Princess_Stargirl

• Princess_StargirlDec 20, 2014, 5:07 PM

  2 points

  in reply to: Sarunas’s comment on: Has LessWrong Ever Back­fired On You?

  It is suicidal to admit an actual serious weakness. For multiple reasons. One is that admitting a serious weakness will leave a very bad impressions that is hard to overcome. See the research that people will frequently pay more for a single intact set of objects then two sets of the same objects where one set is damaged.

  The other problem is that admitting an actual error is going off the social script. It either paints you as clueless or a “weirdo.” This is also a very serious problem.

• Princess_StargirlDec 20, 2014, 5:03 PM

  4 points

  in reply to: Kaj_Sotala’s comment on: Has LessWrong Ever Back­fired On You?

  I don’t think this strategy works well for individuals. Though maybe we are thinking of different reference sets. To me the way to understand social interactions is to look at what politicians do. Or if one only cares about a more intelligent set of humans executives at companies. People may hate politicians/​executives but they are provably good at succeeding socially.

  Are politicians/​executives big on admitting weakness? I don’t think so. They seem much more fond of either blatantly lying (and betting their supporters will defend them) or making only the weakest possible admissions of weakness/​guilt (“mistakes were made”).

  Of course acting like a politician is usually pretty terrible for all sorts of reasons. But its probably the “playing to win” action socially.

• Princess_StargirlDec 13, 2014, 12:46 PM

  3 points

  in reply to: mwengler’s comment on: Does util­i­tar­i­anism “re­quire” ex­treme self sac­ri­fice? If not why do peo­ple com­monly say it does?

  I didn’t say it was “the right thing” to do. I said it was was moral then what I am actually planning to do. You seem to just be assuming people are required to act in the way they find most moral. I don’t think this is a reasonable thing to ask of people.

  Utilitarian conclusions clearly contain more info than “yay X.” Since they typically allow one to compare different positive options as to which is more positive. In addition in many contexts utilitarianism gives you a framework for debating what to do. Many people will agree the primary goal of laws in the USA should be to maximize utility for US citizens/​residents as long as the law won’t dramatically harm non-residents (some libertarians disagree but I am just making a claim on what people think). Under these conditions utilitarianism tells you what to do.

  Utilitarianism does not tell you how to act in daily life. Since its unclear how much you should weigh the morality of an action against other concerns.

• Princess_StargirlDec 13, 2014, 4:59 AM

  2 points

  in reply to: mwengler’s comment on: Does util­i­tar­i­anism “re­quire” ex­treme self sac­ri­fice? If not why do peo­ple com­monly say it does?

  Utilitarianism talks about which actions are more moral. It doesn’t talk about which actions a person actually “prefers.” I think its more moral to donate 300 dollars to charity than to take myself and two friends out for a Holiday diner. Yet I have reservations for Dec 28th. The fact I am actually spending the money on my friends and myself doesn’t mean I think this is the most moral things I could be doing.

  I have never claimed people are required to optimize their actions in the pursuit of improving the world. So why would it be hypocritical for me not to try to maximize world utility.

• Princess_StargirlDec 13, 2014, 4:12 AM

  2 points

  in reply to: sixes_and_sevens’s comment on: Open thread, Dec. 8 - Dec. 15, 2014

  I don’t really like these questions. “What exactly is a number?” doesn’t really have an answer. I can give the standard answer about representing integers as certain sets. And I give the details of constructing the real numbers either as cuts or Cauchy sequences of rationals. But neither answer is very satisfying imo. Saying that integers “are” certain kinds of sets seems wrong to me (as it does to Tim Gowers). My feeling is I don’t know what numbers exactly are.

  I understand you probably are going to attack someone’s expertise if they blank and can’t say anything. But people react to things differently. I could imagine a version of myself who was didn’t realize she needed to spout information even if she couldn’t answer the question fully.

  The other problem is my best friend studied computer science not mathematics. She is however much more intelligent than myself. Her knowledge of math is really quite good. She can give the “standard answer” to “what is an integer” but cannot give the details of a construction of the real numbers (I just asked her).

  So I really think we should be careful about these gotcha questions.

• Princess_StargirlDec 9, 2014, 9:24 AM

  0 points

  in reply to: Dagon’s comment on: Does util­i­tar­i­anism “re­quire” ex­treme self sac­ri­fice? If not why do peo­ple com­monly say it does?

  I know of many people who endorse claims 1 and 3. But I know of no one who claims to believe 2. Am I just misinformed about people’s beliefs? Lesswrong is well known for being connected to utilitarianism. Do any prominent lesswrongers explicitly endorse 2?

  edit:

  My point was I know many people who endorse something like the view in this comment:

  2′) One decision is morally better than another if it yields greater expected total utility.

Does util­i­tar­i­anism “re­quire” ex­treme self sac­ri­fice? If not why do peo­ple com­monly say it does?

• Princess_StargirlDec 9, 2014, 5:42 AM

  1 point

  in reply to: cameroncowan’s comment on: The Athe­ist’s Tithe

  http://​​en.wikipedia.org/​​wiki/​​World_Giving_Index

  Looking at the list of nations by “World Giving index” there does seem to be a decently strong relation between economic freedom and giving. The top countries include the USA, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Australia, Iceland, Denamrk and the Netherlands all of which have rather free economies by world standards. But the relationship seems cannot be that strong. The list also includes Myanmar, Triniad and Tobago, Bhutan, Malaysia and Sri Lanka which are not very free.

  I cannot however see too much of a relation between government spending and giving. For some reason Norway was removed from the 2014 ranking but it was high on the 2013 ranking. And it along with many other nations with high amounts of spending are ranked highly.

• Princess_StargirlDec 9, 2014, 1:43 AM

  0 points

  on: A My Lit­tle Pony fan­fic allegedly but not mainly about immortality

  This story made me cry. It was very beautiful. Thank you for writing it.

  I don’t really understand how people misunderstood your story.

• Princess_StargirlDec 1, 2014, 12:02 AM

  11 points

  on: I’m in a re­ally dark place right now, I think I need help.

  Posting to say I wish you the best.

• Princess_StargirlNov 23, 2014, 3:12 PM

  12 points

  in reply to: solipsist’s comment on: When should an Effec­tive Altru­ist be veg­e­tar­ian?

  I found attempts to follow a vegetarian or vegan diet dramatically reduced my quality of life. Especially veganism was almost unbearable. I couldn’t even have a slice of pizza or an ice cream cone! given my experience unless I was 100% convinced I was absolutely obligated to become a vegetarian/​vegan I would not do so.

  I do however donate 10% of my pre-tax income to developing nations. Which works out to a very large (imo) percentage of my take home pay. I also find this rather unpleasant and distressing but arguments on lesswrong convinced me I was basically obligated to do it. And losing 10% of my pre-tax income is far less painful then giving up meat and vastly less painful than giving up meat + dairy.

  It is interesting people have such different internal reactions.

• Princess_StargirlNov 10, 2014, 7:19 PM

  9 points

  on: Open Thread: What are your im­por­tant in­sights or aha! mo­ments?

  I try to be skeptical of “ah ha moments” I have. However in one case I think it is logicsal for me to accept the “ah ha.”

  For many years I have done Zazen at a Temple (two hour drive ….) and at home. Being involved in budhism one hears alot about “the self is an illusion” or “ego-death.” I personally kind of alieved they were just making things up. However one day me and some friends took a rather large dose of LSD in a park on a chilly fall day.

  At one point I remember hearing this repetitive thumping noise for an hour or two and not being able to figure out what it was. When it finally occured to I burst out in hysterical laughter. The noise was my foot violently shaking and hititng what I was sitting on. I was of course shaking because I had been outside for about 6 hours at this point and was freezing cold, but it hadn’t even occured to me that I was uncomfortable. My mental state after realizing I wa scold is hard to explain. I honestly conceptualized things as “there is a person outside who is very cold” but the fact that this person was me did not seem relevant at all. In general that there was one specific person associated to “me” stopped making sense.

  Of course I am not claiming that this experience proves anything about budhism. But my previous “alief” was that it was impossible to lose one’s sense of self, even short term. But since I had personally experienced this it must in fact be possible.

• Princess_StargirlNov 4, 2014, 1:22 AM

  5 points

  in reply to: orthonormal’s comment on: The Best Text­books on Every Subject

  In my opinion the “good stuff” in evans is in chapters 5-12. Evans is a pretty good into book on the modern “theory” of Linear and Non-linear PDEs. Strauss by comparison is a much less demanding book that is concerned with concrete examples and applications to physics. (less demanding is a good thing if the material covered is similar, but in this case its not).

  Possibly Strass is overall the better book. And I really dislike Evan’s chapter 1-4 (he does not use Fourier theory when it helps, his discussion of the underlying physics of some equations is very lacking, etc). But directly comparing Strauss and Evans seems odd to me. The books have very different goals and target audiences.

  If the comparison is evans 1-4 vs strauss then I too would recommend Strauss. And this restricted comparison makes a ton of sense imo.

• Princess_StargirlNov 4, 2014, 1:13 AM

  0 points

  in reply to: Fluttershy’s comment on: Aca­demic papers

  I personally find lecture notes superior to textbooks. Text authors frequently fail to edit their work down to the essentially material. When I am first learning a subject I want the key results. Once I understand the core ideas I can look up more details when I need them. Textbooks can be great for reference but as an introduction I like notes.

  I am mostly familiar with studying math, economics and computer science. So I am not sure how my experience compares with people studying other subjects.

• Princess_StargirlOct 28, 2014, 10:37 PM

  6 points

  on: LW Sup­ple­ment use survey

  Cool survey!

  I wish you could have answered the “how often” question for each supplement.

• Princess_StargirlOct 27, 2014, 1:28 AM

  47 points

  on: 2014 Less Wrong Cen­sus/​Survey

  I too have done the survey!

  And am extremely excited to see the results.

• Princess_StargirlOct 25, 2014, 7:33 PM

  4 points

  in reply to: Apprentice’s comment on: ques­tion: the 40 hour work week vs Sili­con Valley?

  Sorry if I was unclear. I am not claiming I understand why that article was written. But the quote is very funny.

• Princess_Stargirl 25 Oct 2014 18:21 UTC

  7 points

  in reply to: Apprentice’s comment on: ques­tion: the 40 hour work week vs Sili­con Valley?

  I was about to post that quote too. Surely IQ has nothing to do with “ability to process on the fly” or “pull together disparate bits of information.”

• Princess_Stargirl 23 Oct 2014 17:57 UTC

  3 points

  on: What sup­ple­ments do you take, if any?

  The only one thing that really helps is modafinil daily. 200 mg about 3 hours after I wake up.

  I also take alpha lipoic acid as I think it “might” make me feel better but I am really not sure.

• Princess_Stargirl 22 Oct 2014 17:01 UTC

  14 points

  on: Power and difficulty

  I don’t nescessarily agree this happens in most media. Most superheros for example just have their powers for no reason (some “earn” them but most don’t). In many stories if you are not born part-demon or a wizard you can never be something other than canonfodder. Even in stories where training is sueful people often get OP powers for no reason.

  I actually think fiction overall presents being powerful as a two factor model. Hard work and unchangeable luck. In some domains the hard work dominates and in others the “genetic” stuff does. People randomly get very OP powers all the time in many anime (if you happen to eat a strong Logia or Lengendary Zoan fruit you are automatically very strong in One piece). the details might not match up but the two factor model is basically how skill works in the real world two. With the relative importance of the two factors differing per domain.

  ec:

  In harry Potter you cannot be “Strong” unless you are born a wizard. There is no getting around this. In the real world you cannot be a good mathematician with an IQ of 80. This is no way around this either.