especially if sylvester stallone subsequently signed up, pledging to stop him in the future.
nazgulnarsil
oh goody, lesswrong finally has its own super villain. is any community really complete without one?
Language is not about communication of abstract concepts, it’s about communication of status.
An intelligent rationalist likes to have incorrect reasoning pointed out so they can correct it. A normal person perceives corrections as an assertion of higher status.
An intelligent rationalist enjoys discussing difficult subject mater that stretches the limit of their understanding. A normal person perceives such topics as an assertion of higher status.
An intelligent rationalist is interested in pragmatic solutions to problems. A normal person uses stances on known problems to signal their social affiliations.
An intelligent rationalist explicitly reasons about social norms and ignores them when advantageous. A normal person implicitly views such behavior as signaling group disloyalty.
An intelligent rationalist values intelligence terminally (okay this isn’t strictly rational, but is a common pattern). A normal person values intelligence instrumentally.
I’m sure there are many more, and you could write pages about each one, but I think this covers some broad swaths.
You can be gentle about DH7 by attributing the improved argument to someone with high status. This is my typical strategy and seems to work well. It’s a double whammy because you’re implicitly associating them with someone of high status e.g. “it’s funny you say that, it’s very similar to an argument by ”. I’m NOT saying that you actually have to know a bunch of famous arguments offhand, the better argument can be attributed fallaciously to anyone who has spoken on a topic and can have little to do with the person’s original argument. Few notice and you have the out of being mistaken even if they do.
it is a grave mistake to believe that ultra-rationality means immediate dismissal of sensory experiences that (currently) have no good explanation.
“But let a female rationalist be the one to say it.”
this really bothers me.
nice try unfriendly AI.
I got pulled from first grade and was homeschooled for awhile. I would physically attack teachers and students when they were aggressively dumb. I don’t think my social skills really recovered.
edit: Wow, this brought up a lot of memories. I think my entire identity is thanks to a garage sale where someone was getting rid of a bunch of science oriented books and I begged my mom into buying them. In third grade I got to go to a school with a library and teachers preferred me to read in class rather than be disruptive. The class library had lots of sci-fi, including stuff like Heinlein, and I remember thinking adults must be illiterate because of the disconnect between the content they wouldn’t allow in other media formats and the stuff in books. The librarian knew, and she would lend me her personal books, as long as I promised not to tell anyone about the racy stuff. I specifically remember The Kin of Ata which was a morality play hinging on a rape scene, though not a violent or graphic one.
I think a large contingent on LW would be more interested in what an optimal employment scenario looks like after graduating with a high-value degree. I know I am.
PUA stuff targets the middle of the bell curve. Of course it looks silly to intelligent people.
is there a simple explanation of the conflict between bayesianism and frequentialism? I have sort of a feel for it from reading background materials but a specific example where they yield different predictions would be awesome. has such already been posted before?
My experience is that intelligent people overestimate the abilities of people around the middle.
http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/07/stupider-than-you-realize.html
“Imagine being told you were made for a purpose, and that longevity and happiness are not in the list of design objectives.” -David Eubanks, Life Artificial
after the civil war a pipeline was built from the heart of academia into the sewage of politics, hoping that the crystal pure waters of science would wash out the muck. no one remembered to install a backflow valve and the sewage of politics simply backed up into academia.
90% of grants come from the same place. You don’t need conspiracy theories to explain coordination when everyone is getting checks with the same signature.
edit: before i get down modded to oblivion I’d just like to point out that standard history suffers from severe crippling hindsight bias. history properly interpreted is the search for decisions that had disproportionate impact on the future light cone. Because we dont have access to alternate presents this is extremely difficult and the standard methods strike me as guilty of the same curve fitting that evolution was in its infancy (lamarckianism, social darwinism, other sillyness).
directly pursuing mating is low status, let us disguise it....
watching LW try to influence the real world reminds me of the AI in the box. craig here being the guy with the button.
you may want to warn people that they need to play a large amount of hands for variance to go down to acceptable levels.
the procedure here is how to consistently feel better after a few weeks (vs typical lazy cheap diets)
breakfast, buy:
plain (unsweetened) yogurt
honey
fruit (bananas or whatever berries are on sale)
granola (again, unsweetened)
dump together in bowl and eat. if you don’t feel hungry in the morning just do a very small serving at first.
lunch: whatever, avoid sugar/white bread
dinner, buy :
rice-a-roni red beans and rice when it is on sale (goes to 75 cents a box once every couple months at my local store)
bell pepper (or spicier pepper to taste)
olive oil
boil, then simmer 20 minutes
yes, this procedure can be improved upon. the advantage of this one is low activation cost as it is about as difficult as the regular bachelor diet of instant foods. if you’re trying to eat healthier but can’t find the motivation this is a decent compromise.
major thing to avoid besides the obvious: fruit juice and fruit flavored anything. you’re subverting your body’s desire for actual fruit. fruit juice is no better for you than soda.
I’m guessing this is mostly preaching to the choir here, but if this helps one person it was worth the 5 minutes.
- Topics from “Procedural Knowledge Gaps” by 11 Feb 2012 21:38 UTC; 58 points) (
- 13 Feb 2012 10:19 UTC; 6 points) 's comment on [Link] Cooking for people who don’t by (
i ghost write papers for lazy rich undergrads at prestigious institutions and my experience has been that the soft sciences are a muddle of garbage with obscenely little worth given the billions of dollars poured into them that could be saving lives.
the joint stock corporation is the best* system of peacefully organizing humans to achieve goals. the closer governmental structure conforms to a joint-stock system the more peaceful and prosperous it will become (barring getting nuked by a jealous democracy). (99%)
*that humans have invented so far