This initially seems like it would be better, but before doing the survey I considered it and decided not to do it because:
For a lot of these the age at which you first did it, or would have been ready to do it, is quite low, running into childhood amnesia.
Even when it is within a period of your life you remember it's pretty hard, often, to figure out how old you were. Especially, how old you were when you did the first time as opposed to some random time you remember. And even for the latter, it can take some time to connect it to other events and m
allow the creation of new forms that have more complex results by breaking the symmetry created by always having to refer to the left- or right-starting individuals as an indivisible set
Today callers do this by adding "1st" or "2nd": the "1st Lark" is the Lark in each couple that is going down the hall, and the "1st Robin" is the Robin in each couple that's going up the hall. If they want to refer to the whole couple they say "1s" or "2s", as in "1s lead down between the "2s".
...Quick technicality (you can ignore this if you don't care): the "robins and
If you are already using a database and think you might want a simple index (ex: on an ID) then sure, just add it. But if feeling like you should have an index pushes you to start using a database, or if you want the support something complicated like full text search, then I don't think it's so clear.
(This post is not anti-index, it is anti-"you should never be doing full table scans in production")
Maybe use more than one octave of range? So if we wanted to do it in Am we'd turn 123-456-7890 into A3 B3 C4 - D4 E4 F4 - G4 A4 B4 G3
I've only skimmed your post, but is part of the claim that the things that brains instinctually know are too minor to count?
I think the brain has parts that are non-pretrained learning algorithms (cortex, striatum, cerebellum), and I think that the brain has other parts that are not learning algorithms at all (hypothalamus, brainstem).
The hypothalamus & brainstem do lots of things, but I don’t think I would describe them as “knowing” anything at all.
Like, I think there’s a little innate part of the brainstem that triggers vomiting—when it gets certain combinations of input signals then it triggers certain muscle movements and hormones etc. Does that mean that the brainstem ...
You could do that, but I don't think it would sound very good? And I don't think it would make it easier for a kid to memorize?
Don't you also need to include the millions of brains over millions of years of pre-training during evolution?
I don’t think that’s a good way to think about things. I think evolution is much more closely analogous to a search over neural architectures, hyperparameters, reward / loss functions, and other things like that, and not like “pretraining” for within-lifetime learning. See my post “Learning From Scratch” In The Brain.
Another example: using statistics about the frequency of abductions to argue that children should need to be pretty old before being on their own outside the house. Except a huge fraction of kidnapping is parental custody disputes, and if you're a parent making this decision you know whether that's a relevant concern.
I've used them, and similar tools, but don't really see the advantage over source code with comments?
That's annoying! Maybe try filing feedback inside the app?
(My guess is you're in some experimental treatment that as a side effect accidentally overrides the setting)
I agree the tradeoffs change a lot then! Our kids interacted with a relatively small number of adults, each of which didn't interact with other baby-signing kids. If they'd been in a daycare that did baby sign we'd probably have tried to use their system.
There is basically no fixed expense difference in the larger bands, at least at our scale. We rent the hall for the same amount of time for setup, have the same amount of sound equipment, etc.
Our dance, and most dances, pay per person instead of per band. I don't entirely know where that is, though I do have some guesses? Mostly I think it's that it feels like you're paying someone to do work, and there's an amount that feels fair to pay them regardless of how many other people are working alongside them?
If you switched from paying per person to paying per...
Unfortunately I want private previews: when I send a draft blog post to someone for review that may contain things that shouldn't be public.
People definitely vary in how much they shed, though thousands of times more than average sounds higher than I've seen?
At least with covid during the time when cases were tracked reasonably well there was a pretty close connection between covid levels in municipal wastewater and case rates. For example, see Nationwide Trends in COVID-19 Cases and SARS-CoV-2 RNA Wastewater Concentrations in the United States:

(Blue is wastewater concentration, orange is cases)
Do you mean that the container with the contaminated fuel was stored outdoors in the container that you linked to?
Yes. I put 5gal gas (plus the recommended small amount of STA-BIL) into the linked container, and stored it outdoors, yes.
1: I didn't. It's possible I didn't close it correctly? This seems like the most likely possibility.
2: Modern gas cans are vapor-tight so it seems to me they should be keeping water out.
Seems pretty unlikely: while the can wasn't locked up, if someone was going to steal it I'd expect they'd just take the whole can and go.
'Immutable' is a tricky word. Let's be more specific about what R0 does and doesn't include:
I don't think getting into much detail here is a good idea, but a pathogen could have a long incubation period after which it's disastrous. HIV is a classic example, and something engineered could be far worse.
Poisonous frogs often have bright colors to say "hey don't eat me", but there are also ones that use a "if you don't notice me you won't eat me" strategy. Ex: cane toad, pickerel frog, black-legged poison dart frog.
Welp, guess I shouldn't pick up frogs. Not what I expected to be the main takeaway from this thread but still good to know.
A related bit is that you can't generally respond to occasional weeks when you need 200hr of work by bringing in new people, or people from other areas of the company. You need people who already understand your systems, understand the general shape of the work (at least in normal times), and know how to work together.
You also need to be able to handle losing an employee. Even if you could get along fine with a single competent highly utilized person, if everything depends on them and they quit you're in massive trouble. Much less so if you have three p...
What about "weird frog"? Frogs don't have the same negative connotations as bugs and they have the same wide range of danger levels.
Ray pointing out the level of complaints is informative even without (far more effort) judgement on the merits of each complaint. There being a lot of complaints is evidence (to both the moderation team and the site users) that it's worth putting in effort here to figure out if things could be better.
There being a lot of complaints is evidence [...] that it's worth putting in effort here to figure out if things could be better.
It is evidence that there is some sort of problem. It's not clear evidence about what should be done about it, about what "better" means specifically. Instituting ways of not talking about the problem anymore doesn't help with addressing it.
Sort of, but it depends where you live. Younger kids walking to school is unusual at this point, but it used to be super prevalent, and where we live there are still crossing guards. There are cases where I'm worried that the local authorities (the Department of Children and Families, DCF) would see things differently and we could get in trouble, but this isn't really one of them?
I've spent most of my time as a musician exploring areas where there aren't teachers, for better or worse.
This, and a different case where another one of the most covid cautious organizers had the trajectory of death rates backwards, has me wondering how much of the caution is driven by misunderstandings of the risk.
On the other hand, I don't think there's any reason to expect that misunderstandings are more likely on the cautious side, so probably organizers that are especially unconcerned about covid are also misunderstanding risks?
In the case of classical violin, artisans have been making them for centuries and the best players have generally played on excellent instruments. If we look at instruments in other fields, though, we seem much less of this. Popular music is full of people who learned on relatively cheap instruments, many of them sticking with them as professionals. Looking at old electronic tech is probably the most interesting here, where a lot of sounds come from the limitations of the technologies available then, and people now try very hard to imitate them.
Personal...
A third grader (9y) walking to school alone is reasonably normal here, and if anything went wrong in the morning before leaving she could have come in and woken me. This particular situation doesn't seem like one with much risk of conflict with authorities.
On the other hand, at 7y she was the first in her class to be walking to school alone, and we were the first parents (in institutional memory, not ever) to tell the school our kindergartner could walk home with an older sibling (2nd grade at the time). And they've gone to the park by themselves at ages w...
I'm sorry that happened! That sounds stressful for everyone!
I read Lily and Anna your comment, and asked if anything similar had happened to them:
Anna: No one has ever actually asked me, but I think it might happen in the future.
Lily: I remember two times when someone asked me. The first time I was coming home from a friend's house and I got confused about directions and I was looking around, and someone asked if I needed help. Another time I was over by the park and an old lady asked if I was okay. I was just walking near the park, not doing anything weir...
An "and" thing. The only "or" thing any of the dances I found had was that some allowed either proof of vaccination or a test. Sheet with details.
I think it's generally best to figure out what policies you think would be best, and then decide which ones to push for based on a combination of their impact-if-enacted and their feasibility.
In this case, I think enforcing existing regulations on handguns is both higher impact and higher feasibility than pushing to ban assault rifles. Banning all guns would be higher impact, but very low feasibility.
It’s not clear to me that putting effort into enforcing existing regulations is more feasible for many of the folks advocating assault rifle bans, nor is it clear to me that it’s a significantly higher impact approach.
Re: feasibility — Your examples of folks advocating additional legislation are federal and state politicians, while my impression is that most handgun enforcement actions in the U.S. traditionally rely on law enforcement agencies at more local levels. Thus, it’s not clear that the folks pushing such policies are in as good a position to...
Fair! I was thinking of it as three instances, where we have three different statistics being used to support policy changes that don't fit their underlying causes, but you're right that they're all on gun policy.
Thinking a bit, here are two other cases where you see similar things:
Transportation, with people using "road deaths" to push for making buses safer after high-fatality crashes, even when buses are already far safer than cars and it's cars that are the reason for high road deaths (even adjusting for mode share)
Domestic hunger, where the exam
AWS IOT service similarly changed pricing dimensions in a way that was overall cheaper for most, but much more expensive for some use cases, basically unbundling connections, messages, and transformation/routing.
Thanks for pointing me to this! More info: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/aws-iot-update-better-value-with-new-pricing-model/
This being in 2017 is also a lot more relevant for modern Amazon than something from 2007.
In response to Ben's comments I've edited my post to clarify additional situations in which I don't think giving an org a heads up is needed:
I'm not advocating this for cases where you're worried that the org will retaliate or otherwise behave badly if you give them advance warning, or for cases where you've had a bad experience with an org and don't want any further interaction. For example, I expect Curzi didn't give Leverage an opportunity to prepare a response to My Experience with Leverage Research, and that's fine.
Not sure how much this addresses...
Public criticism of people is rare enough that I wasn't thinking about it, but yes, I think the same arguments apply.
I think the case is much weaker when (a) you don't think they would want to respond or (b) you don't trust them to behave honorably with the information.
If you don't have a cooperative relationship with the org then I wouldn't apply this rule, no. But most org criticism I see where someone didn't run it by the org is in cases where someone has either no preexisting relationship with the org (beyond being within the EA community) or one that's sufficiently cooperative that sharing would have been fine.
Edited to add something covering this, though I suspect it doesn't go as far as you'd prefer?
(Also curious what you think of Ray's argument)
I'm only proposing here that EA community members let EA organizations review drafts before publishing.
I think this probably also applies to other similar communities, but not without that cooperative relationship.
Isn’t whether there is, in fact, a cooperative relationship likely to be precisely the issue at hand, in many cases of criticism of EA orgs?
In cases where you're worried about bad behavior by an org or have had a bad experience with them and don't want to interact with them (including the examples you described above) I agree it's fine to go ahead without sending it to them.
On the other hand, I think this is only rarely the case for critical posts? The larger category, what this doesn't apply, is what I was trying to address here. I should edit the post to include this, though I need to think about the wording and don't have time to make the change right now.
Right. I suspect we still have some disagreement but happy to leave it here.
(To briefly leave pointer, but with no expectation Jeff for you to respond to it: I think this sort of dynamic extends further into lots of other criticism, where even if your criticism isn't about bad behavior you're still pretty unsure how they respond to criticism and whether they'll respond well, and it can be very stressful to engage directly yet still pro-social to publish criticism.)
Hey, is there anything about this document you'd like me to edit before I criticize you?
I am 100% not advocating that! Giving the organization an opportunity to prepare a response is not the same thing as letting them decide or influence what your post says.
Most of those sites (and very near 100% when weighted by traffic) are funded by ads, though.
Most of these have a model where some visitors pay while others don't pay and see ads. Substack is an exception, with free users not seeing any ads, but I'd bet that this is just them being new (most new sites deprioritize advertising to maximize growth) and that in a few years they'll show ads to free... (read more)