This post is one more addition to the worrying trend in LW that asks for black and white solutions as it there were no middle ground. Would you say that having no army is better than having an army at all? I would feel more comfortable knowing that we have Godzilla in our side than having nothing
mukashi(Adri A)
Karma: 1,024
Beware of small world puzzles
Here it is mine: dentists have about zero understanding on how to cure something as common as gum disease, because most of the field is based on a pile of outdated beliefs. I owe LW a post about this one day, as soon as I have the energy and the time. Future readers: if I haven’t done it yet and you want to know more, please remind me
[Question] Hedging omicron impact to supply chains
I’m a 100% with you. I don’t like the current trend of LW becoming a blog about AI, and much less about a blog about how AGI doom is inevitable, (and in my opinion there have been too many blog posts about that, with some exceptions of course). I have found myself lately downvoting AI related posts more easily and upvoting content non related to AI more easily too
You should think about making this a top-level post. Having talked to a few of my pro-Russian friends/acquaintances (mostly Russians and Serbians), I cannot stress how on point this analysis is. I experienced what you describe here very well, the fact that they “breathe” a different model of the world.
I also noticed that they all fall prey to the same failure mode (related to the Fallacy of Grey):
Everyone knows that Russian news is bullshit and we don’t believe them ourselves
But everyone also knows that “All” news is bullshit, including your Western propaganda.
Given that all news is bullshit, it is impossible to know what is right or wrong, so I prefer to continue believing whatever is more convenient for me
Hi! Biologist (kind of, Biotechnologist and PhD in Bioinformatics) here.
Biology as a field is way too broad. You can pick any branch of biology and spend your whole life studying that, there will still be things to learn. Having said that, and given that you’re interested in things related to longevity, I would:
First, be aware of one thing: there is a massive difference between Biology and Physics ( I could make a similar comparison with other sciences, but Physics serves my purpose). Feynman explains that VERY well in his book “Surely you are joking Mr Feynman”. Physics students try to develop an intuition about how different models of the world work. Biologists, on the other hand, f**ng adore memorizing names by heart and many old University professors think that it is the right thing to do (e.g. memorizing the names of the molecules involved in the Krebbs cycle). The result is that most things that Biologists studied at some point are simply forgotten. For instance, I studied a few courses on Plant physiology but if you ask me what is the difference between C3 and C4 plants I have no clue. So my first piece of advice is, “try to learn Biology as a physicist would do it”. Learn the important concepts and learn how to reason about those concepts
Second, develop a solid understanding of Molecular Biology. I would buy (or borrow) “Molecular Biology of the Cell” aka “The Albert” and read a few chapters. The concepts you should be very familiar with are:
Replication, transcription, translation
The basics of genetic regulation
Metabolism, especially how the cell obtains energy: respiratory chains, ATP synthesis, etc.
YouTube is your friend. There are very good channels out there explaining complex concepts.
Some of the names of molecules and metabolic pathways will be unavoidable important, e.g. caspases. Use Anki to memorize those. This might contradict a bit the first point, but you will need to develop some “general culture” and this requires memorization. For instance, words you need to be familiar with: respiratory complex system, NADH, telomeres. Words you do NOT be familiar with e.g. Succinate Coenzyme Q Reductase.
Try to explain the different things that you learn without using their real names. E.g. can you find an alternative name for every part of the machinery involved in ATP synthesis? (for example, instead of saying ATP synthase, you could say nano rotor that puts together ADP and P). If you can do that for most things that you learn, you are good to go.
Read “Power, sex, suicide”. It is a popular science book but it has a very good level. If you have spent a few weeks/months reading The Albert, you will understand most of it.
In Biology Evolution is King. You don’t need to understand the in and outs of population genetics, but you certainly benefit from understanding what we know about the origins of mitochondria for instance.
Speak with biologists and test your ideas with them (in the best case scenario, find people having PhDs). Say to them you think “that we could just do some engineering in the telomerase” and we would solve the longevity problem. Some of them might not follow what you are saying. Search for the person that laughs at this statement and tell him/her to explain why this wouldn’t work. That’s the guy you want to hang out with. Speak with him and make him ridicule your ideas. If you understand why the things you are proposing do not make sense, this will mean you are learning.
Thank you, Queensland
That’s a fantastic post thank you. How likely do you reckon it is that the obesity epidemic is driven, at least in part, by another contaminant that is not lithium?
I have been (and I am not the only one) very put off by the trend in the last months/years of doomerism pervading LW, with things like “we have to get AGI right at the first try or we all die” repeated constantly as a dogma.
To someone who is very skeptical of the classical doomist position (aka AGI will make nanofactories and will kill everyone at once), this post is very persuasive and compelling. This is something I could see happening. This post serves as an excellent example for those seeking effective ways to convince skeptics.
What can we learn from traditional societies?
As someone who is pretty much an outsider to this community, I think it is interesting that a major drive for many people in this community seems to be tackling the most important problems in the world. I am not saying is a bad thing, I am just surprised. In my case, I work in academia not so much because of the impact I can have working here, but mainly because it allows me to have a more balanced life with a flexible time schedule.
I agree with many of those tweets. Many of them had actual good points.
Just a dumb question, why do you/Eliezer talk about the log-odds and not just probability? Is there any reason behind this word choice?
Besides this, I’m fully on board, I enjoy this framing much more than the “die with dignity”
[Book review] Who we are and how we got here
(Link) I’m Missing a Chunk of My Brain
This question is brilliant but I see about zero answers truly addressing it: it says, things you KNOW are true. I have seen quite a few answers, especially the AI related ones that fall in the category of Im pretty confident in my prediction that this will happen, which is not what the OP is asking
Strong upvote. Those are very good examples. I think that many of the so called irrational actions are in fact pretty rational and what fails is the framework we use to judge them. I wrote a post some time ago touching on a similar subject: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/R2GAuP9CdGtsDcpy4/beware-of-small-world-puzzles
A couple of things I wanted to add:
There is also a complementary point to point number 1. I have seen systematically people coming mostly from the physics and mathematics underestimate the complexity of the ideas/problems in Biology. I have seen a lot of that in LW, so watch out. If someone says that by reading a DNA sample a very powerful computer can derive the moral values of humans, you can bet a lot of money that this person has no clue about biology. To me, it sounds like a biologist saying that the Bayes theorem is false because probabilities are in the mind. Don’t become that arrogant prick. Do your homework!
The above list gives you a very solid understanding of molecular biology, certainly more than the vast majority of philosophers. Something missing is probably Physiology. To learn about physiology, use the same ideas above: YouTube, some manual, present your ideas to other people, etc.
Thanks jefftk for your short posts on random stuff making consistently Less Wrong more about what I wish it should be