nhaliday + vague   41

A Lttle More Nuance
economics lowest, though still increasing (also most successful frankly, wonder why? :P):
In this view, the trajectories of the disciplines relative to one another are sharpened. I have to say that if you’d asked me ex ante to rank fields by nuance I would have come up with an ordering much like the one visible at the end of the trend lines. But it also seems that social science fields were not differentiated in this way until comparatively recently. Note that the negative trend line for Economics is relative not to the rate of nuance within field itself—which is going up, as it is everywhere—but rather with respect to the base rate. The trend line for Philosophy is also worth remarking on. It differs quite markedly from the others, as it has a very high nuance rate in the first few decades of the twentieth century, which then sharply declines, and rejoins the upward trend in the 1980s. I have not looked at the internal structure of this trend any further, but it is very tempting to read it as the post-WWI positivists bringing the hammer down on what they saw as nonsense in their own field. That’s putting it much too sharply, of course, but then again that’s partly why we’re here in the first place.

https://twitter.com/GabrielRossman/status/879698510077059074
hmm: https://kieranhealy.org/files/papers/fuck-nuance.pdf
scitariat  social-science  sociology  philosophy  history  letters  psychology  sapiens  anthropology  polisci  economics  anglo  language  data  trends  pro-rata  visualization  mostly-modern  academia  intricacy  vague  parsimony  clarity  multi  twitter  social  commentary  jargon  pdf  study  essay  rhetoric  article  time-series  lexical  grokkability-clarity 
june 2017 by nhaliday
Is Economic Activity Really “Distributed Less Evenly” Than It Used To Be?
http://xenocrypt.github.io/CountyIncomeHistory.html

First, imagine if you had a bar chart with every county in the United States sorted from lowest to highest by wages per capita, with the width of each bar proportional to the population of the county.

In fact, whenever anyone talks about “clustering” and “even distributions”, they’re mostly really talking about ways of comparing monotonic curves with integral one, whether they realize it or not.
org:med  wonkish  unaffiliated  debate  critique  trends  economics  commentary  douthatish  urban  distribution  inequality  polarization  malaise  regularizer  clarity  usa  history  mostly-modern  data  analysis  spock  nitty-gritty  compensation  vague  data-science  visual-understanding  🎩  thinking  plots  ssc  multi  tools  dynamic  money  class  class-warfare  left-wing  time-series  density  realness  geography  urban-rural  grokkability-clarity 
may 2017 by nhaliday
soft question - Thinking and Explaining - MathOverflow
- good question from Bill Thurston
- great answers by Terry Tao, fedja, Minhyong Kim, gowers, etc.

Terry Tao:
- symmetry as blurring/vibrating/wobbling, scale invariance
- anthropomorphization, adversarial perspective for estimates/inequalities/quantifiers, spending/economy

fedja walks through his though-process from another answer

Minhyong Kim: anthropology of mathematical philosophizing

Per Vognsen: normality as isotropy
comment: conjugate subgroup gHg^-1 ~ "H but somewhere else in G"

gowers: hidden things in basic mathematics/arithmetic
comment by Ryan Budney: x sin(x) via x -> (x, sin(x)), (x, y) -> xy
I kinda get what he's talking about but needed to use Mathematica to get the initial visualization down.
To remind myself later:
- xy can be easily visualized by juxtaposing the two parabolae x^2 and -x^2 diagonally
- x sin(x) can be visualized along that surface by moving your finger along the line (x, 0) but adding some oscillations in y direction according to sin(x)
q-n-a  soft-question  big-list  intuition  communication  teaching  math  thinking  writing  thurston  lens  overflow  synthesis  hi-order-bits  👳  insight  meta:math  clarity  nibble  giants  cartoons  gowers  mathtariat  better-explained  stories  the-trenches  problem-solving  homogeneity  symmetry  fedja  examples  philosophy  big-picture  vague  isotropy  reflection  spatial  ground-up  visual-understanding  polynomials  dimensionality  math.GR  worrydream  scholar  🎓  neurons  metabuch  yoga  retrofit  mental-math  metameta  wisdom  wordlessness  oscillation  operational  adversarial  quantifiers-sums  exposition  explanation  tricki  concrete  s:***  manifolds  invariance  dynamical  info-dynamics  cool  direction  elegance  heavyweights  analysis  guessing  grokkability-clarity  technical-writing 
january 2017 by nhaliday
Information Processing: Thought vectors and the dimensionality of the space of concepts
If we trained a deep net to translate sentences about Physics from Martian to English, we could (roughly) estimate the "conceptual depth" of the subject. We could even compare two different subjects, such as Physics versus Art History.
hsu  ai  deep-learning  google  speculation  commentary  news  language  embeddings  neurons  thinking  papers  summary  scitariat  dimensionality  conceptual-vocab  vague  nlp  nibble  state-of-art  features 
december 2016 by nhaliday
Overcoming Bias : Chip Away At Hard Problems
One of the most common ways that wannabe academics fail is by failing to sufficiently focus on a few topics of interest to academia. Many of them become amateur intellectuals, people who think and write more as a hobby, and less to gain professional rewards via institutions like academia, media, and business. Such amateurs are often just as smart and hard-working as professionals, and they can more directly address the topics that interest them. Professionals, in contrast, must specialize more, have less freedom to pick topics, and must try harder to impress others, which encourages the use of more difficult robust/rigorous methods.

You might think their added freedom would result in amateurs contributing more to intellectual progress, but in fact they contribute less. Yes, amateurs can and do make more initial progress when new topics arise suddenly far from topics where established expert institutions have specialized. But then over time amateurs blow their lead by focusing less and relying on easier more direct methods. They rely more on informal conversation as analysis method, they prefer personal connections over open competitions in choosing people, and they rely more on a perceived consensus among a smaller group of fellow enthusiasts. As a result, their contributions just don’t appeal as widely or as long.
ratty  postrat  culture  academia  science  epistemic  hanson  frontier  contrarianism  thick-thin  long-term  regularizer  strategy  impact  essay  subculture  meta:rhetoric  aversion  discipline  curiosity  rigor  rationality  rat-pack  🤖  success  2016  farmers-and-foragers  exploration-exploitation  low-hanging  clarity  vague  🦉  optimate  systematic-ad-hoc  metameta  s:***  discovery  focus  info-dynamics  hari-seldon  grokkability-clarity 
december 2016 by nhaliday
Contra Simler on Prestige | Slate Star Codex
su3su2u1 challenged status/signaling theories of human behavior: can they make any real-life predictions? His example was a recent medical conference that threw together three groups of people – high-status top professors, medium-status established doctors, and low-status new residents. The women in one group (female doctors + male doctors’ wives/girlfriends) were wearing conspicuous fancy jewelery. The women in the other groups weren’t. Which group had the jewelery?

His point was that status/signaling theories don’t answer this question for us with any degree of confidence. Maybe the high-status top professors wear the jewelery to signal wealth and dominance. Maybe the low-status new residents wear it aspirationally and because they need to impress. Maybe the medium-status established doctors wear it, because the residents can’t afford it and the professors countersignal that they don’t need it.
ratty  postrat  yvain  ssc  simler  critique  status  signaling  thinking  essay  debate  paying-rent  models  gedanken  insight  empirical  operational  vague  info-dynamics 
november 2016 by nhaliday
Ra | Otium
Ra = smooth, blank, prestigeful (or maybe just statusful) authority

--

Vagueness, mental fog, “underconfidence”, avoidance, evasion, blanking out, etc. are hallmarks of Ra. If cornered, a person embodying Ra will abruptly switch from blurry vagueness to anger and nihilism.

Ra is involved in the sense of “everyone but me is in on the joke, there is a Thing that I don’t understand myself but is the most important Thing, and I must approximate or imitate or cargo-cult the Thing, and anybody who doesn’t is bad.”

Ra causes persistent brain fog or confusion, especially around economic thinking or cost-benefit analysis or quantitative estimates.

Ra causes a disinclination to express oneself. An impression that a person who is unknown or mysterious is more attractive or favorably received than a person who is an “open book.”

Ra is fake Horus.
things  thinking  mystic  postrat  status  signaling  essay  civilization  society  power  insight  hmm  metabuch  🦀  hidden-motives  leviathan  models  2016  core-rats  minimalism  frisson  ratty  vague  cost-benefit  schelling  order-disorder  emotion  info-dynamics  elegance  judgement 
october 2016 by nhaliday
Can It Be Wrong To Crystallize Patterns? | Slate Star Codex
So provisionally I’m not sure there’s such a thing as crystallizing a pattern and being wrong to do so. You can crystallize patterns in such a way that it ends out misleading people who were already at risk of being misled – like the “ley lines” and “international Jewry” examples – and in practice this is a HUGE HUGE problem. But it seems to me that if you’re good enough at sorting through connotations to handle it that crystallization is usually a good idea.
thinking  rationality  yvain  ssc  essay  reflection  things  insight  lesswrong  critique  ratty  epistemic  map-territory  clarity  error  vague  systematic-ad-hoc  info-dynamics  grokkability-clarity 
october 2016 by nhaliday
Overcoming Bias : Two Kinds Of Status
prestige and dominance

More here. I was skeptical at first, but now am convinced: humans see two kinds of status, and approve of prestige-status much more than domination-status. I’ll have much more to say about this in the coming days, but it is far from clear to me that prestige-status is as much better than domination-status as people seem to think. Efforts to achieve prestige-status also have serious negative side-effects.

Two Ways to the Top: Evidence That Dominance and Prestige Are Distinct Yet Viable Avenues to Social Rank and Influence: https://henrich.fas.harvard.edu/files/henrich/files/cheng_et_al_2013.pdf
Dominance (the use of force and intimidation to induce fear) and Prestige (the sharing of expertise or know-how to gain respect)

...

According to the model, Dominance initially arose in evolutionary history as a result of agonistic contests for material resources and mates that were common among nonhuman species, but continues to exist in contemporary human societies, largely in the form of psychological intimidation, coercion, and wielded control over costs and benefits (e.g., access to resources, mates, and well-being). In both humans and nonhumans, Dominance hierarchies are thought to emerge to help maintain patterns of submission directed from subordinates to Dominants, thereby minimizing agonistic battles and incurred costs.

In contrast, Prestige is likely unique to humans, because it is thought to have emerged from selection pressures to preferentially attend to and acquire cultural knowledge from highly skilled or successful others, a capacity considered to be less developed in other animals (Boyd & Richerson, 1985; Laland & Galef, 2009). In this view, social learning (i.e., copying others) evolved in humans as a low-cost fitness-maximizing, information-gathering mechanism (Boyd & Richerson, 1985). Once it became adaptive to copy skilled others, a preference for social models with better than average information would have emerged. This would promote competition for access to the highest quality models, and deference toward these models in exchange for copying and learning opportunities. Consequently, selection likely favored Prestige differentiation, with individuals possessing high-quality information or skills elevated to the top of the hierarchy. Meanwhile, other individuals may reach the highest ranks of their group’s hierarchy by wielding threat of force, regardless of the quality of their knowledge or skills. Thus, Dominance and Prestige can be thought of as coexisting avenues to attaining rank and influence within social groups, despite being underpinned by distinct motivations and behavioral patterns, and resulting in distinct patterns of imitation and deference from subordinates.

Importantly, both Dominance and Prestige are best conceptualized as cognitive and behavioral strategies (i.e., suites of subjective feelings, cognitions, motivations, and behavioral patterns that together produce certain outcomes) deployed in certain situations, and can be used (with more or less success) by any individual within a group. They are not types of individuals, or even, necessarily, traits within individuals. Instead, we assume that all situated dyadic relationships contain differential degrees of both Dominance and Prestige, such that each person is simultaneously Dominant and Prestigious to some extent, to some other individual. Thus, it is possible that a high degree of Dominance and a high degree of Prestige may be found within the same individual, and may depend on who is doing the judging. For example, by controlling students’ access to rewards and punishments, school teachers may exert Dominance in their relationships with some students, but simultaneously enjoy Prestige with others, if they are respected and deferred to for their competence and wisdom. Indeed, previous studies have shown that based on both self- and peer ratings, Dominance and Prestige are largely independent (mean r = -.03; Cheng et al., 2010).

Status Hypocrisy: https://www.overcomingbias.com/2017/01/status-hypocrisy.html
Today we tend to say that our leaders have prestige, while their leaders have dominance. That is, their leaders hold power via personal connections and the threat and practice of violence, bribes, sex, gossip, and conformity pressures. Our leaders, instead, mainly just have whatever abilities follow from our deepest respect and admiration regarding their wisdom and efforts on serious topics that matter for us all. Their leaders more seek power, while ours more have leadership thrust upon them. Because of this us/them split, we tend to try to use persuasion on us, but force on them, when seeking to to change behaviors.

...

Clearly, while there is some fact of the matter about how much a person gains their status via licit or illicit means, there is also a lot of impression management going on. We like to give others the impression that we personally mainly want prestige in ourselves and our associates, and that we only grant others status via the prestige they have earned. But let me suggest that, compared to this ideal, we actually want more dominance in ourselves and our associates than we like to admit, and we submit more often to dominance.

Cads, Dads, Doms: https://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/07/cads-dads-doms.html
"The proper dichotomy is not “virile vs. wimpy” as has been supposed, but “exciting vs. drab,” with the former having the two distinct sub-groups “macho man vs. pretty boy.” Another way to see that this is the right dichotomy is to look around the world: wherever girls really dig macho men, they also dig the peacocky musician type too, finding safe guys a bit boring. And conversely, where devoted dads do the best, it’s more difficult for macho men or in-town-for-a-day rockstars to make out like bandits. …

Whatever it is about high-pathogen-load areas that selects for greater polygynous behavior … will result in an increase in both gorilla-like and peacock-like males, since they’re two viable ways to pursue a polygynous mating strategy."

This fits with there being two kinds of status: dominance and prestige. Macho men, such as CEOs and athletes, have dominance, while musicians and artists have prestige. But women seek both short and long term mates. Since both kinds of status suggest good genes, both attract women seeking short term mates. This happens more when women are younger and richer, and when there is more disease. Foragers pretend they don’t respect dominance as much as they do, so prestigious men get more overt attention, while dominant men get more covert attention.

Women seeking long term mates also consider a man’s ability to supply resources, and may settle for poorer genes to get more resources. Dominant men tend to have more resources than prestigious men, so such men are more likely to fill both roles, being long term mates for some women and short term mates for others. Men who can offer only prestige must accept worse long term mates, while men who can offer only resources must accept few short term mates. Those low in prestige, resources, or dominance must accept no mates. A man who had prestige, dominance, and resources would get the best short and long term mates – what men are these?

Stories are biased toward dramatic events, and so are biased toward events with risky men; it is harder to tell a good story about the attraction of a resource-rich man. So stories naturally encourage short term mating. Shouldn’t this make long-term mates wary of strong mate attraction to dramatic stories?

https://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/07/cads-dads-doms.html#comment-518319076
Woman want three things: someone to fight for them (the Warrior), someone to provide for them (the Tycoon) and someone to excite their emotions or entertain them (the Wizard).

In this context,

Dom=Warrior
Dad= Tycoon
Cad= Wizard

To repeat:

Dom (Cocky)+ Dad (Generous) + Cad (Exciting/Funny) = Laid

https://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/07/cads-dads-doms.html#comment-518318987
There is an old distinction between "proximate" and "ultimate" causes. Evolution is an ultimate cause, physiology (and psychology, here) is a proximate cause. The flower bends to follow the sun because it gathers more light that way, but the immediate mechanism of the bending involves hormones called auxins. I see a lot of speculation about, say, sexual cognitive dimorphism whose ultimate cause is evolutionary, but not so much speculation about the proximate cause - the "how" of the difference, rather than the "why". And here I think a visit to an older mode of explanation like Marsden's - one which is psychological rather than genetic - can sensitize us to the fact that the proximate causes of a behavioral tendency need not be a straightforward matter of being hardwired differently.

This leads to my second point, which is just that we should remember that human beings actually possess consciousness. This means not only that the proximate cause of a behavior may deeply involve subjectivity, self-awareness, and an existential situation. It also means that all of these propositions about what people do are susceptible to change once they have been spelled out and become part of the culture. It is rather like the stock market: once everyone knows (or believes) something, then that information provides no advantage, creating an incentive for novelty.

Finally, the consequences of new beliefs about the how and the why of human nature and human behavior. Right or wrong, theories already begin to have consequences once they are taken up and incorporated into subjectivity. We really need a new Foucault to take on this topic.

The Economics of Social Status: http://www.meltingasphalt.com/the-economics-of-social-status/
Prestige vs. dominance. Joseph Henrich (of WEIRD fame) distinguishes two types of status. Prestige is the kind of status we get from being an impressive human specimen (think Meryl Streep), and it's governed by our 'approach' instincts. Dominance, on the other hand, is … [more]
things  status  hanson  thinking  comparison  len:short  anthropology  farmers-and-foragers  phalanges  ratty  duty  power  humility  hypocrisy  hari-seldon  multi  sex  gender  signaling  🐝  tradeoffs  evopsych  insight  models  sexuality  gender-diff  chart  postrat  yvain  ssc  simler  critique  essay  debate  paying-rent  gedanken  empirical  operational  vague  info-dynamics  len:long  community  henrich  long-short-run  rhetoric  contrarianism  coordination  social-structure  hidden-motives  politics  2016-election  rationality  links  study  summary  list  hive-mind  speculation  coalitions  values  🤖  metabuch  envy  universalism-particularism  egalitarianism-hierarchy  s-factor  unintended-consequences  tribalism  group-selection  justice  inequality  competition  cultural-dynamics  peace-violence  ranking  machiavelli  authoritarianism  strategy  tactics  organizing  leadership  management  n-factor  duplication  thiel  volo-avolo  todo  technocracy  rent-seeking  incentives  econotariat  marginal-rev  civilization  rot  gibbon 
september 2016 by nhaliday
The new politics of meaning | Meaningness
The politics of meaning are swirling into a new configuration. Since the 1960s, “values issues” have defined stable left and right political coalitions. Most people dutifully lined up with one side or the other, and most political questions were forced to align with a fixed left vs. right opposition.

The 2016 American Presidential campaign, and the UK Brexit vote, have split “left” and “right” internally, each into roughly equal halves. A new basic division of political opinion has emerged—in these countries, at least. But what is it?

I suspect the fault line in the new politics reflects the communal versus systematic modes of relating to meaning. This realignment offers both fearful risks and hopeful opportunities—because both modes are partly right and partly wrong. Although a communal/systematic split could be catastrophic, it may also point the way to a new mode that heals the fundamental crisis of meaningness that has plagued the West for a hundred years.
politics  prediction  speculation  postrat  insight  chapman  britain  community  essay  hmm  values  haidt  things  brexit  2016-election  c:***  trump  vague  systematic-ad-hoc  individualism-collectivism  ideology  populism 
july 2016 by nhaliday
Universal Love, Said The Cactus Person | Slate Star Codex
"And John Stuart is one of / the dark satanic mills" - the big green bat

some nice purple prose for flavor too
fiction  rationality  drugs  thinking  postrat  yvain  regularizer  insight  contrarianism  essay  parable  len:short  ssc  🦀  🤖  mystic  new-religion  meaningness  psychedelics  ratty  frontier  microfic  2015  metameta  vague  realness  emotion 
april 2016 by nhaliday

bundles : vague

related tags

2016-election  :/  academia  adversarial  aesthetics  ai  akrasia  algebra  alignment  analogy  analysis  anglo  anthropology  apollonian-dionysian  applicability-prereqs  applications  arbitrage  arrows  article  asia  atoms  authoritarianism  automation  aversion  benevolence  better-explained  biases  big-list  big-picture  blowhards  bounded-cognition  branches  bret-victor  brexit  britain  buddhism  business  c:*  c:***  career  cartoons  chapman  chart  cheatsheet  checklists  china  civilization  clarity  class  class-warfare  coalitions  cog-psych  commentary  communication  community  comparison  compensation  competition  complement-substitute  complexity  composition-decomposition  computation  concept  conceptual-vocab  concrete  contrarianism  cool  coordination  core-rats  correlation  cost-benefit  creative  crime  criminal-justice  critique  cultural-dynamics  culture  culture-war  curiosity  current-events  data  data-science  debate  deep-learning  definition  degrees-of-freedom  dennett  density  design  devtools  dimensionality  direct-indirect  direction  discipline  discovery  discussion  disease  distribution  douthatish  drama  drugs  duplication  duty  dynamic  dynamical  economics  econotariat  egalitarianism-hierarchy  elegance  embeddings  emotion  empirical  endo-exo  ends-means  enhancement  entertainment  environment  envy  epistemic  error  essay  ethical-algorithms  europe  evopsych  examples  exocortex  explanans  explanation  exploration-exploitation  explore-exploit  exposition  externalities  extratricky  farmers-and-foragers  fashun  features  fedja  fiction  fields  finance  flexibility  focus  foreign-lang  form-design  fourier  frisson  frontier  futurism  games  gedanken  gender  gender-diff  geography  geometry  giants  gibbon  god-man-beast-victim  google  government  gowers  grokkability  grokkability-clarity  ground-up  group-selection  growth  guessing  haidt  hanson  hari-seldon  hci  heavyweights  henrich  hi-order-bits  hidden-motives  hierarchy  history  hive-mind  hmm  homogeneity  howto  hsu  human-capital  humility  hypocrisy  ide  ideas  ideology  idk  illusion  impact  impetus  impro  incentives  individualism-collectivism  inequality  info-dynamics  insight  intellectual-property  intelligence  interdisciplinary  interface  interface-compatibility  interview  intricacy  intuition  invariance  islam  isotropy  iteration-recursion  jargon  judgement  justice  knowledge  language  law  leadership  left-wing  legibility  len:long  len:short  lens  lesswrong  let-me-see  letters  leviathan  lexical  links  list  live-coding  local-global  logic  long-short-run  long-term  low-hanging  machiavelli  machine-learning  macro  malaise  management  manifolds  map-territory  maps  marginal-rev  matching  math  math.AT  math.CA  math.CT  math.DS  math.GR  math.MG  math.NT  mathtariat  matrix-factorization  meaningness  measurement  medicine  mental-math  meta:math  meta:rhetoric  metabuch  metameta  michael-nielsen  micro  microfic  minimalism  models  monetary-fiscal  money  mostly-modern  move-fast-(and-break-things)  multi  mystic  n-factor  naturality  near-far  necessity-sufficiency  neuro  neuro-nitgrit  neurons  new-religion  news  nibble  nihil  nitty-gritty  nlp  noise-structure  oly  open-closed  operational  optimate  order-disorder  org:bleg  org:edu  org:inst  org:mag  org:med  org:rec  org:sci  organizing  orourke  oscillation  overflow  papers  parable  parallax  parasites-microbiome  parsimony  patience  paying-rent  pdf  peace-violence  perturbation  phalanges  philosophy  physics  planning  plots  poast  polarization  policy  polisci  politics  polynomials  populism  postrat  power  prediction  presentation  priors-posteriors  pro-rata  problem-solving  productivity  profile  programming  proofs  properties  property-rights  proposal  psychedelics  psychiatry  psycho-atoms  psychology  puzzles  q-n-a  quantifiers-sums  quantitative-qualitative  quantum  ranking  rat-pack  rationality  ratty  realness  redistribution  reference  reflection  regularizer  reinforcement  religion  rent-seeking  retrofit  rhetoric  rigor  risk  roots  rot  s-factor  s:**  s:***  sapiens  schelling  scholar  science  scitariat  sex  sexuality  signal-noise  signaling  simler  simulation  sinosphere  skunkworks  social  social-choice  social-science  social-structure  sociality  society  sociology  soft-question  spanish  spatial  speculation  spock  sports  ssc  state-of-art  status  stories  strategy  stress  structure  study  stylized-facts  subculture  success  summary  supply-demand  symmetry  syntax  synthesis  systematic-ad-hoc  tactics  tails  tcs  tcstariat  teaching  technical-writing  technocracy  techtariat  telos-atelos  the-devil  the-great-west-whale  the-monster  the-trenches  theory-of-mind  theos  thick-thin  thiel  things  thinking  thurston  time  time-series  todo  tools  topology  toxoplasmosis  trade  tradeoffs  trends  tribalism  tricki  troll  trump  tutorial  twitter  ui  unaffiliated  uncertainty  unintended-consequences  uniqueness  universalism-particularism  unsupervised  urban  urban-rural  usa  vague  values  vgr  video  visual-understanding  visualization  volo-avolo  water  wealth  welfare-state  west-hunter  wiki  wire-guided  wisdom  within-without  wonkish  wordlessness  working-stiff  world-war  wormholes  worrydream  writing  yoga  yvain  zero-positive-sum  🎓  🎩  🐝  👳  👽  🖥  🤖  🦀  🦉 

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: