Sorted by New

Wiki Contributions


SlateStarCodex deleted because NYT wants to dox Scott

As a heads up it looks like you need to be logged in to use the contact-newsroom page.

The case for C19 being widespread

One benefit is that it is a good chance for training. We have a complicated real world question were the answer and even the best way of approaching the answer are currently unknown, but we will know the answer soon. Making predictions and recording the reasoning will allow for retrospectives.

Testing the Efficacy of Disagreement Resolution Techniques (and a Proposal for Testing Double Crux)
it should be hard or impossible for participants to look up the answers during the study

I am unclear how you are going to enforce this in practice given that the study will be online and that you're expecting people to spend at least 30 minutes on conversation, which implies a large enough reward that it is worth hunting down answers that can't be found on the front page of Google. The only thing that comes to my mind is asking them to make predictions about the future. Related what will your policy be on participants looking up and/or sharing references relevant to steps in their reasoning? E.g. if one of the questions is about Trump being reelected will participants be allowed to visit 538 during step 1 and/or link their partner to it in step 4?

I didn't have enough time to properly evaluate the statistics portion, but at first glance it looks ok. Nothing seems wrong with the significance tests beyond them being significance tests. IIRC BEST addresses my main issues with them, particularly being able to indicated the absence of an effect in a way that isn't the case for mere non-significance, but I haven't used it in forever and don't have time to brush up on it at the moment.

No Really, Why Aren't Rationalists Winning?

Its one of the things Val taught. I honestly don't remember much of the details, but "deliberate practice but where you think hard about not Goodhart-ing and practicing the wrong thing"? actually sounds about right.

No Really, Why Aren't Rationalists Winning?

It was taught at CfAR during the period I think James attended.

No Really, Why Aren't Rationalists Winning?

Have you been using turbocharging training with him?

Living in an Inadequate World

A bit off the main topic, but what was the Ketosylent recipe?

Small but important change State every belief as a probability that is less than 100% -> State every belief as a probability that is less than 100% and greater than 0.

Notes From an Apocalypse

I enjoyed this post. Citations would have been strongly appreciated but I think posting this without citations > not posting, so I upvoted anyway. In the spirt of crowdsourced fact checking I semi-randomly picked the Darwin quote and hox genes to briefly research. The Darwin quote is real, and its use in other sources suggests that you used the standard interpretation rather than e.x. deliberately taking it out of context. Your explanation of hox genes is really not how I would have done it, but wikipedia agrees that "The sequence and function of Hox genes is highly conserved" which is what matters for your thesis. In restrospect choosing a highly disclaimed section for fact checking was a bad idea, but in my defense hox genes sounded intersting and had an easy to search keyword.

The run up to this apocalypse seem to have included at least a few generalizable events:

At this point I stopped and mentally assigned a 90% probability that this was about to become singularity thing. I applaud myself.

Voting Weight Discussion

New posts also start with their user having upvoted them once, so if you have 25 karma, you'll start with 3 points.

I have observed that this upvote does not effect the posters karma, this is a good design, but not clear from the text of this post.

Load More