trentmkelly/LessWrong-43k huggingface dataset:
Meetup : Washington, D.C.: Anime & Manga Discussion
by RobinZ — 2014-11-07T14:07:13.541Z

Discussion article for the meetup : Washington, D.C.: Anime & Manga Discussion

WHEN:
09 November 2014 03:00:00PM (-0500)

WHERE:
National Portrait Gallery

We will be meeting in the Kogod Courtyard of the National Portrait Gallery (8th and F Sts or 8th and G Sts NW, go straight past the information desk from either entrance) to talk about anime, manga, and related topics. Per the norm, we plan to let people congregate from 3:00 to 3:30 before kicking things off.

As with the Current Events meetup, conversation on any subject of interest to attendees (be it in the main conversation or in a side conversation) is both permitted and encouraged, but we encourage everyone to take advantage of this meeting as a Schelling point for anime & manga discussions.

Upcoming Meetups:

Nov. 16: To-Do List Hacking (improving results via instrumental rationality)

Nov. 23: Fun & Games (bring games, play games, converse, socialize, or any combination thereof)

Nov. 30: TBA (to be summarized)

Discussion article for the meetup : Washington, D.C.: Anime & Manga Discussion
Meetup : Saint Petersburg meetup - "with probable lectures"
by efim — 2014-11-07T13:11:50.846Z

Discussion article for the meetup : Saint Petersburg meetup - "with probable lectures"

WHEN:
14 November 2014 07:00:00PM (+0300)

WHERE:
Россия, Санкт-Петербург, Московский пр. 65

We will gather for at least three hours, in the same free venue.

There is a high probability of report on LW post about drugs and substances, and it is likely to be followed with the discussion.

We will also try to find anything interesting in everyones areas of specialization and arrange small impromptu lectures.

And otherwise chat and have fun.

You can reach me by phone - +7-(911)-843-56-44 or mail: efim.wool@gmail.com or vk: vk.com/timetravel, also vk.com/lw_spb

Discussion article for the meetup : Saint Petersburg meetup - "with probable lectures"
Meetup : West LA: Blindsight
by abramdemski — 2014-11-07T11:54:11.832Z

Discussion article for the meetup : West LA: Blindsight

WHEN:
12 November 2014 07:30:00PM (-0800)

WHERE:
11066 Santa Monica Blvd, Los Angeles, CA

How to Find Us: Go into this Del Taco. We will be in the back room if possible.

Parking is free in the lot out front or on the street nearby.

Discussion: We will be discussing the psychological/philosophical issues raised in the novel Blindsight. For those who have not read the book, an introduction will be given. So, you do not need to read the book to attend; however, there will be spoilers.

Recommended Reading:
* Blindsight, free on the web (and in PDF) and not too long if you'd like to read it before the meetup.
No prior exposure to Less Wrong is required; this will be generally accessible.

Discussion article for the meetup : West LA: Blindsight
The Danger of Invisible Problems
by  — 2014-11-06T22:28:57.255Z

TL;DR: There is probably some costly problem in your life right now that you are not even aware of. It is not that you are procrastinating on solving it. Rather, this problem has gradually blended into your environment, sinking beneath your conscious awareness to the degree that you fail to recognize it as a problem in the first place.

This post is partially an elaboration on Ugh fields, but there are some decisive differences I want to develop. Let me begin with an anecdote:

For about two years I've had a periodic pain in my right thigh. Gradually, it became worse. At one point I actually had a sort of spasm. Then the pain went away for a few weeks, then it came back, and so forth. All the while I rationalized it as something harmless: "It will probably just go away soon," I would think, or "It only inhibits my mobility sometimes." Occasionally I would consider seeking medical help, but I couldn't muster the energy, as though some activation threshold wasn't being reached. In fact, the very promise that I could get medical help whenever convenient served to further diminish any sense of urgency. Even if the pain was sometimes debilitating, I did not perceive it as a problem needing to be solved. Gradually, I came to view it as just an unfortunate and inevitable part of existence.

Last Monday, after hardly being able to walk due to crippling pain, I finally became aware that "Wow, this really sucks and I should fix it." That evening I finally visited a chiropractor, who proceeded to get medieval on my femur (imagine having a sprained ankle, then imagine a grown man jumping on top of it). Had I classified this as a problem-needing-to-be-solved a few months earlier, my treatment period would probably be days instead of weeks.

Simply, I think this situation is of a more general form:

You have some inefficiency or agitation in your life. This could be solved very easily, but because it is perceived as harmless, no such attempt is made. Over time your tolerance for it increases, even if the problem is worsening (Bonus points for attempts at rationalizing it). This may be due to something like the peak-end rule, as the problem doesn't cause any dramatic peaks that stick out in your memory, just a dull pain underlying your experience. Even if the problem substantially lowers utility, your satisficing lizard brain remains apathetic, until the last moment, when the damage...
Meetup : Denver Area Meetup 2
by TheStevenator — 2014-11-06T03:57:42.297Z

Discussion article for the meetup : Denver Area Meetup 2

WHEN:
13 November 2014 06:00:00PM (-0700)

WHERE:
960 S Colorado Blvd Glendale, CO 80246

The last location we tried had a comedy show going on, which meant talking outside in the mild cold. I'm hoping that this location has a starbucks that we can hang out in, but if not I'm sure there will be some alcove of chairs for some quiet chat. As usual, time and location is amenable to adjustment. Please rsvp in the comments. I'll figure out some signal so that we can easily find each other in the next few days and post it in the comments.

Discussion article for the meetup : Denver Area Meetup 2
Productivity 101 For Beginners
by Peter Wildeford — 2014-11-05T23:04:46.263Z

I'd like to believe that I'm pretty productive, and people seem interested in how I do it. Previously, I had written "How I Am Productive"and it became one of my most popular essays of all time.

The real secret is that, in the past, I wasn't nearly as productive. I struggled with procrastination, had issues completing assignments on time, and always felt like I never had enough time to do things. But, starting in January 2013 and continuing for the past year and a half, I have slowly implemented several systems and habits in my life that, taken together, have made me productive.

I've learned productivity, and I want to try to teach it to others.

When I wrote "How I Am Productive", I kind of brain dumped everything that I knew in one place. To do better, I should help people go one step at a time. I also focused a lot on particulars of my situation -- to do better, I should be more general. The aim of this -- Productivity 101 for Beginners -- is to try to make a general, step-by-step guide to increasing people's productivity.

...It's basically what I would do if I somehow had to start over.

-

Disclaimer: This is still advice based on what works for me. I've attempted to validate it by trying it on a couple of other people and integrating feedback. I've also tried to improve it based on what I've learned in the year between writing this and writing "How I Am Productive". But your mileage still may vary, and I'm not a professional coach.

Step One: Get some goals!

...So here's my step-by-step guide to being productive. ...Start on step one. Focus on step one. Do not move on from step one until you're done with step one.

Most people think productivity starts with "how", but I always find that it starts with "why".

Why do you want to be productive?

...If you could do more, what would you do? Would you try to exercise? Would you practice programming regularly? Would you start writing?

Action point for this step: Carefully pick two goals -- two things that you want to accomplish that you're currently not doing. Focus on them and how awesome it would be if you could get those things done!

Avoid this common mistake: Do not pick more than two goals. Only focus on two to star...
Polling Thread - Personality Special
by Gunnar_Zarncke — 2014-11-05T22:40:29.878Z

Another installment of the Polling Thread.

This is a special installment: It's about getting feedback about you!

It has been said Don't Be Afraid of Asking Personally Important Questions of Less Wrong. And there is a Curiosity checklist: Looking for feedback. We are in a Tell Culture. So why not learn something about yourself? For some people it is easy to sense how they are perceived. For some it is difficult. Even if you get feedback it is (luckily!) more often positive - but this sometimes leaves out murky key points. Giving constructive personal feedback is difficult. Lets try it.

By focussing this thread on personal feedback I want to prime you and the other participants on giving and receiving constructive personal feedback.

Do not assume that Crocker's Rules apply by default. If you want to operate under Crockers rules you should clearly indicate thus.

The following rules (from Admonymous) should give a guideline on giving feedback:

Be constructive. Make sure the recipient can act upon your admonition. Good: "Please try to make less clicking noises. A lot of people are annoyed by them." Bad: "You suck."

Admire. Just as the recipient may need your feedback to change behavior that bothers you, they may not be aware of how other aspects of their behavior please you, and even if they are not blind to it, you could encourage them further by giving explicit praise. Use the site to encourage positive behavior as much as you use it to change negative behavior.

Be gentle. As long as you get the message through, there is no need to be harsh. How you express an admonition can be almost as important as the content. Be mindful of wording, and use softer forms over more harsh alternatives (for example, consider using “could” instead of “should”). Good: "Sometimes you smell of sweat. Perhaps you could shower more often." Bad: "You stink!"

Be specific. Provide as many details as you can without exposing yourself. Not only is this going to help the recipient identify exactly the problematic aspects of their behavior, it will also encourage them to take you seriously. Good: “When you arrange meetings, sometimes they are ineffective because you don’t stop people when they go off-topic.” Bad: “Your meetings are wasting people’s time.&rdquo

...
Meetup : Bratislava
by Viliam_Bur — 2014-11-05T20:59:19.803Z

Discussion article for the meetup : Bratislava

WHEN:
10 November 2014 06:00:00PM (+0100)

WHERE:
Bistro The Peach, Mariánska 3, Bratislava

Bistro the Peach asi stále nie je poriadne označené, ale je to oproti predajni richmanov na Mariánskej. Alebo sa riaďte podľa google mapy a čísla ulice. Vchod vyzerá tak, že na začiatku pasáže sú krátke schody do prvej časti bistra, vedľa je druhá časť, kde sedíme, a potom je ešte terasa.

Discussion article for the meetup : Bratislava
Ethnic Tension And Meaningless Arguments
by Scott Alexander — 2014-11-05T03:38:42.000Z

I.

Part of what bothers me – and apparently several others – about yesterday’s motte-and-bailey discussion is that here’s a fallacy – a pretty successful fallacy – that depends entirely on people not being entirely clear on what they’re arguing about. Somebody says God doesn’t exist. Another person objects that God is just a name for the order and beauty in the universe. Then this somehow helps defend the position that God is a supernatural creator being. How does that even happen?

“Sir, you’ve been accused of murdering your wife. We have three witnesses who said you did it. What do you have to say for yourself?”

“Well, your honor, I think it’s quite clear I didn’t murder the President. For one thing, he’s surrounded by Secret Service agents. For another, check the news. The President’s still alive.”

“Huh. For some reason I vaguely remember thinking you didn’t have a case. Yet now that I hear you talk, everything you say is incredibly persuasive. You’re free to go.”

While motte-and-bailey is less subtle, it seems to require a similar sort of misdirection. I’m not saying it’s impossible. I’m just saying it’s a fact that needs to be explained.

When everything works the way it’s supposed to in philosophy textbooks, arguments are supposed to go one of a couple of ways:

1. Questions of empirical fact, like “Is the Earth getting warmer?” or “Did aliens build the pyramids?”. You debate these by presenting factual evidence, like “An average of global weather station measurements show 2014 is the hottest year on record” or “One of the bricks at Giza says ‘Made In Tau Ceti V’ on the bottom.” Then people try to refute these facts or present facts of their own.

2. Questions of morality, like “Is it wrong to abort children?” or “Should you refrain from downloading music you have not paid for?” You can only debate these well if you’ve already agreed upon a moral framework, like a particular version of natural law or consequentialism. But you can sort of debate them by comparing to examples of agreed-upon moral questions and trying to maintain consistency. For exmaple, “You wouldn’t kill a one day old baby, so how is a nine mo...
Meetup : Urbana-Champaign: Writing Prompts
by Manfred — 2014-11-04T17:18:44.525Z

Discussion article for the meetup : Urbana-Champaign: Writing Prompts

WHEN:
09 November 2014 02:00:00PM (-0600)

WHERE:
206 S. Cedar St., Urbana, IL

In honor of RaNoWriMo, let's do a few writing prompts - 15 minutes of just sitting down and writing the first page of something awesome.

Want advice? Check out an episode of writing excuses.

Discussion article for the meetup : Urbana-Champaign: Writing Prompts
prediction and capacity to represent
by sbenthall — 2014-11-04T06:09:57.357Z

To the extent that an agent is predictable, it must be:

observable, and

have a knowable internal structure

The first implies that the predictor has collected data emitted by the agent.

The second implies that the agent has internal structure and that the predictor has the capacity to represent the internal structure of the other agent.

In general, we can say that people do not have the capacity to explicitly represent other people very well. People are unpredictable to each other. This is what makes us free. When somebody is utterly predictable to us, their rigidity is a sign of weakness or stupidity. They are following a simple algorithm.

We are able to model the internal structure of worms with available computing power.

As we build more and more powerful predictive systems, we can ask: is our internal structure in principle knowable by this powerful machine?

(x-posted to digifesto)
Welcome!
by Benya_Fallenstein — 2014-11-04T03:20:47.000Z

Welcome to MIRI's as-yet-unnamed new forum for technical Friendly AI research---whether or not it's associated with MIRI! We want to provide a place for posting and discussing work on topics like the Löbian obstacle, updateless decision theory, and corrigibility. The LessWrong group blog has hosted some discussions on topics like these in the past, but Friendly AI research has never been entirely on topic there. By creating a forum focused entirely on research, we hope to make it easier to find, and have, interesting discussions of interesting new work.

The forum is world-readable, but posting and commenting will be invite-only. We have some ideas for a review process for submissions by non-members, but contributions from non-members will probably not be accepted until early 2015 at the earliest.

I'm hoping that having a forum where people are already familiar with some of our background assumptions will help MIRI to more quickly communicate new research results---currently, there are a number of things we haven't finished writing up yet, not because the technical results are all that hard to write up, but because it is difficult to motivate them and provide enough surrounding context for them to be useful as a stand-alone tech report. Here are four topics I plan to post about in the next two weeks:

A formalism for logically omniscient, perfectly Bayesian agents, which live in and are able to reason about a world that contains other such agents, and in which such agents aren't "special" (using classical game theory---i.e., mixed strategies and Nash equilibria---to get around diagonalization problems). (First post: Topological truth predicates.)

Using this: A variant of AIXI that is able to reason about a world containing other (variant) AIXIs which are equally powerful.

A formal model of Stuart Armstrong's utility indifference and problems with it (these are in the Corrigibility paper MIRI recently released), and a new variant we've been considering which avoids these problems (but may introduce others; we don't know yet!).

A result that proof-based UDT is optimal in a certain sense: For every particular decision theory, there is a "fair" decision problem (in a certain formal sense) that fails on this decision problem, but for every provably "fair" decision problem, there is an N such that UDT with any proof length ≥N succeeds on this decision proble

...
Meetup : Brussels November meetup: Hell and existential risks
by Roxolan — 2014-11-04T03:02:37.433Z

Discussion article for the meetup : Brussels November meetup: Hell and existential risks

WHEN:
08 November 2014 01:00:00PM (+0100)

WHERE:
Rue des Alexiens 55 1000 Bruxelles

Hi all,

As on every second Saturday of the month, it's meetup time. It's approximately Halloween (eight days are nothing over the lifetime of a species!) so this month we'll be talking about rational horror.

Information-theoretic death. Mutually assured destruction. Von Neumann probes with deadly payloads. Super-intelligences with non-human values. Super-intelligences with slightly non-human values. Meta jokes about the current status of LessWrong Brussels. Moloch the incomprehensible prison. The heat death of the universe. We welcome relevant scientific news, science-fiction recommendations, transhumanist musings, and chilling heavenward curses.

We will meet at 1 pm at "La Fleur en papier doré, close to the Brussels Central station. The meeting will be in English to facilitate both French and Dutch speaking members.

If you are coming for the first time, please consider filling out this one minute form to share your contact information.

The Brussels meetup group communicates through a Google Group.

Meetup announcements are also mirrored on meetup.com

Discussion article for the meetup : Brussels November meetup: Hell and existential risks
Superintelligence 8: Cognitive superpowers
by KatjaGrace — 2014-11-04T02:01:01.526Z

This is part of a weekly reading group on Nick Bostrom's book, Superintelligence. For more information about the group, and an index of posts so far see the announcement post. For the schedule of future topics, see MIRI's reading guide.

Welcome. This week we discuss the eighth section in the reading guide: Cognitive Superpowers. This corresponds to Chapter 6.

This post summarizes the section, and offers a few relevant notes, and ideas for further investigation. Some of my own thoughts and questions for discussion are in the comments.

There is no need to proceed in order through this post, or to look at everything. Feel free to jump straight to the discussion. Where applicable and I remember, page numbers indicate the rough part of the chapter that is most related (not necessarily that the chapter is being cited for the specific claim).

Reading: Chapter 6

Summary

AI agents might have very different skill profiles.

AI with some narrow skills could produce a variety of other skills. e.g. strong AI research skills might allow an AI to build its own social skills.

'Superpowers' that might be particularly important for an AI that wants to take control of the world include:

Intelligence amplification: for bootstrapping its own intelligence

Strategizing: for achieving distant goals and overcoming opposition

Social manipulation: for escaping human control, getting support, and encouraging desired courses of action

Hacking: for stealing hardware, money and infrastructure; for escaping human control

Technology research: for creating military force, surveillance, or space transport

Economic productivity: for making money to spend on taking over the world

These 'superpowers' are relative to other nearby agents; Bostrom means them to be super only if they substantially exceed the combined capabilities of the rest of the global civilization.

A takeover scenario might go like this:

Pre-criticality: researchers make a seed-AI, which becomes increasingly helpful at improving itself

Recursive self-improvement: seed-AI becomes main force for improving itself and brings about an intelligence explosion. It perhaps develops all of the superpowers it didn't already have.

Covert preparation: the AI makes up a robust long term plan, pretends to be nice, and escapes from human control if need be.

Overt implementation: the AI goes ahead with its plan

...
Meetup : Frankfurt: New LW apartment and guests
by Kendra — 2014-11-03T13:02:54.022Z

Discussion article for the meetup : Frankfurt: New LW apartment and guests

WHEN:
08 November 2014 02:00:00PM (+0100)

WHERE:
Frankfurt, Heerstrasse

We have just moved in with each other! And we have guests. One Earning to give person (and EA) from London and one Effective Altruist from Vienna.

If you want more information, please message me here, on our mailing list (https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/less-wrong-frankfurt) or reach me via phone 0049 176 34 095 760.

Discussion article for the meetup : Frankfurt: New LW apartment and guests
Open thread, Nov. 3 - Nov. 9, 2014
by MrMind — 2014-11-03T09:55:07.288Z

If it's worth saying, but not worth its own post (even in Discussion), then it goes here.

Notes for future OT posters:

1. Please add the 'open_thread' tag.

2. Check if there is an active Open Thread before posting a new one. (Immediately before; refresh the list-of-threads page before posting.)

3. Open Threads should be posted in Discussion, and not Main.

4. Open Threads should start on Monday, and end on Sunday.