Foc.us is a commercially available tDCS system marketed to gamers, and at a price that is almost affordable, depending on the actual benefits of the device. Does anyone here have experience, expertise, our any other insight with regards to this?
Slackson
Karma: 482
EY, you are one thousand times worse than Joss Whedon.
The theoretical microeconomics view is the one that claims:
After all, if there is unemployment, wages should fall, making it more attractive to hire workers. Therefore the equilibrium should be that everyone who wanted to work at the wages available should work. And this is not only an equilibrium, but an attractor: free-floating wages should move the economy towards the equilibrium.
Point. I imagine that increased speed will not be the most cost-effective way to turn money into political influence, however. There are plenty of ways to do that already, and unless it’s cheaper than other alternatives it won’t make much of a difference.
If an em is running at 10x speed, do they get 10x the voting power, since someone being in power for the next 4 years will be 40 subjective years for them?
One vote for one person already seems suboptimal, given that not everybody has equal decision-making capabilities, or will experience the costs and benefits of a policy to the same degree. Of course, if we started discriminating with voting power incautiously it could easily lead to greater levels of corruption.
Solving the decision-making balance could be done with prediction markets on the effects of different policies, a la futarchy, but that doesn’t solve the other part of the problem. If we’re assuming prediction markets will be used for policy selection, the “voting on values” part still needs fixing. I don’t have any ideas on that, so we’re kind of back where we started.
Is there any particular reason an AI wouldn’t be able to self-modify with regards to its prior/algorithm for deciding prior probabilities? A basic Solomonoff prior should include a non-negligible chance that it itself isn’t perfect for finding priors, if I’m not mistaken. That doesn’t answer the question as such, but it isn’t obvious to me that it’s necessary to answer this one to develop a Friendly AI.
Eliezer’s first post on Overcoming Bias was, as far as I know, The Martial Art of Rationality. I think that title works well to set the tone.
Not the right term for what’s happening. Deflationary spiral refers to low demand reducing prices, which reduces production, which reduces the employment rate/average wage, which reduces demand. The bitcoin economy is not large enough for this to be the case. Rather, it appears to be a speculative bubble, where people predict the price will go up, so more people buy it, and so the price goes up, etc. Then enough people at once go “this is as far as the train’s going” and everybody panics and tries to sell and the price crashes.
Since bitcoin is a currency experiencing deflation due to a cyclic process, “deflationary spiral” would sort of make sense if it didn’t already refer to another specific phenomenon.
This sounds reasonable. I’m guessing bodybuilding programs are more controversial than Starting Strength. Or is there a clear winner there too?
Thanks for the informative comment.
Is SS for looking good, or for practical strength? I know they correlate, but optimizing for one doesn’t necessarily mean optimizing for the other.
Do you recommend any resources on creating and using mnemonic devices? It’s something I’ve always struggled with.
Nothing leaps to mind, other than the obvious SIAI and FHI.
Opportunity costs. We’d prefer it was spent on a Mars colony than on most things, but if we’re spending money on x-risk reduction, it might not be the most cost-effective way to help.
It means it has 0 replies. The way the comments work is that the one above is the “parent” and the one’s below are “children”. Sometimes you see people using terminology such as “grand-parent” and “great grand-parent” to refer to posts further above.
This is awesome. Thanks for doing all that work.
So punishment originally had an effect of discouragement of behaviour that the punisher did not like. Then since only those who were higher status could get away with punishing others it developed the status-signalling effects too, and now that status signalling is the primary purpose.
That makes sense. Thanks.
What evolutionary reason is there for it to make the punisher feel good to some degree, if it does not work? We didn’t evolve with televisions, but we did evolve with other people. If a strategy of punishment doesn’t have any actual effect, then we wouldn’t have that instinct.
It does not require an intimate understanding of D&D to enjoy, just in case that put you off. If you’ve never played, but you know the general idea of how the game works, then you should be okay.
Looking at a primary school curriculum could help with this.
This is a very double-edged sword, for me at least. I’m inclined to change options so many times I never actually complete a solution.