1. I really like dimensional analysis. It's a simple and powerful trick, almost magical, that allows you to distinguish between plausible and chimerical formulas. 2. I really like the type signature. It's a simple but ontologically important change for classifying different objects. [1] 3. I really like computational complexity, and...
Epistemic status: half-baked thought When an embedded agent - let's say Emmy - is faced with a choice from a set of actions (Ai)i∈1..n, she is uncertain about what type of decision maker she is in her epistemic position. For every possible choice Ai among (Ai)i∈1..n Emmy might select, the...
Just skimmed the post. Seems your notion of "unawareness" shares a cluster alongside with Knightian uncertainty and non-realizability in decision and learning theory.
Both insightful and somewhat surprising it wasn't that obvious to you. I really like the search and the frame sexual/romantic/intimate[1].
Amusingly, it seems to me the umbrella term to name "The Thing" is... Trust. This post seems to answer your confusion about the concept of Trust (socially intended), two years ago.
Maybe it's because I'm French, but I don't think "intimacy" is that confusing.
On a quick search, I couldn't find such a repo. I agree that this is/was the heart of Lesswrong, but what I'm aiming for is more specific than ‘any cool intellectual thing’. A lot of LW's posts are about contrarian viewpoints, or very particular topics. I'm looking for well-known but surprising stuff, to develop common knowledge.
Should feel like: ‘OMG, everyone should know [INSERT YOUR TRICK]’
Let's list our ‘intellectual lifehacks’ here, i.e., elements of knowledge that have properties like. :
I don't have a proper definition other than ‘I feel like it’ to the question ‘Does this count as an intellectual lifehack?’, but I'd like to make it clear that I'm setting the bar very high. I hope you'll be able to connect the dots with n=3... Anyway, share and discuss!
Thanks for these last three posts!
Just sharing some vibe I've got from your.. framing!
Minimalism ~ path ~ inside-focused ~ the signal/reward
Maximalism ~ destination ~ outside-focused ~ the world
These two opposing aesthetics is a well-known confusing bit within agent foundation style research. The classical way to model an agent is to think as it is maximizing outside world variables. Conversely, we can think about minimization ~ inside-focused (reward hacking type error) as a drug addict accomplishing "nothing"
Feels there is also something to say with dopamine vs serotonine/homeostasis, even with deontology vs consequentialism, and I guess these two clumsy clusters mirrors each other in some way (feels isomorph by reverse signe function). Will rethink about it for now.
As an aside note: I'm French too, and was surprised I'm supposed to yuck maximalist aesthetic, but indeed it's consistent with my reaction reading you about TypeScript, also with my K-type brain.. Anecdotally, not with my love for spicy/rich foods ^^'
Oh. As I read those first lines, I thought, "Isn't it obvious?!!! How the hell did the author not notice that at like, 5 years old?" I mean, it's such a common plot in fiction. And paradoxically, I thought I wasn't good at knowing social dynamics. But maybe that's an exception: I have a really good track record at guessing werewolves in the werewolf game. So maybe I'm just good at theory (very relevant to this game) but still bad at reading people.
The idea of applying it to wealth is interesting, though.
Me too :) But I then realized it's not any "game", but the combinatorial ones.
This.
Excellent post! I think it's closely related to (but not reducible to) to the general concept of Pressure. Both pressure as
It's not about bad intentions in most practical cases, but about biases. Hanlon's razor doesn't apply (or, very weakly) to systemic issues.
Epistemic status: half-baked thought
When an embedded agent - let's say Emmy - is faced with a choice from a set of actions , she is uncertain about what type of decision maker she is in her epistemic position.
For every possible choice among Emmy might select, the story would be "it turned out that Emmy is an -er"[1].
If Emmy is able to say confidently "I'm about to act ", this means that she has already made her decision (or that she had no choice in the first place, depending on the situation[2]). The choice therefore takes place during the uncertainty phase, when Emmy might say "I'm not sure who I am. Maybe a -er, maybe -er... Or am I... (read more)
Thanks, very cool concept to share!
I wonder if we could we make this Law a tool? I will try to propose one: the Ultrafinite Recursion's Guillotine.
That is to cut any intellectual search or debate which is too far within the meta hierarchy. We are able to track it though languages, but it often seems languages lose track with meaning, and I suspect this is related.
(And yes, I know, it tickles to notice that I just named UR's Guillotine a tool from a law, thus deriving an ought from an is, how ironic...)