For a large majority of people who read this, learning a lot about how to interact with other human beings genuinely and in a way that inspires comfort and pleasure on both sides is of higher utility than learning a lot about either AI or IA. ~90%
This is a time that the system of hiding votes less than −3 is a bad thing. In this thread, downvotes indicate that a belief that people may have thought was rare is actually pretty common on LW, which is something I’m interested in seeing.
You could do this with polls instead of karma. The advantage of karma is that it provides an incentive for people to play to win. The disadvantage is hiding comments.
Warning: the comments section of this post will look odd. The most reasonable comments will have lots of negative karma. Do not be alarmed, it’s all part of the plan. In order to participate in this game you should disable any viewing threshold for negatively voted comments.
Unfortunately, since the first irrationality game, the hiding code was changed so that this is no longer possible.
Am I allowed to post about whether a counterfactual world would be “better” in some sense, if I specify something like “If Y had happened instead of X, the number of excess deaths from then till now would be lower / economic growth would have been better” ? I don’t know whether that falls under preferences disguised as beliefs.
Meta thread
Why are we reviving this at all?
Just as a curiosity, this was the most downvoted comment in the original thread:
(-44 points)
This is a time that the system of hiding votes less than −3 is a bad thing. In this thread, downvotes indicate that a belief that people may have thought was rare is actually pretty common on LW, which is something I’m interested in seeing.
You could do this with polls instead of karma. The advantage of karma is that it provides an incentive for people to play to win. The disadvantage is hiding comments.
“provides an incentive for people to play to win”
You mean an incentive to hold irrational beliefs? Is that something we want to incentivize?
No, not to hold irrational beliefs, but to admit to holding irrational beliefs.
I agree. I want to comment on some of the downvoted posts, but I don’t want to pay the karma
Great idea. I’ll put a note in the post so that if anyone ever resurrects this in the future they’ll do it that way.
Should we down vote posts with many propositions if we agree with a majority? One? All? There are already two split clusters for me.
Hmm. I’d recommend if the split has one that’s much stronger go with that vote, otherwise leave it at zero and explain in a comment.
Unfortunately, since the first irrationality game, the hiding code was changed so that this is no longer possible.
Am I allowed to post about whether a counterfactual world would be “better” in some sense, if I specify something like “If Y had happened instead of X, the number of excess deaths from then till now would be lower / economic growth would have been better” ? I don’t know whether that falls under preferences disguised as beliefs.
Perhaps you can try to turn it in a more generalized form?
How do you mean?