If we calibrate so that “taking down the homepage” (redirects to 404 error or whatever it is) for 24 hours is of badness 1 (goodness = −1).
Then the “game over” page is of badness <1 (maybe 0.75?).
Then the whole red-button game is fun, and gives people (like both of us) something interesting to talk about, which is worth some goodness (-X badness). Plus the homepage might be down for less than 24 hours.
So they think : X >~ 0.75
IE The Lesswrong team appear to have decided that the fun of the game (playing/speculating) is worth more than a few hours of homepage plus the time spent implementing the game.
First observation: this represents a different set of values to those I infer from the 2020 post-mortem. Good, perhaps there have been updates.
Second observation: Games are more fun when the outcome is less certain, and currently it seems very likely to result in “game over”. The participant count is higher than 2020 and players are anonymous.
Modifying the rules to reduce the estimated chance of “game over” would thus increase the upside and decrease the downside.
There are also other games to play, keeping the fun but without the costs. How about a nice game of chess?
But the outcome IS uncertain. I want to know how low the karma threshold can go before the website gets nuked. There are other fun games, but this one is unique to LW and seems like an appropriate way of celebrating Petrov Day.
I wonder how it would change things if there was an additional rule: “the button will be taken offline after X hours, pulled from [publish the distribution], unknown to anyone but Ruby in advance”.
If we calibrate so that “taking down the homepage” (redirects to 404 error or whatever it is) for 24 hours is of badness 1 (goodness = −1).
Then the “game over” page is of badness <1 (maybe 0.75?).
Then the whole red-button game is fun, and gives people (like both of us) something interesting to talk about, which is worth some goodness (-X badness). Plus the homepage might be down for less than 24 hours.
So they think : X >~ 0.75
IE The Lesswrong team appear to have decided that the fun of the game (playing/speculating) is worth more than a few hours of homepage plus the time spent implementing the game.
First observation: this represents a different set of values to those I infer from the 2020 post-mortem. Good, perhaps there have been updates.
Second observation: Games are more fun when the outcome is less certain, and currently it seems very likely to result in “game over”. The participant count is higher than 2020 and players are anonymous.
Modifying the rules to reduce the estimated chance of “game over” would thus increase the upside and decrease the downside.
There are also other games to play, keeping the fun but without the costs. How about a nice game of chess?
But the outcome IS uncertain. I want to know how low the karma threshold can go before the website gets nuked. There are other fun games, but this one is unique to LW and seems like an appropriate way of celebrating Petrov Day.
I wonder how it would change things if there was an additional rule: “the button will be taken offline after X hours, pulled from [publish the distribution], unknown to anyone but Ruby in advance”.