thedstrat

I think the author is very myopic in understanding that other people care - just not about the same things he cares for. Most people don't care about publicly available dog poop bags or fixing a random bike lane that's sort of wrong. In fact you could argue that the things he cares about are not the most important things. Other people might care more about family than work, or about animal activism than petitioning for green space. It's not that others don't care, they just care about different things - sometimes more important and sometimes less.

Agreed. The analyses based solely on a comparison of average centipawn loss is so so flawed. It only takes using an engine move once or twice to completely demolish a much better opponent in a game. These types of analyses don't find this type of cheating.

A much better analysis imo would be trying to find the probability of someone at his ELO finding surprising moves. EG I played a 1900 online recently who happened to completely turn around a game by setting up a forced mate in 6, with several branching moves a few moves down which all happened to result in mate because of incredibly lucky piece positions. I can't calculate the probability of someone at a relatively low level like that finding such a move, but I bet it's very low. This is the type of analysis which I'm guessing Magnus is using to assess Niemann as a cheater.

Why do you think this would be best facilitated by a government as opposed to a large group of stakeholders?

Its pretty frustrating that people are using these shady stablecoins where you can't see the code or assets backing them (eg USDT), when there are stablecoins that are fully open source and you can see the backing in real time (eg DAI)

There are intelligent people though that don't do well on standardized tests (or at least don't get top tier results). I agree that standardized testing is a good metric to get a general idea of aptitude, but I think it hugely fails in appreciating people who are able to solve 'non-standardized' problems. And those are actually the people who should be placed in top institutions

Both observers are just seeing what already happened millions of miles away. Though they see the alien fleet arriving at different times, it's not possible that the aliens are doing different things in different reference frames. They made one decision and then the two people see the results of that decision at different times

One thing that isn't central at all, but it stood out to me.

"The amygdala appears to do something similar for emotional learning. For example infants are born with a simple versions of a fear response, with is later refined through reinforcement learning."

Positive and negative emotions can be seen as a reward/punishment mechanism - the goal of a reinforcement learning policy. Our brain is able to change this policy (what defines a positive or negative emotion) over time as our emotional intelligence matures. For example, when we are babies, we cry at anything that scares us. As we get older, we mature and change the emotional reaction automatically. In the example, we learn that not everything should scare us. I never realized that the brain (or ULM) can modify everything, including it's own policies, in response to external stimulus.

He talks as if the inverse correlation between interest rates and inflation no longer applies. But I don't think that the data shows that.

I’ve been practicing off an on for about ten years. I’m definitely not an expert. I like your explanation, but I think there’s more to it. Mindfulness doesn’t necessarily have to be about focusing on a particular thought. You can focus on nothingness and receive similar results. You can focus on a certain feeling for different results. Your focus object has a lot to do with what you get out of the experience. Additionally, the habit of recognizing what it feels like to not let your thoughts race can be powerful when your thoughts start racing at a later time.

I interpreted breathoften’s comment differently. As someone who’s played chess at a very high level, I feel like I understand people who play these games for the art behind it. It’s difficult to describe, but chess for me is beautiful because to win you must be patient, careful, understand what is and isn’t important, etc. playing chess is like learning virtues. An algorithm playing chess doesn’t care about any of that. I wonder if it’s similar to the difference between meditation and acid. One gives you time to understand and the other just gets you there without explanation.

I entirely disagree. By buying and owning shares of Exxon, you’re contributing and supporting the oil and gas industry. It’s completely a choice, as opposed to driving a car which is a financial necessity to some.

Millenials are the first generation to realize that they will be around for the climate crisis. In the circle of people I know, it’s a huge motivator to learn and hopefully do something about.

What does it actually mean to “be in denial of death” though? How does our mind divert accepting this reality? I’ve never experienced that; it sounds somewhat dramatic.

I’m jealous. I’ve lived in California oregon and Washington my whole life. You basically can’t walk to most nearby locations because of freeways, interstates, etc. In my current city there’s only two stores I can walk to because I’m walled in by major streets/freeways