Search Ideas
2886 ideas match your query.:
You may be overstating the difficulty. IIRC you like rural America. Finding a quiet place to live should be doable, even in cities but especially in rural places. (Believe it or not I once stayed at an Airbnb in Tahoe that was TOO quiet to sleep. It was so quiet it kinda freaked me out. And that’s saying something because I love quiet.)
Have you traveled internationally? I’m thinking specifically of flying west for a large distance.
For example, if I fly to the West coast from central Europe and I land at 12pm say. That’s 9 hours behind Europe. And then I try to stay up until 10pm or so. That’s nearly impossible. I’ve fallen asleep with the lights on.
Would be interesting if you still lay awake for an hour or so even when severely jet lagged.
What’s wrong with using melatonin indefinitely?
AFAIK it creates no physical dependence, you don’t build a tolerance, and it’s cheap. What’s not to love?
Something I made the other day, recipe in the caption :) https://www.instagram.com/p/Db2DzFplBXq/?igsh=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==
Could you do meal prep for the week? Have meals ready in the freezer so you don’t need to cook every day.
The cause of procrastination is a conflict between preferences. Part of you wants to take out the trash, another doesn’t. The solution is a common preference: a new option both parts of you prefer to their respective initial position.
Can you identify those parts within you?
Try brainstorming many new options on V. With any luck, you’ll find a new option both parts of you want without delay.
But you don’t have that obligation right now, right?
There’s a company that makes a cube that you put in your bedroom and it creates a sound barrier. Like a noise canceling perimeter. It’s like noise canceling headphones except you don’t have to wear anything. I forget the name of the company but worth searching for it online. I remember being excited about it because I had the exact same idea and was stoked to see somebody actually doing it.
Just stumbled upon this tip in my Insta feed to deal with noisy neighbors: https://www.instagram.com/reel/Db4gheyx9WP/?igsh=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==
Apparently you can buy a device that cancels out vibrations in your walls. Not sure I’m understanding exactly how it works.
I’ve been using Spotify for over a decade.
Every few months I try Apple Music only to run into bugs and switch back.
But this most recent switch is actually decent.
Transferring my favorited songs from Spotify finally worked.
AutoMix song transitions are fantastic.
Spatial Audio is a win.
Fingers crossed I won’t have a reason to return to Spotify this time.
Explanations are functions. In other words, explanations are software. There’s no sharp distinction between explanations and end products here. So the concern about tight coupling still applies.
@edwin-de-wit recently asked Deutsch about this:
… hard to vary can also be a property that you don’t want. Sometimes they say that complicated systems are just so entangled that they’re no longer changeable. You could call that hard to vary but it’s not a property you pursue.
Deutsch’s reply:
Quite so. So hard to vary is about explanations, not about end products. So the end product should be easy to vary, if you want to. But it should be hard to vary in the sense that you don’t want to.
Taking Popper Too Far, Again: https://libertythroughreason.com/taking-popper-too-far-again/
Rationality as Computation: https://libertythroughreason.com/rationality-as-computation/
I think you may have misunderstood me. I asked how I can know that our discussion about HTV will be productive if we continue it now. (For context and for others: I’ve found that Liberty and I have roughly the same discussion in various venues every few months or so. I raised this issue in the linked X thread.)
I didn’t ask you to continue the object-level discussion itself.
Please address my concern before continuing the discussion.
Would it help to distinguish between dogmatic vs. critical information processing?
That’s a distinction I’ve been using. All programs written to date are dogmatic. Whereas a genuine evolutionary algorithm would be critical, at least in part.
We don’t know how to write critical code. We only know how to write dogmatic code that looks critical.
Cosmic rays have been known to flip bits in computers, eg impacting election results: https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021arXiv210505103N/abstract
However, due to computational universality, we should be able to simulate a knowledge-growing system plus cosmic rays impacting that system.
So then at that point the source of the mutation is part of the program again…
How much overlap is there between the concept of inferential novelty and reach, if any?
Paul Raymond-Robichaud tells me (I think in this space) that in math, you can have a formalized notion of HTV. From what I recall he said, it sounded like that would be trivial to develop (for a mathematician like Paul – not for me).
Anyone who’s both mathematically and epistemologically inclined could give this a shot at generalization.
Space where Tyler, Charlie, and I discuss hard to vary: https://x.com/dchackethal/status/2083018149151084792
Maybe allowing deletion of exact duplicates with no parents is reasonable?
Too niche/specific for an extra feature tbh. If accidental duplicates happened often, then maybe.
Did you know you can type em dashes (on Mac) by hitting alt + shift + hyphen?