raydora

Karma: 80

raydora 14 Oct 2021 15:58 UTC
10 points
in reply to: Dagon’s comment on: Is nuking women and children cheaper than firebombing them?
Games with non-real-world rules are how everyone who fights wars prepares for wars.

raydora 18 May 2015 3:38 UTC
9 points
in reply to: Halfwitz’s comment on: Open Thread, May 18 - May 24, 2015
I recently joined this site after lurking for awhile. Are blog contributions of that sort are the primary purpose of Less Wrong?

It seems like it fulfills a niche that the avenues you listed do not: specifically, in the capacity of a community rather than an individual, academic, or professional endeavor.

There are applications of rational thought present in these threads that I don’t see gathered anywhere else. I’m sure I’m missing something here, but could viewing Less Wrong as a potential breeding ground for contributors of that kind be useful?

I realize it’s a difficult line to follow without facing the problems inherent to any community, especially one that preaches a Way.

I haven’t encountered the rationalist tumblr scene. Is such a community there?

raydora 7 Aug 2015 20:26 UTC
8 points
on: Forecasting health gaps
Yesterday, I was surprised when I treated a patient (for a heart attack) to find that he later ended up in the ER. I’ve only treated a handful (exactly five!) with MI-like symptoms, and none of them had his low heart rate or controlled breathing. Surprise meant my model needed to be updated, and a quick look at this showed me that I really only needed two symptoms to be wary.

Physicians and other healthcare providers in the ‘algorithmic’ camp (vs ‘clinical’) essentially forecast diagnosis through probability-based predictions. Algorithms are also referred to simply as ‘flowcharts’ and as part of standard operating procedure. Medical algorithms incorporate a large number of established heuristics in a standardized manner, and have been shown to dramatically increase diagnostic accuracy. The medical branch of the military has access to a wealth of patient data, and they create algorithms based on that data.

In the private sector, there’s Medal, Apervita, Syapse and others. There’s a few private companies ‘democratizing healthcare data’ for a price. There’s even more information from health insurance providers, which tend to have their own healthcare data companies, which organizations can also access for a price.

DXplain uses Bayesian logic for diagnostics, and is open to physicians. TXdent does the same for dental care. Adjuvant! is publicly available to healthcare providers and exists for cancer patients. eMedicine is pretty great, but nigh useless to the layperson, other than a better version of WebMD, even though it’s a service offered by the same company. If you wanted to improve self-care, you might be able to get some mileage out of CATmaker, but it assumes you’re a provider, and I doubt a layperson would get use out of it. Tripdatabase is a curated database, mostly with links to studies from NIH, so you’ll encounter the paywall either way.

There’s also CDSS, which, while acknowledged as effective, is having problems with implementation due to the state of IT in healthcare.

Disease models exist primarily to forecast infection rates and risks. In addition to census data, there are publicly available datasets for infectious diseases.

All this to say that I suspect the specialists in your post are obfuscating the problem.
- Medical datasets are not freely available to every medical institution.
- Not every provider employs information gleaned from this data.
- Algorithmic, probability based care is essentially controlled by a few companies.
Solve the problem, and you close part of the gap in English speaking countries. If you can read Dutch or Russian, you might be able to get access to all of the above (albeit with more geographically limited datasets) for free, but I don’t really know.

If you want to identify health risks for yourself, cross reference the probability of infection in your meatspace community with your own demographic (parents, habits, location, age, general health, medical history) information and take appropriate preventive measures.

raydora 15 Jun 2015 13:10 UTC
6 points
in reply to: John_Maxwell’s comment on: Open Thread, Jun. 15 - Jun. 21, 2015
I can honestly say that utilizing a memory palace and linking was a significant jump in my life. I started training myself in their use about a year ago, but never had to put them into action in a constrained time frame until recently. It felt wonderful. Currently working on incorporating spaced repetition into my routine. My chief problem is prioritizing lists. Figuring out what needs to be memorized in a subject requires some understanding, and I usually lack that in subjects I’m deeply interested in.

A combination of mnemonic techniques and mental math methods that I’d never encountered in childhood make a huge difference. I wonder why they are not taught in schools.

CARVER encourages tertiary recon to validate whatever data was initially gathered. I’m sure this wouldn’t be a problem for a neo-rationalist civilian or SOCOM, but when it’s applied in regular Army, the element that’s engaged in tertiary recon has incentive to simply agree with the initial report, especially if that’s the sort of thing command encourages.

That’s about all the topics I have serious familiarity with on that thread. Will check out the rest.

raydora 26 Oct 2015 23:16 UTC
5 points
on: Sidekick Matchmaking—How to tackle the problem?
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.

raydora 2 Jul 2015 1:15 UTC
5 points
in reply to: shminux’s comment on: July 2015 Media Thread
Within the fantasy genre, he seems well known as the current authority on the (seriously labeled, humorously adopted by him) ‘grimdark’ genre.

If you like that, you’ll probably loveBest Served Cold and The Heroes. He’s got the trappings of a debutante in The First Law, but those two books show an experienced designer at work.

There’s something Tarantino-like about him, as applied to fantasy fiction. An ability to confer personality through changes in writing style is probably what truly sets him apart from other fantasy authors, though. Above all, he is able to tell when a character has no stories left to tell, and usually sets them aside in favor of a minor character from a previous fiction.

When Steven Erikson and George Martin do it, it sometimes seems arbitrary, a reminder to the reader that it’s a shitty world where shitty things happen, and they are often taken out of the plot by death or worse.

It feels more (I’m not sure if the denouement of the First Law might allow this to make more sense, or reveal it to be an old impression that does not match reality- it’s definitely the case in his more recent adult books) natural in Abercrombie’s books, and I don’t doubt that feeling is entirely deliberate. I have an impression that he’s a writer that doesn’t leave much to chance, artistic whim, or fits of inspiration.

raydora 16 Jun 2015 23:45 UTC
5 points
in reply to: Elo’s comment on: Open Thread, Jun. 15 - Jun. 21, 2015
My math skills are probably extremely poor, so it’s been easier for me to to make large gains. Most often, this is manifest in three digit multiplication or division, in situations that don’t allow for calculators. Small scale logistics (how much fuel do we need for x days in x area? How much food?) and other stuff a middle schooler wouldn’t have trouble with. The difference between three minutes and thirty seconds usually doesn’t matter, but I’m preparing for worst case scenarios anyway.

Currently, I have memorized nonsense paragraphs for work and basic medical diagnostic algorithms, as well as the pharmacology of drugs I administer most often. Memorizing faces, names, and minor facts concerning people at work is uncommonly useful in getting the job done. Following proper channels is usually nigh impossible, so we rely on a system of favors.

Basic python functions. Any factoid that may inspire fiction.

I am sometimes (about once a month) in situations where I am given a short amount of time to take in specific information, often digits, and there are dozens of checklists. This is where I’ve seen the most dramatic improvement.

Hrm. I think I’ve figured it out, purely from writing this reply. I’ll just focus on biases, python functions, and mathematical formulas I encounter until I’m ready to take on another major subject.

raydora 29 Sep 2015 14:30 UTC
4 points
in reply to: skeptical_lurker’s comment on: Open thread, Sep. 28 - Oct. 4, 2015
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.

raydora 20 Oct 2015 0:35 UTC
3 points
on: Nature publishes an article about alternative therapy
Am I alone in thinking this should be in the Open Thread? /meta

raydora 31 Jul 2015 18:12 UTC
3 points
on: Open Thread, Jul. 27 - Aug 02, 2015
Has anyone read anything about Applied Information Economics?

raydora 2 Apr 2024 15:26 UTC
2 points
0
on: The Best Tacit Knowledge Videos on Every Subject
Domain: Combat Sports
Link: Muay Thai Library
Person: Sylvie Von Duuglas-Ittu
Background: Muay Thai fighter with over 200 fights.
Why: Sylvie shows herself learning with her ‘Muay Thai Library’ videos. She narrates how she explores learning someone’s technique or strategy.
More than any particular technique, these videos show someone’s learning process. This is applicable to all combat sports.

raydora 28 Dec 2015 13:45 UTC
2 points
in reply to: [deleted]’s comment on: Open Thread, Dec. 28 - Jan. 3, 2016
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.

raydora 28 Dec 2015 13:37 UTC
2 points
on: Sports
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.

raydora 18 Nov 2015 11:57 UTC
2 points
in reply to: CronoDAS’s comment on: Open thread, Nov. 16 - Nov. 22, 2015
Have you talked to her about it? What does she say?

raydora 15 Nov 2015 16:55 UTC
2 points
in reply to: Gleb_Tsipursky’s comment on: Rationality Merchandise—First Set
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.

raydora 8 Nov 2015 3:29 UTC
2 points
in reply to: Dorikka’s comment on: Open thread, Oct. 19 - Oct. 25, 2015
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.

raydora 29 Sep 2015 16:14 UTC
2 points
in reply to: CCC’s comment on: Rationality Quotes Thread September 2015
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.

raydora 29 Sep 2015 16:06 UTC
2 points
in reply to: Raiden’s comment on: Open thread, Sep. 28 - Oct. 4, 2015
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.

raydora 9 Nov 2015 20:38 UTC
1 point
in reply to: [deleted]’s comment on: Open thread, Nov. 09 - Nov. 15, 2015
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.

raydora 29 Sep 2015 22:14 UTC
1 point
in reply to: CCC’s comment on: Rationality Quotes Thread September 2015
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.