NatashaRostova

Replying toWhat are you surprised people don't just buy?

What are you surprised people don't just buy?

This.

Yeah that's totally cool. LW style is different though. Not necessarily in a good way, and this difference might even be why it's less popular than other sites these days. But it's different in that LW doesn't, as far as I have observed, want lots of people from different sides. It wants an almost algorithmic approach to reality, where more colorful language is viewed as disrupting the truth by inflaming tribal parts of your brain.

Everything you're saying is totally reasonable for someone who doesn't understand the very very specific thing LW is trying to accomplish, and the idiosyncratic rules of engagement for this site.

Personally I don't come here as often as other sites in part due to these rules, at times, feeling stringent shrug

Replying toA question about the rules

NatashaRostova9y

A question about the rules

The style of your blog is very very much at odds with the style of Less Wrong. I would never submit anything here that classified as a cohesive set what 'liberals' think, and then attacked that classification. Writing here should map more to statistical estimation and modeling, where every word and claim is scrutinized, thoughtful, and attempts to avoid invoking needless emotion. That last point is harder to nail down. It is of course possible to have an excitable tone that runs orthogonal to the strict argument, but it's pretty hard to do right.

I do, sometimes, write more in line with the tone you choose on my personal blog, but I wouldn't ever submit it here. And as I write more and think more, I've become increasingly convinced it's not the best way to think. Trying to be persuasive, methodological, and charitable, is more fun since it's much more challenging.

You'd have better luck in the reactosphere, which probably gets more readers than LW anyway.

Replying toOdds ratios and conditional risk ratios

NatashaRostova9y

Odds ratios and conditional risk ratios

I thought it was interesting -- and frustrating for you. I haven't invested the time into proving to myself you're right, but in the case that you are I hope you're able to get someone to verify and lend you their credibility.

Why do you think two senior biostats guys would disagree with you if it was obviously wrong? I have worked with enough academics to know that they are far far from infallible, but curious on your analysis of this question.

Replying toMetrics to evaluate a Presidency

NatashaRostova9y

Metrics to evaluate a Presidency

Coming up with criteria and metrics on the economy is pretty easy

I agree. In fact, I think coming up with criteria and metrics on the economy is profoundly challenging within the US context. We know there are right tail events (inflation, unemployment, etc) that are very strong. But when they are all generally stable, or within the realm of stability, but the variation within demographics and geographies of the US is huge, the value of the metrics can start to dramatically collapse IMO.

Replying toMetrics to evaluate a Presidency

NatashaRostova9y

Metrics to evaluate a Presidency

It's hard to think of how one could do a lit review on that without, like, a thousand sources to try and characterize the general scope of the problem.

Replying toCould a Neuroscientist Understand a Microprocessor?

NatashaRostova9y

Could a Neuroscientist Understand a Microprocessor?

This is pretty cool. It reminds me of an article I read on brain surgery recently (https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/03/magazine/karl-ove-knausgaard-on-the-terrible-beauty-of-brain-surgery.html). Where the surgeon keeps the patient awake, and zaps different parts of the brain to see what they map to. They don't even try to pretend they understand the system, but try to map simple correlations.

Replying to0.999...=1: Another Rationality Litmus Test

NatashaRostova9y

0.999...=1: Another Rationality Litmus Test

[Note, after rereading your post my comment is tangential]

I have always been empathetic to the argument, from people first presented with this, that they are different. Understanding how math deals with infinity basically requires having the mathematical structure supporting it already known. I'm not particularly gifted at math, but the first 4 weeks of real analysis really changed the way I think, because it was basically a condensed rapid upload of centuries of collaborative work from some of the smartest men to ever exist right into my brain.

Otherwise, at least in my experience, we operate in a discrete world that moves through time. So, what I predict is happening, is that... (read more)

Replying toThoughts on "Operation Make Less Wrong the single conversational locus", Month 1

NatashaRostova9y

Thoughts on "Operation Make Less Wrong the single conversational locus", Month 1

Can we elect a dictator?

Replying toThoughts on "Operation Make Less Wrong the single conversational locus", Month 1

NatashaRostova9y

Thoughts on "Operation Make Less Wrong the single conversational locus", Month 1

Sincere question: Do you think the SSC comments section accomplishes politics while filtering out foam, spittle etc? (or perhaps the comments section there is more robust to simply ignoring bad comments, which isn't the same on a forum?)

Having no moderator experience, I guess there is probably a lot on that end that I don't know.

How do you identify complex systems?

NatashaRostova

As I have studied scientific inference over the past decade, there is one major class of problems that frustrates me the most. It's what I think most people here focus on understanding: How to properly identify a complex system.

We all basically know that complex systems are unpredictable, in certain types of ways, due to incredible differences in outcomes present in small changes in starting parameters. Despite this, there seem to be some complex systems that still follow a certain state or pattern identifiable to a single input. In my field of study (economics) we know that if you increase the money supply inflation follows. Sort of. Lots of people though inflation would... (read 659 more words →)

Positive vs. Normative Rationality

NatashaRostova

[Epistemic Status: Highly speculative/experimental. Playing around with ideas on rationality. Extremely interested in input, criticism, or other perspectives]

I.)

Throughout the 20th century the University of Chicago school of thought seems to have generated the most positive rational analysis, which branched out across the social sciences among economist types. These guys took a positive view as a given. Their research interests were in studying how these agents would form equilibrium, or lead to suboptimal outcomes in politics or markets, rather than commenting on what an individual ought to do.

While their analysis was based on positive rationality, these guys clearly had preferences for how the world should run that made its way into their analysis.... (read 1413 more words →)

Traditions and Rationality.

NatashaRostova

A couple months ago I read a post on facebook about how perhaps more young female virgins should sell their virginity, if they receive a lot of money. It was based on this article about a young women selling her virginity for 120k.

What bugs me is these cases are often lazy in assuming there aren't incredibly complex systems lurking behind these simple calculations.

If you wanted to be rational about this, you could map your perception of this story to dollars, take the situation as well specified, and estimate what a women ought to do (or at least seriously consider) given those circumstances. For the sake of argument let's assume that the... (read 935 more words →)

Unfortunate Information

NatashaRostova

I'm growing increasingly convinced the unfortunate correlations between types of people and types of arguments leads to persistent biases in uncovering actual knowledge.

As an example, MR wrote this article (they just linked to again today) on Ben Carson in 2015/11. Cowen's argument is that, while perhaps implausible (although it may have tenuous support), the idea that Carson believes that the pyramids were used as grain storage isn't in any possible way less unrealistic than any other religious beliefs. If anything, that singular belief is relatively realistic compared to more widely accepted miracles in Christianity, or similar religions.

So why does he get so much flak for it? Cowen argues that he shouldn't, that... (read 358 more words →)

Nassim Taleb on Election Forecasting

NatashaRostova

Nassim Taleb recently posted this mathematical draft of election forecasting refinement to his Twitter.

The math isn’t super important to see why it’s so cool. His model seems to be that we should try to forecast the election outcome, including uncertainty between now and the end date, rather than build a forecast that takes current poll numbers and implicitly assumes nothing changes.

The mechanism of his model focuses on forming an unbiased time-series, formulated using stochastic methods. The mainstream methods as of now focus on multi-level Bayesian methods that look to see how the election would turn out if it were run today.

That seems like it makes more sense. While it’s safe to

... (read 458 more words →)

LESSWRONG
LW

LESSWRONG
LW

"What is Wrong With our Thoughts" -David Stove (1991)

Nassim Taleb on Election Forecasting

Traditions and Rationality.

Unfortunate Information

NatashaRostova

NatashaRostova

How do you identify complex systems?

Positive vs. Normative Rationality

Traditions and Rationality.

"What is Wrong With our Thoughts" -David Stove (1991)

Unfortunate Information

Nassim Taleb on Election Forecasting

NatashaRostova

"What is Wrong With our Thoughts" -David Stove (1991)

Nassim Taleb on Election Forecasting

Traditions and Rationality.

Unfortunate Information

NatashaRostova

NatashaRostova

How do you identify complex systems?

Positive vs. Normative Rationality

Traditions and Rationality.

"What is Wrong With our Thoughts" -David Stove (1991)

Unfortunate Information

Nassim Taleb on Election Forecasting