Works for me as well now when I use my computer (404 was on iPad).
If you want to be really good at something and make discoveries, you should care a lot about understanding tiny details and getting them right.
Social status competitions (plus sexism).
More IT help tickets.
I think it may be harder to get Paths Forward for stuff like this today (unless you can go viral on social media).
Certain gaming communities have good attention to detail.
He doesn’t say what the issue is in words, but I think he’s right to expect his target audience to understand. I caught it on first viewing no problem. But I better explain because people here are not in the target audience.
He’s repeatedly doing a sequence of two attacks (with a tiny walk forward after the second attack to reset his attacks and avoid the third one in the sequence). The green wind animation for an attack doesn’t always happen after he does this a few times (in other words, you see one green sphere instead of two in a row). The sound still plays. If I had to guess, the attack still happens and does damage – it’s just a visual bug – though that’d be worth testing.
Be wary of paying huge amounts of money for college enabled by loans.
5 posts were split to a new topic: Uber’s Predatory(?) Leases and Capitalism
Thomas Szasz warned us about anti-suicide stuff.
Psychiatrists have often violated confidentiality when they found it convenient. In “The myth of psychotherapy”, Chapter 10, Section V Szasz wrote:
In his “On the History of the Psycho-Analytic Movement,” Freud resorts to an extremely revealing tactic in trying to destroy Jung as a modern psychotherapist by identifying him as just another old-fashioned pastor: he quotes the confidential communications of a patient who had been a former patient of Jung’s.
Starts around 4min in and I’m 10min in. So far he’s talked about how you really need to understand the basic concepts before trying to learn more advanced stuff. (Also I used to know the guy who’s talking. Besides chess, he’s a fan of Ayn Rand.)
The arrogance and confessions about rationalism are interesting, particularly near the start of the thread. He says he felt like he should win because he thinks he’s rational, and that lots of people liked Less Wrong due to this vibe. I agree and some of my readers have the same problem.
The difference is LW encourages and sanctions it when you talk to others, whereas I challenge and criticize it, which is a major reason that people dislike me.