I took the survey.

The reason you didn't see the Philosopher's Stone in your first read is that it wasn't there. Eliezer accidentally dropped it in one of his edits, and put it back in after Reddit was all "Where's the Stone?!"

Possible typos.

1. "And the difference might not that amount to that much." Extra "that"

2. "Think through each step of what you’ll be doing, and try to avoid relying on your brains associations with whole events." Should be "brain's associations"

3. "So, how successful, do you predict, you’ll be able to influence your predictions?" I'm having trouble parsing this sentence.

No, my eating disorder hasn't been an active problem for ~8 years. Thank you for your concern.

I agree that "unclear and often highly subjective" are downsides to categories of content that warrant trigger warnings, but this exchange (below) would pretty clearly warrant a trigger warning for eating disorders if it was on a site that used trigger warnings.

Are there effective methods of ceasing to enjoy some activity, or of refraining from enjoyable things?

For food items you can create distaste by mixing the food item with something that makes you throw up.

This comment made me wonder if trigger warnings might have a place on Less Wrong. Probably not, because I suspect that the utility gains would not be worth the controversy of trying to change norms in that direction.

Is there a better search term than "self-modification," or a better place to look other than LW, for self-modification ideas/experiments, of the "when system 1 and system 2 are in conflict, listen to system 2" type? Any comments like "This particular thing worked for me and here's a link to it" are welcome.

The link in "And no, evolutionary psychologists do not only offer 'postdictions'..." is broken.

The link to an "Intuitive Explanation of Bayesian Reasoning" is broken. The new URL is here: http://yudkowsky.net/rational/bayes