Representing your internal state is bothersome when it's significantly subtle,
with a first impression misleading and clarification difficult. It's just not
efficient, so you round up in the direction that won't raise an issue instead of
being direct. This seems like manipulation (eluding notice as ...(read more)
Bug: Link posts like this one don't show the link anywhere when opened via a permalink, only when seen in a list of posts (like user's posts).
You can remove the upvote from your own comment or even downvote it.
My guess is that finding a fully satisfactory solution is hopeless, in much the
same way as with specifying aligned goals (i.e. no solution is in closed form,
without reference to human-derived systems doing decision theory/axiology).
A crucial problem is finding how agent's decisions influence a g...(read more)
> Higher-voted comments are consistently more insightful and interesting than low-voted ones.
This was also my experience (on LW) several years ago, but not recently. On Reddit, I don't see much difference between highly- and moderately-upvoted comments, only poorly-upvoted comments (in a popular t...(read more)
(The quote markup in your comment designates a quote from your earlier comment, not my comment.)
You are not engaging the distinction I've drawn. Saying "It's useful" isn't the final analysis, there are potential improvements that avoid the horror of intentionally holding and professing false belie...(read more)
> A priori assuming that one cannot solve a problem
("A priori" suggests lack of knowledge to temper an initial impression, which doesn't apply here.)
There are problems one can't by default solve, and a statement, standing on its own, that it's feasible to solve them is known to be wrong. A "usef...(read more)
> Quality may speak for itself, but it can be too costly to listen to the quality of every single thing anyone says.
Which is why there should be a way to vote on users, not content, the quantity of unevaluated content shouldn't divide the signal. This would matter if the primary mission succeeds a...(read more)
There is a partial translation of the book and other things at lesswrong.ru.
I'll cite the thought experiment for the reference:
> Betting on the Past: In my pocket (says Bob) I have a slip of paper on which is written a proposition P. You must choose between two bets. Bet 1 is a bet on P at 10:1 for a stake of one dollar. Bet 2 is a bet on P at 1:10 for a stake of ten dolla...(read more)