Sequences

Re-reading Rationality From AI To Zombies
Reflections on Premium Poker Tools

Comments

Ah, that's good to know about clicking on it. In retrospect I'm surprised I didn't realize that.

And that makes sense about being difficult to come up with a better option. I was thinking of having the comment appear in the middle of the screen to the left of the comment icon. That has the downside of being more intrusive. My sense is that the upsides outweigh the downsides, but I'm not particularly confident. I also think it makes sense to not let the perfect be the enemy of the good with this feature, especially wrt releasing fast and seeing what users think.

Very cool. Thanks for the response.

I am finding it somewhat difficult to work with. As I'm reading the post, scrolling down and first come across the comment icon, I hover over it. But at this point I'm scrolled down such that the comment icon is at the bottom right of the screen, which makes the text of the comment cut off. It's also covered by the Intercom button. So I have to scroll to see the text of the comment. But when I scroll my cursor is no longer over the comment icon, so the comment text disappears.

All of that just means that I have to scroll to the right position first and then put my cursor over the comment icon. Part of me feels like that's not really a big deal, but another part of me feels like it might be a trivial inconvenience that makes me too unmotivated to use the feature. I can't tell yet.

This is very cool. Lining up with the text by matching blockquotes is very clever!

Yeah absolutely. I'm curious: how difficult was it to implement this feature? Utilizing blockquotes that way means you don't have to store side comments any differently really, so maybe it was easy to implement. Then again, things are never as easy as you'd initially expect.

It's interesting how people's responses can be so different here. I'm someone who gets pretty extreme anxiety from the x-risk stuff, at least when I'm not repressing those feelings.

Ah, that's a really great point about game selection and it totally escaped me! Thanks for mentioning it. Taking it further, nowadays people are moving away from holdem and towards games like PLO and Short Deck because holdem has gotten too competitive.

I agree about comparative advantage, but I'm not sure that it'd be going down that path. There's a lot that can be said about what makes a dish good/better. My sense is that it's better to restrict the scope of the post to the idea that it's often worth looking for a better dish than how to go about doing so.

Yeah, it's not the best analogy. It's not obvious enough that moving from the French omelette to the Thai-style one is in fact a significant upgrade. The whole idea of the post is that sometimes moving to a different "dish" yields much better results than improving the current one, so I wanted the "significant upgrade" part to be visceral and clear. I don't feel like I was able to get to that point though. I messed around with the omelette example and also tried thinking of different examples but wasn't able to get to a point where I was particularly satisfied.

Is that where you are coming from? Or are you saying that the main idea of the post didn't shine through in the first section?

(I really appreciate this sort of feedback btw. It helps me as a writer. Thank you!)

Unironically eating the french omelette is bad... and that it's silly to order french omelettes at restaurants

Huh, really? I didn't realize that, I thought it was considered to be both a good chefs test and a good dish. I just skimmed through the Serious Eats post again though and am not actually seeing a claim that it is such a good dish though, so maybe you're right. I've never actually had one myself.

but by virtue of being such a good idea it will tend to apologize for the imperfections of the chef making it. If the Thai omelette is a 20x multiplier on execution, then it's more than 20x harder to tell the difference between good at execution and great at execution.

I don't think that's necessarily true. It's possible that a dish has a large spread: it can be, say, 20x better if executed well and 20x worse if executed poorly. How good a dish is (when executed reasonably well) and how forgiving it is are two separate things. But perhaps they're correlated.

I think you're generally right that people tend to miss the point that you should not put great tests on pedestals and that it's silly to order french omelettes at restaurants. But proxy variables do have their place. I guess my main gripe is the rest of the post doesn't seem to follow from how you constructed the omelette story.

The main idea isn't really about tests and proxy variables. To use a different analogy, it's about the explore-exploit tradeoff. Sometimes continuing to exploit is unwise and you'd be much better off exploring entirely different "dishes".

Yeah, I have very similar thoughts.

That's an interesting point/question. My thinking is that there's a tradeoff: if you make decisions in the moment you benefit from having that more up to date information, but you're also going to be more tempted to do the wrong thing. I suppose that OP and others believe that the latter side of the tradeoff has more weight.

Load More