16 minutes here. Also guessed frequently.
We have mandatory ‘fun days’ where we grill hot dogs and play ultimate football.
Thanks for the link, I’ll definitely attempting to implement some of the lessons from it to my draft next year. Incidentally, drafting is where I’ve always failed- I kind of just picked players without any knowledge or analysis, and then figured out what I could do with them during the season. The waiver wire helped, of course. Mine is an extremely blue collar league, so there’s not much in the way of strategy besides ‘I follow my gut’.
I’m deeply interested in this problem.
I’ve got to ask, though.
Isn’t this a niche filled by ‘business intelligence’ and ‘data science’? They call it a lot of different things, sure, but they seem to be operating in the same space- at least, they may seem to, to a non-technical executive. An exception is mid-to-small business—I don’t think there’s a lot of penetration there.
I no longer play sports (unless it’s mandated by work), unless you count grappling on occasion.
Yes, I maintain a fantasy football team to practice statistical thinking (as opposed to actual statistics, at the moment) and because I found it ingratiates me with my colleagues. My workplace went from a den of geeks to regular Monday night football types in the space of months, so I switched from D&D to fantasy football.
It’s safe to say I don’t really have teams I root for (once upon a time it was Newcastle United, because I liked zebras as a kid) or sports I watch more than a few minutes of. Yet I’m interested in sports- now more than ever.
It’s in the details. How does a tennis player improve his reaction time? How does handball transfer to boxing? How does the conditioning a football wide receiver employs differ from a midfielder’s training in football? What are the steps coaches take to improve performance? When performance is at a peak, what’s the best method for getting a group of people with adrenaline driving them to incorporate tactics into their play? Are tactics something you need to pay attention to? Sports provide a simple world with well-defined rules to explore the effect of competition on innovation.
If a team isn’t maximizing play within those rules, that team should lose over time. There’s a consequence for not paying attention to reality- especially in professional sports. If passing the ball in a particular way is bad form but it works and isn’t against the rules, surely teams will eventually start doing it, and the game will have to be re-examined.
You can find a lot of these aspects in multiplayer virtual games, but the physical skills required for sports introduce a whole new element that’s extremely interesting. Sure, Counter-Strike might raise your reaction time, but that’s just your eyes and your hands. A squash player, now, she’ll need to move her whole body.
I see the value in sports. I just don’t find it fun to, actually, you know, play, due to skill mismatch. People are either way better or much worse. Unless it’s capture the flag, paintball, or some other ‘new’ sport. The sports I do enjoy are one-on-one, but they carry a high risk of injury or are a heavy time sink.
I do wonder why people haven’t come up with a better game- one that maximizes suspense and use of complex tactics.
But which sport has had the most rules changes over time? A cursory glance suggests the NFL, but I suppose I should make a note to crunch those numbers when I’m inclined.
One last thing. I think there might be a better way to structure professional teams to encourage drama. As the saying goes, you’re just rooting for a jersey. Perhaps some sort of player buy-in to a team might change that. After all, city leagues, high school games, national, and even college sports make for more compelling stories.
Measuring RMR could reveal snowflake likelihood.
If ego depletion turns out to be real, choosing not to limit yourself in order to focus on something you find important might be a choice you make. Different people really do carry their fat differently, too, so there’s that. Not everyone who runs marathons is slender, especially as they age.
And then there’s injuries, but that brings up another subject.
I’m not sure how expensive whole body air displacement is in the civilian world, but it seems like a decent way to measure lean mass.
Have you talked to her about it? What does she say?
I’m a little surprised you hired someone for those designs. May I ask how much you paid? Quite honestly, you could’ve gotten the same design from a middle school student taking a graphic design class. This is fine if you’re doing it yourself, but if you’re paying for it, well, I think I could do better for free, and I’ve got absolutely no qualifications in the field.
I know what kind of designs appeal to a subset of society, but I guess we’d have to figure out who your target audience for those t-shirts are. It might not be anyone here, or anyone with the privilege of appreciating art, though the fact that you’re publishing in sites like LifeHacker suggests otherwise.
It’s the old argument with car dealership and personal injury/family/divorce law ads. Yes, they’re not pleasing to you and me, but they may work for their intended audience.
However, I think there’s something to be said for aesthetically pleasing designs, especially those that are universal enough to carry across a large number of cultures.
You can take a look at the general designer zeitgeist at portfolio websites like Behance and Dribble.
In addition to Fiverr, there’s also 99designs and others. Plenty of t-shirt websites now use the contest format, as well, and you can look at submissions to see the kinds of designs that are given a chance.
I’m talking about pleasure in general. Not just sexual.
I’m not sure the potential risk of side effects of the drugs in question are worth such a change. I don’t know how old you are, but your libido might also diminish over time.
I used to have similar thoughts as a teenager, so I understand the sentiment, but like everything else at that age, those concerns seem minute in hindsight.
How much fun do you have? Increasing hedons might yield a more efficient balance.
Late reply, I know!
Standardizing decisions through checklists and decision trees has, in general, shown to be useful if the principles behind those algorithms are based on a reliable map. In medical practice, that’s probably the evidence-based medicine approach to screening, diagnosis, and treatment.
In addition, all this assumes that patient management skills are not a concern, since it’s not something I personally consider important (from the point of view of a patient) when considering a provider of any medical or technical service. If you typically require more from your physician (and many people do see physicians as societal pillars and someone to talk to their non-medical problems about) than medical evaluation and treatment, then it is something to keep in mind.
Anecdotally, every medical provider I’ve encountered who was a vocal opponent of clinical decision support systems had a tendency to jump to dramatic conclusions that were later proven wrong.
This is one of the few studies on the subject that isn’t behind a paywall.
I think becoming a sidekick would be an interesting experience.
I don’t really have (this is not false humility- I think my most advanced skill is cooking, and I’ve never cooked for a living) any strong suits, and am mostly concerned with mundane instrumental rationality at the moment.
I’m a liberal arts dropout who joined the military a few years ago. My immediate goal is learning basic math and programming.
I suspect an outside interest (i.e, a ‘hero’) might help lend some focus.
Am I alone in thinking this should be in the Open Thread? /meta
I don’t have any surefire methods that don’t require a very basic working knowledge of medicine, but a general rule of thumb is the physician’s opinion of the algorithmic approach to medical decision making. If it is clearly negative, I’d be willing to bet that the physician is bad. Not quite the same as finding a good one, but decent for narrowing your search.
Along with this, look for someone who thinks in terms of possibilities rather than certainties in diagnoses.
All assuming you’re looking for a general practitioner, of course. I wouldn’t select surgeons based on this rule of thumb, for instance.
If you’re looking for someone who simply has good tableside manner, then reviews and word of mouth do work.
That’s a good question. I don’t really know. I think I’ve been equating ‘persuasion’ with ‘dark art’. I need to figure out what separates effective persuasive techniques from dark arts, if anything, and if the label ‘dark art’ has any use.
Yes, it does, though those answers lead to further questions.
How can you gain information from a prediction you cannot test, until you die? Is there some way to test it? Or have you encountered personal evidence of an afterlife already?
Why does free will or an afterlife require a God?
It’s hard to convey tone in text, but these are honest questions. If they make you uncomfortable, it’s fine if you ignore them.
Regarding the sequences, you may find it easier to derive the same information from books popularizing a lot of the source material it is based on, if the sequences themselves turn you off.
What can you predict with the existence of your God that you can’t predict without?
And what makes your God more likely than any other God or Gods?
I suppose it’s a question of granularity. While there have been a number of sound arguments for 16⁄64 equalling 1⁄4, there are hitherto no arguments of equal strength for the existence of any particular deity.
16⁄64 being equal to 1⁄4 allows people to predict what will happen when they scale objects.
Perhaps a rating system based on proportions, symmetry, and skin health. However, I’m not convinced this is that (it is a large factor in decisions, yes, but it’s not one you can change much beyond style and hygiene, unless you’re willing to undergo plastic surgery) important, except in the realm of Tinder-esque situations.
If you happen to live somewhere where random people will complement you or flirt with you, I suppose number of incidents/number of people exposed to over a large span of time could be a metric.
How is a sexbot different from a sexdoll or a fleshlight and pornography?
I don’t think it would create any problems in a mentally healthy individual, though it might exacerbate those suffering from pre-existing issues surrounding sex.
A large portion of my coworkers (due to the nature of the job, they’re probably in that weird space between family, friend, and acquaintance) fiercely endorse beliefs that I am at odds with (against gay marriage, strong religiosity, complete climate change denial, etc) but we can discuss our beliefs (for the most part; one of them insisted he would have his daughter flogged if she ‘turned gay’, and then kidnapped and sent to some less accepting society to ‘chase it out of her’) without any heated arguments. Even if we do, we still have no problems buying each other lunch the next day.
This is a wholly personal experience, since I’m used to holding contrarian views. I think it still bothers my System 1, but not enough for me to devote System 2 time to it.
What about the world at large, though?
Would an online interaction promote calm discussion, or in-person interaction?
While that dichotomy might differ in the LessWrong community due to cultural factors, I think it’s safe to say that people think the opposite is usually true for most internet interactions.
A few possibilities come to mind, in regards to possible trends. I realize that it’s a mixture. Help me out if I’ve missed something.
A) People are more belligerent online, less belligerent in person.
B) People are less belligerent online, more belligerent in person.
C) People are the same online and in the real world.
D) Online vs. real world belligerence determined strongly by culture.
Public opinion seems to favor A.
I’m having trouble finding relevant studies, because I’m not sure if data collected from the context of online sexual/nonsexual harassment is useful, here.
The scifi action flick Edge of Tomorrow might be a close-but-not-perfect example. Most of the movie is an extended training montage, with one (more or less the same as Groundhog Day) unique conceit.
The coming of age movie I Not Stupid is essentially about the distinction between a growth and fixed mindset, as played out against a backdrop of the highly competitive Singaporean education system.
Arguably Batman, when taken at face value. Due in part to sheer volume, there are probably a few story arcs from both Batman and Spider-Man comics that have elements of this. Not even mentioning the countless lesser known entities of super-hero comics that embody it, especially those with Charles Atlas superpowers.
A lot of fight sport fiction might get close, too.
I have an inkling that fiction in the near future featuring The Unchosen One will at least attempt more of this, or at least a Hollywood/Anime version of it.