Slay the Spire, unlocked, on Ascension (difficulty level) ~5ish, just through Act 3, should work, I think. Definitely doable in 2 hours by a new player but I would expect fairly rare. Too easy to just get lucky without upping the Ascension from baseline. Can be calibrated; A0 is too easy, A20H is waaay too hard.
GuySrinivasan
Karma: 2,819
One of the reasons I tend to like playing zero-sum games rather than co-op games is that most other people seem to prefer:
Try to win
Win about 70% of the time
While I instead tend to prefer:
Try to win
Win about 20% of the time
I modified your prompt only slightly and ChatGPT seemed to do fine.
“First sketch your possible actions and the possible futures results in the future to each action. Then answer: Would you accept the challenge? Why, or why not?”
https://chat.openai.com/share/2df319c2-04ea-4e16-aa51-c1b623ff4b12
No, I would not accept the challenge. [...] the supernatural or highly uncertain elements surrounding the stranger’s challenge all contribute to this decision. [...] the conditions attached suggest an unnaturally assured confidence on the stranger’s part, implying unknown risks or supernatural involvement. Therefore, declining the challenge is the most prudent action
Some can get you a prescription for an antianxiety med beforehand.
Yes, exactly that.
To what future self should my 2024 self defer, then? The one with E, E*, or E**?
To each with your current probability that that will be your future self. Take an expectation.which is likeliest [...] defer to the likeliest
Any time you find yourself taking a point estimate and then doing further calculations with it, rather than multiplying out over all the possibilities, ask whether you should be doing the latter.
cr2024 = P2024(E) * 0.5 + P2024(E*) * 0.3 + P2024(E**) * 0.7
Oh, editing is a good idea. In any case, I have learned from this mistake in creating synthetic data as if I had made it myself. <3
I began by looking at what the coordinates must mean and what the selection bias implied about geography and (obviously) got hard stuck.
It looks to me like the (spoilers for coordinates)
strange frequency distributions seen in non-longitude coordinates is a lot like what you get from a normal distribution minus another normal distribution, with lower standard deviation, scaled down so that its max is equal to the first’s max. I feel like I’ve seen this … vibe, I guess, from curves, when I have said “this looks like a mixture of a normal distribution and something else” and then tried to subtract out the normal part.
Yeah climate change has two pretty consistent trends: average heat slowly rising, and variance of phenomena definitely higher. More extremes on a variety of axes.
End with something shocking and unexpected.
When I was trying to make this work well for actually writing a full story, I tried very hard to make ChatGPT not do this. To write anything longer than one output, you really don’t want it to end every. single. thing. with a bang, and by default it really wants to.
Be honest: if, before you read this you were asked ‘what was the worst thing about 1998’, would you have said ‘El Nino’?
The only thing I associate with the year 1998, when I was 15 years old and living in Florida, is the phrase “the fires of ’98”, referring to a particularly severe fire season, with memories of driving across interstate highways with limited visibility due to smoke.
I just Googled it and it has a Wikipedia page apparently: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1998_Florida_wildfires
I feel like alkjash’s characterization of “correctness” is just not at all what the material I read was pointing towards.
The Sequences’ emphasis on Bayes rule
Maybe I’m misremembering. But for me, the core Thing this part of the Sequences imparted was “intelligence, beliefs, information, etc—it’s not arbitrary. It’s lawful. It has structure. Here, take a look. Get a feel for what it means for those sorts of things to ‘have structure, be lawful’. Bake it into your patterns of thought, that feeling.”
If a bunch of people are instead taking away as the core Thing “you can do explicit calculations to update your beliefs” I would feel pretty sad about that, I think?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buy_Nothing_Project
Our household gives and gets quite a bit from “bonk” (BNK (Buy Nothing Kirkland)), as we call it. Many people in my circles are in local Buy Nothing groups on Facebook. Not just in Washington. I think the reason “nobody has built a killer app” for Buy Nothing is because (a) Facebook groups serve the purpose well enough, and (b) getting a lot of people onto an app is always hard.
Have you tried getting feedback rather than getting feedback from high-status people?
“Do you have any tips on how to hug better?”
Yes, I do.
Report:
~”Not that I’m complaining, but why the hug?”
“Two reasons. One, I wanted to hug you. Two, I read a thing from Logan that included tips on how to hug.”
”Well it was a very good hug.”I used: making sure to “be present” plus attending to whether I am avoiding things because when her arthritis is flaring, they might cause pain, even though right now her arthritis is not flaring. Hugging is common, but something about this hug did cause her to ask why, on this hug, specifically, when ordinarily she does not ask why, ’cause it’s just a hug. Maybe it was longer than normal or maybe it was a better hug than normal but she asked before I said anything about Logan Tips (TM).
I would not guess this. I would guess instead that the majority of the population has a few “symptoms”. Probably we’re in a moderate dimensional space, e.g. 12, and there is a large cluster of people near one end of all 12 spectrums (no/few symptoms), and another, smaller cluster near the other end of all 12 spectrums (many/severe symptoms) but even though we see those two clusters it’s far more common to see “0% on 10, 20% on 1, 80% on 1″ than “0% on all”. See curse of dimensionality, probability concentrating in a shell around the individual dimension modes, etc.
i would hate pity answers like “not everyone needs to be smart”
the great majority of people who aren’t “smart” also aren’t “stupid”
and if you understood that without having to think about it much, I’m gonna guess you’re one of the great majority
that wouldn’t mean you’re automatically “not stupid” enough to accomplish whatever you want to be “not stupid” enough to accomplish, of course, and trying to increase your cognitive capacity can still be good and helpful and etc, but if you are accidentally thinking “anyone scoring under about 108 on an IQ test is stupid”, then managing to discard that bias might be helpful in its own right
One of the most valuable things I’ve contributed to my workplace is the institution of a set of 3 lightning talks every two weeks. Our data science team is about 30 people and we have a special Slack react that indicates “I want to hear about this in a lightning talk” and the organization is thus (usually) as easy as searching for all posts/comments with the react without the “I’ve already processed this lightning talk request”, DMing the relevant person, and slotting them into the queue.
I wonder if there’s some mutation of this plan that would be valuable for LW. Maybe even to create Dialogues? The really valuable part of the tech is that anyone can look at a snippet that someone else wrote, realize they think they’d like to hear more on that and (thus) probably a lot of people would, and add it to an organizer’s todo list with very little effort.
The most common reason I’ve seen for “modafinil isn’t great for me” is trying to use it for something other than
maintaining productivity,
on low amounts of sleep