Cthulhoo

Karma: 969

Cthulhoo Sep 5, 2013, 10:04 AM
3 points
in reply to: Osuniev’s comment on: You are the average of the five people you spend most time with.
I second this. Friends selection usually involves having some mutual interests: math, music, movies, parties, whatever. The focus of the activity you do together will mostly invole those interests, therefore you will put more effort into getting “better” at them, if only because you’re spending more time practicing.

I don’t think the opposite can be true: of you hate physics, you can’t just hang out with a phisicist to get better at it. I regularly hang out with my oldest group of firends, and none of them has ever expressed interest in knowing more about my thesis on the Higgs Boson—or the law of conservation of momentum for what matters. On the other hand, I can have more challenging conversation with my colleagues on this topic, but, while many of them are also excellent musicians, I never thought about getting to practice with my guitar again.

Cthulhoo Sep 3, 2013, 10:49 AM
73 points
on: Rationality Quotes September 2013

In some species of Anglerfish, the male is much smaller than the female and incapable of feeding independently. To survive he must smell out a female as soon as he hatches. He bites into her releasing an enzime which fuses him to her permanently. He lives off her blood for the rest of his life, providing her with sperm whenever she needs it. Females can have multiple males attached. The morale is simple: males are parasites, women are sluts. Ha! Just kidding! The moral is don’t treat actual animal behavior like a fable. Generally speaking, animals have no interest in teaching you anything.

Oglaf (Original comic NSFW)

Cthulhoo Aug 28, 2013, 3:24 PM
2 points
on: Open Thread: How much strategic thinking have you done recently?
I often find that the hardest part is finding the answer to:

Do you know what your long-term and medium-term goals are?

I honestly have no idea. I can easily focus on short term goals, when I am rather confident that Me(now) will be very similar to Me(goal reached). Things get harder and blurrier when I have to take into account my most likely self modification. Concrete example. Since I was 10, I’ve always wanted to be a physicist. Roughly near the end of my Ph.D. I started to evolve into someone who doesn’t want to be a phisicist. I tried a short post-doc abroad and looked for a different job. If I had known in advance I could have spared me at least a couple unpleasant months abroad and a couple (make it 3) of years of underpaid work. But I didn’t know. Now I find myself wanting to make a lot more money, but I keep wondering what will happen if this desire faded away abruptly and I finded myself trapped in an awful job.

Cthulhoo Aug 22, 2013, 3:57 PM
2 points
in reply to: [deleted]’s comment on: Simple investing for a complete beginner? (Just… developing world index funds?)

A lot of investment sites also have these kinds of rough tests to get an idea of your risk tolerance so they can suggest advice accordingly, although they aren’t necessarily perfect. This link seems to explain some of the issues that come up: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_32/b4142059711173.htm

As a side note, if you go to your bank and ask them about investing your money, they will probably make you take one of these tests, and then suggest investments that match your profile (not necessary the best choices, but it could give you an idea of what you can expect).

Cthulhoo Aug 22, 2013, 3:54 PM
0 points
in reply to: johnjohn’s comment on: Simple investing for a complete beginner? (Just… developing world index funds?)

This is the idea that one must assume risk (uncertainty) to obtain excess expected returns. It is by no means ubiquitous: assuming risk may reduce expected returns. For example, people assume risk to gain exposure to negative expected returns in a casino (roulette, blackjack, &c). No doubt there are plenty of examples in financial markets where risk does not automatically yield excess expected returns.

In theory, all financial institution optimize around something like the efficient frontier. This should ensure that higher risk corresponds to higher returns. In practice, quantitative finance goes through a lot of approximations, therefore some real portfolios could be strictly dominated by other choices.

You imply that one should invest where economic growth is expected to be highest. Note that it does not follow that shares in high growth companies (or countries) will lead to high returns. This is because the expected future growth may well be built into the current price. That is, if everyone thinks something will be likely worth a lot in the future, the current price will be bid up to reflect this. It is the uncertainty of the outcome that may arguably cause higher expected returns. If people have a distaste for uncertainty, then the price might be bid down leading to higher expected returns.

This is one of the reasons for the low-growth/low-variance profile of the more developed countries’ markets compared to the high-growth/high-variance profile of the developing ones.

Cthulhoo Aug 22, 2013, 3:48 PM
0 points
in reply to: roystgnr’s comment on: Simple investing for a complete beginner? (Just… developing world index funds?)

I would agree that this is true, but I’d caution against thinking of even government bonds as a textbook “risk-free” investment.

Correct consideration, I personally know a greek guy who bought decennial bonds from his own country five years before the collapse and got heavily screwed. This should be a more remote possibilitie for e.g US bonds, and it’s kind of a “second order consideration” for someone who is just approaching the idea of investing money. I’m not sure of the taxing policies in the US, so I can’t really help, but the priciple it’s true. One of the reasons why I was suggesting Insurance Companies in another post is that they usually are subjected to a different (lighter) tax regime.

Cthulhoo Aug 22, 2013, 9:14 AM
0 points
in reply to: Owen_Richardson’s comment on: Simple investing for a complete beginner? (Just… developing world index funds?)

Should I even bother with this “investment” stuff right now, or just move the whole 13k sum to a simple savings account and worry about reinvesting it in a year?

It depends on when you think you will need the money, and how much dependant you are on that amount. If you plan on using it at some point (e.g. for buying a car) then try something with low risk. Usually insurance companies have good low risk funds, which guarantee a minimum return of 2-3% a year, and average round 4-5% (they mainly invest in bond: you could do it directly on your own, but if you know nothing about finance, you should probably trust them).

If, on the other hand, you think you could afford to risk losing some money in the short run, then go for the equity investment, but try to spend some time to evaluate it and chose the mean return/risk profile that fits you best.

Cthulhoo Aug 22, 2013, 9:04 AM
4 points
in reply to: Owen_Richardson’s comment on: Simple investing for a complete beginner? (Just… developing world index funds?)
Just be careful that markets /= economy. The developing economies might still grow steadily, while their markets can fluctuate a lot. One of the most widely used Indexes for emerging markets is the Morgan Stanley BRIC. You can easily google and find some funds that invest in it and look at their performance to get an idea. The first one that I found (here) has a decent summary of its most important features. You can see that it is actually losing money . A very important number you should look at is the standard deviation, which is written to be 23% over three years. On the contrary, investing e.g. in the US health care sector has given much better results (see here) with less risk.

To summarize: what you say it’s true in the long run, but equity investments have a significant short and medium-term evolution, which is generally independent of the long-term trends.

Cthulhoo Aug 22, 2013, 8:16 AM
1 point
on: Simple investing for a complete beginner? (Just… developing world index funds?)

Markets are essentially random walks with an upward trend?

Yes, but with a relatively high variance.

“Index funds” are magic boxes that you put money in and your money will grow at the same rate of the market that the fund “indexes”?

This is more or less true (minus some potential entry/manteinance costs)

“Developing world” economies generally grow a lot quicker than those in the “developed world”?

In general this is true, but the variance here is even higher. Lately, though, they are not performing particularly well (see here for example).

And there are enough of these places over the world, and they’re independent enough, that natural disasters/political trouble/etc in a few of them still leave a consistent and high rate of average growth? So shouldn’t I just put all my money in a fund that “indexes” all these “developing” economies together?

Yes, diversification reduces the risk, but the risk for equities remains in general significantly higher then the one for e.g. government bonds (i.e. losing your money is a real concern).

That said, even with a very good allocation, it should be very hard to make more than 8-10% a year with you investent (not impossible, mind you, chaotic systems are chaotic). This means rouglhy 1-1.3K per year in you condition. Of course, mr. exponential says that the longer the investment, the better (barring future market instabilities). It’s up to you to decide if it’s worth it. On the other hand, if you don’t need the money now, there are other forms of investing that block your capital for a longer period of time, but with much lower risk.

EDIT Maybe it’s an obvious advice, but be careful about what you’re doing. If there’s someone you trust to whom you can ask questions and submit invesment proposals for evaluation, absolutely do it. In any case, try to learn at least the basic features of what you’re investing in (e.g. stock markets’ returns have fat tails, whch means high probability of heavy losses, various derivatives can have many complicated features). I’ll be glad to answer any questions, here or by PM, the best I can, but any specific investment must be evaualted on its own.

Cthulhoo Aug 2, 2013, 3:29 PM
2 points
in reply to: Polina’s comment on: Tell Your Rationalist Origin Story
A Nobel prize is awarded?

Cthulhoo Aug 2, 2013, 7:33 AM
9 points
on: Rationality Quotes August 2013

Whatever alleged “truth” is proven by results to be but an empty fiction, let it be unceremoniously flung into the outer darkness, among the dead gods, dead empires, dead philosophies, and other useless lumber and wreckage!

Anton Lavey, The Satanic Bible, The Book of Satan II

Cthulhoo Jul 9, 2013, 10:04 PM
2 points
on: Where Are We the Weakest?
I usually proceed by asking a different question (the question if you want). Where am I not winning? Which areas of my life am I unsatisfied with? Then I go on asking the question you mentioned (or very similar ones):
- Why am I not winning?
- How much important is this area to me? It should be at least a bit since the issue came to my mind, minor problems are usually automatically filtered out (not always, of course, a problem I see could be the symptom of a bigger one, but I should at least be aware of something)
- Can I identify a solution?
- Would it be easy to apply? Better: would the cost/benefint ratio be worth it?
- Can I generalize one solution to many problems?

Cthulhoo Jul 4, 2013, 1:57 PM
0 points
in reply to: [deleted]’s comment on: Welcome to Less Wrong! (5th thread, March 2013)

I use my “rationalnoodles” nickname almost everywhere, however still can’t decide if it’s appropriate on LW. Would like to read what others think.

Considering that infanticide is a generally accepted discussion topic here, I don’t think people will question a nickname ;)

Welcome!

Cthulhoo Jul 4, 2013, 1:55 PM
11 points
in reply to: baiter’s comment on: Rationality Quotes July 2013
It should also be noted that if one doesn’t start wishing for a horse, the probability of obtaining one decreases furtherly.

I know this is meant to be a call to action instead of contemplation, but sometimes I’ve heard it quoted intending : “Be and adult, stop whishing for very-difficoult-to-obtain things”, and this is a statement I don’t agree with.

Cthulhoo Jun 4, 2013, 2:42 PM
2 points
in reply to: NancyLebovitz’s comment on: Rationality Quotes June 2013
Well, it’s somewhat hidden in steps 2 and 3. You have to be able to correctly state your hypothesis and to indentify all the possible variables. Consider chocolate water: your hipothesis is “There exist some brands of water that tastes like chocolate candy”. Let’s say for whatever reson you start with a prior probability p for this hypothesis. You then try some brands, find that none tastes like chocolate candy, and should therefore apply bayes and emerge with a lower posterior. What’s much more effective, though, is evaluating the evidence you already have that induced you to believe the original hypothesis. What made you think that water could taste like chocolate? A friend told you? Did it appear in the news? In the more concrete cases:
- Sex partners : Why did you expect them to be able to satisfy you without your input? What is your source? Porn movies?
- Computer repair shops : Why did you expect people to work for free?
- Diets : Have you talked to a professional? Gathered massive anedoctale evidence?

Cthulhoo Jun 4, 2013, 8:13 AM
0 points
in reply to: NancyLebovitz’s comment on: Rationality Quotes June 2013

The thing is, some of the steps are very vague You’re right of course, this was meant to be fully general. Details should be tuned on each specific instance.

If you have a bad case of insufficient clue, what’s the cure?

I’m not sure I understood what you mean, but I guess you’re thinking about cases where you can’t have a “perfect experimental setup” to collect information. Well, in this case one should do the best with the information one has (though information can also be collected from other external sources of course). Sometimes there’s simply not enough information to identify with sufficient certainty the best course of action, so you have to go with your best guess (after a risk/reward evaluation, if you want).

Cthulhoo Jun 3, 2013, 4:41 PM
4 points
in reply to: Said Achmiz’s comment on: Rationality Quotes June 2013
This can be easily generalized as an algorithm.
- Something repeatedly goes wrong
- Identify correctly your prior hypothesis
- Identify the variables involved
- Check/change the variables
- Observe the result (apply bayes when needed)
- Repeat if necessary
Scientific method applied to everiday life, if you want :)

Cthulhoo Jun 2, 2013, 8:31 AM
7 points
on: Rationality Quotes June 2013
-Thank you, thank you Lord, for preserving my virginity!
- You bloody idiot! Do you think God, to keep you a virgin, will drown the whole city of Florence?
(Architect Melandri to Noemi, the girl he is in love with, who thinks the flood of 1966 was sent as an answer to her prayers)

All my Friend, Act II [roughly translated by me]

Cthulhoo Jun 1, 2013, 10:49 AM
5 points
in reply to: sixes_and_sevens’s comment on: Optimizing for attractiveness

passionately

Answering to diegocaleiro, I think this is the key. Be passionate about the topics that spark your interest, try to transmit how awesome they are. Often people are more lazy and scared by unknown and possibily complicated topics, but if you manage to make things accessible to them, they will be genuinely interested. Then it’s also up to your ars oratoria, of course. I have a weird sense of humor and tend to interject the more serious discussion with jokingly remarks, this helps releasing the pressure if the topic gets too complicated.

Cthulhoo Jun 1, 2013, 10:39 AM
0 points
in reply to: loup-vaillant’s comment on: Optimizing for attractiveness

First, many EU citizen tend to assume $1 is 1€ at first approximation, while currently it’s more like $1.3 for 1€. Cthulhoo may have made this approximation. Second, lower salaries may be compensated by a stronger welfare system (public unemployment insurance, public health insurance, public retirement plan…). This one is pretty big: in France, these cost over 40% of what your employer has to pay. Third, major cost centres such as housing may be cheaper (I wouldn’t count on that one, though). To take an example, I live in France, and here, entry-level programmers with an engineering degree make about 23k€ in net salary (often with a few benefits, and possibly more in the capital). That’s about 38k€ that your employer have to pay. Convert that in US$, and we’re talking about $49k.

Just to clarify: I did adjust euros to dollars in my estimation. To be more precise, I work in what is mainly a software company (though I’m not myself a programmer), and the standard net salary here is 19K€ per year which makes roughly 25$ per year. Now, of course if you’re really good you can climb the ladder, and there are possible bonus if you reach outstanding results, but this requires more then the “teach yourself programming” level. From what I know, this is pretty much the standard, and a quick google search gives some confirmation of my numbers on this page: http://www.worldsalaries.org/italy.shtml.

It should be noted, though, that all salaries are rescaled roughly in the same way, and the cost of living is lower, so you might need to adjust your usual perspective.