In response to Effective learning
Comment author: ChristianKleineidam 24 May 2017 08:21:28AM 0 points [-]

tactics such as the aforementioned spaced repetition [freeware]

Why do you link to cram.com instead of the standard solution of Anki?

In response to Political Ideology
Comment author: ChristianKleineidam 24 May 2017 08:16:30AM -1 points [-]

For instance: access to child pornography reduces the rate of child sexual abuse and

Many people in EA are statistically literate. Saying because in an n=1 (or maybe n=3) experiment a → b, proves that a → b in general either suggest statistical incompetence, inability to use statistical thinking because the subject is political or an attempt to mislead.

Comment author: AnneWissemann 23 May 2017 03:57:43PM 2 points [-]

FWIW, I found the article somewhat cringy, partly because of the references to pick-up artist culture that don't include the disclaimers I'd expect for practices such as negging: it ends up sounding like the OP endorses the practice.

The other part is that the tone of the article sounds wildly overconfident to me given the evidence presented. A strongly counterintuitive finding needs more justification than a link to an outside source IMO. I'd have taken away more with more in-text explanations and less overall points made.

Comment author: ChristianKleineidam 23 May 2017 08:24:58PM 1 point [-]

As far as the pickup-up theme goes, it's worth noting that the whole article doesn't say anything about vulnerability and the value of opening up to the person with whom you want to start or keep a relationship.

Comment author: ChristianKleineidam 19 May 2017 01:39:31PM 0 points [-]

Most people don’t get help soon enough. Someone who experiences psychosis usually doesn’t get treatment until more than a year later. Someone with bipolar typically isn’t diagnosed until more than three years after their first mood episode.

In many venues, I think it's okay to tell people the official narrative for dealing with mental health without evidence, but in this space, I would like to see evidence for a claim like "Most people don’t get help soon enough". This means I would like a discussion of the likely impact of seeking professional care vs. not seeking it before making such a claim.

Comment author: Daniel_Eth 24 April 2017 01:32:39AM 1 point [-]
Comment author: ChristianKleineidam 24 April 2017 08:13:49AM 0 points [-]

It's not clear that Juicero is actually a bad venture in the sense that doesn't return the money for it's investors.

Even if that would be the case, VC's make most of the money with a handful companies. A VC can have a good fund if 90% of their investments don't return their money.

I would guess that the same is true for high risk philanthropic investments. It's okay if some high risk investments don't provide value as long as you are betting on some investments that deliever.

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 23 April 2017 07:32:52PM 1 point [-]

I'm not sure that's true. There are a lot of venture funds in the Valley but that doesn't mean it's easy to get any venture fund to give you money.

I don't have the precise statistics handy, but my understanding is that VC returns are very good for a small number of firms and break-even or negative for most VC firms. If that's the case, it suggests that as more VCs enter the market, more bad companies are getting funded.

Comment author: ChristianKleineidam 24 April 2017 07:46:39AM -1 points [-]

I don't think the argument that there are a lot of VC firms that don't get good returns suggest that centralization into one VC firm would be good. There are different successful VC firms that have different preferences in how to invest.

Having one central hub of decision making is essentially the model used in the Soviet Union. I don't think that's a good model.

Decentral decision making usually beats central planning with one single decision making authority in domain with a lot of spread out information.

Comment author: Kerry_Vaughan 21 April 2017 05:11:07PM 8 points [-]

But if I can't convince them to fund me for some reason and I think they're making a mistake, there are no other donors to appeal to anymore. It's all or nothing.

The upside of centralization is that it helps prevent the unilateralist curse for funding bad projects. As the number of funders increases, it becomes increasingly easy for the bad projects to find someone who will fund them.

That said, I share the concern that EA Funds will become a single point of failure for projects such that if EA Funds doesn't fund you, the project is dead. We probably want some centralization but we also want worldview diversification. I'm not yet sure how to accomplish this. We could create multiple versions of the current funds with different fund managers, but that is likely to be very confusing to most donors. I'm open to ideas on how to help with this concern.

Comment author: ChristianKleineidam 23 April 2017 07:30:23AM 2 points [-]

As the number of funders increases, it becomes increasingly easy for the bad projects to find someone who will fund them.

I'm not sure that's true. There are a lot of venture funds in the Valley but that doesn't mean it's easy to get any venture fund to give you money.

Comment author: ChristianKleineidam 22 April 2017 10:38:47AM 3 points [-]

The donation amounts we’ve received so far are greater than we expected, especially given that donations typically decrease early in the year after ramping up towards the end of the year.

How much did you expect?

Comment author: ChristianKleineidam 18 April 2017 03:48:33PM 0 points [-]

If you're passionate about politics and in America, than getting involved now seems like a potentially positive action but it wont be neglected if you align with Democrat positions (but potentially easier to get involved if you are Republican).

Why do you believe it's easier to get involved as Republican?

There are a lot more ways to get involved in state politics than in national policy.

Comment author: ChristianKleineidam 22 November 2016 08:50:59PM 6 points [-]

First, the spread of mini-Trumps across the West would multiply his risks.

I'm not sure what's meant with mini-Trump here. It seems like it you aren't talking about Trump, the human being but about Trump, the symbol.

When thinking about effective actions it's important to be precise.

The fact that Trump seems to have a short attention span for complex arguments doesn't mean that's true for right-wing politicians in Europe. There are shared problem but if we treat everything the same way we loss precision in understanding the problems.

View more: Next