E.g. bat and ball answer is intentional (a 'Type 2' trait) - you're trying to answer the question. But also uncontrollable ('Type 1') - you get the stupid 10 cents answer whether you like it or not.pic.twitter.com/j1yeEzpNBL
Za najbolje sučelje na Twitteru koristite Microsoft Edge ili instalirajte aplikaciju Twitter iz trgovine Microsoft Store.
Some crackpot. Interested in 'mathematical intuition', whatever that is.
U tweetove putem weba ili aplikacija drugih proizvođača možete dodati podatke o lokaciji, kao što su grad ili točna lokacija. Povijest lokacija tweetova uvijek možete izbrisati. Saznajte više
Dodajte ovaj Tweet na svoje web-mjesto kopiranjem koda u nastavku. Saznajte više
Dodajte ovaj videozapis na svoje web-mjesto kopiranjem koda u nastavku. Saznajte više
Integracijom Twitterova sadržaja u svoje web-mjesto ili aplikaciju prihvaćate Twitterov Ugovor za programere i Pravila za programere.
| Država | Kod | Samo za korisnike |
|---|---|---|
| Sjedinjene Američke Države | 40404 | (bilo koje) |
| Kanada | 21212 | (bilo koje) |
| Ujedinjeno Kraljevstvo | 86444 | Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2 |
| Brazil | 40404 | Nextel, TIM |
| Haiti | 40404 | Digicel, Voila |
| Irska | 51210 | Vodafone, O2 |
| Indija | 53000 | Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance |
| Indonezija | 89887 | AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata |
| Italija | 4880804 | Wind |
| 3424486444 | Vodafone | |
| » Pogledajte SMS kratke šifre za druge zemlje | ||
Vremenska crta mjesto je na kojem ćete provesti najviše vremena i bez odgode dobivati novosti o svemu što vam je važno.
Prijeđite pokazivačem preko slike profila pa kliknite gumb Pratim da biste prestali pratiti neki račun.
Kada vidite Tweet koji volite, dodirnite srce – to osobi koja ga je napisala daje do znanja da vam se sviđa.
Najbolji je način da podijelite nečiji Tweet s osobama koje vas prate prosljeđivanje. Dodirnite ikonu da biste smjesta poslali.
Pomoću odgovora dodajte sve što mislite o nekom tweetu. Pronađite temu koja vam je važna i uključite se.
Bez odgode pogledajte o čemu ljudi razgovaraju.
Pratite više računa da biste dobivali novosti o temama do kojih vam je stalo.
Bez odgode pogledajte najnovije razgovore o bilo kojoj temi.
Bez odgode pratite kako se razvijaju događaji koje pratite.
E.g. bat and ball answer is intentional (a 'Type 2' trait) - you're trying to answer the question. But also uncontrollable ('Type 1') - you get the stupid 10 cents answer whether you like it or not.pic.twitter.com/j1yeEzpNBL
Lots more interesting background on this paper and other recent criticism of the 'Type 1'/'Type 2' split in @xuenay's post:https://www.lesswrong.com/s/ZbmRyDN8TCpBTZSip/p/HbXXd2givHBBLxr3d …
In the "what on earth got the Berkeley rationalists so confused" department, _Thinking Fast And Slow_ plays a starring role. One of their dismissals of any critique of rationalism is "yes, we know System 1 is important and honor it!"
Nitpick: AFAIK, _Thinking_ didn't have that big of an impact on the LW crowd, because EY's writing had largely popularized much of the same research that "Thinking" did.
I was actually wondering about the history, as I wasn't around for LW 1.0. I thought the cognitive bias stuff was quite central to the LW project, after all it's called Less Wrong...
... but was it actually all that popular a topic, or just what was in the air ~2008 (like atheism)? I certainly don't see that much of it there any more, just lots of AI.
I did read *Thinking* (without having read EY) around 2010, and swallowed it uncritically, so I'm in no position to crow at anyone else for doing that now :)
FWIW I learned the original Kahneman & Tversky stuff in an intro cognitive psychology class in 1979. It’s a robust collection of effects, which is what cog psych needs (they realized already back then that a lot of results tend to evaporate if you push on them).
Would be interesting to understand of how the field moved from that into the System 1/2 delusion. It’s easy to see how they could just pick up the rational vs irrational folk theory that goes back to Ancient Greece, but why did no one call bs on it?
The people working on more nuanced versions of S1/S2 theory did criticize the more simplistic versions (see the Evans & Stanovich paper in my post), but sensible researchers calling BS on some versions of a theory may just get ignored by people pushing the worse versions.
Yeah should maybe have just included the whole of that box, here's the rest (with the Evans and Stanovich bit):pic.twitter.com/rrohDrwdMJ
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.