I’m unable to measure compassion so i don’t.
L29Ah
Karma: −27
How many european kings can you name, off the top of your head?
I think there no good reason to think that every ejaculation has the same effect.
Why do you think so?
2) This only applies to half the population but that wasn’t even addressed in the post.
I’ve addressed it in the topic. Also it applies to 90% of the lesswrong readers, according to the polls.
4) Unlike breaking some taboos, there was no attempt made to present an argument that this might be a taboo worth breaking.
I don’t see any arguments that this taboo might be one that worth including in one’s set.
5) The language used signals immaturity; “good fap” is not mature language. One can do a much better job breaking a taboo or getting people to tolerate it if one doesn’t come across as immature.
Can i haz ppl addressing the essence of my messagez?
LessWrong community fails at tabooed topics it seems.
Prostitute?
I’d put some more information on my knowledge and more specific skills.
I often try to persuade myself i’ll change some part of my behaviour at some peculiar point of time instead of researching why i still haven’t done this. By “overcoming myself” i mean modifying the behaviour one part of me doesn’t like in favour of some other behaviour some other part of me doesn’t like.
I’m going to stop making new years resolutions and stop behaving like i need to “overcome” myself in favour of some poorly explored goals and social stimuli.
Suppose you don’t have any time to figure out which people would be better. And suppose no one else will know that you were able to pull a switch.
Then my current algorythms will do the habitual stuff I’m used to do in similar situations or randomly explore the possible outcomes (as in “play”), like in every other severely constrained situation.
Honestly, it seems like your notion of ethics is borderline psychopathic.
What does this mean?
Please explain how say a trolley problem fits into your framework.
The correct choice is to check out who do you want to be killed and saved more, and what are, for instance, the social consequences of your actions. I don’t understand your question, it seems.
How does this contradicts my notion of ethics? You will surely use what you know about the ethical properties of manslaughter to reach the goal and save yourself from the troubles, like manipulating the public opinion in your favor via, for instance, imitation the target people attacking you. Or even consider if the goal is worthy at all.
This seems like a very non-standard notion of what constitutes ethics. Can you expand on this captures the usual intuitions about what the concerns of ethics are?
The concerns of ethics for a given agent is to facilitate one to interact with others effectively, no?
That’s not obvious. What if one entity is parseable in such a way and another one isn’t?
Every human produces lots of different kinds of behaviour, so it can be modeled as a pack of specialized agents.
Why?
Because ethics is essentially simplified applied modeling of other beings.
It does not as the other person is parseable as multiple ones as well.
Uploading is not a thing atm, and once it is viable, the corresponding ethics will be constructed from special cases of the entity’s behaviour, like it was done before.
I still don’t get how the anthropic principle cares about the labels we assign to stuff.
How many people am I?
Does it make any difference?
It does not as you don’t obtain any world properties that ‘your’ existence should reflect with such a definition.
Video games are nicely described by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinforcement#Schedules. I’d try make the disgusting part of the gaming, like the resources spent per utility achieved and the methods they are capturing my attention, the most sailent when i go over my decision three to do something.
Regarding “learning to want”, it is a matter of constructing and applying a model of your motivation (like i did ↑, but subjectively tailored).
// hey wtf lw.c doesn’t respect rfc1738
How would you build any other skill or habit? I don’t really understand how the answer to your specific question would be different.
The one that makes people think cognitive biases are distinct entities.