Object Of Objects

New goal: learn the original language.

England population in 1300 was not far below population in 1800. And 60 years is a few generations! Maybe the target technology level is around 1920 (sufficient for electric cars and flight). Could consider splitting the experts among a few countries to promote race dynamics.

Cool, I followed you on Lichess. Maybe I'll message you elsewhere about game dev stuff.

Maybe Japan in the Meiji period is a good case study.

I'd guess about 60 years, assuming they are received as advisors with valuable knowledge (by analogy with the AI scenario).

2. Explaining why some common moral intuition holds is weird. The intuition is obvious, so they'll think it doesn't need any justification. The fact that you're trying to explain it is suspicious, and maybe indicates that you actually believe the opposite.

I think maybe there are two effects in play here. 1. Making a statement on any "weird" topic makes you weird, regardless of which side you argue for. But people might misidentify why they find it weird; they'll think the problem is the side you picked, and so argue the opposite.

Children, wondering where they came from, are often told: you were born to your parents. Well, if that's so, where did the parents come from? Their own parents? But an infinite past is disproved by thermodynamics. So the parentage theory is clearly false.

In the old days before X, how did people share their ideas? Just blurt it out to whoever happens to be standing nearby? What a weird thing to do.

I wonder where they'd go if you lead by asking whether plants are sentient.

I play go sometimes. Since last week I'm trying some chess tactics puzzles on Lichess. I'm doing some game development experiments too. How are you liking go?

Hmm, that doesn't make me feel less confused. Could you explain it more? Like what is the result that follows from what assumptions?

I'm confused. Are you saying these are statements that are derivable from population ethics and that this is a bug that needs fixing?

I think tsumeshogi are different from tsumego or chess tactics puzzles because the opponent's branching factor tends to be much lower than the player's branching factor. This makes winning sequences much easier to verify than to find. It's more NP-ish.

Hey, what games are you playing these days?

What were the approximate ratios of the three badge types?

I guess you shouldn't make a board game that's visually too similar to a different board game, or else it will look like the players are making really bad decisions.

For people who play both chess and shogi, a common opinion is that tactical skills transfer more than strategic skills. This is an example of instrumental convergence.

This guy really likes isotopes.

ISTM that suffices to show that defection is not optimal though.

Unless every size vs. speed tradeoff is made in favor of size, we're unlikely to get close to information theoretic bounds.