I like this lens. I’m not sure if I have anything useful to say about your posts, but I enjoyed reading them.
Measure
Karma: 1,712
My choice for the main map:
Class: Warrior
Path: LLRRRLLR (the single-enemy path)My reasoning:
A Warrior with at least a Shield and only one previous encounter beats The Collector 100% of the time (135/135 in the dataset).
My choice for the bonus map:
Class: Warrior
Path: RRRLLLLR (pick up the Armor, Shield, and Powder)My reasoning:
Armor and Shield are both pretty effective for the Warrior, and the fewer Enemy encounters seems to be better.
I’m a bit worried that this is too simplistic, but the only other path that makes sense doesn’t seem to be quite as good for any of the classes. There may be some additional synergy between the Armor and Shield beyond their individual synergy with the Warrior class.
so there is no deterrence value in publicly prosecuting her
It doesn’t have to deter her. It’s following through on your threat to show others that you’re the sort of person/government/society that follows through on your threats.
Does this work?
Player 1 makes a move for White.
Player 2 has option to switch colors
Black player makes a move
White player has option to switch colors
Play continues with White’s 2nd move as normal Armageddon.
I suppose you could wait to start the timer until after Player 1 chooses. The first move and response plus choosing shouldn’t take very long since it can probably be fully precomputed.
So AI slop is horseradish?
Someone needs to pass a law that all current Australian MPs get automatic citizenship.
there’s no way for a person to test if they have the lesion
Can’t they just check whether they enjoy smoking?
US population in 1950 was about half what it is now, and population density in cities has probably increased even more. The counterfactual with a 0% vaccination rate today is surely much worse than 400-500 deaths per year.
Wouldn’t this be analogous to a LLM with a very tiny context window in addition to frozen weights?
This confuses me. Are you saying the CDT agent does not have “the ability to alter outcomes of future interactions”?
Yes, but EY’s statement implies that all (1, 2, 3) must be true for reciprocity to be strategic. There are iterated contexts where 1 and/or 2 do not hold (for example, a CDT agent playing iterated prisoner’s dilemma against a simple tit-for-tat bot).
Eliezer Yudkowsky: Reciprocity in humans is an executing adaptation. It is not strategically convergent for all minds toward all other minds. It’s strategic only
By LDT agents
Toward sufficiently strong LDT-agent-predictors
With negotiating power.
I assume this is referring to a one-shot context? Reciprocity seems plenty strategic for other sorts of agents/counterparties in an iterated context.
Perhaps for much of the planets lifetime, the earth was a graveyard of pristine corpses, forests of bodies, oceans of carcasses, a world littered with the indigestible dead.
Why wouldn’t corpses would have been claimed by macroscopic scavengers?
I agree. Either “worthwhile” or “valuable” would be better here.
The ingredients do not contain real wasabi root.
Is the “wasabi” listed in the ingredients (8th ingredient) a different part/extract of real wasabi?
To guarantee objectivity I turned to Grok to ask if Elon Musk has ever done this. The answer is yes.
Independent of whether I agree with this, I would like to point out that it is perfectly consistent and reasonable to both want [X] to be banned and also keep doing [X] yourself unless and until it is actually banned.
This happens largely because so many players effectively focus largely on their own survival rather than the survival of their team, so they become afraid to speak out or otherwise try to help the village win, and that the villager side is in various ways the harder one to play well. Whereas if the villagers are good enough at working together, getting people talking and analyzing Bayesian evidence, they can win remarkably often, including a high chance of identifying a werewolf at game start without any hard evidence.
In werewolf, there’s a tradeoff as a villager between playing optimally for the current game vs. glomarizing sufficiently that you’re not immediately outed next game when you draw the werewolf role.
Speaking from minimal cooking experience, why is this called a reverse sear? Is a non-reverse sear where you sear the outside first and then cook the inside afterward? What makes one of these a better technique?
An alternative to the bridge analogy would be a wall that doesn’t fully enclose your velociraptor exhibit. Until the gaps are closed, building the wall higher is fence-post security.