All of pushcx's Comments + Replies

Many of the characters have thick accents and/or a patois. If you can comfortably carry a conversation in a crowded bar you'll be fine without them.

2gwern8y
And on top of that, I'm hearing-impaired. Let purists watch without subtitles - I'd prefer to actually understand what people are saying.

So if you want to keep people occupied for a looooong time without running out of game-world, focus on PvP

Or invest in "procedural content generation", where the game world is constantly generated or regenerated. The "roguelike" genre has made games that have been played for decades (like Rogue, Nethack, ADOM) and continues to grow (Ultima Ratio Regum, Dwarf Fortress). It's hybridizing into other genres like action platformers (Rogue Legacy, Spelunky, Risk of Rain). Games are creating new genres by starting with PCG (FTL, Minecraft).... (read more)

Sure: there's no indication of delivery, so you don't even know if one of the hops in your message opened all the envelopes, took all the money, read your private note, and trashed it.

175th8y
I think there's a bonus feature to having two hops in the middle. If the sender finds that the recipient never received the message, he immediately distrusts his first hop and perhaps publishes the knowledge. If the first hop wasn't the culprit, he either publishes the second hop's unreliability or takes horrible devious Slytheriny vengeance on them. So, due to mutually assured destruction, neither hop wants to defect and risk losing a nice income source permanently.
1gwern8y
Yes, without public-key crypto or at least crypto of some sort, you easily lose any secrecy to any bad actors in the mix net. But the absence of dummy messages or very high traffic also means you don't necessarily get anonymity either: just observe everyone in the System.

Maybe the reason the post reminds you of myth is that it's expressing a lack of agency. It's a common feature there; generally the world is a place where awful things happen to you just because. The poster above is in a complex system where he feels he has no control, and the "whiff of aggrieved entitelment" response touches on that exact raw nerve.

Yes. Speeds of 100wpm are not particularly hard to reach with deliberate practice. The benefit is not the time savings of typing less, it's the cognitive savings of spending your attention on your topic rather than the mechanics of entering text and correcting errors.

Psychologists now classify motivation as intrinsic vs. extrinsic - are you doing something because you want to, or because someone told you to/offered you something? Importantly, for creative tasks like knowledge work, extrinsic motivators like bonuses are weaker than people's concern for a job well done. Many studies in a variety of situtations have shown the counterinuitive result that adding bonuses to a task makes people perform worse, give up quicker, and not do it on their own initiative.

The book Drive by Daniel Pink is an excellent walk through the research.

Looking for a partner for open-ended study of math/cs topics like calculus, linear algebra, stats, Haskell, SICP - open to suggestions for similar topics. Ideally, we'd meet weekly for 1-2h to discuss the previous week's study and plan for the next. Bonus points if you're in Chicago. :)

0zedzed9y
I'd be up for studying proofy calculus [http://smile.amazon.com/Calculus-Vol-One-Variable-Introduction-Algebra/dp/0471000051] (inclusive) or C Programming [http://amazon.com/Programming-Modern-Approach-2nd-Edition/dp/0393979504/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1399453125&sr=8-1&keywords=king+c] .

The workshops currently cost $3,900 + travel, I don't think it was much lower a year ago. Have your improvements recouped that cost? Has the workshop increased your income?

I paid about $1000 total for workshop plus travel. The social confidence and "try new things" aspects led me to obtain a scary part-time job at the hospital that brought well over $1000 in income, plus networking and comfort zone expansion. I also started thinking about job options in terms of different salaries and world-changing leverage, which my brain had previously tagged as somehow immoral. This hasn't yet led to me, for example, moving to the USA where nursing salaries are higher or looking for startup opportunities, but it's explicitly on... (read more)

4XFrequentist10y
(They were in fact $600 + travel).

Hi folks, I'm Peter. I read a lot of blogs and saw enough articles on Overcoming Bias a few years ago that I was aware of Yudkowsky and some of his writing. I think I wandered from there to his personal site because I liked the writing and from there to Less Wrong, but it's long enough ago I don't really remember. I've read Yudkowsky's Sequences and found lots of good ideas or interesting new ways to explain things (though I bounced off QM as it assumed a level of knowledge in physics I don't have). They're annoyingly disorganized - I realize they were ori... (read more)

-2MugaSofer10y
This seems to be a common problem. It certainly happened to me.
6magfrump10y
I think a part of the problem with other people filling the "vacuum" left by Eliezer is that when he was writing the sequences it was a large amount of informal material. Since then we've established a lot of very formal norms for main-level posts; the "blog" is now about discussions with a lot of shared background rather than about trying to use a bunch of words to get some ideas out. That is, most of the point of the sequences is laying out ground rules. There's no vacuum left over for anyone to fill, and LW isn't really a "blog" any more, so much as a community or discussion board. And for me, personally, at least, a lot of the attraction of LW and the sequences is not that Eliezer did a bunch of original creative work, but that he verbalized and worked out a bit more detail on a variety of ideas that were already familiar, and then created a community where people have to accept that and are therefore trustworthy. What this "feels like on the inside" is that the community is here because they share MY ideas about epistemology or whatever, rather than because they share HIS ideas, even if he was the one to write them down. Of course YMMV and none of this is a controlled experiment; I could be making up bad post hoc explanations.

I'm also wary of a community so tightly focused around one guy. I have only good things to say about Yudkowsky or his writing, but a site where anyone is far and away the most active and influential writer sets off alarm bells. Despite the warning in the death spiral sequence, this community heavily revolves around him.

Yeah, it's a problem. I'd even go so far as to say that it's a cognitive hazard, not just a PR or recruitment difficulty: if you've got only one person at the clear top of a status hierarchy covering some domain, then halo effects can p... (read more)

-2Michelle_Z10y
Apply skepticism evenly? I mean, you don't have to do/participate in something just because a bunch of other people are doing it. TBH, I'd like to see a type of "sequence review" of stuff from other major writers on this site. It's useful in that I'll occasionally read one if I don't remember having read it before, so I can't knock it.

I was continuing on the post's opening thought experiment of a computed universe; I was thinking whatever program is computing the new states of the universe would do this check. Sorry for the confusion.

How would you compute that in one sweep-through, without any higher-order metatime?

A way has occurred to me.

Take the basic program described in the beginning of this post, in which the universe is deterministically computed with a cached series of states of the universe. The change is to make this computation is parallel on a staggering scale, because of how Time-Turners work. I'm going to explain this like there's only one wizard with a Time-Turner that works for one hour, but I'm pretty sure it holds up for the complex case of many Turners that can go... (read more)

0Ritalin10y
By whom? The DM? Jokes aside, how does that happen, exactly? (As a matter of fact, that could be an amusing mechanic to add to games that allow for time travel, though the players would be stuck in a Groundhog Day Loop until they pass the check).