Damn it, that was the worst time to make a typo. I meant Stagnation. But back to the point, I’m not following how someone could believe in the Great stagnation as presented in wikipedia to not having it be a motivating factor to support basic income.
niceguyanon
But the surveyed belief was about entering the great stagflation.
EDIT: I mean stagnation
So the last survey has me a little surprised and confused regarding the amount of people who strongly disagree with entering great stagnation and strongly agree with basic income, all across the board.
Can someone shed some light on why this might be? I’m surprised because I would expect strong supporters of basic income to have some belief in the coming technological automation unemployment. You see this all the time in r/futurology, where they are always posting up articles talking about how jobs are going away and not coming back.
I’m not saying they are right, but the point goes to show that these two beliefs sorta go hand in hand, or at least from what I’ve seen. So what about LW made the survey so different? Is it that I have the wrong idea about what the great stagnation is?
I’m guilty of over updating towards stupid/crazy when ever someone has a cranky belief. I was on board with the bullying of Ben Carson, but in hindsight the man is a neurosurgeon; I’m pretty sure he’s smarter than me.
Since you have a child, have you heard of Elimination Communication and what is your opinion?
Agree. There have been an influx of posts and almost no comments to go with them, looks sad. SSC’s most recent post is really interesting but almost no comments, perhaps because it has already been discussed on SSC, maybe this will help.
we are all ‘useful idiots’ of a sort.
It’s sheep all the way up!
I have already spent hours researching this topic.
I applaud your effort and hope your hours spent means others’ saved.
Like no Aloe in Aloe products.
for #3 feels like from the inside:
” This person just used a highly technical word/jargon I do not know, although it’s not a status grab, its so fucking annoying that you would think that I would know that word. How could you be so smart and stupid at the same time? Of course I don’t know that word, don’t you have some sense of savoir faire to anticipate I might not know that word”?
Thanks for replying to some of the points.
He won – OK yes update for, but it doesn’t move me that much
Why? This seems like a huge signal for competence,
I do not know much about election math, so from what I can gather from “experts” the results were very close, closer than most would have thought. It seems disingenuous to me to consider a win as a huge signal of competence for either candidate because of how close the election results were. If an NBA team wins the game by 1 point at the buzzer, it would be unfair say that it was a blowout. Now if Trump had won 10 elections in a row, that would move me to update more.
Trump’s overall record, of what fraction of his businesses have ended in bankruptcy, is very good, and that seems more meaningful for judging overall competence. (Do you know what fraction that is, incidentally?)
I don’t disagree. His bankruptcies didn’t really update me much in the direction of incompetency. The major signal for me is the “University”.
What is better, a delusional psychic healer that naively believes his own bullshit, or psychic healer who is in it for the money? Hold this thought.
Here is the parallel, these types of schools definitely were scams of the education variety, targeting elderly and uneducated. Just to be clear the business failed spectacularly, these people did not become rich. So, what is better, a delusional Trump that naively believes his own bullshit, or a Trump that who was in it for the money?
2 divorces & 3rd wife – This is fair game
Are you familiar with the phrase ‘serial monogamy’?
I was not but I am now. He could have pursued serial monogamy with out conforming to cultural and social norms of taking vows. Whatever his intentions are he is still twice divorced and went back in with a 3rd AND THEN sought out extramarital affairs. Yes to me it does imply that he has poor understanding of relationship management and his own impulses. Competent people tend not to fall for the Dunning-Kruger effect; is it fair to say he was over confident thrice?
the 2004 election, but a lot of people were of the opinion that Kerry was ‘obviously’ smarter than Bush because of their very different demeanors. But when someone went to the trouble of digging up their officer qualification test scores (both highly g-loaded tests) and converting them to comparable figures, it seems like Bush scored slightly higher than Kerry did.
I somewhat remember and I underestimated Bush based on his demeanor, and you have updated my priors a good amount on this point.
BTW if you or anyone else made it all the way down here. Just because I mostly agree with Scott’s assessment that he is incompetent, doesn’t mean I think Trump will be a disaster, or can’t be successful.
Trump is clearly very good at getting his way and ‘winning,’ is demonstrably intelligent
I think we have access to mostly the same information; “evidence” seems to be moving us in opposite directions or we disagree on how much to update our priors in the same direction, because I find Scott’s charge of incompetence to be mostly true whereas you mostly false, regarding Trump.
Would you care to give what you believe are the best evidence for his winning-ness and intelligence? I haven’t seen any anything really that compelling. Before anyone thinks that imverysmart, I know I’m not competent enough to run a country and I don’t think I am especially talented at picking out stupid people either; I’m just interested in seeing how two people can see the same thing and think different.
Evidence for being competent:
He won – OK yes update for, but it doesn’t move me that much
Pretty wives – I don’t think anyone is seriously using that as evidence but if they are then you are naive when it comes to how easy it is for the rich to have attractive spouses, no update
Genetics – Uncle a physicists, Father was truly self-made, best evidence in favor of IMO
He is rich or he stayed rich/successful real estate developer – update for slightly, it isn’t that surprising that rich established billionaire remains a billionaire.
Television show – Yup, I’ll give him that.
Evidence for being incompetent:
Casino failure—Start-ups have shown me that business’s are complex and depends a lot on luck, so while I’ll ding him here, I don’t update a lot
2 divorces & 3rd wife – This is fair game
Speech pattern – Some people think he keeps it simple on purpose. It is simple because he is simple. Else, he would have found ways to signal his intelligence to those that are looking for clues.
Doesn’t read – Yes, it does make you significantly less competent IMO.
Climate change –
Groping – I find the stories credible. He was rich and famous yet needed to resort to groping to get some women to fail to sleep with him
Trump University – a sophisticated businessman should have identified that this is likely a scam, or he knew but did it anyway, either way he lost.
Lack of credible sources of people close to him claiming that he is competent. New Yorker Article on his Ghostwriter is damning.
Living in a world made entirely of atoms and nothing else (and when you die, you return to dust and that’s it) seems unsatisfying to them.
You need not be spiritual to find that unsatisfying.
I consider myself an atheist that dabbles with spirituality on occasion, mainly with drugs. Part of it is escapism no doubt, but I am also very deliberate and ceremonial about it, I’m trying to get more out of the experience than just feeling high. If you read more about the Psychonaut community where ever websites you can find them at, you would get some sort of feeling for what non-religious spirituality means. I wouldn’t consider myself part of that community, I just pass by. sdr gave a pretty good go at it.
The inversion of the usual ranking is weird.
It is and it was a distraction in getting to the core argument, for me at least.
High variance is a good thing if you’re sleepwalking off a cliff already.
In the range of possible ways to describe the status quo, from 0⁄100 to 100⁄100, sleepwalking off a cliff is oddly specific and on one end of an extreme assessment.
Isn’t the main argument that for most cases high variance is bad?
OP’s link is more about the reason behind voter shyness, where as your link is more about the reason behind voter choice. But yea, I agree mostly with what your article interpretation too.
Are you really that wrong though, if you gave him a 40-45% chance? Am I making an error to say that based on the real results, someone who was 60%+ sure of a Trump win is more wrong than you are?
If I truly believed 538, and that is what I told myself, I shouldn’t have been surprised – and yet I was. So what is happening here? I’m not usually surprised by anything that I assign a probability of greater than 10% of happening, why do I feel the way I feel? Perhaps my true probability was <10%.
Does that answer your question of why self-experimentation with mTOR inhibitors is not popular?
My expectations of self-experimenters to put themselves in potential harm is overestimated.
I’ll try: The main thesis is that economic growth has slowed in the United States and in other advanced economies, as a result of falling rates of innovation >>> belief that further advancing automation will not raise wages and stagnant wages will persist, >>>support basic income.