rfergie

> there are students whose performance on such assessments is not a good signal of their intellectual ability

Is there a form of assessment that is a good signal of the intellectual ability of all students?

> Probably 80% of the recent PhD grads I know are looking to leave academia, despite the fact that they went into it to pursue a career in academia

Has this changed recently?

For most taxes you expect higher earners to pay more but this is not the case with student loans because high earners pay of their loans quickly whereas lower earners end up paying far more in interest.

An actual graduate tax would be far less regressive than the current system

> so either none of the current competitors are doping or all of them are

The drafting effect in cycling means that a clean cyclist can finish very closely behind a doped cyclist

> It seems like ClosedAI wants their system to follow the desires of some people and not others, but without describing which ones or why

If the problem is "unaligned AI will destroy humanity" then I'd take a system aligned with the desires of some people but not others over the unaligned alternative

> What might be seen as exponential progress could actually be the accumulation of a few tremendous leaps

This is what exponential progress is as long as the leaps continue happening

Thank you for the link to the paper; very interesting!

One construction of the natural numbers that I've seen is

1. There exists an element 0 that is a natural number

2. For every natural number there is a "sucessor" that is also a natural number. (i.e. if n is a natural number then n+1 is a natural number)

This construction means there can't be an upper bound N because then step 2 couldn't be applied to N.

Maybe there are other constructions that could workaround this? I'm guessing not because you'd still struggle to define the usual rules of addition for all numbers in a bounded set

I think that at a networking event 1-2 minute conversations are normal so this isn't a sign you are doing something wrong

Don't you just end up on a "meaning treadmill" instead?

> There’s a huge difference between being there from day one vs day 2,555. Between being a founder and an employee who joined later on

This is true but there is also a huge difference between 97% and 3%

Just saying "36000 die" by itself doesn't tell me very much about how dangerous it is - expressing that as a percentage gives much more information I think.

As another person points out 0.03% is 3 times the risk of dying in traffic which, before looking at the numbers, I would have guessed to be the most dangerous aspect of a trip like this.

You seem to think I am being trite and using a "dry presentation" of statistics to minimise the risks of being murdered by a cartel but I actually find this presentation brings the (large) risk of it home to me much more clearly than with a contextless number like 36,000.

E.g. for the UK the numbers are 0.001% murders and 0.003% for traffic

> some of them talk about their gorgeous cars for the sake of talking about their cars

> My coffee machine is all mine (Gaggia Babila)