hedges

Posts

Sorted by New

Wiki Contributions

Comments

Open thread, May 8 - May 14, 2017

Yes.

I recommend the app warmly, but at the same time I'd be happy to switch if something with better design or features came up. I haven't found anything as good yet.

Open thread, May 8 - May 14, 2017

I probably explained badly. You can have 10 yes/no questions and fill half with 7 clicks using this app. It works exactly like the example you gave.

Open thread, May 8 - May 14, 2017

That's incorrect if I understood right. Here's how I use it:

  • Click reminder notification (or tracker-specific shortcut) to open
  • Click yes or no (you can have multiple of these in a single tracker)
  • Click save

So it's 1 click to begin, 1 click for each choice, 1 click to save. There's also support for input fields and lists with predefined values.

If you know an app that does this better, I am looking..

Open thread, Nov. 7 - Nov. 13, 2016

No, I don't think that either organization has taken an official stance, and I respect them for that. I've also talked with some people within 80,000 Hours who are clearly not mind-killed; who have been very reasonable and convincing instead. I was maybe a bit too harsh and do not mean this as a recommendation that everyone should stop supporting these organizations.

(Very rarely - that's a good point. If you imagine people fighting between two different friendly AI approaches with the same fervor, though..)

Open thread, Nov. 7 - Nov. 13, 2016

A statement made by a lifelong liberal writer, who was offended by Trump's lifestyle. Trump has short attention span, and doesn't read books - therefore he will use nukes!

Predicting one person's proclivity to cause nuclear war is an incredibly complicated prediction problem, and one flimsy and tribally motivated statement has almost zero predictive power. If I see a reasonable analysis, which considers both candidates and what kind of scenarios could actually lead to nuclear war; I'm ready to change my beliefs.

Open thread, Nov. 7 - Nov. 13, 2016

In my case, not signaling any caution was enough to make me think that they're mind-killed. I also understand well what kind of strategies may be more effective in influencing the general public; which is part of the problem. I doubt their behavior and writings convinced anyone who hadn't already decided.

There were other writings which were much more persuasive, Scott's writings for example. The people I'm referring to, just spent the last year doing tribal screaming. And they're still doing it. Freaking out because their foretold doomsday came (and went).

Open thread, Nov. 7 - Nov. 13, 2016

No, of course not. There are many situations where one can be reasonably certain that one political stance is better than another. My feeling of disgust was not caused by them supporting Hillary, but by the fervor and conviction displayed. It felt like at some point they had good reasons to choose a political stance, but then took it to the extreme and forgot all caution.

Open thread, Nov. 7 - Nov. 13, 2016

Claiming Trump as the most significant current existential risk, and prioritizing political activism over all other charity work, are the two that I was most offended by. These were usually not backed by any rigorous analysis or explanation, just the assumption that the reader conforms to the beliefs.

But I think ultimately, it was the frequency and amount of emotion and hostility that was shown that made my mind image these people as mind-killed.

Open thread, Nov. 7 - Nov. 13, 2016

Has anyone else been disgusted by how partisan and mindkilled many "rationality figureheads" have been during this election?

I've stopped supporting 80,000 Hours because of their employees' writings and lost trust in CFAR; I now see them as political think tanks that are possibly even more biased and broken than the average organization.

Load More