radical_negative_one
Just one suggestion: come up with a new goal to put at the top of the list, and shift the rest down. That way, “how to hack into the computer our universe is running on” would be “up to 11″ on the list.
The new #1 item could be something like “We’re going to make yet another novelty t-shirt store!”
I remember once we had a big Open Thread argument about Pirates Vs Ninjas. IIRC it involved dozens of posts and when somebody pointed out that it had gone on too long, and how silly it had become, somebody else argued that it was, in fact, a useful rationality exercise.
Perhaps this [edit: cutting the conversation short] is a sign that the community has matured in some way.
I’m guessing that even if you survive, your quality of life is going to take a hit. Accounting for this will probably bring our intuitive expectation of harm closer to the actual harm.
Do we have any reliable authorities on the sociology of internet forums yet?
Thanks Xachariah, this question had occurred to me also, it’s nice to see that someone else already took the risk.
If Jesus could see the entirety of history, then he could see whether he is the first “Jesus Christ”. Given that the extra Christs are all explained by delusional patients copying the first Christ, this would be some sort of evidence (to himself) whether he is the real one.
Counterpoint: as Satan explains, it’s all a hallucination anyway.
It just occurred to me that this is basically the state of humanity in Brave New World.
I happen to have a copy of The Dilbert Future. You’re right that Scott Adams writes mainly for comedy. However, the end section of The Dilbert Future is more serious. Adams actually writes, “I’m turning the humor mode off for this chapter because what you’re going to read is so strange that you’d be waiting for the punch line instead of following the point.” And without re-reading the whole thing, as i recall his tone is about as serious as he promises. The serious chapter includes some quantum physics speculation, but the main idea Adams advocates is affirmations), which he ties into part of his life story.
IJ Good Institute would make me think that it was founded by IJ Good.
I remember reading, on the topic of optimal charity, that it’s only rational to select a single cause to donate to… until the point of giving enough money to noticeably change the marginal utility of each additional dollar. (Thiel has that much money, of course.) This information-gathering strategy could be a new reason for spreading donations at the level of large-scale donations, if it hasn’t been discussed before.
I also can’t advocate Ruby as a beginner language because of its syntax.
What specifically is wrong with Ruby’s syntax? (I don’t know much about comparative programming languages.)
Who else is reading this page because they visited LessWrong to procrastinate?
And the first thing i see when i get here is a discussion post on internet procrastination. I feel so ridiculous now that i have no choice but to get back to work!
Ah, but perhaps there a simple fix for this: posts that would be on-topic for LessWrong are off-topic for the Off-Topic section. (edit: didn’t see komponisto’s comment)
I like desserts and meat, i didn’t want to give myself an aversion to those things. So i selected Smoking on the list. In between the disgust images, it showed mainly… kittens, babies, and electric guitars, but very little smoking.
Who Can Participate
Requirements for participation include the following:
A baccalaureate, bachelors, or undergraduate degree from an accredited college or university (more advanced degrees are welcome); and A curiosity about how well you make predictions about world events – and an interest in exploring techniques for improvement.
Ah. After a few weeks i just assumed that the response rate or overall quality was too low to be usable.
So… we’re not going to see an article built out of all the submissions?
radical_negative_one is a terrible person [pollid:31]