4 ms·

This on the other hand I like, very much! Particularly: > Also, in general it seems unlikely humans function as optimizers natively, because optimization tend

This on the other hand I like, very much! Particularly: > Also, in general it seems unlikely humans function as optimizers natively, because optimization tends to require drastically narrowing and quantifying your objectives. I would guess that if they're describable and consistent, most human utility functions look more like noisy prioritized sets of satisfaction criteria than the kind of objectives we can train a neural network against Considering this, what do you think us humans are actually up to, here on HN and in general? It seems clear that we are up to something, but what might it be?

advael 2y ago
On HN? Killing time, reading articles, and getting nerdsniped by the feedback loop of getting insipid replies that unfortunately so many of us are constantly stuck in In general? Slowly dying mostly. Talking. Eating. Fucking. Staring at microbes under a microscope. Feeding cats. Planting trees. Doing cartwheels. Really depends on the human
- mistermann 2y ago
  I would tend to agree!! > Talking. Have you ever noticed any talking that ~"projects seriousness &/or authority about important matters" around here?
  - advael 2y ago
    I think most people do that all the time. Projecting authority is one of the most important skills in a world dominated by human institutions, because it's an effective means of manipulating most humans. Sad but true
    - mistermann 2y ago
      Do you know any single person who can stop the process, at will? Maybe not always, but at least sometimes, on demand (either internally or externally invoked)?
      - advael 2y ago
        What, like not project authority? Admit that they are lost, confused, powerless, don't know something, aren't in control? Break the empire society kayfabe? Yes, absolutely. I view this as one of the criteria by which I assess emotional maturity, and despite societal pressures to never do so, many manage to, even though most don't I'm not a sociologist, but I think the degree to which people can't turn it off maps fairly well onto the "low-high trust society" continuum, with lower trust implying less willingness or even sometimes ability to stop trying to do this on average, though of course variation will exist within societies as well I have this intuition because I think the question of whether to present vulnerability and openness versus authority and strength is essentially shaped like a prisoner's dilemma, with all that that implies
        mistermann 2y ago
        > I'm not a sociologist, but I think the degree to which people can't turn it off maps fairly well onto the "low-high trust society" continuum We're not fully aligned here....I'm thinking more like: stop (or ~isolate/manage) non-intentional cognition, simulated truth formation, etc.....not perfectly in a constant, never ending state of course, but for short periods of time, near flawlessly.
        advael 2y ago
        Sure. There are people who can do that. I think it's a hard skill to master but definitely one that can be performed and improved somewhat reliably for people who manage to get the hang of it initially and care to work at it, and which I have seen a decent number of examples of, including a few who seem better at it than me
        mistermann 2y ago
        Could you name any such (famous) people? I think we're not talking about exactly the same thing though, which I'd say is my fault. I would like to modify this: > stop (or ~isolate/manage) non-intentional cognition, simulated truth formation, etc.....not perfectly in a constant, never ending state of course, but for short periods of time, near flawlessly. ...to this (only change is what I appended to the end): > stop (or ~isolate/manage) non-intentional cognition, simulated truth formation, etc.....not perfectly in a constant, never ending state of course, but for short periods of time, near flawlessly, without stopping cognition altogether (such as during "no mind" meditation or "ego death" using psychedelics). Think more like a highly optimized piece of engineering, where we have ~full (comparable to standard engineering or programming) access to the code, stack, state, etc.

advael 2y ago

On HN? Killing time, reading articles, and getting nerdsniped by the feedback loop of getting insipid replies that unfortunately so many of us are constantly stuck in In general? Slowly dying mostly. Talking. Eating. Fucking. Staring at microbes under a microscope. Feeding cats. Planting trees. Doing cartwheels. Really depends on the human

mistermann 2y ago
I would tend to agree!! > Talking. Have you ever noticed any talking that ~"projects seriousness &/or authority about important matters" around here?
- advael 2y ago
  I think most people do that all the time. Projecting authority is one of the most important skills in a world dominated by human institutions, because it's an effective means of manipulating most humans. Sad but true
  - mistermann 2y ago
    Do you know any single person who can stop the process, at will? Maybe not always, but at least sometimes, on demand (either internally or externally invoked)?
    - advael 2y ago
      What, like not project authority? Admit that they are lost, confused, powerless, don't know something, aren't in control? Break the empire society kayfabe? Yes, absolutely. I view this as one of the criteria by which I assess emotional maturity, and despite societal pressures to never do so, many manage to, even though most don't I'm not a sociologist, but I think the degree to which people can't turn it off maps fairly well onto the "low-high trust society" continuum, with lower trust implying less willingness or even sometimes ability to stop trying to do this on average, though of course variation will exist within societies as well I have this intuition because I think the question of whether to present vulnerability and openness versus authority and strength is essentially shaped like a prisoner's dilemma, with all that that implies
      - mistermann 2y ago
        > I'm not a sociologist, but I think the degree to which people can't turn it off maps fairly well onto the "low-high trust society" continuum We're not fully aligned here....I'm thinking more like: stop (or ~isolate/manage) non-intentional cognition, simulated truth formation, etc.....not perfectly in a constant, never ending state of course, but for short periods of time, near flawlessly.
        advael 2y ago
        Sure. There are people who can do that. I think it's a hard skill to master but definitely one that can be performed and improved somewhat reliably for people who manage to get the hang of it initially and care to work at it, and which I have seen a decent number of examples of, including a few who seem better at it than me
        mistermann 2y ago
        Could you name any such (famous) people? I think we're not talking about exactly the same thing though, which I'd say is my fault. I would like to modify this: > stop (or ~isolate/manage) non-intentional cognition, simulated truth formation, etc.....not perfectly in a constant, never ending state of course, but for short periods of time, near flawlessly. ...to this (only change is what I appended to the end): > stop (or ~isolate/manage) non-intentional cognition, simulated truth formation, etc.....not perfectly in a constant, never ending state of course, but for short periods of time, near flawlessly, without stopping cognition altogether (such as during "no mind" meditation or "ego death" using psychedelics). Think more like a highly optimized piece of engineering, where we have ~full (comparable to standard engineering or programming) access to the code, stack, state, etc.