niplav @niplav@schelling.pt

embarassador

Publish this to LessWrong?

You can use subscripts to add probabilities to claims:

https://niplav.github.io/notes#Subscripts_for_Probabilities

In a similar fashion, rare nodes central in a semantic network (such as domain names for very common words) have only value due to their connections to other nodes nearby.

Corollary: Land-value tax would make far less sense in a hyperbolic space: It's really easy to get from one point to another quickly.

Natural resources consumption taxes might still be worth it.

Land-Value Tax seems roughly right to me, but I feel like they could be generalized to graph-centrality taxes:

It's not that we don't have enough land, but the value of land is really dependent on how valuable the land around it is (in a fashion similar to the value of networks in Metcalfe's law[1]).

So establishing the value of land is a kind of coordination game, in which people try to eke out centers of valuable land.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metcalfe%27s_law

Capabilities idea: 9b853b32ec0e742a0978f7999278326ba8138b55

They figured out they wouldn't be able to create alignment in time and therefore chose noble civilizational decline in hopes of future civilizations picking up the task

i mean how many bits can you even hide in a human-understandable theorem?

meditation has the effect of “conceptual regularization” for me: less discrete thinking, and more conservative concept boundaries

evolution lets animals age because otherwise they fall into procrastination type paradox situations

orthogonality of substrate and structure in general

Projects that give me money > projects that improve my life > projects that increase my knowledge about the world > all other projects

🤔

Aaahhh

[2]: https://twitter.com/jessi_cata/status/1581009760991662081

Wait. Hangon. The second name…it feels…familiar………

[1]: https://arbital.com/p/transparent_newcombs_problem/

Prediction this makes: conflict theorists more often profess Knightian uncertainty about a thing

Knightian uncertainty is applicable if there is a process explicitely optimising against your belief state

It is unfortunate that positive/negative can mean "presence"/"absence" and "being for"/"being against".

It is similarly unfortunate that "phobic" can mean both "afraid of" and "being against".