Three Bayesians walk into a bar: a) what’s the probability that this is a joke? b) what’s the probability that one of the three is a Rabbi? c) given that one of the three is a Rabbi, what’s the probability that this is a joke? (c)
According to the base rate there is an evidence that this is a joke about Russia national team or Suarez bite
Yeah of course for lesswrongers it’s quite a novice level, but besides behavioral economics and game theory classics there are some implications of neurobiology which wasn’t common to me
As you can’t know is current reality simulation or not, you could propose 50-50 probability as you have no anchor to operate on.
a)Current reality is a simulation ran by superintellegent computers. In this case you shouldn’t hesitate even for a second—you are obviously going for option 1 where you will live in a better world
b)You are living in reality. If given reality is not a simulation your utility function in simulation will differ from your real needs and wants, there you should ask a question that will maximize your real utility which can be how to bring peace to earth, bring down inequality and lift happiness level and maybe even kill death.
But actually we have some evidence of the world we live in, because supercomputer came to you and gave you two choices, it doesn’t somehow fit for what we expect to see in our daily routine. It means that supercomputers exists and probability that you live in simulation is close to 100% But in fact it is likely that Omega doesnt run simulation because you can speak to it and see it, it is more likely that there is another more powerful supercomputer out there who rans simulation on this simulation. You should choose option 1
(C)
All three theories are obviously wrong, moss-grown and vulnerable.
As consequentalist u can think that raping and killing is ok if torturer receives more amount of joy then amount of pain received by the victim. It seems even more obvious in the case with group of assaulters and one victim.
As deontologist you can always justify almost any deed by some trivial “for greater good” rule
And virtue ethics can be misleading in many ways, consider Halo effect and what can be consequences—Dr. Evil will take over world in seconds.
Please prove where I am wrong, I just pointed out weak points of each movement which seemed obvious to me
Sounds awesome, unfortunately I am living in Saint P, and just heard about the event, so wouldnt be able to come. But I a am superinteresting in organizing similar meetup in my city. Can we swap our experiences somehow?
Не кажется ли вам что “прикладная рациональность” звучит более по-русски, чем практическая?
But Russia still has a “democratic” political structure, everyone off course knows that it’s not like this in reality and only one party exists. But soon in 2018 there’ll be new president elections and that’s last term for Putin. Uncertainty that’s what we will get for sure
I’m living in Russia however I don’t watch TV and read newspapers, but I can say for sure, that Russian Invaders are proclaimed heroes, and NATO guys as Evil. And It’s not a surprise for me that on the other side of the Globe opinion is exactly the contrary. My personal view of the problem is that Putin and Obama are both worth each other, they are strong leaders and will they never stop if there is a chance to gain more power. Situation in Ukraine is imho this—Ukranian side completely entangled in their own problems, and they thought that it was Russia who they must blame and gone comletely nuts, then West gave them weapons and so on
To test how strong is this analogy, we should make bets like: Conditional on Putin successfully annexing a part of territory of Ukraine, what is the probability of Russia attacking another country within 1, 3, 5, 10 years? Which country will it be?
Too much globalization (russialization in this case) is hard to contol, Russia has enormous territory, we already got Crimea which is a port, and got unfriendly response from the world. I expect things to calm down for next 4 years I assume probability of 5% of the invasion to any other country
Explore “The back of the napkin” by Dan Roam—it can prove useful
You can’t write your characters more intelligent than you in fact are
Oh it’s sounds promising, i like some kind of metametainfinite leveling stuff
Damn I didn’t talk about running or sky-jumping, only what intelligence covers. I meant that your characters can’t have wider worldview and broader mindmap, and although consider WYSIATI (what-you-see-is-all-there-is) principle, applies also to all that you know.
I had a similar thought, Utility of outcome with unfriendly AI is far more significant than the dreams about future utopian technological synchronized multi-orgazm paradise, to put it another way, and you may call me yesterday guy, I prefer the world where I’m not inside a total control by governments and multi-corporations
High mate, I’ve just finished reading “David and Goliath” and my impression is that you have low self-esteem approximately because your classmates were doing slightly better than you. If you had chosen university/college with lower requirements you would be more motivated to do science because you would be on top of the leaderboard, shame that you are on crossroads now, but it is your way to go
oh, we can finally begin actually do smth?
Yeah, I find then some times we are concentrated on some global topics which are of course highly important, but we forget to do good for our very neighbours to start the chain( consider rewatching “pay it forward” movie)
As for me i really hate this lads, cause they bite all over my body even in places where any of my friends can’t see any of them. But even with that I don’t think that this problem is worth solving nowadays, because we have many more significant threats to attack.
I am quite surprised it occured in Rationality Forum, because Effective Altruism is highly supported here and one of it’s main credos is to be as effective as it can be and provide as much positive impact on society.
Talking about environment I suppose first we should make it more eco-friendly, finally get rid of fossil fuels and stop transforming the planet we live on into a heap of rubbish. When it’s settled we can take care of mosquitos (but only after many investigations that it won’t cause any effect on the food chain)
Would anyone advice new book called The Joy of X by Steven Strogatz? (I am not an advanced mathematician)
http://www.amazon.com/The-Joy-Guided-Tour-Infinity/dp/0547517653
I’ve started to visit lectures on European Art of XVII century, and because of tutor’s brilliant experience and broad knowledge I reconsidered what is it to actually look at painting, however I am not good at visual arts by myself and I’m focusing my attention not on styles and brushstrokes but on possible meanings and explanations of creation.
I’m shocked how little people (even who consider themselves open-minded) are actually not seeing anything around them. For example at my hometown at summer there were inconceivable sunsets, I’ve never seen that sky can be like that, words can’t covey it, so you’ve got to take this for granted, but nobody didn’t seem to notice, nobody looked up at the skies, people just continued to hurry for their miserable consumer needs with a lot of roadrage and other mindless behavior
The mind is known to be a pattern-seeking machinery, so you always missing something for which you simply don’t look
There’s even a whole book about the experiment you noticed
http://www.amazon.com/The-Invisible-Gorilla-Intuitions-Deceive/dp/0307459667
Elizier, and what about Huxley? Counterpoint is a stream of author’s extremely rational counciousness, but you two might not get along, because Auldus wasn’t too impressed of highly developed AI