For a large majority of people who read this, learning a lot about how to interact with other human beings genuinely and in a way that inspires comfort and pleasure on both sides is of higher utility than learning a lot about either AI or IA. ~90%
Hahaha indeed. Oh well. I was afraid of that, but opted to because I was worrying about the karma hit. It seems like a good habit to not take karma seriously.
I guess I’ll have to go be insightful in some other thread now or something.
“Least rational time to say it” does not necessarily or even primarily refer to karma. By making your claim here you are asserting, via the rules of the post, that you believe you understand this better than lesswrong does. Apart from being potentially condescending it is also a suboptimal way of achieving a desirable influence. It is better to act as if people already know this and are working on enhancing their social skills, encouraging continued efforts as appropriate.
By making your claim here you are asserting, via the rules of the post, that you believe you understand this better than lesswrong does.
I was asserting that, and I’m delighted to be incorrect.
Apart from being potentially condescending
Granted, but that would be true regardless of the topic. (Every proposition commented to this post implies condescension about the topic in question.)
It is better to act as if people already know this and are working on enhancing their social skills
I’m not sure I agree with that in general. The people who DO know this and are trying to enhance their social skills will simply agree with me (no change); the ones who don’t and aren’t will either continue not trying (no change) or perhaps consider whether they’re incorrrect (positive effect, in my mind). Now, if I knew I were speaking to a particular individual who was already working on this, then yes, reminding them it was important would be rude. But I’m addressing a group of people, among whom that is true of some and not others; I’m trusting the ones of whom it’s already true not to interpret it as if I were speaking to them alone.
Why would I be offended? No, I was responding to the implicit assumption that ‘rational’ applied to a Karma Maximiser. This misses most of the social nuance.
Granted, but that would be true regardless of the topic. (Every proposition commented to this post implies condescension about the topic in question.)
(This is entire conversation is just tangential technicalities we are discussing but) actually it doesn’t. Disagreement is disrespect but the act of condescension requires more specific social positioning. A comment here could demonstrate obstinacy or arrogance without condescension. (A lot of Tim’s contrarian comments could be taken as examples.)
It is better to act as if people already know this and are working on enhancing their social skills
I’m not sure I agree with that in general. The people who DO know this and are trying to enhance their social skills will simply agree with me (no change); the ones who don’t and aren’t will either continue not trying (no change) or perhaps consider whether they’re incorrrect (positive effect, in my mind).
On this we disagree on a substantive matter of fact. This is actually one of the most critical lessons to be learned when doing that work on social skills that you consider so important. And, while most of us are well aware of the fact, it is just the social, instrumental rationality err most likely to be seen on LessWrong. One doesn’t have to look too hard to find examples of people here achieving precisely the opposite of their intended result via direct challenge and accusation. (ie. If I particularly cared about influencing your behaviour instead of discussing details I would not be making replies here.)
While this kind of subject is of interest to me LessWrong isn’t the place where I most enjoy (alternately, consider it instrumentally rational) to discuss such things in depth. That being the case I had best leave it at that.
I just realized that either I get karma for this or I get warm fuzzies from people agreeing with me. Suddenly the magic of the game is clear.
:)
This one’s really hard for me… there’s low hanging fruit in IA that gives the problem a Pascalian flavor. Generally, people would do much better with social skills, but if one person finds one really good IA technique and tells the future FAI team, that might be enough to tip the balance. So 90% seems possibly too high.
Generally, people would do much better with social skills, but if one person finds one really good IA technique and tells the future FAI team, that might be enough to tip the balance.
And don’t forget the direct benefit that good IA techniques can have on the ability to develop social skills!
Adderall does wonders for my ability to interact with people. Now if only I could get an oxytocin nasal spray prescription… well, I’m definitely going to give it a shot.
I was very energetic and chatty, and didn’t really care about personal space. My friend gave it to me at a party because he wanted to see what it did to my chess ability. It was too hard to tell if it improved my chess, but it definitely led to me sitting very close to a girl that lives in my neighborhood and actually connecting with her. Normally I come across as laconic, which works pretty well for some reason, but it was nice to actually feel passionate about getting to know someone, and feel an emotional bond forming in real time. I ended up driving with her to Denny’s, and I was so into the conversation that I kept on taking my eyes off the road and looking at her, and this led to slightly suboptimal driving safety. So, a warning: adderall helps you focus, but not necessarily on the right things.
I ended up driving with her to Denny’s, and I was so into the conversation that I kept on taking my eyes off the road and looking at her, and this led to slightly suboptimal driving safety. So, a warning: adderall helps you focus, but not necessarily on the right things.
I’ve had the same experience (conversation vs driving attention focus based on stimulants). Watch out for that stuff!
I was very energetic and chatty, and didn’t really care about personal space.
It took me a couple reads to make sense of your description, because I parsed this as the “before” picture, and didn’t see the difference. :)
and feel an emotional bond forming in real time
I love that feeling. I’ve only gotten it with a few friends—usually it’s either too gradual to notice, or I realize suddenly that we’ve gotten closer without feeling it happen.
So, a warning: adderall helps you focus, but not necessarily on the right things.
I was just thinking about this one the other day. I was musing about taking adderall and piracetam, and thinking “Is intelligence/cognition really a bottleneck I need to clear up? Shouldn’t everyone else be taking this stuff?”
Wait, I was certain I had replied to this, but I just stopped into the thread again and it doesn’t seem to be here. Sorry about that! I intended closer to 90%.
Good question. I don’t have a lot of information about who reads these (especially including the people who read but don’t comment or vote), but 90% seems like the right ballpark.
For a large majority of people who read this, learning a lot about how to interact with other human beings genuinely and in a way that inspires comfort and pleasure on both sides is of higher utility than learning a lot about either AI or IA. ~90%
At −20 it looks like you’re winning the ‘most rational belief, least rational time to say it’ award!
Hahaha indeed. Oh well. I was afraid of that, but opted to because I was worrying about the karma hit. It seems like a good habit to not take karma seriously.
I guess I’ll have to go be insightful in some other thread now or something.
“Least rational time to say it” does not necessarily or even primarily refer to karma. By making your claim here you are asserting, via the rules of the post, that you believe you understand this better than lesswrong does. Apart from being potentially condescending it is also a suboptimal way of achieving a desirable influence. It is better to act as if people already know this and are working on enhancing their social skills, encouraging continued efforts as appropriate.
I was asserting that, and I’m delighted to be incorrect.
Granted, but that would be true regardless of the topic. (Every proposition commented to this post implies condescension about the topic in question.)
I’m not sure I agree with that in general. The people who DO know this and are trying to enhance their social skills will simply agree with me (no change); the ones who don’t and aren’t will either continue not trying (no change) or perhaps consider whether they’re incorrrect (positive effect, in my mind). Now, if I knew I were speaking to a particular individual who was already working on this, then yes, reminding them it was important would be rude. But I’m addressing a group of people, among whom that is true of some and not others; I’m trusting the ones of whom it’s already true not to interpret it as if I were speaking to them alone.
Did I offend you?
Why would I be offended? No, I was responding to the implicit assumption that ‘rational’ applied to a Karma Maximiser. This misses most of the social nuance.
(This is entire conversation is just tangential technicalities we are discussing but) actually it doesn’t. Disagreement is disrespect but the act of condescension requires more specific social positioning. A comment here could demonstrate obstinacy or arrogance without condescension. (A lot of Tim’s contrarian comments could be taken as examples.)
On this we disagree on a substantive matter of fact. This is actually one of the most critical lessons to be learned when doing that work on social skills that you consider so important. And, while most of us are well aware of the fact, it is just the social, instrumental rationality err most likely to be seen on LessWrong. One doesn’t have to look too hard to find examples of people here achieving precisely the opposite of their intended result via direct challenge and accusation. (ie. If I particularly cared about influencing your behaviour instead of discussing details I would not be making replies here.)
While this kind of subject is of interest to me LessWrong isn’t the place where I most enjoy (alternately, consider it instrumentally rational) to discuss such things in depth. That being the case I had best leave it at that.
I just realized that either I get karma for this or I get warm fuzzies from people agreeing with me. Suddenly the magic of the game is clear.
ETA: … although now I’m wondering how strongly I would have to word it before people stopped agreeing with it.
:)
This one’s really hard for me… there’s low hanging fruit in IA that gives the problem a Pascalian flavor. Generally, people would do much better with social skills, but if one person finds one really good IA technique and tells the future FAI team, that might be enough to tip the balance. So 90% seems possibly too high.
And don’t forget the direct benefit that good IA techniques can have on the ability to develop social skills!
Adderall does wonders for my ability to interact with people. Now if only I could get an oxytocin nasal spray prescription… well, I’m definitely going to give it a shot.
Interesting! I’d never heard that. How so?
I was very energetic and chatty, and didn’t really care about personal space. My friend gave it to me at a party because he wanted to see what it did to my chess ability. It was too hard to tell if it improved my chess, but it definitely led to me sitting very close to a girl that lives in my neighborhood and actually connecting with her. Normally I come across as laconic, which works pretty well for some reason, but it was nice to actually feel passionate about getting to know someone, and feel an emotional bond forming in real time. I ended up driving with her to Denny’s, and I was so into the conversation that I kept on taking my eyes off the road and looking at her, and this led to slightly suboptimal driving safety. So, a warning: adderall helps you focus, but not necessarily on the right things.
I’ve had the same experience (conversation vs driving attention focus based on stimulants). Watch out for that stuff!
It took me a couple reads to make sense of your description, because I parsed this as the “before” picture, and didn’t see the difference. :)
I love that feeling. I’ve only gotten it with a few friends—usually it’s either too gradual to notice, or I realize suddenly that we’ve gotten closer without feeling it happen.
Haha. Noted.
I was just thinking about this one the other day. I was musing about taking adderall and piracetam, and thinking “Is intelligence/cognition really a bottleneck I need to clear up? Shouldn’t everyone else be taking this stuff?”
Roughly how big do you think a “large” majority is? Closer to 65%, or closer to 90%?
Wait, I was certain I had replied to this, but I just stopped into the thread again and it doesn’t seem to be here. Sorry about that! I intended closer to 90%.
I’m certain you replied to it too—I see it right there underneath this one:
http://lesswrong.com/lw/2sl/the_irrationality_game/2qil?c=1
Potential bug?
Well, NOW I see it. It must’ve just gotten buried under something before. Oh well. Better to’ve answered twice than never.
Good question. I don’t have a lot of information about who reads these (especially including the people who read but don’t comment or vote), but 90% seems like the right ballpark.