Celarix

Karma: 349

Celarix 28 Nov 2024 12:59 UTC
1 point
0
on: What epsilon do you subtract from “certainty” in your own probability estimates?
My opinion is that whatever value of epsilon you pick should be low enough such that it never happens once in your life. “I flipped a coin but it doesn’t actually exist” should never happen. Maybe it would happen if you lived for millions of years, but in a normal human lifespan, never once.

Celarix 30 Sep 2024 4:43 UTC
11 points
3
on: Explore More: A Bag of Tricks to Keep Your Life on the Rails
She then proceeded to sock puppet it in mock dialogue to the student next to her.
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
...
Uh, to contribute something useful: good piece! I love the idea of aiming for any goal in a broader direction, landing even close to an idealized “perfect goal” is probably still OOMs better than trying for the perfect goal, failing, and going “eh, well, guess I’ll lay bricks for 40 years”.
I also like the section on intrinsic motivation—describing it as “all the things you find yourself doing if left to your own devices”. I do fear that, for many, this category contains things that can’t be used to support you, though, but then your diagram showing the dots outside the bounds of “video games” but pointing back to it I think nicely resolves that conundrum.
And when all else fails, apply random search.
Hell yes. Speaking from my own experience here, whatever you do, don’t get stuck. Random search if you have to, but if you’re unhappy, keep moving.

Celarix 30 Apr 2024 15:47 UTC
1 point
1
in reply to: Ann’s comment on: Thoughts on seed oil
Ah, I think I see where you’re pointing at. You’re afraid we might be falling prey to the streetlamp effect, thinking that some quality specifically about Western diets is causing obesity, and restricting our thoughts if we accept that as true. I agree, and it’s pretty terrifying how little we know and how much conflicting data there is out there about the causes of obesity.

It might very well be that the true cause is outside of the Western diet and has little to do with it, and I could definitely see that being true given how much we’ve spent and how little we’ve gotten for research taking the Western diet connection for granted.

Celarix 29 Apr 2024 15:15 UTC
1 point
1
in reply to: Ann’s comment on: Thoughts on seed oil
Sure, I broadly agree, and I do prefer that people are living longer, even obese, than they would be with severe and long-term malnutrition. I think what you’re saying here is “the modern Western diet provides a benefit in that it turns what would have been fatalities by malnutrition into survival with obesity”, but please correct me if I’m wrong.

Basically, it is good—very good, one of the greatest human accomplishments—that we have been able to roll back so much suffering from starvation and malnutrition. I think, though, that we can address obesity while also avoiding a return to the days of malnutrition.

Or, in other words, there are three tiers, each better than the last:
- Planes get shot down and pilots die
- Planes get riddled with bullets but return safely
- Planes don’t get damaged and pilots can complete mission

Celarix 28 Apr 2024 16:05 UTC
1 point
0
in reply to: Ann’s comment on: Thoughts on seed oil
We would still have to explain the downsides of obesity, and not just in the long-term health effects like heart disease or diabetes risks, but in the everyday life of having to carry around so much extra weight.

Despite that, I’d still agree that being overweight is better than being underweight.

Celarix 23 Apr 2024 15:44 UTC
4 points
3
on: Rejecting Television
The visual techniques of TV—cuts, zooms, pans, and sudden noises—all activate the orient response.
Anecdote, but this form of rapid cutting is most assuredly alive and well. I saw a promotional ad for an upcoming MLB baseball game on TBS. In a mere 25 seconds, I counted over 35 different cuts, cuts between players, cuts between people in the studio, cut after cut after cut. It was strangely exhausting.

Celarix 20 Apr 2024 2:14 UTC
1 point
0
in reply to: JBlack’s comment on: A New Response To Newcomb’s Paradox
The thing about Newcomb’s problem for me was always the distribution between the two boxes, one being $1,000,000 and the other being $1,000. I’d rather not risk losing $999,000 for a chance at an extra $1,000! I could just one-box for real, take the million, then put it in an index fund and wait for it to go up by 0.1%.

I do understand that the question really comes into play when the amounts vary and Omega’s success rate is lower—if I could one-box for $500 and two-box for $1,500 total and Omega is wrong 25% of the time observed, that would be a different play.

Celarix 16 Apr 2024 2:09 UTC
5 points
0
on: Taking into account preferences of past selves
I don’t want to spend ten years figuring this out.
A driving factor in my own philosophy around figuring out what to do with my life. Some people spend decades doing something or living with something they don’t like, or even something more trivially correctable, like spending one weekend to clean up the basement vs. living with a cluttered mess for years on end.

Celarix 10 Apr 2024 14:32 UTC
3 points
0
in reply to: abstractapplic’s comment on: Medical Roundup #2
Hmm. My family and I always let the ice cream sit for about 10 to 15 minutes to let it soften first. Interesting to see the wide range of opinions, wasn’t even aware that wasn’t a thing.

Celarix 5 Apr 2024 15:14 UTC
1 point
0
in reply to: Anand Baburajan’s comment on: Open Thread Spring 2024
My thinking is that the more discussed threads would have more value to the user. Small threads with 1 or 2 replies are more likely to be people pointing out typos or just saying +1 to a particular passage.

Of course, there is a spectrum—deeply discussed threads are more likely to be angry back-and-forths that aren’t very valuable.

Celarix 3 Apr 2024 14:26 UTC
1 point
0
in reply to: Anand Baburajan’s comment on: Open Thread Spring 2024
Ooh, nice. I’ve been wanting this kind of discussion software for awhile. I do have a suggestion: maybe, when hovering over a highlighted passage, you could get some kind of indicator of how many child comments are under that section, and/or change the highlight contrast for threads that have more children, so we can tell which branches of the discussion got the most attention

Celarix 29 Mar 2024 14:35 UTC
3 points
0
in reply to: green_leaf’s comment on: Vernor Vinge, who coined the term “Technological Singularity”, dies at 79
Noted, thank you. This does raise my confidence in Alcor.

Celarix 28 Mar 2024 13:37 UTC
2 points
0
in reply to: Sune’s comment on: Vernor Vinge, who coined the term “Technological Singularity”, dies at 79
This doesn’t really raise my confidence in Alcor, an organization that’s supposed to keep bodies preserved for decades or centuries.

Celarix 22 Mar 2024 3:08 UTC
1 point
0
on: A Teacher vs. Everyone Else
I can kind of see the original meme’s point in the extremes. Consider a mechanic shop that has had very, very slow business for months and is in serious financial trouble. I can see the owners Moloching their way into “suggesting” that their technicians maybe don’t fix it all the way. After all, what’s the harm in having a few customers come back a little more often if it means maybe saving the business?

But this is only on the extremes.

Celarix 13 Mar 2024 15:15 UTC
1 point
0
in reply to: Kaj_Sotala’s comment on: The Felt Sense: What, Why and How
Noted, thank you.

Celarix 12 Mar 2024 15:06 UTC
1 point
0
on: The Felt Sense: What, Why and How
Here’s Duncan Sabien describing the experience of honing down on a particular felt sense
I’m confused—the original author seems to be Connor Morton?

Celarix 22 Feb 2024 13:39 UTC
1 point
0
in reply to: Unnamed’s comment on: 2023 Survey Results
I mean, sure, but that does kinda answer the question in the question—“if event X happens, should you believe that event X is possible?” Well, yes, because it happened. I guess, in that case, the question could be more measuring something like “I, a Rationalist, would not believe in ghosts because that would lower my status in the Rationalist community, despite seeing strong evidence for it”

Sort of like asking “are you a Rationalist or are you just saying so for status points?”

Celarix 22 Feb 2024 1:28 UTC
2 points
0
in reply to: Algon’s comment on: 2023 Survey Results
I kinda disagree—if you see ghosts, almost all the probability space should be moving to “I am hallucinating”.

Celarix 4 Feb 2024 20:46 UTC
2 points
0
in reply to: lemonhope’s comment on: Wrong answer bias
Fair! That’s a simple if not easy solution, definitely bottom-left quadrant instead of bottom-right!

Celarix 4 Feb 2024 0:45 UTC
3 points
0
in reply to: Said Achmiz’s comment on: Wrong answer bias
Likely true. The sorts of problems I was thinking about for the razor are ones that have had a simple solutions for a very long time—walking, talking, sending electrical current from one place to another, illuminating spaces, stuff like that.

Perhaps a 2x2 grid would be helpful?

I feel like this post is standing against the top-left quadrant and would prefer everyone to move to the bottom-left quadrant, which I agree with. My concern is the people in the bottom-right quadrant, which I don’t believe lukehmiles is in, but I fear they may use this post as fuel for their belief—i.e. “depression is easy, you attention-seeking loser! just stop being sad, it’s a solved problem!”