LESSWRONG
LW

720
FAWS
262967970
Message
Dialogue
Subscribe

Posts

Sorted by New

Wikitag Contributions

Comments

Sorted by
Newest
No wikitag contributions to display.
LW Women- Minimizing the Inferential Distance
FAWS13y70

The writer and danerys thought so, apparently, and it made sense when I read it.

My point is that I don't know what exactly they were thinking and that's why I'm asking. If they think that plowing in particular is a feminine activity that would make it somewhat more understandable, but it's not at all obvious to me from the post that this (their thinking so) is actually the case, and even then I don't quite see what was supposed to be signified since Christine was already regularly including things like making tea. Occams razor would suggest a single misapprehension the absence of which leads to the whole section to making sense more likely than multiple misapprehensions.

Reply
LW Women- Minimizing the Inferential Distance
FAWS13y140

I don't understand how Christine the female dungeon master who has apparently consistently been playing with approximately gender-balanced groups not accommodating plowing fits in here. Plowing doesn't even seem like a particularly feminine activity (compared to e. g. trying for peaceful relations with the elves).

Reply
Checklist of Rationality Habits
FAWS13y20

Do you have an example of a military dictatorship where the immensely rich were allowed to keep their wealth, but couldn't use it to exert political influence?

Reply
A place for casual, non-karmic discussion for lesswrongers?
FAWS13y30

Or, you know, they could weight suffering in a continuous, derivable way that doesn't make a fundamental distinction in theory, but achieves that result in practice; amputating a finger is worth more than a billion blood-pricks, one broken arm is worth more than a billion billion nudges, and so on.

That's not (at all realistically) possible with a number as large as 3^^^3. If there is a number large enough to make a difference 3^^^3 is larger than that number. You say "and so on", but you could list a billion things each second, each a billion times worse than the preceding, continue doing so until the heat death of the universe and you still wouldn't get anywhere close to a difference even worth mentioning when there's a factor of 3^^^3 involved.

Reply
2012 Less Wrong Census/Survey
FAWS13y00

26 - Ebjf, gur guerr yvarf ner svkrq ng n cbvag naq ebgngr. 29, 35, 38 - Zvqqyr pbyhza vf gur genafsbezngvba cresbezrq ba gur yrsg pbyhza gb neevir ng gur evtug ebyhza.

Reply
2012 Less Wrong Census/Survey
FAWS13y280

I wonder whether there are visible conversion effects on the redwood question for native metric users? Estimates slightly on the short side and neatly divisible by three because the quick and dirty meter -> feet conversion is multiplying by three?

Reply
2012 Less Wrong Census/Survey
FAWS13y30

Edit: For copulation's sake, whose kneecaps do I have to break to make Markdown leave my indentation the Christian Underworld alone, and who wrote those filthy blatant lies masquerading as comment formatting help?

does
     prefacing 
          with 4 extra spaces 
    work?

EDIT: Apparently not. Very likely a bug then.

Reply
2012 Less Wrong Census/Survey
FAWS13y350

Took the survey.

Reply
Raising the forecasting waterline (part 1)
FAWS13y-20

That's surely an artifice of human languages and even so it would depend on whether the statement is mostly structured using "or" or using "and".

It's true of any language optimized for conveying information. The information content of a statement is reciprocal to it's prior probability, and therefore more or less proportional to how many other statements of the same form would be false.

In your counter example the information content of a statement in the basic form decreases with length.

Reply
Raising the forecasting waterline (part 1)
FAWS13y10

I disagree with this. The reason you shouldn't assign 50% to the proposition "I will win the lottery" is because you have some understanding of the odds behind the lottery. If a yes/no question which I have no idea about is asked, I am 50% confident that the answer is yes. The reason for this is point 2: provided I think a question and its negation are equally likely to have been asked, there is a 50% chance that the answer to the question you have asked is yes.

That's only reasonable if some agent is trying to maximize the information content of your answer. The vast majority of possible statements of a given length are false.

Reply
Load More
10Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 16, chapter 85
13y
1114
4Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 15, chapter 84
13y
1238
12Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 14, chapter 82
13y
794
17Meta: Karma and lesswrong mainstream positions
14y
45
19Luminosity (Twilight fanfic) discussion thread
15y
439
5Spring 2010 Meta Thread
16y
147