I am an independent research and programmer working at my own consultancy, Shapley Maximizers ÖU. I like to spend my time acquiring deeper models of the world, and generally becoming more formidable. I'm also a fairly good forecaster: I started out on predicting on Good Judgment Open and CSET-Foretell, but now do most of my forecasting through Samotsvety, of which Scott Alexander writes:
Enter Samotsvety Forecasts. This is a team of some of the best superforecasters in the world. They won the CSET-Foretell forecasting competition by an absolutely obscene margin, “around twice as good as the next-best team in terms of the relative Brier score”. If the point of forecasting tournaments is to figure out who you can trust, the science has spoken, and the answer is “these guys”.
I used to post prolifically on the EA Forum, but nowadays, I post my research and thoughts at nunosempere.com / nunosempere.com/blog rather than on this forum, because:
But a good fraction of my past research is still available here on the EA Forum. I'm particularly fond of my series on Estimating Value. And I haven't left the forum entirely: I remain subscribed to its RSS, and generally tend to at least skim all interesting posts.
I used to do research around longtermism, forecasting and quantification, as well as some programming, at the Quantified Uncertainty Research Institute (QURI). At QURI, I programmed Metaforecast.org, a search tool which aggregates predictions from many different platforms, which I still maintain. I spent some time in the Bahamas as part of the FTX EA Fellowship. Previously, I was a Future of Humanity Institute 2020 Summer Research Fellow, and then worked on a grant from the Long Term Future Fund to do "independent research on forecasting and optimal paths to improve the long-term." I used to write a Forecasting Newsletter which gathered a few thousand subscribers, but I stopped as the value of my time rose. I also generally enjoy winning bets against people too confident in their beliefs.
Before that, I studied Maths and Philosophy, dropped out in exasperation at the inefficiency, picked up some development economics; helped implement the European Summer Program on Rationality during 2017, 2018 2019, 2020 and 2022; worked as a contractor for various forecasting and programming projects; volunteered for various Effective Altruism organizations, and carried out many independent research projects. In a past life, I also wrote a popular Spanish literature blog, and remain keenly interested in Spanish poetry.
You can share feedback anonymously with me here.
Particularly interested in LW's speculation about distributed computing, and whether you could see the largest training run via that method over the next few years.
Thanks, yes.
I'm not saying anything the post isn't saying, I'm just pointing out that the forecasting/simple Bayesian tradition of knowledge really agrees with this post. You then have further arguments around the virtue of orienting the world around happy paths and normies, but still.
Makes me empathize with the defender :), but let me tell you, being interrogated in an airport for six hours trying to convince a US immigration agent that I'm an oddball not a danger is not fun
people who have opinions about how [whatever] should be done are unusually likely to be bad actors who want me to do [whatever] in such a way as to benefit them
But the inference is correct, no, since you are discarding the probability mass on "innocent normie", no?
Very interesting! will mention in my forecasting newsletter
No, the shapley value hasn't been changed. The correct way to do this would have been, that, if:
A: $0
B: $0
A+B: $300
then
A: $0
B: $0
A+B: $0 (Carol vetoes) A+B: $300
A+C: $0
B+C: $0
A+B+C: $300
Your example is wrong becuase you are not leaving the A+B case unchanged.
I agree that "being more people" is a problem in coalitional dynamics with vetos, but I don't think this is a problem with the Shapley value solution. I agree that when trying to apply the Shapley value solution, you should make sure to set C's value as zero (even though it might hurt egos), etc.
I think your contributions are sufficiently counterproductive (lengthy, wrong, uninformed) that per my "Reign of Terror" moderation policy I'm banning you from my posts. I met a person with your same name at a NY meetup a few years ago, and I don't have anything against you as a person & wish you the best. Maybe I'm unduly annoyed because I see some of my worst qualities in this comment (maybe something like futile disagreeableness). FWIW I would have been more sympathetic with your stance a few months ago, but I think that we since have much more data. If you feel strongly about this and we have a mutual acquaintance that can intercede & vouch for you I'll reconsider this.
The US also has a strong presidential system
No, the US has a system where power is divided across the three branches. Further, the President can release prisoners from federal prisons through a pardon.
Neither do you
I don't know with absolute certainty but I am really sure. I can observe that El Salvador has a strong presidential system, and Bukele a strong grip on power.
Neither do any of American judges issuing orders in this case
This is an interesting point about to what extent judges can make geopolitical judgment calls. The way they are handling this is by judging the administration on the steps it has taken. This could just be a strongly worded letter. So far that hasn't happened.
This is really cool!