rmoehn's Comments

Does anyone have a recommended resource about the research on behavioral conditioning, reinforcement, and shaping?

These are the research-related resources listed in Karen Pryor's ‘Don't Shoot the Dog’, which itself is a great practical resource about training with reinforcement etc.:

Does iterated amplification tackle the inner alignment problem?

IDA includes looking inside the overseen agent: ‘As described here, we would like to augment this oversight by allowing Bⁿ⁻¹ to view the internal state of Aⁿ.’ (ALBA: An explicit proposal for aligned AI) If we can get enough information out of that internal state, we can avoid inner misalignment. This, however, is difficult and written about in The informed oversight problem.

Some quick notes on hand hygiene

masks […] help prevent touching one's mouth and nose

I agree in the case of someone who knows what they're doing. For many, however, a mask does the opposite. Yesterday I went out for two hours and saw someone re-pinching the wire above the nose, someone pushing the mask around their face, and someone taking the mask off and putting it in her pocket.

The latter seems innocuous, but think about it: Taking the mask off, she touched the outside, which had caught all the nasty viruses. Thereafter she ate lunch. Then, coming back from the cafeteria and after touching many shared surfaces, she probably put the mask back on, touching the inside in the process. Then the inside touches her face.

Some quick notes on hand hygiene

Studying this with Anki is a waste of time in my opinion. Just execute the instructions three times and you're good to go. Physical skills are best learned physically.

Aside from that: Strong upvote!

Strange thing about the WHO guide: The nail area/tip of the thumb doesn't get much friction. Step 7 appears to address the space under the fingernails (which should be short anyway). But at least the lateral half of my thumb tip doesn't touch anything when I try it. Hm, maybe in step 6.

"How quickly can you get this done?" (estimating workload)

Thanks! I especially like how differences of understanding were exposed when estimates diverged.

"How quickly can you get this done?" (estimating workload)

Did you get very good at estimating, because you had tracked the time on similar pieces of work before? Ie. were you doing reference class forecasting? If yes, that's a good reminder for me. I'm familiar with the concept, but it has slipped from my mind recently.

Also, how much effort would the estimating itself take? For example, how many seconds or minutes would you be thinking about a three-hour work item?

"How quickly can you get this done?" (estimating workload)

I've given up on estimating software development tasks well. Yes, you can do interval estimates, as How to Measure Anything recommends. Yes, you can track your estimates and improve them over time. But it's slow and few project management applications support it. (OmniPlan is the only one that works on Mac and gives you Monte Carlo simulations based on your interval estimates. But getting information on how well your estimates matched reality is still hard.)

So I've settled on the 80/20 solution, Evidence Based Scheduling. It's implemented in FogBugz, which forecasts milestone completion using a Monte Carlo simulation based on your past estimates and how long it actually took. Which means that you make quick and dirty estimates, and out comes a probability distribution over completion dates that automatically takes into account how good you are at estimating.

They changed their pricing recently, but it should still be free for up to two users. You might have to ask the sales team.

All that said, if you have actionable guidance on how to estimate, how to get milestone completion forecasts based on the estimates, then how to judge and improve your estimation accuracy – if you have that and all in a convenient way, I'd be happy to know and adopt it.

Load More