propaganda (in its literal meaning, “public communication aimed at influencing an audience and furthering an agenda”)
Wiktionary at the link marks that usage as dated, I wouldn’t call it “its literal meaning”. I believe the closest current single word would be “advocacy”.
I see how it makes sense but it was super freaking hard for me to understand why “Cassandra/Mule”. These words mean so many things I guess
Real-world disagreements tend to persist; they’re predictable—in flagrant contradiction of how the beliefs of Bayesian reasoners would follow a random walk. From this we can infer that typical human disagreements aren’t “honest”, in the sense that at least one of the participants is behaving as if they have some other goal than getting to the truth.
Technically, it’s sufficient if one of the participants incorrectly believes this about the other. If I incorrectly believe you’re a bus arrival time scammer, we won’t converge despite both being honest.
wait, neuron stuff is discrete?
I have a basic understanding of QC. So in my understanding ok sometimes two branches can cancel each other out, or go back to the same state. Still, I would think there is enough “butterfly effect” type stuff that many worlds get split up to never meet again. And for each of those there’s a really small complex number.
I don’t think this can be exactly right. I have googled some largest numbers in the universe (space and time) and they were < 10^100. Then I turned to computing 1/the magnitude of the amplitude of our branch. At that point I have some probability distribution of what that number is, and it can be surprising (aka seem fake) if it’s exponentially more than the previous numbers.
It seems quite clear to me that is a valid form of reasoning that has ever worked correctly. It may turn out to be wrong in this case, but my vibe tell is that something is up with the amplitude.
Some form of this reasoning could work for the cat in your example, e.g. comparing the width of a hair to the size of the house he’d get the order of the order of magnitude of earth (math not checked).
This might work better or worse depending on the version of Occam’s razor, which I have uncertainty over.
Many Worlds seems fake because doesn’t that imply the universe is tracking a complex number with magnitude in the order of 10^-10^100 for the branch that we live in? Since the worlds have to split up all the time.
all the other quantities (number of atoms in the universe, planck times since the big bang) are only a singly stacked exponential like 10^100
Also whats the precision of these amplitude numbers.
Wasn’t translator supposed to be a normal stable job? Allegedly they were hit hard by google translate even pre-llm
the implementation could use some work because the emoji votes here are overflowing on mobile
which one is your favorite?
hmm it didn’t strike me when reading but that paragraph in OP is kinda bad as you say.
> the minimax theorem
a less complicated and more correct reference is Zermelo’s theorem, this is combinatorial game theory not economic (a further complication of reality is that the wiki article is kinda bad, it’s just induction). The theory also explains that in fact some chess moves are better than others in a mathematical sense, because some worsen the position more than others (e.g. Win->Draw vs Win->Win). Though it doesn’t match what Tessa says about vectors with lengths very well.
no way they invented yudslop 💀
Interpretations-of-media realism is the claim that there exists at least one interpretative of media statement that is objectively true.
that’s what I meant but somewhat jokingly
as a gaygp victim thank you for your service
less wrong should add a “confirms my biases” reaction. like to put under stuff that idk if it’s especially objectively true or good but I love hearing that shit
I liked the dashed-words in planecrash but many here felt jarring: “work-site”, “processor-ticks”. why do we have to know these are single words in robot language. but not eg “space station”
sounds miserable, have they looked into not being violinists?
Yudkowskian self help thought is weird such as the “firewall” (between beliefs and what would be good to believe)
But I think my mind doesn’t work with the firewall, for example if I slightly delulu myself that my efforts will work out I have energy and such, and idk how to get these benefits with the firewall.
I recall it was a big problem for me for a few weeks when I was reading hpmor