Nicolas Lacombe

Aspiring rationalist, web developer, polyamorous, effective altruist. https://nlacombe.net/summary

Comments

What are some real life Inadequate Equilibria?

dating on dating apps (I think) men sends messages or tries to match with as many people as possible to increase their chances of talking to someone. women receives a lot of messages/potential matches so they get more selective. which in turns creates less matches per message sent for men, which reacts by sending more messages

this is from what I read and from my experience and experience of people I talked to. also, it looks like there is still a big heterosexual dynamics in this case (this might not apply to all dating apps but I guess it must apply to the big ones). I stayed a big vague in the description since I have seen different reasons for every of those points (that are not necessarily contradicting each other though: they could be additive)

What are some real life Inadequate Equilibria?

anoter big point is that people who got voted and benefited from first past the post have incentive not to change it

[LIVE!!] LW/EA New Year's Ultra Party

Thank you very much to the organizers and everyone that was present! ❤️ I had a nice time and I loved the online platform/system I would not have been able to meet some of the people I met if it weren't for the online event

Norms of Membership for Voluntary Groups

the other thing to consider is that the internet offers the possibility of less acountability

when meeting in person it is harder to disguise yourself as someone else

also, since there is a big transport cost of frequenting a different place (a different library, coffee shop, etc), causing people not to like you means you are increasing your chances of conflict every future time you will frequent that place

online if you cause someone not to like you in an online space, you can more easily find or create another similar online space where that person is not there, or create a new account and join the same space, or ignore/block them even if they seek conflict, their impact on you might be less: you can't really physically hurt someone online and disrupting their actions/discussions can be more difficult

Signaling importance

<p style="color: #f00">test</p>

The LessWrong 2018 Book is Available for Pre-order

how can I get notified when I can buy the ebook?

What are reliable ways to make a statement in such a way that I will be able to prove in the future that I had made that statement?

With an asymmetric cryptographic key you can sign messages to prove that those messages came from the same specific private key. You can then create strong evidence of the identity of the key (that you have the key) by using systems/accounts that are identified to you and that only you have access to share other signed messages that proves that the owner of the account has the private key in question. This is probably more convenient and trusted world wide (some people might not trust authorities of unknown countries but might trust some online systems that are known worldwide) while offering a comparable level of security/trust to my opinion. The traditional channels of law/notary/governments have their benefits too (like physical inspection to match a government provided ID) but it looks like to me that they also have bigger costs (harder to access the data (probably not digitalized or protected from public acces) , higher fees, potentially less recognized worldwide)

Y Couchinator

The idea looks similar to https://www.couchsurfing.com to me.