I love the idea of LW/OB meetups.
In fact I showed up for one listed in NYC at Georgia’s Bake Shop (corner of 89th st and Broadway) but no one else did :(
I love the idea of LW/OB meetups.
In fact I showed up for one listed in NYC at Georgia’s Bake Shop (corner of 89th st and Broadway) but no one else did :(
I got the location from the google calendar posted a few weeks ago.
http://lesswrong.com/lw/1am/lw_meetup_google_calendar/
The link you included does not resolve correctly for me.
(Thanks Robin)
“But what would a person who completely didn’t care about such affiliations do? Pretty much the same thing.”
I disagree. This is a case of different populations having different utility formulas for the same item. Those who enjoy being affiliated with high status institutions are receiving utility other populations do not.
I think that people often pre-screen their selection options removing those options they think are overpriced aka do not fit their utility formula. They filter out signals belonging to other populations who use a different utility function.
An item may have many utility functions. Populations who’s utility formulas match the market price see correct signals. Populations who’s formulas do not match see the item as either a deal or rip-off. I imagine that populations that view the item as a deal must be small. Those that see the item as a rip-off probably purchase alternatives based off of signaling data they feel is valid.
In some cases the utility function map to the same value but in others they do not.
I think the key is to have a third party test you. Ideally this third party has created a profile of you.
My solution would be to give an interactive test that gives you a harder or easier questions based off of how you answer the questions. I would incorporate this with a profile so that when you come back the next day it knows what level of questions to give you. Ideally you could test several types of IQ with few questions.
The tests-questions-games like the above posts would be designed to be fun.
At the end the test would tell you how you preformed compared to other times.
You wanted M&Ms. If you had not had a $1 bill you would not have gotten them.
“Would you rather it be a $1 bill (and you get to buy M&Ms) or it be a $5 bill (and you don’t get M&Ms)?”
Depends on the person and how they value money/M&Ms.
I do feel confident saying that ANY person in that situation would be less happy finding that $5 then latter finding $5 under there couch while vacuuming.
“I don’t want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it through not dying.” --Woody Allen
This was my first contact with this story. I still don’t feel informed.
Wikipedia was the best of the resources. The site arguing defendants are guilty was the worst. My probabilities on Konx and Sollecito are “high” because I feel I still have not found an argument against them that was properly constructed. Before lowering my probability to 1% I would like to hear a better explanation of why the court found them guilty.
Your probability estimate that Amanda Knox is guilty. p = 6%
Your probability estimate that Raffaele Sollecito is guilty. p= 6%
Your probability estimate that Rudy Guede is guilty. p = 70%
How much you think your opinion will turn out to coincide with mine. p = 90% (That we both agree in direction; that RG is probably guilty. I expect your probabilities are higher though)
** Note that I leave plenty of probability for the possibility that none of the three are guilty.
I agree with Eliezer but like Maxwell’s point about assigning extra probability to Knox and Sollecito because the guilty argument was so poorly formated. “She was convicted but I don’t get why, perhaps I don’t understand this.”
That said I think 15% or less more then accounts for this uncertainty. I gave Knox a 6% probability.
Side note, I am surprised that more people are not assigning probability to the chance that none of them did it.
Credit Cards vs Payday Loans and Layaway.
I cannot pull out the reference but I have read that consumers are very responsive to credit cards; that those who do not carry balances know little about the rate that they would be charge while they know more about the perks they get from using the card, cash back etc.
It is shown that many of those who carry balances on the cards pick cards with lower rates and move balances when rates rise.
Some get trapped but is this trap worse than payday loans? If one over regulates unsecured lines of credit then the supply of unsecured credit will decrease and those in need of it will resort to black markets. The rate on a CC may be high but is far better than the options available 50 years ago. How can rates be low on a population with high default rates?
Madoff committed fraud.
If you give me $1,000 for a ring that I tell you is platinum and it ends up being silver I have violated our contract.
Maldoff did not simply manage peoples money ineptly he stole it.
Indeed!
A great Econtalk episode. I highly suggest people interested in the topic listen.
Free the data!
The reporting engine they have created is impressive but it always better to have more people looking at the data. Who knows what mashups hackers on the side would make?
I applaud the idea of getting a large set medical data together though crowd sourcing. I just wish anyone could run there own statistics on the data.
I think your and Eliezer’s statements contain much more signaling then counter-signaling and is why they work with strangers.
Strangers and counter-signaling:
You cannot counter signal with people who have no previous impression about the attribute you are counter-signaling.
Whether the person is a stranger or friend is irrelevant. A counter-signal is likely to work whenever the recipient already has a positive view of the attribute you are counter-signaling.
Note you can send a positive and negative (counter) signal at the same time. If the net is positive counter-signal will work.
Good friends don’t signal:
I think that friends that know you well do not pay much attention to signals or counter-signals. Signals are used when a person has incomplete information about another person.
Friends who really know you will not be fooled by fake counter-signals while strangers may be fooled if primed correctly beforehand with a positive signal.
“Still seems it strange, that thou shouldst live forever? Is it less strange, that thou shouldst live at all? This is a miracle; and that no more.” Edward Young
Scrapheap Transhumanism:
“I’m sort of inured to pain by this point. Anesthetic is illegal for people like me, so we learn to live without it; I’ve made scalpel incisions in my hands, pushed five-millimeter diameter needles through my skin, and once used a vegetable knife to carve a cavity into the tip of my index finger. I’m an idiot, but I’m an idiot working in the name of progress: I’m Lepht Anonym, scrapheap transhumanist. I work with what I can get.”
Here is more: http://hplusmagazine.com/articles/enhanced/scrapheap-transhumanism
HT:Tyler Cowen
Selfishness is a counter signal/handicap http://lesswrong.com/lw/1sa/things_you_cant_countersignal/
How it is interpreted based entirely on your positive singles. Counter signals at best enhance the underlining signal.
If you are high status despite being rude then you must have some trait that compensates for your flaw. If you are low status and rude then you have no trait to compensate for your rudeness.
Single strength is related to:
1) Difficulty of producing the signal. (A collage degree vs high school degree)
2) The size of the handicap vs the positive signal (Not having a collage degree but making a lot of money.)
3) The difficulty in faking the signal.
This is not Prisoner’s Dilemma. The original has no reputation effects. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner’s_dilemma
This was a game in a game theory class. As so the teacher is trying to teach things like strategy domination, ect. In this case I believe he was applauding Ashley because she understood that a bid of .01 was weekly dominated by all other bids; that all other bids yield as good or better results.
Was it a bad idea for her to show herself as a “selfish git”? I don’t know that depends on the social situation. My guess is that folks in a game theory class get that this is a game.
See Yale open course on game theory for background: http://oyc.yale.edu/economics/game-theory/
On a side note if you want to take reputation into consideration consider the iterated prisoner’s dilemma. Computer science classes commonly do this early on as a fun way of getting kids to create data structures capable of remembering who ripped them off.
In the experiment you trade with you classmates $1. If you both are honest you get back $1.1. If one cheats and the other does not they get $2. If both cheat they get $1. If someone cheats you most program that they cheat that person from then onward.
When the students don’t know how many trades the program will be run for the honest traders do best.