Closed Limelike Curves

138 karmaJoined May 2020



    The empirical track record is that the top 3 AI research labs (Anthropic, DeepMind, and OpenAI) were all started by people worried that AI would be unsafe, who then went on to design and implement a bunch of unsafe AIs.

    "AI is powerful and uncontrollable and could kill all of humanity, like seriously" is not a complicated message.

    Anything longer than 8 morphemes is probably not going to survive Twitter or CNN getting their hands on it. I like the original version ("Literally everyone will die") better.

    In what sense? The problem of potential helium scarcity has been (effectively) solved in the last few years by just looking for more helium deposits.

    In a sense, we are "running out" (because there's only a finite supply of Helium), we're just running out very, very slowly.

    Actually, maybe I should clarify this. This is standard practice when you hire a decent statistician. We've known this since like... the 1940s, maybe?

    But a lot of organizations and clinical trials don't do this because they don't consult with a statistician early enough. I've had people come to me and say "hey, here's a pile of data, can you calculate a p-value?" too many times to count. Yes, I calculated a p-value, it's like 0.06, and if you'd come to me at the start of the experiment we could've avoided the million-dollar boondoggle

     that you just created.

    You’re completely correct! However, it’s worth noting this is standard practice (when the treatment makes up most of the cost, which it usually doesn’t). Most statisticians will be able to tell you about this.

    So I think I have two comments:

    1. It’s actually pretty neat you figured this out by yourself, and shows you have a decent intuition for the subject.
    2. However, if you’re a researcher at any kind of research institution, and you run or design RCTs, this suggests an organizational problem. You’re reinventing the wheel, and need to consult with a statistician. It’s very, very difficult to do good research without a statistician, no matter how clever you are. (If you’d like, I’m happy to help if you send me a DM.)

    Could be marketed as a medication for hypersomnia, narcolepsy, chronic fatigue, and ADHD.

    There's an EA cause area in this, but it's not tooth-related. Our jaws are perfectly fine. The problem is bad incentives in the healthcare system; dentists get paid to take wisdom teeth out, not to leave them in, so about 90% of wisdom tooth extractions are unnecessary

    The mortality rate of anesthesia is not quite negligible; a couple hundred people have died because of anesthesia during wisdom tooth removal, and there's also the risk of infection.

    With regard to differing forms of , the article you linked notes:

    Despite these minor differences in processing, each of these forms is probably equally effective when equal doses are given.

    Which is understating things a bit: All the minor variants will be identical after dissolving in the body -- anyhydrous creatine will become hydrated, and particle size is 0 after the creatine has dissolved. The only (minor) difference is that micronized creatine will dissolve slightly faster if you mix it with a drink, because of the smaller particle size. This can be mildly convenient, but I've never been bothered by the monohydrate being too slow to dissolve (it's almost instant for both forms).

    With respect to the impacts on cognitive performance, Gwern completed an in-depth look here. Most important is the section on publication bias; the authors of these papers failed to replicate their results several times, but these failures were never published. Gwern concludes (and I agree) that creatine almost certainly doesn't affect intelligence in nonvegetarians, and has at best

    The study you quote at the end about vegetarianism has a sample size in the low dozens, and I wouldn't put much stock in it. The large meta-analyses of this all find better life expectancy and health markers in vegetarians/vegans. The one important exception is B12 (for which the study you cite finds a deficiency in vegans). Luckily, th

    is can easily be fixed by supplements.

    I'd rephrase that, maybe. Whether we're asking people to make a change doesn't matter--that's assigning an unearned privilege to old ideas. The reason we have to justify this claim is because it's a claim. If you're saying "I know vegetarianism is healthier," you should be able to explain how you know that.

    If you're wondering whether the above studies  leave some room for including fish in your diet: My guess is yes, pescetarianism is likely to be slightly healthier, because of the aforementioned effects of polyunsaturated fats (including omega-3 fatty acids). This is why doctors also recommend the Mediterranean diet a lot, although it's not clear how much of the effect comes from fish and how much from vegetables. Omega-3 supplements definitely help.

    Load more