I get that my usage hurts indirectly, my question was specifically if everyone used FB occasionally and for similar purposes as I do, would FB still be detrimental? Harming other people because they have unhealthy patterns of usage is still a concern but a lesser one to me
I use FB occasionally to stay in touch with family/friends.
I subscribe to interesting people on Twitter and find it a great source of intellectual information.
I know these are harmful to some people, and I’ve occasionally noticed addictive behavior in myself, but overall seems like a good trade. If someone wants to explain/convince me that this is highly dangerous to me in a non-obvious way or that **my kind** of usage is endangering the commons I’m open to hear it.
Are you working with Satvik? I know he was into this stuff.
I have 1 foot in finance, and still learning a lot. As it appears you self-taught this stuff, what were good resources for you?
What is good literature on learned helplessness?
The One is a myth.
Yes, 100%. But really good chemistry comes in grades, in this case I feel really really good chemistry. There are probably partners “above the acceptable threshold” nearby, and if I date date long enough I might feel the same about someone else, but in this case LDR is a temporary inconvenience, I just want to make it work in LDR format until I feel good/convinced enough to turn it into N(ear)DR, which is well in my power to do.
Not retracted (I guess no more delete feature) just expanding longer comment elsewhere
It’s an LDR that I intend to turn into NDR. LDR temporarily. Hope that helps.
Sure. I know something about general CS stuff, ML, applied Bayesian stats and finance. Generally I would not be answering questions for a bounty (I’m well compensated to do this at work and I don’t want *more work*) but would spend some time if I think it helped people of contributed to an important body of knowledge. For me it comes from a different “time budget”. I realize many people would feel differently but there’s probably a class of people like me.
I think the answer will be highly dependent on the question. The opportunity cost of someone answering a q-n on yoga (being a yoga expert) is very different from someone answering an investment question.
Thanks for sharing. Good story and happens to give me encouragement as I seems to be falling into a (for now) LDR relationship with somebody in another country. It feels more “doable” based on this.
Agree! Tricky territory. I think it’s fair to take an outside view as a first cut (e.g. how many people survived Everest), then very carefully evaluate if the reference class is relevant. Yudkowsky writes about this quite a bit in places cannot recall which particular place.
Great idea, would be awesome if someone adds links to best reference posts for each one of these (additional benefit this will identify whitespace that needs to be filled).
“Will Adam be able to get back to cycling within a month [after a recent accident]?”
(Probably unnecessary word of caution) do not forecast your own behavior due to risk of reduced agency.
The confusion I’m trying to resolve is it feels like saving the best for last, if you have priors (assuming no attrition in the pool, which is obviously false). The intuition here is you’re using some % of the pool for calibration purposes, and should not be using your best prospects for calibration.
What if there are prior probabilities over “secretary ability” eg reading their resume or getting references? Has anyone worked out that variant?
If you want to go mad, commit to drawing two lines the same length and don’t stop until you are dead from trying to line up atoms to be in the right places. There are quicker ways to go insane.
Related humor https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-wbWGwZ7_k
Hi Anna, since you’ve made the specific claim publicly (I assume intended as a warning), would you mind commenting on this
Specifically it’s given there’s some collateral damage when people are introduced to new ideas (or more specifically broken out of their world views). You seem to imply that with Michael it’s more than that - (I think Vaniver alludes to it with the creepy comment).
Another words is Quirrell dangerous to some people and deserves a warning label or do you consider Michael Quirrell+ because of his outlook.
Thanks (&Yoav for clarification). So in your opinion is MV dangerous to a class of people with certain kinds of beliefs the way Harry was to Drako (the risk was pure necessity to break out of wrong ideas) or is he dangerous because of an idea package or bad motivations of his own
Ah sorry would you mind elaborating the Draco point in normie speak if you have the bandwidth?