Ixiel

Karma: 668

Ixiel Nov 14, 2016, 5:37 PM
4 points
on: Open thread, Nov. 14 - Nov. 20, 2016
Has anybody seen a good study on the health benefits of brewed versus pod based coffee?

My GP and I agree intuitively it seems brewed should be better but neither of us knew of an actual study (though to be fair my Google fu is very weak and she hadn’t researched and came up wanting, just didn’t have one on the top of her head)

Ixiel Aug 10, 2016, 3:43 AM
2 points
in reply to: Viliam’s comment on: Open Thread, Aug. 8 - Aug 14. 2016
Just one point of data: I kept a spreadsheet when I lost 59 pounds in 96 days. I had values for my personal base burn as a function of current weight and per task (usually a rower and hiking), and a daily deficit of 2000 calories correlated fairly well with a daily loss of .55 pounds (in round numbers; I don’t want to sound like the proverbial economist with a sense of humor. I also went over some and under some, used nutritional labels and activity estimates that rounded to the nearest 10, &c.)

I was not scientifically rigorous so grain of salt, but over three months or so, I anecdotally found that 3500 calories of deficit correlated very well with a pound of loss. After that I stayed pretty constant while I was paying attention, 1-2 years. Bit North of there now, but I don’t do much counting anymore.

Ixiel Jun 14, 2016, 6:57 PM
0 points
in reply to: Lumifer’s comment on: Lifestyle interventions to increase longevity
Out of baked beans?

Ixiel Jun 14, 2016, 1:38 PM
−1 points
in reply to: WalterL’s comment on: Open thread, Jun. 13 - Jun. 19, 2016
Yeah, that’s a good tool if you have it. Of course, I would still have to convince the spokesman. Though I’m not trying to sell that the aliens and gods made the moon out of green cheese so it’s not too hard there.

Ixiel Jun 14, 2016, 1:35 PM
0 points
in reply to: ChristianKl’s comment on: Open thread, Jun. 13 - Jun. 19, 2016
That’s a good point; sorry for the ambiguity.

I believe my point to be correct and want myself and my interlocutor to agree on the correct answer. Therefore I want both: If we both reach a truth that is not my prior belief, that’s a win, and if I get my interlocutor to agree with a true point that’s a win. If I’m right and fail to get agreement that is a loss, and if I am wrong and get agreement, that is a greater loss.

So basically: I’m greedy. Answers to both questions please :)

Ixiel Jun 13, 2016, 10:44 PM
2 points
in reply to: Fluttershy’s comment on: Open thread, Jun. 13 - Jun. 19, 2016
This is exactly the kind of thing I meant. Thank you for the reply!

Ixiel Jun 13, 2016, 4:20 PM
0 points
in reply to: g_pepper’s comment on: Open thread, Jun. 13 - Jun. 19, 2016
You’re quite right of course. I’ll probably do both, point out the invalid argument AND have a rock solid argument of my own. Thank you for your input.

Ixiel Jun 13, 2016, 3:20 PM
0 points
in reply to: Lumifer’s comment on: Open thread, Jun. 13 - Jun. 19, 2016
Yeah, for want of a specific book counter that’s what I figured. But I figured if there WERE a book method to bypass that this is the community that would know, and it’d be worth knowing. Thanks anyway.

Ixiel Jun 13, 2016, 10:41 AM
0 points
in reply to: Viliam’s comment on: Open Thread June 6 - June 12, 2016
Yeah, we have “Code Blue Saratoga” in the winter (branding, nothing to do with respiration) to provide extra shelter to the homeless when it gets below a certain temperature, so temperature is a factor.

It’s actually quite a bit overfunded (charity, not taxes). I really hope it moves into some other ways to serve the people it’s there to serve, even if not exactly in the way intended. I don’t expect a “Red Cross didn’t give my disaster relief check to the right disaster!” outcry here. Food is pretty much at equilibrium, but there might be some comfort items possible.

Ixiel Jun 13, 2016, 10:36 AM
0 points
in reply to: Viliam’s comment on: Open Thread June 6 - June 12, 2016
Yup. And being at K&C for most of my life, any windfalls get passed forward, so I’m not competing with anyone for those going forward. But not especially helpful in replication.

Oops. Hit a one way button. Will just use edit to rewrite next time But now I know what “retract” does :)

Ixiel Jun 13, 2016, 10:28 AM
6 points
on: Open thread, Jun. 13 - Jun. 19, 2016
Overcoming Eager Evidence

Does anyone know any good way to make a point that one believes is true on its own merits but clearly benefits the speaker or is easier for the speaker?

Suppose a poor person is saying we should all give more money to poor people, are there ways to mitigate the effect of “You’re only saying that to benefit yourself” beyond either finding someone else without that perceived (and likely actual, but maybe less than perceived) bias or just taking the hit and having a strong enough case to overwhelm that factor?

Ixiel Jun 13, 2016, 9:45 AM
0 points
in reply to: Viliam’s comment on: Open Thread June 6 - June 12, 2016
Hmm, that’s interesting data, thanks. None of that is true in my nearest city but that in no way proves it’s not the norm. If a person is actually mentally incompetent you’re probably quite right, and organized crime could be a wrench in a lot of systems if it’s organized enough.

Though maybe economics should—if you’ll forgive the allusion—remove the log from its own eye first, and maybe then if it has any spare juice move on to solving health care problems and law enforcement problems. I haven’t given this enough thought to be sure about it, but it’s a thought.

Ixiel Jun 13, 2016, 9:37 AM
2 points
in reply to: Viliam’s comment on: Open Thread June 6 - June 12, 2016
Oh I’m not worried. I was just saying I had assumed that it was that and missed the signal for the noise and might have picked up that I was making a mistake earlier if I hadn’t. Though when “Thanks for your help” gets downvoted… maybe it’s not zero effect :)

It’s like when I waited tables. I don’t think I’m alone here, but when I got a bad tip, as long as I didn’t pour coffee on the customer’s lap, there was only one reason for a bad tip. The customer was a cheap bastard of course. Might be why I never stopped being a very bad waiter until I stopped being a waiter :)

Ixiel Jun 12, 2016, 12:16 AM
2 points
in reply to: gwern’s comment on: Open Thread June 6 - June 12, 2016
I hadn’t thought of that, good point. It still rings of the best example I have, but maybe not by as much. I have zero experience with actual people dying on actual streets so I use what I’ve got.

Yeah, I hope if experiments are done they’re done well. A half-baked experiment could easily do more harm than good.

Ixiel Jun 11, 2016, 6:08 PM
0 points
on: 2016 LessWrong Diaspora Survey Analysis: Part Two (LessWrong Use, Successorship, Diaspora)
Thanks again In; this definitely answers a question about which I was curious.

Ixiel Jun 11, 2016, 6:05 PM
2 points
in reply to: The_Gentleman’s comment on: Open Thread June 6 - June 12, 2016
Why do you think so? What I’ve seen from GiveDirectly and the conversations I’ve had with poor people don’t bear this out. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but do you have factual support for this I could see?

Ixiel Jun 11, 2016, 6:03 PM
4 points
in reply to: Lumifer’s comment on: Open Thread June 6 - June 12, 2016
Amen, and amen, and amen. I agree with everything you say here and consider none of it refutation.

Fresh eyes: I fell into a trap here. “Because I plan on doing some more serious campaigning for a more aggressive GBI (among other things) ” was poorly phrased, and I fell into a pattern of defending it. I focused there because it seemed the nearest point of contact to this community. My intent was largely to dodge answering questions about my actual thesis because I’m not public with it yet.

In doing so, I sound like a bad parrot of all the other GBI plans that spend a lot of time talking about how pretty the island over there probably is and far less time on boat schematics. GBI is compatible and has a foothold, but is not my core thesis. And while I assumed the downvotes were just the social conservative faction doing what they do (I don’t know anything specific I’ve done to tick them off, but I disagree more with them than any other LW faction and it’s a documented tactic of theirs, so it was an easy out), I now think maybe some folks noticed this and didn’t have time to type it up. Thanks guys, message worth hearing.

So I’ll respond here and wrap up, unless you want more, because my question was already answered.
1. I think there are a variety of preferences on the issue, and that policy is skewed toward accomodating the work-hard-play-hard group. I’d like that rolled back a bit.
2. Golly that did read like a false dilemma didn’t it? Sorry. My intent was to say that I have heard that argument a few times, and I can’t beat it. I definitely agree there are compromise positions, and even though I’d love a non-means-based GBI with tax simplification, in practice I bet we end up with one in the best reasonable case. But 2a is a total strawman. It is uncontroversially true, nobody I’ve ever met denies it, and it has nothing to do with my argument. If I say “if you argue that gravity is a repulsive force originating from dark matter that only looks attractive because we’re in gravity shadows I can’t defeat that argument.,” “nobody in America is being repelled by gravity under the current system” is not a rejoinder.
3. Yup, medical care is a tough one. We’re not immortal yet, and that’s a problem. It’s a good point, and I hope it gets a good answer in actual policy.
Anyway, thanks for your patience.

Ixiel Jun 11, 2016, 1:14 PM
3 points
in reply to: gjm’s comment on: Open Thread June 6 - June 12, 2016
Just genetic lottery. My family owns a chain of convenience stores in upstate NY, and after some time in banking I decided I’d prefer not to work any more. I am writing a book, but I don’t feel comfortable calling myself an author until I publish it.

I’m comfortable talking about it as long as I don’t feel like I’m being perceived as bragging about something over which I have no control (which is stupid, and which I see in other people all the time)

Ixiel Jun 10, 2016, 8:39 PM
3 points
in reply to: Lumifer’s comment on: Open Thread June 6 - June 12, 2016
1a. I don’t think that follows. I’m not saying people should work according to their ability, but that on the whole, the output humanity will have anyway will run the world. As time goes by, we can and have gotten more inequality, and by some measure I saw once (citation needed, but I’m preparing to host a party soon. Delaying not deferring) the achievements of some group of say 100 people have done more than the rest of the world put together. I do not think most of them were in it to keep body and soul together, but more research is needed.

1b. Money, same as now. I’m not waving a wand and declaring superabundance here, just saying if we’re not ready as a society to let people die of want, let’s not mess about and let’s just give everybody money. I do not have a counterargument to “He who does not work shall not eat,” except to say that that is a coherent view and a different set of values than I think most of America holds. If you’re okay with a lazy fella dying on the street, I don’t know how to bridge the gap in basic premises.

2a. This is another “jury question” I’m afraid, and I don’t have the data. Getting rid of make-work jobs (and fractional things in that vein) will free up people to not have to work for society not to collapse, but the big issue leads right into...

2b. This is really the bedrock question. Is it better to work five fewer hours a week to get to the moon a year later and keep the old iPhone an extra few months? What are the real numbers for that (those came straight from the rectal number generator)? I’m still working on that one, and as with most questions of value, it will likely vary, but it can still be clarified.

And OT, this right here is why I don’t want LW to die. Every other venue of which I can think (apart from one friend, incidentally the one that introduced me to LW) would either say “that’s dumb” or “Cool idea” with no further helpful commentary. Off to party setup if I don’t reply it’s not me being evasive.

Ixiel 10 Jun 2016 19:26 UTC
2 points
in reply to: Lumifer’s comment on: Open Thread June 6 - June 12, 2016
1. Well I have a much longer argument for this in the book, but I propose that the amount of work people will do because they want to is more than enough to run society. 40h per person per week (ish) is, in my view, largely makework.
2. Of course.
  The markets have a major confound, imo, in the form of pro-job policy. I believe, and I have some support for this but not enough to prove the point yet, that if “jobs creation” did not occur as a political activity, the market would normalize below the level people would produce without, again using the provocative language descriptively not manipulatively, the lingering threat of dying of want.