landon

8.5K posts

landon banner
landon

landon

@schemathingz

Future CTO. Theological tinkerer. Semi-irreverent apologist, semi-apologetic about my irreverence. Creator of Liminal Space.

KC Metro انضم Aralık 2018
585 يتبع230 المتابعون
landon
landon@schemathingz·
@owroot Followed closely by having the person holding you sit down or otherwise try to be comfortable in any way.
English
0
0
0
95
O.W. Root
O.W. Root@owroot·
For a baby, having someone wipe your face with a warm wash cloth is the worst thing in the world that can ever happen to you.
English
62
227
8.1K
274.3K
landon
landon@schemathingz·
@sonikudzu @QiaochuYuan Similar: delaying child rearing until you're older and wiser (and less resilient to sleep deprivation, etc)
English
1
0
9
1.9K
loading…
loading…@sonikudzu·
people’s bodies give them three years of loveydovey juice to get them through any frustrating adjustments required to merge their lives and they wait it out. outsmarting yourselves smh
Callan@callanable

After spending my 20s and early 30s in Boston/NYC, I can attest to the fact that *no one* in my circles questioned this and it was normal to "date" for up to 10 years. I saw this for years on Reddit—screenshot from thread on /r/datingover30 on the "honeymoon phase."

English
8
11
717
172K
Shibetoshi Nakamoto
Shibetoshi Nakamoto@BillyM2k·
@Polymarket lololol the obvious thing that would happen 100% of the time happened whoever implemented that should be fired from every company
English
10
3
229
12.3K
Polymarket
Polymarket@Polymarket·
NEW: Amazon has reportedly scrapped its internal AI leaderboard as costs soared, with a senior executive telling staff: “don’t use AI just for the sake of using AI.”
English
458
1.8K
21.3K
9.1M
landon
landon@schemathingz·
@n00rdung @jane_plainly It's possible you're also doing this, but with the issue Devon is talking about.
English
0
0
0
16
slovborg
slovborg@n00rdung·
@jane_plainly yes. signalling "I am very smart" while showcasing inability to *really* think about what the issue wants for you *is* the epitome of upper-midwit takes
English
5
0
14
1K
slovborg
slovborg@n00rdung·
upper-midwit cope the unensouled 130iq-ish truly are insufferable
Devon Eriksen@Devon_Eriksen_

This is why IQ tests don't work too well on really smart people. Because sorta smart people tend to give the expected answer. And really smart people tend to point out that the question is wrong, and start arguing with the test, or trying to correct it, thereby making the test impossible to grade and annoying everyone. The expected answer to this is 72. Because 2*2*2 = 8 and 5*5*2 = 50, so 6*6*2 = 72. But the (really) correct answer is "I don't know." Because what you have is two points on a 3 dimensional graph (x,y) -> z. z = 2*x*y is one surface that can be drawn through these two points. And I suspect it's the simplest formula for a surface that can be so drawn, although I haven't bothered to check. But an infinite number of contiguous surfaces can be drawn in three dimensions that encompass these points (2,2,8) and (5,5,50). Each of these surfaces can be described by its own formula. Some of them will also touch (6,6,72). But others of them will touch (6,6, {something else entirely}) instead. This might sound really, really pedantic. But it's not. Everyone knows that the expected answer is the simple one, but that's only on a test... a fake artificial made up problem. When we start trying to do this in the real world, which, after all is what this "IQ" thing is actually for, then using the same kind of "IQ test thinking" can get you in trouble. "My 3-month-old son is now TWICE as big as when he was born. He's on track to weigh 7.5 trillion pounds by age 10." -@pronounced_kyle Fitting the simplest-formula curve, as opposed to the correct curve, makes our predictions of real-world stuff dead wrong. So this kind of test question promotes a dangerous habit of thought. But, Devon, I hear some of you ask, doesn't the principle of Occam's Razor demand that we fit the simplest curve? No. No, it does not. It does not require that we select the simplest possible answer, given what we have currently seen. It requires that we prefer hypotheses that make fewer assumption to those that make more. These are two different things entirely. If I see one black sheep, the simplest hypothesis is that all sheep are black. The hypothesis requiring the fewest assumptions is that at least one sheep is black on at least one side. You will note which of these is correct. All of this is, of course, irrelevant to questions on IQ test. But questions on an IQ test only matter as much as they are relevant to the actual universe... Where ideas like this are very relevant indeed.

English
41
7
445
45.5K
landon
landon@schemathingz·
@tris_does_stuff I think that's his point. The test itself reveals the obvious intent of the test designer, and you can reasonably assume the "correct answer" given that frame. But that's a different exercise from solving the problem.
English
0
0
2
448
tristan
tristan@tris_does_stuff·
This is a dumb person's idea of how a smart person thinks. The answer is obviously, *obviously*, 72. If you sit there autistically and complain that you don't have all the required information, then you haven't understood the question, you can't make reasonable assumptions, you can't do basic inference, and you're not a problem solver.
Devon Eriksen@Devon_Eriksen_

This is why IQ tests don't work too well on really smart people. Because sorta smart people tend to give the expected answer. And really smart people tend to point out that the question is wrong, and start arguing with the test, or trying to correct it, thereby making the test impossible to grade and annoying everyone. The expected answer to this is 72. Because 2*2*2 = 8 and 5*5*2 = 50, so 6*6*2 = 72. But the (really) correct answer is "I don't know." Because what you have is two points on a 3 dimensional graph (x,y) -> z. z = 2*x*y is one surface that can be drawn through these two points. And I suspect it's the simplest formula for a surface that can be so drawn, although I haven't bothered to check. But an infinite number of contiguous surfaces can be drawn in three dimensions that encompass these points (2,2,8) and (5,5,50). Each of these surfaces can be described by its own formula. Some of them will also touch (6,6,72). But others of them will touch (6,6, {something else entirely}) instead. This might sound really, really pedantic. But it's not. Everyone knows that the expected answer is the simple one, but that's only on a test... a fake artificial made up problem. When we start trying to do this in the real world, which, after all is what this "IQ" thing is actually for, then using the same kind of "IQ test thinking" can get you in trouble. "My 3-month-old son is now TWICE as big as when he was born. He's on track to weigh 7.5 trillion pounds by age 10." -@pronounced_kyle Fitting the simplest-formula curve, as opposed to the correct curve, makes our predictions of real-world stuff dead wrong. So this kind of test question promotes a dangerous habit of thought. But, Devon, I hear some of you ask, doesn't the principle of Occam's Razor demand that we fit the simplest curve? No. No, it does not. It does not require that we select the simplest possible answer, given what we have currently seen. It requires that we prefer hypotheses that make fewer assumption to those that make more. These are two different things entirely. If I see one black sheep, the simplest hypothesis is that all sheep are black. The hypothesis requiring the fewest assumptions is that at least one sheep is black on at least one side. You will note which of these is correct. All of this is, of course, irrelevant to questions on IQ test. But questions on an IQ test only matter as much as they are relevant to the actual universe... Where ideas like this are very relevant indeed.

English
83
29
1.6K
205.5K
landon
landon@schemathingz·
@antibearthesis Why would a bank loan you money for less than they could make in an index fund?
English
0
0
0
12
Noah
Noah@antibearthesis·
How to make $1,000,000 (easy): • Borrow $1M at 3% • Place it in the S&P 500 at 15% • Wait 5 years → $2M • Pay back the loan, keep $1M Why aren’t you doing this?
English
625
102
3.6K
1.9M
landon
landon@schemathingz·
@shashank_sindhe @SidJain_80 That just moves backpressure management upstream. Why not scale consumers based on queue depth?
English
0
0
0
11
Shashank Sindhe
Shashank Sindhe@shashank_sindhe·
@SidJain_80 You introduce backpressure by making producers slow down or drop when the queue hits limits..
English
1
0
0
343
Sid
Sid@SidJain_80·
Interviewer: Producers send faster than consumers can handle. Queue grows infinitely. How do you introduce backpressure control?
English
14
1
47
4.8K
landon
landon@schemathingz·
@EOEboh I see two: 1) you shouldn't need to parse the response body to determine success (status code would be better) 2) empty data should be represented as [] and/or a 404/204 response status
English
0
0
0
613
Captain-EO 👨🏾‍💻
Your API returns this: { "data": null, "error": null, "success": true } Your senior flags this in code review. What's the problem?
English
25
4
223
80.1K
rob🏴
rob🏴@rob_mcrobberson·
@cremieuxrecueil i’m guessing this guy was retarded before he ever talked to an llm
English
3
0
22
513
Crémieux
Crémieux@cremieuxrecueil·
Met a guy I think has AI psychosis. He thinks he can create smallpox based on some nonsense instructions he got from an LLM.
English
48
6
383
29.1K
landon
landon@schemathingz·
@rob_mcrobberson While I agree, if a company already has said policy, you don't wanna be the guy to try to change it.
English
1
0
1
58
rob🏴
rob🏴@rob_mcrobberson·
it’s hard to understate this, but if your company is afraid to deploy on a friday ur infra is pure garbage. this is actually a question you should ask companies during the interview process. its basically “are you retarded?” but more professional
English
36
6
448
36.7K
Crémieux
Crémieux@cremieuxrecueil·
Exceeded the target. Haven't looked at scores yet, but will note that reds were *much* less accurate when it came to identifying the threshold to save everyone. For red, it's 100%. For blue, it's 50%+1. Since this is obvious, I think the reds might just be partisan-brained.
Crémieux@cremieuxrecueil

I've received 166 wordsum scores plus blue/red button press results, and I'm so tempted to look, but I have to wait until I hit my target sample size of 2,350. Which side's button pushers will end up being more intelligent?

English
95
10
658
61.2K
CinnamonToastKen
CinnamonToastKen@cinnamontoastk·
This red button/blue button discourse is wild. 100% red saves everyone no consequence 51% of blue saves everyone no consequence 51% red kills all of blue but they frame it like its blues fault they had to kill them even though red is the only choice that causes anyone to die.
English
949
571
12.3K
343.8K
landon
landon@schemathingz·
@_space_punk_ I also like your reframe that it's not about being personally moral - we're actually banking on a baseline of love that would kick in across everybody
English
1
0
1
20
landon
landon@schemathingz·
@_space_punk_ Exactly. People either imagine that the lizard brain's desire to live will take over, or no-greater-love-than-this will. I'd gamble on the second.
English
1
0
1
18
ꜱᴘᴀᴄᴇ ᴘᴜɴᴋ
ꜱᴘᴀᴄᴇ ᴘᴜɴᴋ@_space_punk_·
I think this is a fascinating argument to hear solely from the red side because I genuinely believe that the second it stops being a hypothetical and one is actually presented with the option, they'd universally push blue
Synthetic Beef@SyntheticBeef

@bitcloud 57% of them are, when they are voting on an online hypothetical with nothing at stake.

English
4
1
28
1.5K
landon
landon@schemathingz·
@corsaren @DanielleFong I think I agree. Zero-cost displays of goodwill are inherently cheap signals, and usually the displays that we see are manufactured to create that impression. So now we have a bad proxy of "I see goodwill -> must be fake"
English
0
0
1
56
corsaren
corsaren@corsaren·
The worst mind virus the right ever invented was their pathological hatred for “virtue signaling”. Very toxic for the soul to train yourself to distrust displays of goodwill and even find them actively repulsive. You fools. The failure of leftist wokes was a ~lack~ of virtue.
English
62
28
505
10.1K
landon
landon@schemathingz·
@Apocaloptimist5 I didn't think they were correlated until this. It surprises me how many "rationalists" have such a narrow view of rationality.
English
0
0
2
125
Apocaloptimist
Apocaloptimist@Apocaloptimist5·
The red and blue button experiment does an excellent job of exposing how many people equate "rationality" with being a psychopath.
English
91
86
1.8K
23.9K
annie
annie@soychotic·
If you picked red, you’re no longer able to complain about the US not being like Japan
English
188
50
1.9K
43.3K
Hiems Lupes
Hiems Lupes@Lupes20635·
@pipebombxoxo @soychotic Red is the most logically correct choice, but she did raise a good point on how immoral that choice would be. So there is a valid argument for blue
English
3
0
21
713
NoMoreBuffalo
NoMoreBuffalo@luther_snell·
@TheLlamaBro @minordissent @cinnamontoastk Among people smart enough to know what they are doing, sure, but remember we are talking the whole world, much of which has a very low IQ, by twitter egghead standards. Lots of them would probably just push randomly.
English
1
0
0
34