Orborde

[Link] Sarah Con­stantin on RaDVaC

Meetup Notes: Ole Peters on ergodicity

Pric­ing ex­ter­nal­ities is not nec­es­sar­ily eco­nom­i­cally efficient

[Question] What eco­nomic gains are there in life ex­ten­sion treat­ments?

Taxi In­dus­try Reg­u­la­tion, Dereg­u­la­tion, and Rereg­u­la­tion: The Para­dox of Mar­ket Failure

• Orborde 13 Jan 2021 0:34 UTC

  10 points

  in reply to: romeostevensit’s comment on: A vastly faster vac­cine rollout

  A medical worker who tried to sign up for vaccine administration recruitment was confronted with needing 21 pieces of paperwork showing that they had completed various trainings, many of which have nothing to do with vaccination.

  Care to paste a source link?

[Question] What is the best day to cel­e­brate Smal­lpox Erad­i­ca­tion Day?

What’s go­ing on with this failure of Bayes to con­verge?

• Orborde 9 Oct 2022 10:41 UTC

  6 points

  1

  on: The Redac­tion Machine

  Setting it all up was damned expensive: she died at ninety—about 70 years of redaction time multiplied by a typical human metabolic rate and mass landed you with a lot of redaction entropy. Look at the price of energy, convert the Kilowatt hours and it came to a lot of money. She had to set up an on-death remortgage of her home to cover it even with the subsidies.

  A typical human consumes maybe 3000 kcal of food per day. Which is about 3.5 kWh. Current price for electricity in the US is about $0.17/​kWh. Do all the math, and you get an electricity cost of about $20,000 for a 90-year reversal, if the reversal consumes close to the metabolic energy spent. Which doesn’t seem ridiculously expensive compared to what a human can save in their lifetime (ditto 10x that cost, if you imagine that it takes 10J to reverse the entropy of 1J of metabolism).

  Are you imagining a much less efficient process?

• Orborde 30 Dec 2021 5:43 UTC

  5 points

  4

  in reply to: maia’s comment on: What would you like from Micro­covid.org? How valuable would it be to you?

  My policy with microcovid from the very beginning has been to look at the numbers and basically ignore the “high risk /​ medium risk” designations, because they don’t match my risk tolerance and that divergence has only increased over the course of the pandemic (now that I’m vaccinated, 1 uCov is less costly because it carries less risk with it).

  Not from the very beginning, but for most of this year this is how I’ve used microcovid.

• Orborde 28 Feb 2021 15:46 UTC

  5 points

  on: Ar­row grid game

  I’m confused about this diagram. Is it plotting out activity preferences?

• [ ]

  [deleted]

• Orborde 5 Feb 2021 16:44 UTC

  4 points

  on: [Link] Sarah Con­stantin on RaDVaC

  It looks like her objection is that the RaDVaC folks chose some pretty questionable peptides. Presumably you could simply order some different peptides, but I think you’ll run into the following problems:

  • You need to pick peptides that will, in the RaDVaC formulation, wind up folded similarly to their conformation in the live virus. I, personally, have no idea how to do that.

  • You don’t really have much evidence of immunogenicity for your new RaDVaC formulation and probably need to measure it again (my understanding is that the RaDVaC designers have done some immunogenicity measures in themselves, so the current formulation has some evidence of immunogenicity).

• Orborde 26 Oct 2022 23:10 UTC

  3 points

  0

  on: A list of Petrov buttons

  I was the co-game-master for 2018 Oxford/​Seattle and had to make a call about whether the game-end launch was legit. Your telling is accurate—the guy who pressed the button indeed acted unilaterally and (he claims) thought the button was disabled.

• Orborde 3 Nov 2019 23:32 UTC

  3 points

  on: Meetup Notes: Ole Peters on ergodicity

  Tangentially: reading about the history of gambling theory (the “unfinished game” problem, etc.) is pretty interesting.

  Imagine how weird it was when people basically didn’t understand expected value at all! Did casinos even know what they were doing, or did they somewhat routinely fail after picking the wrong game design? Did they only settle on profitable designs by accident? Are blackjack, roulette, and other very old games still with us because they happened not to bankrupt casinos that ran them, and were only later analyzed with tools capable of identifying whether the house had the edge?

• Orborde 3 Nov 2019 23:14 UTC

  3 points

  in reply to: ESRogs’s comment on: What eco­nomic gains are there in life ex­ten­sion treat­ments?

  ChristianKI is right—I was speculating that people would stop retiring. Updated my post to make that clearer.

• Orborde 7 Oct 2023 7:02 UTC

  2 points

  in reply to: Alex K. Chen (parrot)’s comment on: Wel­come to The Territory

  Nope!

  (DMed the most recent residents—they moved out at the end of the lease term about a month ago)

• Orborde 12 Feb 2022 16:13 UTC

  2 points

  in reply to: tkpwaeub’s comment on: The Long Long Covid Post

  Can you link to your comment?

• Orborde 27 Nov 2020 8:46 UTC

  2 points

  on: Limits of Cur­rent US Pre­dic­tion Mar­kets (Pre­dic­tIt Case Study)

  PredictIt also limits the number of traders on a given contract to 5,000.

• Orborde 4 Nov 2019 1:07 UTC

  2 points

  in reply to: Richard Meadows’s comment on: Meetup Notes: Ole Peters on ergodicity

  even if Peters et al are wrong about expected utility, do you think they’re right about the dangers of failing to understand ergodicity?

  Not sure. I can’t tell what additional information, if any, Peters is contributing that you can’t already get from learning about the math of wagers and risk-averse utility functions.