Rudi C(Luna Rimar)

What newslet­ters are you sub­scribed to, and why?

[Question] What should I study to un­der­stand real-world eco­nomics? (I.e., To gain fi­nan­cial liter­acy)

[Question] Idea: Create a pod­cast of ad­min tagged posts us­ing AI TTS like Ama­zon Polly

[Question] What is the liter­a­ture on effects of vac­cines on the cen­tral ner­vous sys­tem?

• Rudi C 30 Mar 2020 10:31 UTC

  1 point

  on: Would Covid19 pa­tients benefit from blood trans­fu­sions from peo­ple who have re­cov­ered?

  I asked around, and it’s be­ing done in Iran, too.

[Question] How do you study a math text­book?

• Rudi C 22 Mar 2020 13:29 UTC

  3 points

  in reply to: Wei_Dai’s comment on: What should we do once in­fected with COVID-19?

  Note that an­ti­malar­ial drugs seem to be bad for pso­ri­a­sis.

[Question] Is car­dio enough for longevity benefits of ex­er­cise?

[Question] What is your recom­mended statis­tics text­book for a be­gin­ner?

[Question] What sub­fields of math­e­mat­ics are most use­ful for what sub­fields of AI?

• Rudi C 28 Nov 2019 23:07 UTC

  2 points

  in reply to: quanticle’s comment on: What are the open prob­lems in Hu­man Ra­tion­al­ity?

  Ra­tion­al­ity might not have a lot of prac­ti­cal value, pre­cisely be­cause things that had such value are already well-en­g­ineered by evolu­tion and cul­ture. But it still ad­vances your un­der­stand­ing of the world and your­self a lot, and I per­son­ally find that one of my few ter­mi­nal val­ues. In­ci­den­tally, ra­tio­nal­ity might im­ply that Star­craft is a kind of tro­jan that ex­ploits our re­ward cir­cuits, and if we want to max­i­mize our val­ues (as op­posed to our plea­sure), we are well-ad­vised to take a stance against this ex­ploita­tion.

• Rudi C 28 Nov 2019 22:53 UTC

  1 point

  in reply to: Thrasymachus’s comment on: What are the open prob­lems in Hu­man Ra­tion­al­ity?

  My per­sonal ex­pe­rience is that I had most of what en­ables me to be epistem­i­cally ra­tio­nal from child­hood (so prob­a­bly ge­netic), but that the ex­po­sure to be­hav­ioral eco­nomics, sci­ence and other ra­tio­nal­ity-ad­ja­cent memes early in my life sig­nifi­cantly boosted that ge­netic seed. Another per­sonal ob­ser­va­tion: I have never felt some­one I know has im­proved their ra­tio­nal­ity. Though I also don’t know al­most any­one who even cares about be­com­ing more ra­tio­nal.

• Rudi C 28 Nov 2019 20:42 UTC

  2 points

  in reply to: Xodarap’s comment on: Why are peo­ple so bad at dat­ing?

  I think they do; Con­sider The League. It’s a some­what ex­clu­sive dat­ing app that does provide ad­vice on your pro­file. An app that has a more at­trac­tive com­mu­nity is it­self a more at­trac­tive app.

• Rudi C 28 Nov 2019 20:39 UTC

  5 points

  on: Why are peo­ple so bad at dat­ing?

  A ma­jor miss­ing piece might be that in the an­ces­tral en­vi­ron­ment, sex­u­al­ity and the so­cial sphere were quite differ­ent from the mod­ern day. Speci­fi­cally, (the fol­low­ing points are mere spec­u­la­tion on my part.)

  • Good dat­ing ad­vice was already an es­tab­lished part of the meme pool, while bad dat­ing ad­vice was a memetic weapon of your com­peti­tors.

  • Peo­ple knew ev­ery­one in the tribe rather well, so a lot of op­ti­miza­tion/​de­cep­tion was sim­ply not an op­tion.

  • It was difficult to hide the fact that you are try­ing to op­ti­mize your sex­ual life. This effort it­self prob­a­bly sig­naled against you.

  • Sex­u­al­ity and nor­mal so­cial re­la­tions were much more in­ter­twined, and monogamy not the norm, so you were bet­ter off op­ti­miz­ing your so­cial sta­tus and pop­u­lar­ity as a whole rather than fo­cus­ing nar­rowly on at­tract­ing spe­cific peo­ple with un­sus­tain­able sig­nals.

  • Rad­i­cal self-im­prove­ment was prob­a­bly not all that pos­si­ble in the first place. When your ge­net­ics and the meme pool have had time to evolve for your en­vi­ron­ment, you have lit­tle to gain from try­ing to con­sciously im­prove, and a lot to lose.

  • Reli­gion might also have been a fac­tor in this; If the dat­ing ad­vice was in­fluenced by the tribe’s re­li­gion, it is prob­a­ble that it would op­ti­mize for things that are ir­rele­vant or coun­ter­pro­duc­tive.

  Aside from these, I think you have not pro­duced much ev­i­dence that peo­ple are bad at dat­ing. Most of the ex­am­ples you have pro­vided seem to me to be the kind of things that the pub­lic is gen­er­ally bad at. (Like, the pub­lic doesn’t use “ev­i­dence-based” books on most any sub­ject.)

[Question] What sources (i.e., blogs) of non­fic­tion book re­views do you find most use­ful?

[Question] What video games are more fa­mous in our com­mu­nity than in the gen­eral pub­lic?

• Rudi C 26 Sep 2019 15:03 UTC

  2 points

  on: Ra­tional Read­ing: Thoughts On Pri­ori­tiz­ing Books

  I rate books’ per­ceived po­ten­tial from 0 to 10 (I ac­tu­ally just la­bel any­thing be­low 7 as bad as I’ll never read those). I use Goodreads/​Ama­zon’s rat­ings/​re­views, the source I used to find the book, its Goodreads sum­mary, and its au­thors to es­ti­mate its rele­vance to my goals, its qual­ity in achiev­ing its pur­ported aim, and its rel­a­tive qual­ity in the meme­sphere it tries to elu­ci­date. I use Goodreads ex­clu­sive shelves to la­bel each book’s po­ten­tial and also shelf it un­der what it teaches. I then browse my Goodreads’ shelves when I’m out of books. This whole ap­proach doesn’t work very effi­ciently though, as I have trou­ble as­sess­ing books’ qual­ities and my own pri­ori­ties.

[Question] What are your recom­men­da­tions on books to listen to when do­ing, e.g., chores?

[Question] En­courage cre­at­ing repos­i­to­ries on Github in­stead of Lesswrong

• Rudi C 26 Sep 2019 9:25 UTC

  1 point

  in reply to: habryka’s comment on: How to see the last up­date date of a post?

  What’s the curl com­mand to ac­cess this via the API? The main use I have in mind, though, is just see­ing the lat­est edit date to know how up-to-date the post is (or how well-main­tained, in the case of repos­i­tory-style posts.)