MoritzG's Comments

Summary of "The Straw Vulcan"

The way you commented it is not clear what you are referring to. I did not understand your comment because I did not get "where you were coming from".

Summary of "The Straw Vulcan"

Straw_Vulcan is an example of an attack of two of the three types of thinkers on another.

The moral-thinkers try to show their superiority. In Star Trek this is ever present. In all the stories morality and principles always win over rational compromise. The captains usually favor the best possible short term outcome over risk minimization and the long term. As it is fiction this always works out.

The three thinking types as formalized/categorized (to my knowledge) by Rao Venkatesh of ribbonfarm.

Venkatesh Rao: The Three Types of Decision Makers [The Knowledge Project Ep. #7]

I can hardly express how useful I found this to make sense of the world.

What types of compute/processing could we distinguish?

Thank you, I should have thought of it in that (Time complexity) context. Time complexity is not just about how long it takes but also about the nature of the problem. Chess is neither P nor NP, but the question of complexity is certainly related.

Maybe my question is: Why can there be a Heuristic that does fairly well and is nowhere near exponential? Even a count of the pieces left on the board usually says something that only a full search can prove.

What types of compute/processing could we distinguish?

Then you are wrong because since the search usually does not reach the chess mate state, there is always a scoring heuristic replacing the further exploration search at some dept.

I know and had read chessprogramming prior to your post, you are wrong to assume that I am a total idiot just because I got myself confused.

What types of compute/processing could we distinguish?

Ok, let's go with chess. For that game there is an optimal balance between the tree search and the evaluation function. The search is exploratory. The evaluation is a score.

The evaluation can obviously predict the search to some degree. Humans are very bad at searching, still some can win against computers.

The search is decompressing the information to something more easily evaluated by a computer. A human can do it with much less expansion. Just a matter of Hardware or is it because the information was there all along and just needed a "smarter" analysis?

Key Decision Analysis - a fundamental rationality technique

This reminds me of another issue. If you do make informed complicated decisions, the basis of these decisions might change over time. I struggle with that problem professionally. As an engineer I have to make complicated compromises/decisions. The trouble is that the situation changes all the time. The requirements and the means change. Without tracking why I made decisions there is no way to tell if those decisions still hold, because I do not even remember myself. The project becomes a zombie even before there are true legacy and hand-over issues. Usually decisions are incomprehensible later. We all know this and have though everyone else is an idiot, but often people had good reason to do it that way or lost track as described. Making changes to often reveals that there were reasons, but too late.

Privately you might find yourself in a place that you had reason to go into but those reasons went away without you noticing.

Markets are Anti-Inductive

In reality there are smart penguins and dumb penguins and penguin news papers. The professional penguins will tell other penguins how great it has been going so they can get out before the ledge breaks of and they all fall into the water.

To realize those booked earnings you have to sell without causing the crash, so you have to setup potential buyers first. That is why I consider articles about investing into something in major papers the last warning before the crash. When I read that the only smart thing to do, is to invest into ... I know not too.

Is the "business cycle" an actual economic principle?

You seem to think that the economy and markets are random without memory or state. You are the one with a fallacy called: "the map is not the territory".

Is the "business cycle" an actual economic principle?

I think Liron only meant the times of growth with those 10%. Looking at the recent stock market you will clearly find growth that is much higher than the long term rate and higher than economy + inflation + "risk free return". In the last 10 years the annual rate was indeed 10.5% pa

Load More