User Profile

star0
description0
message14

Recent Posts

Curated Posts
starCurated - Recent, high quality posts selected by the LessWrong moderation team.
rss_feed Create an RSS Feed
Frontpage Posts
Posts meeting our frontpage guidelines: • interesting, insightful, useful • aim to explain, not to persuade • avoid meta discussion • relevant to people whether or not they are involved with the LessWrong community.
(includes curated content and frontpage posts)
rss_feed Create an RSS Feed
All Posts
personIncludes personal and meta blogposts (as well as curated and frontpage).
rss_feed Create an RSS Feed

No posts to display.

Recent Comments

To me it seems to highlight the division between the mind and the will. He seems to say that you can control your mind, but you can not control the way your mind makes you control your mind.

To me it seems to highlight the division between the mind and the will. He seems to say that you can control your mind, but you can not control the way your mind makes you control your mind.

To me it seems to highlight the division between the mind and the will. He seems to say that you can control your mind, but you can not control the way your mind makes you control your mind.

Silas,

I see what you're saying, but I don't think I have a moral obligation to take every available opportunity to make money. I'm reminded of an event when I was about 10 years old: I took some small change and threw it in the trash. I don't remember why I did it, but I do remember that my dad...(read more)

This seems a little bossy to me. Beyond the issue of transaction costs ("the vig") and the effort of gathering the information to try to beat the market (this would an intellectual hobby, like blogging, doing crosswords, or following the horses, that would make sense to do if enjoyable in itself), ...(read more)

Eliezer,

OK, one more try. First, you're picking 3^^^^3 out of the air, so I don't see why you can't pick 1/3^^^^3 out of the air also. You're saying that your priors have to come from some rigorous procedure but your utility comes from simply transcribing what some dude says to you. Second, eve...(read more)

OK, let's try this one more time:

3. Even if you don't accept 1 and 2 above, there's no reason to expect that the person is telling the truth. He might kill the people even if you give him the $5, or conversely he might not kill them even if you don't give him the $5.

To put it another way, condit...(read more)

When I do this demo in class (<a href="http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/bag-of-tricks/">see here</a> for details or <a href="http://www.stat.columbia.edu/~gelman/research/published/smiley11.pdf">here</a> for the brief version), I phrase it as "the percentage of countries in the United Nations th...(read more)

Eliezer,

You write: "I'm sure they had some minor warnings of an al Qaeda plot, but they probably also had minor warnings of mafia activity, nuclear material for sale, and an invasion from Mars." I doubt they had credible warnings about an invasion from Mars. But, yeah, I'd like the FBI etc. to ...(read more)

Eliezer,

I agree with what you're saying. But there is something to this "everything is connected" idea. Almost every statistical problem I work on is connected to other statistical problems I've worked on, and realizing these connections has been helpful to me.