Does “seem like it’s solving computer security” look like helping develop better passively secure systems, or like actively monitoring and noticing bad actions, or both or something else?
Measure
Karma: 1,090
That’s the one.
This seems to be related to Eliezer’s example of your brain state becoming entangled with that of your shoelaces. The key feature there is systems that respond differently to different inputs (e.g. your shoelaces reflect light differently if they’re untied).
Even if the big box is empty and you one-box anyway, the predictor can just say “Yes, but if the big box had been full, you would have two-boxed.” and it’s unclear whether the predictor is accurate or not since you weren’t in that situation.
If the Monday creature is indeed able to fix its preferences, how do you compare utility between the two alternatives since they have different UFs?
Something that comes to mind is, on an open-book test, transcribing an example problem from the book rather than correctly adapting the process to the test problem.
Hypothesis: the generator separately tracks the numerator and denominator and uses the xₙ₊₁ = 2*sqrt(1 - xₙ) rule exactly when this will result in both the numerator and denominator remaining integers.
Value[71] is exactly half of value[49]. (and this again follows a 23)
2.4439140274654036 might be (3³x19×3671×10631)/(2¹⁹x5⁶) with some incorrect rounding (2.4439140274658203125).
The second relation never occurs when xₙ is the negation of the previous xₙ₋₁.
Furthermore, the second relation is always followed by xₙ₊₁ = -xₙ (i.e. there is never a “skipped pair” pattern break immediately following). This means that the skips are unlikely to be random.
Most of the breaks in the (a, -a, b, c, -c, d) pattern look like either the +/- pair was skipped entirely or the unpaired value was skipped. My guess is the complete message consists of alternating “packets” of either a single value or a +/- pair, and each packet has some chance to be omitted (or they are deterministically omitted according to some pattern).
The footnotes link to an external site rather than to the LW footnotes. The return links appear correct, but don’t work (perhaps because of the first problem).
I cut out morning coffee because of the headaches I got on days I didn’t/couldn’t have it. After a couple of weeks, I didn’t miss it. I still get caffeine from other sources, but it’s sporadic, and I think that helps avoid the dependency headaches since my body isn’t “expecting” it.
I suggest Imaginary Evidence Fallacy.
Simulating a quantum computer on a classical one does indeed require a phenomenal amount of resources when no approximations are made and noise is not considered. Exact algorithms for simulating quantum computers require time or memory that grows exponentially with the number of qubits or other physical resources. Here, we discuss a class of algorithms that has attracted little attention in the context of quantum-computing simulations. These algorithms use quantum state compression and are exponentially faster than their exact counterparts. In return, they possess a finite fidelity (or finite compression rate, similar to that in image compression), very much as in a real quantum computer.
You’re comparing a minimal property rights violation with a maximal dress code violation.
Deck-building game similar to Dominion except you use transparent layers in sleeves to modify/assemble individual cards in your deck.
My Choices:
I feel like there’s too much data here. I can just filter only heroes with my exact traits and still get decent sample sizes to compare each possible skill pairing to find the one with the best win rate. Here’s the top of the list:
(230/240) Enlightenment + Radiant Splendor
(146/159) Temporal Distortion + Anomalous Agility
(126/140) Temporal Distortion + Monstrous Regeneration
( 95/110) Temporal Distortion + Mind Palace
(182/213) Temporal Distortion + Rapid XP Gain
Temporal Distortion is obviously very good, but Enlightenment + Radiant Splendor seems to have some combo effect and tops the list with a 94% win rate.
Other Notes:
Hikkikomori: Enlightenment + Radiant Splendor is probably best. Definitely don’t let Hikkikomori pick Mind Palace.
Otaku, Non-Hikkikomori: Shapeshifting is good, especially if also Sociopath (99.9% win rate). Pair with Temporal Distortion if Nerd. For non-Nerd, Uncanny Luck looks good.
Non-Otaku, Non-Hikkikomori: Shapeshifting + Temporal Distortion are still good for Nerd + Sociopath. Otherwise, back to Enlightenment + Radiant Splendor.
In fact, a pretty credible Nature Review shows an increasing complexity up to age 24.
This chart in footnote [3] has age in months, not years. Complexity increase for years 1-2 doesn’t contradict a peak at 5-6.
I was doing okay until I blew my lead guessing that the model wouldn’t predict a typo.