IMO the correct response is to run like hell from the box. In Thingspace, most things are very unfriendly, in much the same way that most of Mindspace contains unfriendly AIs.
Bayeslisk
Karma: 280
Bizarre… it seems just like if a nomadic Bronze Age tribe had picked up scraps of tales from, say, Babylon and Egypt, embellished other collective memories, and created some out of whole cloth for political purposes!
This is a pretty cool visualization, especially for simple “don’t care about the precise values” sort of initial analysis of games. Keep developing it!
Surveyed. Put a humorous pair of Lojban lujvo as a passphrase. I cooperated, knowing that regardless, I was unlikely to win no matter what strategy I pursued, and that priming myself by forcing myself to cooperate now would possibly make me unknowingly want to cooperate in the future to my benefit.
It would become easier, I agree. It would also lose a lot of what makes real, physical things special. Why do people still play actual board games made of cardboard, or bother to meet face to face? A lot of the rationality involved would probably be figuring out through facial expression and vocal intonation whether or not you can trust someone, and this is nearly impossible in a nonphysical context.
I used to play airsoft a few years ago. The main problem with that would be the relatively large expense to start playing, and the need for a very large area. I agree that there should be more than two teams, as I’ve said elsewhere, and the lack of respawns would make sense.
Possibly, however, limited-range weaponry would be more fun/useful/easy to deal with—nerf/boffer swords, (which I admit I have no experience with) thrown weaponry, like tennis balls or dodgeballs, and so on.
This is also very close to what I’m trying to get at, but I want for it to be both more physical and conducted in real time.
What is a matrix IQ test?
I have played that. My idea is slightly similar, I think.
Possibly. You’re giving me an idea—have a simple game with a few interacting rules drawn randomly from a larger set of interacting rules, and see who figures out how to take advantage of how the rules interact. Remind me to get back to you on this.
An amount which is large to me, but thanks for trivializing my willingness to sacrifice.
I agree, and this crossed my mind, but there seems no other way to coordinate properly, and I have, in fact, take a further sacrifice in possibly inspiring any number of other people indistinguishable from normal gender-progressives to act in accordance with this plan, silently, at the possible expense of this effectiveness.
ialdabaoth: I didn’t mean to cause you unhappiness. I was attempting to provide a means of progression, and show support for you over the probable person who was doing this. Further, hyporational, I’d imagine that ialdabaoth has a fair amount of evidence as to who might have had reason to block-downvote (and we need a compact tomato-light word for it) and wouldn’t simply throw accusations around lightly.
I am willing to sacrifice large amounts of karma to test this as someone who cares deeply about both the quality of the LW community and about gender issues, and who experiences significant intangible benefit from cleverly cracking someone’s utility function. Should I?
I would prefer that it be among relatively many people to allow for alliance-building, betrayal, and exercise of the social aspects of combat epistemology. Also, people who come in with knowledge of chess or boxing would have an unfair advantage.
Yes, it is!
Please provide the LW community at large with the username of this person.
An interesting idea I had: epistemology sparring. Figure out a way to make model battlefield rationality work, say in some kind of combat-like game—think boffer LARP, paintball, or even lacrosse or dodgeball—just make it immediate and physical. Make success in the game tied directly to the ability to determine the probability of truth of some statement quickly, and more quickly and accurately than your opponents, and make the games short—no more than half an hour each. Do these frequently to allow for averaging out the failures that will definitely result during play, both at the beginning, due to inexperience, and due to bad luck or inconsistent performance. Any suggestions?
I think we might have a coordination problem. I am wearing a fox-colored scarf.
For my part, I’d translate it as:
.u’oga’ibu’o ko bevri lo so’i ciblu la ciblu cevni .i ko bevri lo so’i sedbo’u la sedbo’u nolstizu
Which glosses in English to:
[With a sense of superiority and courage:] Bring lots of blood to the Blood God! Bring lots of skulls to the Skull Throne!
EDIT: More accurate translation and back-translation, changed gadri, added so’i to English back-translation.
Basically—whoever tried to translate for you was really bad at generating English glosses.
I am pattern-matching from fiction on “black box with evil-looking inscriptions on it”. Those do not tend to end well for anyone. Also, what do you mean by strong evidence against that the box is less harmful than a given random object from Thingspace? I can /barely sort of/ see “not a random object from Thingspace”; I cannot see “EV(U(spoopy creppy black box)) > EV(U(object from Thingspace))”.