Re-posted here: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/X4nYiTLGxAkR2KLAP/open-and-welcome-thread-december-2019?commentId=nS9vvTiDLZYow2KSK
eigen
What are you reading?
I’m looking for a comment from /u/wei_dai; it had something to do along the lines of deciding what to work on (or do, or study) week by week, and then updating/changing after the week (maybe in a post about UDT?) Does someone know what I’m talking about? Search function, wei_dai posts and google has turned up nothing. Thanks for anyone’s help!
- Dec 24, 2019, 12:03 AM; 1 point) 's comment on eigen’s Shortform by (
- Apr 25, 2021, 12:41 AM; 1 point) 's comment on gwern’s Shortform by (
*writing the movie right now*
Relevant here: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/bshZiaLefDejvPKuS/dying-outside
I’m looking for a post from /u/wei_dai; it had something to do along the lines of deciding what to work on (or do, or study) week by week, and then updating/changing after the week (maybe in a post about UDT?) Does someone know what I’m talking about? Search function, wei_dai posts and google has turned up nothing. Thanks for anyone’s help!
I’ve heard some critiques to the part of the sequences concerning Quantum Mechanics and Conscience; but I always considered those as a demonstration of applied rationality, say, “How do we get to the correct answer by applying what we’ve learned?”
This is way more obvious and way more clear in Inadequate Equilibria. Take a problem, a question and deconstruct it completely. It was concise and to the point, I think it’s one of the best things Eliezer has written; I cannot recommend it enough.
This is a great idea. Thanks a lot for sharing.
This is a great idea!
I’m mostly saddened by the comments I miss on Scott Alexander’s blog posts given that the Wordpress comment system is pretty simple IMO (contrasted with LW, there are ~300 comments on each post of The Codex on Scott’s blog while the same posts here only have a few comments, maybe ~3.)
Curious to know if you got better; care to update?
I’ll read it.
Has someone re-read the sequences? did you find value in doing so?
Further, I do think the comments on each of the essays are worthy of reading, something I did not do the first time. I can pinpoint a few comments from people in this community on the essays which were very insightful! I wonder if I lost something by not participating in it or by not having read all the comments when I was reading the sequences.
Thank you. I did not consider the book. Have you or someone read it? I think I’m going to go the route of the articles mentioned in the post I linked.
I’m always surprised by how people construct their idea of identity; I worry that it may be putting obstacles on what you want to achieve.
Relationships are forming and breaking all the time; you are bound to find someone who will love you if you are looking for it and nothing stands in your way, that’s a fact of modern life and evidence is overwhelming.
I do think, that coming here is the right step to make, it has certainly helped me. Welcome.
I do feel like the mental mountains post, this sequence and Kaj’s work is kind of a branching point for the community, one where we may be able to really, really get at a systematized way of changing our minds.
I wonder if someone is going to come forth with a concrete example just like Richard’s in the book; that way we can track progress in a more meaningful way. I know it may be kind of weird, but it would make the results much more substantial.
Eliezer has the sequences, Scott the Codex; what does Robin Hanson have? Can someone point me to a direction where I could start reading his posts in a manner that makes sense? I found this post: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/SSkYeEpTrYMErtsfa/what-are-some-of-robin-hanson-s-best-posts which may be helpful, does someone have an opinion on this?
- Oct 21, 2021, 2:18 AM; 7 points) 's comment on [$10k bounty] Read and compile Robin Hanson’s best posts by (
You can find discussion of this post on Scott’s Blog.
Got it! then I agree with you. I think that a best description of my point would be that yeah, these guys are not burning calories by thinking better or harder. Their exercise plus the higher stress environment could account alone for their high amount burn of calories.
The ESPN article had a misleading title. They go on to say that a player burns 6000 calories a day , but Caruana runs an hour a day (or more). These Grandmasters are not reaching into some esoteric mental ability and burning more calories that way; if anyone has ever seen a Grandmaster play against many players at once, or blindfolded (or even blindfolded and against many players!) one can really understand that they see the board in a way that’s pretty different from us.
The classical theory for this is that they have formed bigger/better chunks than us from excessive playing (the very same way a Mathematician or a Basketball player does). Calorie consumption, is thus correlation in that specific context.
Although, I think, a (weak) connection could be made between the use of Language and these chunks formations or using this chunks (who’s to say this is not a specialized use of Language?) for the context of a tournament, but I have yet to see anything that support this idea.
I understood OP as looking for unpopular beliefs that many people have; not only one random person. I’ve never heard anyone have this belief before so I think, therefore, it does not apply.
First, thank you so much for helping me. No, those are not the comments I had in mind.
It was more something like the texts he has up on his web-page: http://www.weidai.com/stock-options.txt
It was concise and technical (Like, let X be the set of decisions you could make… and the conclusion was why it does make sense to decide things on a week by week basis) and I think it was just a comment here on this website, but I am not sure. Anyways, don’t waste time looking, I just searched a bit more and I could not find it; I will, most likely, message him after the holidays.