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.
It is correct that we can [never find enough evidence](http://lesswrong.com/lw/mp/0_and_1_are_not_probabilities/) to make our certainty of a theory to be exactly 1 (though we can get it very close to 1). If we were absolutely certain in a theory, then *no* amount of counterevidence, no matter how da...(read more)
I wonder: do the names Y'ha-nthlei, Y'not'ha-nthlei, and At'gra'len'ley mean anything? I assume Y'ha and Y'not'ha mean "you have" and "you don't have", but beyond that it just seems random.
Indeed, if the two axes are the coordinates of the two particles, then one blob should be in the lower left and the other in the upper right. Seems Eliezer made a mistake with this diagram.
the median rationalist is still struggling to get a date
First, [citation needed].
Second, if it's true, perhaps one should look at oneself and ask why.
Just because I read the sequences doesn't mean I'm particularly likely to agree with any of them. Some, yes, but not all. Many of the statements you listed are controversial even on LW. If they were unanimously accepted here without further discussion, it would be a worrying sign.
Because Laurie is a person?
Ah, the struggles of people who want to quantify everything in video game terms, whether it makes sense or not. Reminds me of Christian Weston Chandler's "heart level".
(Warning: Googling that name is not for the faint of heart. May cause insanity, outrage, or disillusionment with humanity.)
Where did I demand anything?
That was a joke on my part, but one warning against using overly general umbrella terms. Our copyright and patent laws developed as a result of certain historical circumstances, and it is entirely possible that a hypothetical alien civilization would treat sharing and distribution of ideas entirely ...(read more)
...I didn't? Drat. Sorry.
This is what I get for not looking over my own comments before I post them. I'll be more vigilant in the future.
It is correct that we can [never find enough evidence](http://lesswrong.com/lw/mp/0_and_1_are_not_probabilities/) to make our certainty of a theory to be exactly 1 (though we can get it very close to 1). If we were absolutely certain in a theory, then *no* amount of counterevidence, no matter how da...(read more)
I wonder: do the names Y'ha-nthlei, Y'not'ha-nthlei, and At'gra'len'ley mean anything? I assume Y'ha and Y'not'ha mean "you have" and "you don't have", but beyond that it just seems random.
Indeed, if the two axes are the coordinates of the two particles, then one blob should be in the lower left and the other in the upper right. Seems Eliezer made a mistake with this diagram.
First, [citation needed].
Second, if it's true, perhaps one should look at oneself and ask why.
Just because I read the sequences doesn't mean I'm particularly likely to agree with any of them. Some, yes, but not all. Many of the statements you listed are controversial even on LW. If they were unanimously accepted here without further discussion, it would be a worrying sign.
Because Laurie is a person?
Ah, the struggles of people who want to quantify everything in video game terms, whether it makes sense or not. Reminds me of Christian Weston Chandler's "heart level".
(Warning: Googling that name is not for the faint of heart. May cause insanity, outrage, or disillusionment with humanity.)
Where did I demand anything?
That was a joke on my part, but one warning against using overly general umbrella terms. Our copyright and patent laws developed as a result of certain historical circumstances, and it is entirely possible that a hypothetical alien civilization would treat sharing and distribution of ideas entirely ...(read more)
...I didn't? Drat. Sorry.
This is what I get for not looking over my own comments before I post them. I'll be more vigilant in the future.