Zvi

• Zvi 2 Jun 2020 0:44 UTC

  2 points

  in reply to: Rob Bensinger’s comment on: Covid-19: My Cur­rent Model

  Yeah, I can see how that is con­fus­ing. Will edit.

  Added the fol­low­ing to origi­nal, mods please reim­port or in­sert it di­rectly at top of sec­tion: Pat­tern is that the per­centages in the state­ments are Scott Alexan­der’s origi­nal pre­dic­tions. When I say I bought, sold or held, that’s what I did in the linked-to post.

• Zvi 1 Jun 2020 13:59 UTC

  10 points

  in reply to: dvasya’s comment on: Covid-19: My Cur­rent Model

  I don’t have that info re­gard­ing schools but also no one is sys­tem­at­i­cally col­lect­ing data on any­thing and ev­ery­thing is con­founded, in­clud­ing by con­trol sys­tems.

  On HCQ, as I noted in the other com­ment on it, I’m mostly pre­dict­ing/​ob­serv­ing that the sci­en­tific com­mu­nity has de­cided it’s go­ing to re­ject HCQ, pre­vent­ing it from be­com­ing a con­sen­sus treat­ment. This is partly for ‘good’ rea­sons, partly for not-so-good rea­sons that have noth­ing to do with sci­ence, partly be­cause they no longer know how or are not al­lowed to study things in ways that would un­cover the in­for­ma­tion.

  This is differ­ent from the ques­tion of what you should do if you or some­one you care about gets sick! To which I re­ply IANAD and for le­gal and other good rea­sons, I have no net use­ful ad­vice for you here.

• Zvi 1 Jun 2020 13:54 UTC

  19 points

  in reply to: Gunnar_Zarncke’s comment on: Covid-19: My Cur­rent Model

  Happy to do a small wa­ger at 25% odds if we have some­one we both trust to hold the money, or you trust me to do so, up to $100 vs. $300, or we can do $1 vs. $3 sym­bol­i­cally with no trust is­sues. Judg­ment would be what­ever Scott eval­u­ates to in his pre­dic­tion eval­u­a­tion.

  Note that I agree that it’s >10% that there is a worth­while way to use HCQ as part of a treat­ment strat­egy. But that’s differ­ent from it be­ing the sci­en­tific con­sen­sus!

  For the dis­claimer, I would be very, very wary up­dat­ing from Scott Adams here. He can be in­sight­ful, but when he ad­vo­cates for things that make the ad­minis­tra­tion look good, he’d do that es­sen­tially ir­re­spec­tive of truth value. What you’re get­ting is “here’s the best case I could make given I already wrote the con­clu­sion at the bot­tom of the page.” So if you do want to up­date off such things, you need to com­pare it to how good an ar­gu­ment you ex­pected him to find!

• Zvi 1 Jun 2020 13:47 UTC

  4 points

  in reply to: Rob Bensinger’s comment on: Covid-19: My Cur­rent Model

  OK, so if true we have one hard ex­am­ple, so pre­sum­ably it is *pos­si­ble*. But I also haven’t heard of a sec­ond one, and also asymp­tomatic trans­mis­sion is a thing, etc etc.

  It would be weird if we didn’t have one case some­where that has a plau­si­ble sur­face vec­tor even if they were com­pletely safe.

• Zvi 1 Jun 2020 13:46 UTC

  2 points

  in reply to: Owain_Evans’s comment on: Covid-19: My Cur­rent Model

  The sur­face be­ing a per­son seems im­por­tant in that ex­am­ple. Re­duces the num­ber of steps, if noth­ing else.

Covid-19: My Cur­rent Model

Covid-19 5/​29: Dumb Reopening

Spoiler-Free Re­view: As­sas­sin’s Creed Odyssey

Plague in As­sas­sin’s Creed Odyssey

Mazes Se­quence Summary

Get It Done Now

• Zvi 15 May 2020 11:56 UTC

  2 points

  in reply to: Raemon’s comment on: Le­gends of Runeterra: Early Review

  Also worth not­ing that my gam­ing posts are only here be­cause LW auto-im­ports all blog posts from Don’t Worry About The Vase (thezvi.word­press.com). For such mat­ters, do­ing the dis­cus­sions there is en­couraged.

Covid 5/​21: Limbo Under

• Zvi 14 May 2020 11:59 UTC

  2 points

  in reply to: knite’s comment on: Le­gends of Runeterra: Early Review

  Very briefly. I played a few games. At lower lev­els, game seems very close to “higher point to­tal on your cards wins,” good cards crushed bad cards, and I didn’t get en­gaged. What am I miss­ing? Do you just need to stick with it un­til the cards power up?

• Zvi 14 May 2020 11:58 UTC

  3 points

  in reply to: crabman’s comment on: Le­gends of Runeterra: Early Review

  Emer­gents will be on Mo­bile (iPhone + An­droid) and PC to start. We’ll add oth­ers later if there is de­mand.

  You get into the beta by join­ing the queue here: https://​​www.emer­gents.gg/​​ . First wave is already mostly picked, but shouldn’t take too long to get in once things get rol­ling.

• Zvi 14 May 2020 11:56 UTC

  2 points

  in reply to: Charlie Steiner’s comment on: Le­gends of Runeterra: Early Review

  Good feed­back and in­for­ma­tion. Thanks!

  I can definitely see the case that one can do ‘what­ever one wants rel­a­tively quickly’ - once. As in, I can make *one* of those decks, but not all of them, so I need to choose wisely, cause it’ll be a while be­fore I can do the sec­ond one, etc.

  What’s your pick for the most in­ter­est­ing strat­egy that’s at least tier-2-ish?

• Zvi 14 May 2020 11:54 UTC

  2 points

  in reply to: Charlie Steiner’s comment on: Le­gends of Runeterra: Early Review

  Yeah, if you’re not mak­ing *any* de­ci­sions that’s definitely on you. If you think you’re not mak­ing that many in­ter­est­ing ones, that’s largely on the game, and you’re right.

  I definitely see the case that ‘strat­egy’ in­volves know­ing the com­mon deck builds and play­ing around/​against their ex­act cards. Don’t think the game jus­tifies that level of cog­ni­tive load for me.

Le­gends of Runeterra: Early Review

Covid-19: Comorbidity

• Zvi 10 May 2020 19:26 UTC

  7 points

  on: Really Fresh Baking

  I heartily en­dorse this ser­vice or product.

  Been mean­ing to write a ver­sion of this for a while, but more de­tailed.