I told you the other day that I find you a difficult person to have discussions with
Yes. This is unfortunate, but I cannot help you here.
if you made an effort to think of things I would say in response to your points, and then wrote in anticipation of those things
I think it’s a bad idea. I can’t anticipate your responses well enough (in other words, I don’t have a good model of you) -- for example, I did not expect you to take five million candidate hypotheses. And if I want to have a conversation with myself, why, there is no reason to involve you in the process.
The existence of clickbait tells us basically nothing about how useful it would be for your average Less Wronger to spend more time generating hypotheses.
We didn’t get to an average Lesswronger generating hypotheses yet. You’ve introduced a new term—“interestingness” and set it in opposition to truth (or should it have been truthiness?) As far as I can see, clickbait is just a subtype of “interestingness”—and if you want to optimize for “interestingness”, you would tend to end up with clickbait of some sort. And I’m not quite sure what does it have to do with the propensity to generate hypotheses.
If five hypotheses were all I had time to evaluate, I could simply discard everything after the first five.
If a correct hypothesis was guaranteed to be included in your set, you would discard the true one in 99.9999% of the cases, then.
The initial stage is a basic plausibility check which can happen in just a few seconds.
Let’s try it. “Earth rotates around the Sun”—ha-ha, what do I look like, an idiot? Implausible. Next!
...Isaac Asimov, on the sort of environment that he thinks works best for it.
Where “it” is “writing fiction”?
Your kindergarten analogy might be more apt than you realize—I think most people are at their most creative when they are feeling playful.
LOL. Kids are naturally playful—the don’t need a kindergarten for it. In fact, kindergartens tend to use their best efforts to shut down kids creativity and make them “less disruptive”, “respectful”, “calm”, and all the things required of a docile shee… err… member of society.
I suggest creating a few top-level posts yourself before taking your own opinion on these topics seriously.
I neither see much reason to do so, nor do I take my own opinion seriously, anyway :-P
Do you want playfulness or seriousness? Pick a side.
Yes. This is unfortunate, but I cannot help you here.
I think it’s a bad idea. I can’t anticipate your responses well enough (in other words, I don’t have a good model of you) -- for example, I did not expect you to take five million candidate hypotheses. And if I want to have a conversation with myself, why, there is no reason to involve you in the process.
We didn’t get to an average Lesswronger generating hypotheses yet. You’ve introduced a new term—“interestingness” and set it in opposition to truth (or should it have been truthiness?) As far as I can see, clickbait is just a subtype of “interestingness”—and if you want to optimize for “interestingness”, you would tend to end up with clickbait of some sort. And I’m not quite sure what does it have to do with the propensity to generate hypotheses.
If a correct hypothesis was guaranteed to be included in your set, you would discard the true one in 99.9999% of the cases, then.
Let’s try it. “Earth rotates around the Sun”—ha-ha, what do I look like, an idiot? Implausible. Next!
Where “it” is “writing fiction”?
LOL. Kids are naturally playful—the don’t need a kindergarten for it. In fact, kindergartens tend to use their best efforts to shut down kids creativity and make them “less disruptive”, “respectful”, “calm”, and all the things required of a docile shee… err… member of society.
I neither see much reason to do so, nor do I take my own opinion seriously, anyway :-P
Do you want playfulness or seriousness? Pick a side.
Is this due to lack of ability or lack of desire? If lack of ability, why do you think you lack this ability?
I lack the ability to change you and I lack the desire to change myself.