everyone maintains their property at a certain minimum level, and regular inspections to enforce it. I don't see anything like that mentioned here - do you
... (read more)
3mako yass
1. I have known too many landlords who say, "ah, but, I have a responsibility to my tenants to maintain their house and provide improvements, which I fulfill, so I deserve the money", while failing to maintain the house and while forbidding the tenants from doing it themselves. You'll forgive me if I'm a bit skeptical about this framing. I'm not sure it should be the market's job to improve the value of the property. Where I'm from, the market habitually failed to install adequate insulation, this ended up needing to be legislated on. The person who most has an incentive to maintain the property is the person who lives in it. They may be less competent at this, but the land-owners aren't always competent either. Removing barriers to their doing this might be helpful. Ah. Apparently I removed the section about maintaining detailed, easily queriable information about every apartment (the system that maintains the data that the "requirements about the housing" field in preference expressions is about). I think that might have been the answer to your question of how inspections would be done. I removed it because I thought it was boring, but I suppose it might have been important. So I'll propose a process. Residents would be expected to report on a long list of qualities of their house before moving out (or to pay to have someone else do it). They ought to mostly know these qualities as a result of having lived there. If the resident who then moves into that location disputes their reports (the system asks them whether it's all okay), they have the choice between receiving a fine, or having an inspector come, and if the inspector confirms the disputation, a greater fine. Qualities being tracked are likely to include things like "generally clean", "mold-free", or "no terrible smell" (I suppose that one will have to be a bit subjective and the process might need to be complicated a bit. Lol what if residents got a quality like "haunted" or "ba
9Viliam
The amount of money I spend in a shop is not necessarily proportional to how close I want to live to it. If I make 100 small purchases at $10 each, I probably want it closer to my home than the one where I make 1 purchase at $1000.
4MikkW
Indeed. I would like to highlight a particular example of this failure, namely the construction of multi-story buildings. In the modern market, the landowner builds tall buildings (which is a very difficult, and hence expensive procedure) because the owner profits from the rent gained from the extra real estate area. Mako in the main post suggests "we don't need land markets to help us to decide when and where taller buildings are needed, it's not that hard to get it pretty much right", but 1) in practice, similar proposals (that have actually been implemented, both in communist and nominally capitalist countries) have vastly underestimated the difficulty of this problem, leading to large problems that have made life harder for many people, and 2) if the landowner doesn't have a profit incentive to build higher, who will pay the cost of building higher? The local government? I'd rather the local government's limited resources be used to do something that can't already be done by the free market.
Load More