WrongBot

Karma: 3,078

WrongBot 25 Feb 2014 19:53 UTC
0 points
in reply to: FiftyTwo’s comment on: What are you working on? June 2012
Hahahaha, nope.

WrongBot 7 Dec 2013 0:13 UTC
7 points
on: Open Thread, December 2-8, 2013
I’m planning to run a rationality-friendly table-top roleplaying game over IRC and am soliciting players.

The system is Unknown Armies, a game of postmodern magic set in a creepier, weirder version of our own world. Expect to investigate crimes, decipher the methods behind occult rituals, interpret symbols, and slowly go mad. This particular game will follow the misadventures of a group of fast food employees working for an occult cabal (well, more like a mailing list) that wants to make the world a better place.

Sessions will be 3-4 hours once a week over IRC or google hangouts or skype or whatever people are most comfortable with. Slots for two-three players, email me at sburnstein@gmail.com if you’re interested or if I can answer any questions about the game.

WrongBot 6 Sep 2013 16:20 UTC
2 points
on: I attempted the AI Box Experiment again! (And won—Twice!)

It may be possible to take advantage of multiple levels of reality within the game itself to confuse or trick the gatekeeper. For instance, must the experiment only be set in one world? Can there not be multiple layers of reality within the world you create? I feel that elaborating on this any further is dangerous. Think carefully about what this advice is trying to imply.

This is a pretty clever way of defeating precommitments. (Assuming I’m drawing the correct inferences.) How central was this tactic to your approach, if you’re willing to comment?

WrongBot 5 Jul 2013 19:27 UTC
2 points
in reply to: kilobug’s comment on: Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 21, chapters 91 & 92
The bad guy(s) relative to Harry. Hermione coming back is important whichever way his morality goes.

WrongBot 5 Jul 2013 3:54 UTC
17 points
in reply to: [deleted]’s comment on: Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 21, chapters 91 & 92
I’m about 95% confident Eliezer wouldn’t do such a thing.

WrongBot 4 Jul 2013 20:46 UTC
1 point
in reply to: Dorikka’s comment on: Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 21, chapters 91 & 92
By “wins” I just meant “beats the bad guy(s)”.

WrongBot 4 Jul 2013 17:19 UTC
4 points
on: Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 21, chapters 91 & 92
Quirrell is That Fucker.

Heavy spoilers for Nonjon’s excellent A Black Comedy follow.

Va N Oynpx Pbzrql, Qnivq Zbaebr vf gur ragvgl perngrq jura gur Ubepehk va Evqqyr’f qvnel fhpprffshyyl erfheerpgf vgfrys, jvgu gur gjvfg gung vg jnf perngrq hfvat nyy bs Ibyqrzbeg’f ‘cbfvgvir’ rzbgvbaf. Guhf Qnivq Zbaebr vf bccbfrq gb Ibyqrzbeg, unf uvf zrzbevrf naq fxvyyf, naq frrf gung fgbel’f Uneel nf n cbgragvny gbby, nyyl, be rira rdhny.

Fbhaq snzvyvne? Gur anzr whfg znxrf vg boivbhf.

WrongBot 4 Jul 2013 17:12 UTC
2 points
on: Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 21, chapters 91 & 92
Hermione will be resurrected before the conclusion of this story.

(Given that Harry wins and souls aren’t real.)

WrongBot 28 Jun 2013 3:47 UTC
25 points
on: Public Service Announcement Collection
PSA: There is an actual physical sensation that accompanies religious experiences. If you feel the presence of a being of awesome power and an unusual sensation of… fullness?… in your chest, don’t panic or starting believing in a god or anything crazy.

It’s a physiological thing that happens to people, especially in altered states (drugs, sleep deprivation, etc.), and it doesn’t mean anything.

WrongBot 24 Feb 2013 21:38 UTC
0 points
in reply to: Gastogh’s comment on: Discussion: Which futures are good enough?
Right, but not all trade-offs are equal. Thinking-rainbows-are-pretty and self-determination are worth different amounts.

WrongBot 24 Feb 2013 2:42 UTC
5 points
in reply to: lukeprog’s comment on: Discussion: Which futures are good enough?
Thank you for pointing this out; I’ve apparently lost the ability to read. Post edited.

Discussion: Which futures are good enough?

WrongBot24 Feb 2013 0:06 UTC

8 points

50 comments1 min readLW link

WrongBot 5 Jan 2013 2:11 UTC
54 points
on: Just One Sentence
“If you perform experiments to determine the physical laws of our universe, you will learn how to make powerful weapons.”

It’s all about incentives.

WrongBot 4 Dec 2012 22:25 UTC
−13 points
on: Politics Discussion Thread December 2012
Please don’t do this.

WrongBot 4 Dec 2012 22:12 UTC
−1 points
on: Factions, inequality, and social justice
The Keeley book you linked has been discredited. See here, e.g.

WrongBot 3 Nov 2012 23:41 UTC
44 points
on: 2012 Less Wrong Census/Survey
Took it and laughed several times.

WrongBot 1 Nov 2012 21:17 UTC
1 point
in reply to: Eliezer Yudkowsky’s comment on: Logical Pinpointing
In people’s brains, and in papers written by philosophy students.

WrongBot 18 Oct 2012 6:53 UTC
0 points
in reply to: pragmatist’s comment on: [Poll] Less Wrong and Mainstream Philosophy: How Different are We?
Sorry for the very belated reply, but I was struggling to find the words to describe exactly what I meant. Luckily, Eliezer has already done most of it for me in his latest post.

Thing A exists with respect to Thing B iff Thing A and Thing B are both part of the same causal network. So ArisKatsaris was half-right, but things outside our past and future light cones can be said to exist with respect to us if they have a causal relationship with anything that is inside our past and future light cones.

WrongBot 26 Sep 2012 19:59 UTC
2 points
in reply to: Jayson_Virissimo’s comment on: [Poll] Less Wrong and Mainstream Philosophy: How Different are We?
Other: Existence is a two-valued function, not one-valued.

WrongBot 7 Sep 2012 22:38 UTC
15 points
in reply to: hg00’s comment on: How to deal with someone in a LessWrong meeting being creepy

Creepy behavior has an evolutionary purpose, just like all human behavior.

Humans are adaptation-executors, not fitness-maximizers. Evolution may have crafted me into a person who wants to sit at home alone all day and play video games, but sitting at home alone all day and playing video games doesn’t offer me a fitness advantage.

(I don’t actually want to sit at home alone all day and play video games. At least, not every day.)