Gunslinger

Karma: 61

Gunslinger 19 Feb 2018 12:58 UTC
0 points
on: Open thread, January 29 - ∞
Browsed the net too much and found this. Time to weaponise dopamine. Anyone got a list of actions/objects/whatever and the amount of dopamine they produce?

Seriously now, why bother looking for the g-spot when you can just stuff two cheeseburgers down there..

Gunslinger 19 Feb 2018 12:52 UTC
0 points
on: An alternative way to browse LessWrong 2.0
First thing first: it’s nice.

My (probably irrelevant) issue with it is that.. it kind of nulls all the effort that went into LW2. It’s fine to make something as a prototype and eventually replace it, but “alternative” suggests that it exists side-by-side. This kind of double-effort just seems pointless. Why not just make the LW2 site better, rather than make another site and have two sites that do the same thing?

Also, I don’t think commenting with your existing account is okay. Did they just hand you over the database? That does violate consent/trust. Why do more people need to know this particular email-password combination? If I can’t trust you to NOT hand over my email-password combo to literally everyone then I’ll be sending EY an email with a good argument for quantum suicide,’cause seriously, if a damn email address can’t be contained we might as well pack it up right now, no chance to win against an AI.

Gunslinger 1 Feb 2018 10:23 UTC
5 points
in reply to: cousin_it’s comment on: Open thread, January 29 - ∞
When exactly did that happen? I haven’t been here when the site was “highly active” (which I assume when EY was making the sequences posts) but do we have any statistics about it? I could build a small scraper and make a graph for dates and stuff, but somebody with access to the database could do it much better.

I don’t remember ever seeing statistics on that.

Gunslinger 1 Feb 2018 10:02 UTC
7 points
on: Open thread, January 29 - ∞
Confession thread. I’ve been in love with LessWrong for about 5 years (my first post was this, found on 4chan. Maybe it isn’t exceptional but it always had a place in my heart. In fact, it gave me the courage to get my first job when I was scared of being outside) and I’ve never admitted it. Now that it’s about to go boom I can finally confess that, even though I’ve been a horrible student. Take that, LW2, you’ll never be as awesome.

NEWSFLASH: HPMOR chapter 123 released: Something to protect: Less Wrong.

Gunslinger 30 Jan 2018 21:52 UTC
4 points
in reply to: saturn’s comment on: Open thread, January 29 - ∞
Excellent job. You got bonus points for writing it in Lisp. I assume you’ve read SICP?

Gunslinger 28 Jan 2018 22:49 UTC
22 points
on: Open thread, January 29 - ∞
Old site love thread.

Just curious how many people like, and possibly even prefer, the old site.

I’d also like to know if anyone else has terrible experience with site redesigns. They always, for some reason, end up terrible. Likelyhood of bias: 60%.

Gunslinger 19 Jun 2017 12:07 UTC
0 points
in reply to: Elo’s comment on: Open thread, June. 19 - June. 25, 2017
What do you mean by “logistics”?

Gunslinger 19 Jun 2017 10:48 UTC
0 points
on: Open thread, June. 19 - June. 25, 2017
How do you move from a superficial relationship (I see you at work) to a more meaningful relationship? (friends)?

Gunslinger 9 Jun 2017 18:43 UTC
0 points
on: Book recommendation requests
CFAR also has a booklist. Eliezer has one too, but says it’s deprecated. There’s the ‘rationality’ tag on on Goodreads, and it’s up to you to decide if the books listed live up to it.

Gunslinger 7 Jun 2017 12:41 UTC
1 point
on: Becoming a Better Community
Is there a reason that members of the community can’t game together online? This post on Overwatch provides at least a small amount of evidence that the community would have enough members interested to form teams, and team-building seems to be one of the goals.

That requires that you (in order of importance)
1. Have good computer hardware to run the game
2. Have good latency to the servers (for me specifically, but statistically I’d imagine there shouldn’t be a big one)
3. Have good skill at aiming
4. Actually spend quite a bit of time learning all the game mechanics
As an ex-gamer I just realized that I can drop the games (still miss them sometimes) and focus on reading a book or do some better activity. Games are incredible fun, but so (at least from what I’ve been told) are plenty of drugs that you wouldn’t want to do, and once you generalize it a little bit games can be seen as a drug themselves.

Many people disagree with the ‘gaming is a waste of time’ opinion. I wouldn’t say totally, but most games focus on being like chocolate versus a salad to your mind.

Gunslinger 4 Jun 2017 19:49 UTC
1 point
on: A new, better way to read the Sequences

A new, better way to read the Sequences

Sorry to nitpick but you haven’t said in which way it is better than the on-site Sequences or the PDF.

Gunslinger 2 Jun 2017 19:55 UTC
2 points
on: Book recommendation requests
Meta post:

How often does it happen that:
1. You’re reading a book, and it’s not particularly interesting, or there’s nothing new in it, and you put it down;
2. You read a book, and after n amount of (days, months, years) you felt that it wasn’t as good as you felt it was when reading it.
I’ve recently felt a “yeah, cool” feeling about books I’m reading and am curious if it happens to other people.

Gunslinger 2 Jun 2017 19:48 UTC
2 points
on: Book recommendation requests
I’ve tried GEB. Contrary to what a lot of people feel about it, I did not particularly enjoy the book. I didn’t finish it, so perhaps I didn’t see the grand finale. My assumptions are that GEB was the first time a lot of fans found out about the concepts described in the book, and therefore they like it because of that. From a reductionalist viewpoint, I still haven’t found an adequate answer for “What does GEB have that I can’t find anywhere else?”. Or perhaps, “if we take n amount of people, one group aware of the concepts in GEB and another unaware of it, assuming neither of them read the book, how much would their final rating differ?”.

Gunslinger 29 Apr 2016 10:51 UTC
0 points
on: Open Thread April 25 - May 1, 2016
What are some non-flashcard-style memorization techniques? I’m learning a menu as part of my job as a waiter and it feels more like trial and error. My main problem is that I can’t remember the stuff at all.

I’ve come up with a “open answers” system that I don’t really know if it can work. Let’s say we have x number of things on the system, like item1, item2, item3...item(x). We also have y number of meals (which vary on the number of ingredients) and so you need to fill in the blanks, like this:

Meal 1: _ _ _ _ (underscores should be here but the “you’ll never get what you see” comment system hates them)

This has the advantage of being visible which I personally like. It’s also pretty simple and doesn’t really require reading much beyond “fill in the blanks”. It removes the disorder of “x number of things” and instead moves the question to “where should item(x) belong to?”.

My only significant issue with this is that it’s a trial and error thing—which I personally dislike because that’s how I play chess, and most of my games end up in a loss which disappoints me and makes me think trial and error is meh, but hey I’m just one person, let’s not get into typical mind fallacy here.

Gunslinger 27 Apr 2016 15:14 UTC
0 points
in reply to: Lumifer’s comment on: ‘Science of Relationships’ summarized
What do you mean?

Gunslinger 27 Apr 2016 15:06 UTC
0 points
in reply to: Lumifer’s comment on: ‘Science of Relationships’ summarized
Why not?

Gunslinger 27 Apr 2016 15:05 UTC
0 points
in reply to: ChristianKl’s comment on: ‘Science of Relationships’ summarized
There’s just.. nothing attractive about it? What am I supposed to do with it?

Gunslinger 27 Apr 2016 14:12 UTC
0 points
in reply to: ChristianKl’s comment on: ‘Science of Relationships’ summarized

If you don’t find something convincing, I might give you a better answer if you explain why you don’t find it convincing.

Everything, please. I’m not sure how to approach this at all.

Gunslinger 27 Apr 2016 13:26 UTC
0 points
in reply to: ChristianKl’s comment on: ‘Science of Relationships’ summarized
How do you know what you know?

Gunslinger 27 Apr 2016 5:17 UTC
0 points
in reply to: [deleted]’s comment on: ‘Science of Relationships’ summarized
Any evidence that is indeed the case? My take is that it’s a coincidence.