Consider also that activities you find you enjoy, such as LW or Twitter posting, are likely to be judged by you as more useful than they are. Agree that LW-style is not the only one to think in. Authors here could give more weight to being easily understood than showing off.
I liked your Qanon-feminist tweet, but we have to remember that something that upsets people by creating dissonance around the mistake you intend (even if they can’t pin down the intent) is not as good as actually correcting the mistake. It’s certainly easier to create an emotionally jarring contrast around a mistaken belief than to get people to understand+accept an explicit correction, so I can see why you’d enjoy creating the easy+viral.
I haven’t seen booster net efficacy assessed in an honest way, since they often exclude events for the first 2 weeks post-boost. Agree that we should expect a small effect only; I would approve for whoever wants and leave it at that.
While I lived through and can confirm the prevlance of the ‘extinguish all civilization’ MAD narrative, I wonder today how extinguished it actually would have been. (famine due to a year of reduced sunlight from dust floating around was part of the story)
https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/75411/was-ludwig-wittgensteins-aircraft-propeller-ever-built imaginative I suppose. Why is Wittgenstein thought to have contributed anything of worth? Yes, he was clever. Yes, some of his contemporaries praised him.
sniffles don’t matter; 10 days after fever’s end seems generous/considerate. allegedly positive nasal swab antigen tests will persist for days after it’s impossible to lab-culture the virus from a snot sample but in any case such tests are definitely negative after 14 days of onset
Aren’t rumors typically rounded up for impact in the fashion you caught this someone doing by luck of existing direct knowledge?
Poll inadequancy: zero is not right, but I think the answer to P(hospitalized|covid) is <1%
Do you like strip clubs?
Sounds like you’ve imprinted some sort of not exactly resentment+rejection of the power+value of female sexuality (as I think some gay men have) but rather frustrated worship+submission to it, congruent with high porn consumption, although you say you don’t actually consume much since the out and about the powerless man ogling/frustration stimulus is enough. This voyeurish mode and esp. the powerlessness arousal fetish doesn’t help you pose as the typically high-value ‘prize’ so the lack of access isn’t surprising. As an unsolicited prescription, I’d suggest getting used to interacting with as high-value women as you can stand as powerfully as possible (even if that mean just not acting thirsty; confident flirtation/approaches are even better). If your desire were more connected to pursuit you’d learn+calibrate as part of a road to increasing comfort and inevitably results.
Cyc’s human-input ‘knowledge’ would indeed be an interesting corpus, but my impression has always been that nothing really useful has come of it to date. I wouldn’t pay much for access.
I’m not seeing any difference between pressure and aggression these days.
Trying to push out a revision costs money and doesn’t earn any expected money. And everyone knows this is so. Unofficial market collusion regularly manages to solve harder problems; you don’t need explicit comms at all.
I’ll grant that we’ll hear some competitive “ours works better on variant X” marketing but a new even faster approval track would be needed if we really wanted rapid protein updates.
As evhub mentions, the antibodies you make given the first vaccine you’re exposed to are what will get manufactured every time you see a similar-enough provocation. It may be impossible to switch the learned immune response without some specially designed “different enough” protein that’s hoped to also be protective against the latest variant. I buy the ‘original antigenic sin’ concept—there has to be a reason we’re not naturally immune to flu and corona-colds already after many previous encounters.
Why are you quoting without correction someone who thinks 5 billion divided by 10 million is 500,000 (it’s 500)?
presumably perfect competition defects from perfect price discrimination
‘how-level’ would be easier to parse
In general a language model will ‘know’ the sentence related to the single occurrence of a rare name. I don’t think you learn much here if there are enough parameters available to support this memory.
Perhaps GPT-3 has more parameters than are probably needed to roughly memorize its very large training data. This would be good since the data contains some low quality garbage, false claims, etc (can think of them as ‘noise’). I believe GPT-n are adding parameters faster than training data Here’s my summary of a paper that suggests this is the right move:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzGguadEHOU Microsoft guy Sebastian Bubeck talking about seemingly overparameterized neural models being necessary for learning (due to label noise?). Validation ‘early stopping’ of training duration or size scaling is a mistake. after you’re over some initial hump that would trigger validation early stopping, overfitting is ‘benign’ [already known, dubbed ‘double descent’]. As soon as you can defeat adversarial attacks then you’re probably using enough parameters. He (+intern) proves that in order to perfectly memorize the label-noised data set such that small perturbations in the noise don’t change predicted output, you need a much larger parameter set than the data set (perfectly memorizing the training data set should be possible within some constant factor of its size). He predicts that ImageNet (image labeling task) could benefit from 10-100 billion parameters instead of the current sub-1-billion.
(obviously GPT- are language models but they can be thought of as having an output which is the masked word or the sentence-before-or-after or whatever they’re using to train)
Two reasons you could recommend boosters for vulnerable only:
global first doses first thinking
awareness that eradicating covid by rapid vaccination to herd immunity is futile given current effectiveness+adoption and hope to reduce the mareks-like adaptation of more vax-resistant strains so that the vulnerable can have more of the benefit preserved to them
It does seem that, temporarily supply shortages aside, you should advocate universal ‘vaccination’ (say w/ moderna) iff you also advocate ongoing doses until a real vaccine is available.
Your contrary cite notwithstanding, I predict Delta will end up less damaging on average and more cases will go uncounted due to its mildness. This may also drive some overestimation of its virulence. It does appear to spread well enough that is a question of when not if you’ll be exposed.