Is this just postulating that whatever did happen (historically) should have happened (morally)?
Measure
Karma: 871
I’m confused. What does anthropics have to do with morality?
I’m not sure I understand. If the lever is +100 in world A and −90 in world B, it seems like a good bet if you don’t know which world you’re in. Or is that what you mean by “acceptably small amount of disvalue”?
You can’t make me.
Yep, my bad. I thought that this was still related to the Nine and One-Half thing.
Platform Ten and Three-Quarters
That explains why they didn’t get through—they were one and one-quarter too high.
“Well-earned rest” is the standard idiom.
Maybe “Earned Breaks”? I did like the ‘ratio’ pun though.
Dating is for babies
The confusion comes from parsing this as “babies are the ones who should be dating” rather than as “people date in order to make babies”.
You mean you don’t remember parts 1-3?
For each ⊥i column, if Δ⊥i is in the top 0.66% of those seen before then we perform negative reinforcement.
Do we negatively reinforce False columns that are especially distant from the True column? That seems backward.
It’s easy to write a comment that’s net positive overall. It’s hard to write one that’s separately net positive on each axis. I expect a system like this would lead to me spending more time crafting my comments and posting fewer (better) comments overall.
I read it as “beep to remind you to log what you’re eating”.
I think this only matters if you happen to get an unusually severe case that requires hospitalization, but that still affects the expected value somewhat.
Scott’s Anglophysics world could probably become something like this with more development.
It seems like the equilibrium would push very hard for a very high population density where most people’s parents wanted lots of children.
I’m not sure why this is the case?
The average lifetime number of children would have to be exactly replacement at equilibrium, and if people are generally long-lived, this would imply an extremely low number of children per year. This seems implausible since if even a small number of people were willing/able to sustain a high fertility rate, most other people would have to have no children to keep the average low, and the few high-achievers would be the parents of most of the population.
An empirical-ish strategy of just taking good-looking gear to good-looking areas outperforms most attempts to optimize for anything unless you know a lot about the generating system.
Well, this is basically what I did. I could see some vague patterns, but I wasn’t confident in anything and not having a clear picture of the migration patterns made it much harder to analyze the element effects. I did decide to alternate locations on a last-minute whim in case there were any short-term migration patterns, but I probably still had too much repetition.
-
Surely there would be some contrarians who try Messing With Time (perhaps they precommit to doing something iff they learn that they didn’t do it). What happens to them?
-
Suppose someone learns how they die (say they confirm it with high accuracy with multiple self-messages and even going to the location to observe the event themselves). Wouldn’t this cause them to feel comfortable taking extreme risks at other places/times since they know they’ll survive?
-
It seems like the equilibrium would push very hard for a very high population density where most people’s parents wanted lots of children. You mentioned isolated self-parenting pairs. What regulates how many of these exist?
-
I would expect that a significant fraction of the futile/necessary optimization efforts would be adversarial—analogous to your chess example but on a larger scale with higher stakes, such as political outcomes or group conflicts, with each side trying to out-terminator each other.
-
Related: Being the (Pareto) Best in the World
Maybe this is just typical-minding, but I would guess that the median person might struggle to say which of faze/phase to put in their own writing but would happily go along with whichever one they encounter on an official-looking website without a second thought.