Summary: Trying to use new ideas is more productive than trying to evaluate them.
If you drop the qualifier “new”, then you may find something else holds; trying to use evaluated ideas is more productive than trying to use new ones. From personal experience, I’ve gotten a lot of utility from less wrong threads. Because they are evaluated by the community, I find them more useful.
I rarely post unless I have something constructive to add. One such reason would be if I noticed an error or oversight and think that some reader might benefit from my remark. If I found a post useful however, I just upvote it and don’t comment about its usefulness.
Hypothesis: The lack of people using your posts is more perceived than real.
Proposed Test: At the end of a post, ask that if the reader found the post helpful they leave a comment saying something to that effect, instead of just upvoting. Make sure to give a reason for the request to increase participation. i.e. “If you found this post useful, please comment saying so, because I am testing a hypothesis.”
Then why are you on less wrong? Have you read the sequences?
I’m genuinely perplexed at why someone would spend as much time on LW as you seem to have done while never using any of the ideas in its meme pool. The stated point of this site is to improve human rationality. That means you.
Do you think you’re already above what LW could have taught you? Do you think LW is entirely wrong and just like to tell people that? What’s the deal?
I’m attracted to LW because the idea of a group of people collectively becoming stronger is a powerful one. It’s not the reality of LW, but I’m willing to stick around and scan it every one in a while for someone I can use, and when I see someone I can use, I try to use it. I feel that using ideas I’ve found on LW has made me much better at the things I do.
I’m genuinely perplexed at why someone would spend as much time on LW as you seem to have done while never using any of the ideas in its meme pool. The stated point of this site is to improve human rationality.
The “stated point” is not very relevant to the personal utility one can find.
″...the street finds its own uses for things”—William Gibson.
Can you give an example of great personal utility being conveyed by using a self-help website for some other purpose?
I derive noninstrumental value from thinking about decision-making in new and different ways. For example, I don’t know if it’s useful exactly to sharpen my ideas about ethics, but it’s stimulating and pleasant.
A number of contributors here are good writers, and I enjoy reading their work. I particularly enjoy reading prose from Eliezer and Scott, even if it doesn’t help me in any direct way.
Can you give an example of great personal utility being conveyed by using a self-help website for some other purpose?
Sure. One whitehat example: LW is a community of highly intelligent weird people. I am sure some find a lot of personal utility in just being members of such a community.
And one blackhat example: LW people are a good target for trolling and successful trolling leads to hilarious lulz.
Sure. One whitehat example: LW is a community of highly intelligent weird people. I am sure some find a lot of personal utility in just being members of such a community.
This goes right back to the OP’s point: more people “use” LW for status contests than they do for self-improvement.
So, if the OP posts something on LW, it’s going to be mined for pitfalls to be exploited and pointed out in order to gain status, rather than being fairly evaluated as an instrumental tool.
Which is why the OP doesn’t like LW any more. And why LW will trend towards uselessness over time.
If you drop the qualifier “new”, then you may find something else holds; trying to use evaluated ideas is more productive than trying to use new ones. From personal experience, I’ve gotten a lot of utility from less wrong threads. Because they are evaluated by the community, I find them more useful.
I rarely post unless I have something constructive to add. One such reason would be if I noticed an error or oversight and think that some reader might benefit from my remark. If I found a post useful however, I just upvote it and don’t comment about its usefulness.
Hypothesis: The lack of people using your posts is more perceived than real.
Proposed Test: At the end of a post, ask that if the reader found the post helpful they leave a comment saying something to that effect, instead of just upvoting. Make sure to give a reason for the request to increase participation. i.e. “If you found this post useful, please comment saying so, because I am testing a hypothesis.”
Well, in my personal experience, I almost never use the ideas I find on Less Wrong.
Then why are you on less wrong? Have you read the sequences?
I’m genuinely perplexed at why someone would spend as much time on LW as you seem to have done while never using any of the ideas in its meme pool. The stated point of this site is to improve human rationality. That means you.
Do you think you’re already above what LW could have taught you? Do you think LW is entirely wrong and just like to tell people that? What’s the deal?
I’m attracted to LW because the idea of a group of people collectively becoming stronger is a powerful one. It’s not the reality of LW, but I’m willing to stick around and scan it every one in a while for someone I can use, and when I see someone I can use, I try to use it. I feel that using ideas I’ve found on LW has made me much better at the things I do.
The “stated point” is not very relevant to the personal utility one can find.
″...the street finds its own uses for things”—William Gibson.
Can you give an example of great personal utility being conveyed by using a self-help website for some other purpose?
I guess this goes back to the OPs point that less wrong is more about arguing about minutia than anything else.
I derive noninstrumental value from thinking about decision-making in new and different ways. For example, I don’t know if it’s useful exactly to sharpen my ideas about ethics, but it’s stimulating and pleasant.
A number of contributors here are good writers, and I enjoy reading their work. I particularly enjoy reading prose from Eliezer and Scott, even if it doesn’t help me in any direct way.
Sure. One whitehat example: LW is a community of highly intelligent weird people. I am sure some find a lot of personal utility in just being members of such a community.
And one blackhat example: LW people are a good target for trolling and successful trolling leads to hilarious lulz.
This goes right back to the OP’s point: more people “use” LW for status contests than they do for self-improvement.
So, if the OP posts something on LW, it’s going to be mined for pitfalls to be exploited and pointed out in order to gain status, rather than being fairly evaluated as an instrumental tool.
Which is why the OP doesn’t like LW any more. And why LW will trend towards uselessness over time.
Gaining utility from being a member of a community is NOT AT ALL the same as using that community for status contests.