How big is the problem?

At the start, I thought you were going to in a different direction:

• Given that we are giving AIs frameworks, just how far can we go with that? And will they be useful outside of this or that set of games?

Is it possible that tools like EfficientZero help find the fundamental limits for how much training data you need to figure out a set of rules? If an artificial neural network ever manages to reconstruct the rules of English by using only the stimulus that the average children is exposed too, that would be a strong counter-argument against poverty of stimulus.

• Unless, that artificial network comes with a grammar framework?

ot+1

o(t+1) or o_(t+1)?

Everywhere treated variolation (deliberate infection in order to build immunity) as not being a serious proposal. It’s now clear it would have been a big win.

One criticism I heard of 'giving (more) people an untested vaccine', on the surface boiled down to:

• could be worse than deliberate infection.
• Might not protect against it
• It might not be a big deal (over here)

(This was based around a historical anecdote.)

I've found my intuition are different for 'give untested vaccine to informed volunteers' versus 'variolation'.

Clicking on the footnote link doesn't automatically scroll to the footnotes (when clicked on LW, I haven't checked other places (yet)).

We would need to subtract any opportunity costs or side effects from Paxlovid,

Only opportunity costs that affect the number of lives, per the measure:

What’s our best guess of how many Americans will die as a result of the FDA’s inaction on Paxlovid?

Similarly, an advance commitment to paying a higher price for the first however many pills delivered quickly, conditional on the drug working, and ideally to also cover some costs if it failed, would have done a similar thing.

That's a great explanation. Evidence may also be compatible or incompatible with a hypothesis. For instance, if I get a die (without the dots on the sides that indicate 1-6), and I instead label* it:

Red, 4, Life, X-Wing, Int, path through a tree

Then finding out I rolled a 4, without knowing what die I used, is compatible with the regular dice hypothesis, but any of the other rolls, is not.

*(likely using symbols, for space reasons)

By the way, this was a cool book review.

(The table of contents on the left, didn't really follow the structure, but as per usual I just read the whole thing without looking at that until afterward.)

Does the review start with how you found the book in order to give the reader a taste of what reading that book is like, or just because how you find a book affects things like whether you finish it, and how you understand it?

Do not stick your hand in molten metal.

Bold, or other effects can be added by:

Copying text with the effect.

Highlighting it and selecting B, etc. Some options, like strikethrough text are not apparent in some editors, like Draft-JS. (Copy your text out before switching so you don't lose it.)

and he even wouldn't ride on city streets.

and even he wouldn't ride on city streets.

That point is more easily made when it doesn't involve things that might risk extinction, like the human brain cell teddies, the differing ems, etc.