Perplexed comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 2 - Less Wrong

13 Post author: dclayh 01 August 2010 10:58PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (696)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Perplexed 29 August 2010 05:13:46AM 1 point [-]

Cool. Thx. I'm more ancient than I like to admit, and this is my first fanfic experience. I'm very proud that I didn't have to look up "ship".

Comment author: komponisto 29 August 2010 06:15:48PM *  3 points [-]

I'm very proud that I didn't have to look up "ship".

I however did -- because I didn't find my correct guess plausible. (An apostrophe would help: " 'ship ".)

(Imagine if I wrote: "It was my first ence of that sort." You might be able to guess that "experience" is the most likely meaning, but it would need verification and still feel weird afterward.)

I also don't understand "call out": does it mean "refer to", or "advocate"?

Comment author: Alicorn 29 August 2010 06:35:49PM 4 points [-]

(Imagine if I wrote: "It was my first ence of that sort." You might be able to guess that "experience" is the most likely meaning, but it would need verification and still feel weird afterward.)

I'm tempted to start using "ence" as an abbreviation for "experience". I like the sound of it and it seems like a word that deserves a monosyllabic version.

Comment author: katydee 29 August 2010 06:52:37PM 3 points [-]

I know people who use "tech" for "technique," "grade" for "upgrade," etc. Once you get used to it, it really is more efficient, but at the price of making it more difficult for outsiders to understand what you're saying.

Comment author: ata 30 August 2010 03:43:49AM *  4 points [-]

For a while I've wondered what exactly Robin Hanson is doing (what he's trying to signal, perhaps? I don't know) when he uses abbreviations like "med", "docs", "tech", etc. (Pretty sure there are other common ones not coming to my mind right now.) He doesn't otherwise come off as a lazy writer, he can't really pass for "folksy" (and super-contrarian econblogging isn't quite the right context for that anyway), they aren't difficult or cumbersome words...

Comment author: wedrifid 30 August 2010 04:43:26AM *  0 points [-]

He doesn't otherwise come off as a lazy writer, he can't really pass for "folksy"

It seems to be the titles of his posts and not the content which he likes to keep extremely simple, even trite. I take it as wry counter signalling. There is a touch of ironic contrast between what could superficially look like a naive opinion and reasoning that is in fact based in some measure on sound economic principles, or at least of premises that the intended audience would accept.

Comment author: TobyBartels 30 August 2010 12:32:36AM 2 points [-]

Once you get used to it, it really is more efficient, but at the price of making it more difficult for outsiders to understand what you're saying.

This is the characteristic feature of jargon. (And fanfic has its jargon like anything else.)

Comment author: wnoise 30 August 2010 03:30:45AM 3 points [-]

Some jargon actually isn't much more efficient.

Comment author: Pavitra 30 August 2010 03:32:33AM 2 points [-]

Those terms of jargon are probably being used for ingroup identification.

Comment author: wnoise 30 August 2010 03:37:16AM 0 points [-]

Yes, of course, in the cases that have sprung to my mind.

Comment author: TobyBartels 01 September 2010 12:01:33AM *  1 point [-]

Good point. I hereby amend my comment to say that this is the characteristic feature of useful (or appropriate) jargon. (So now I am making the claim that group identification is neither useful nor appropriate, which of course isn't always true either.)

Comment author: Alicorn 29 August 2010 07:00:29PM 2 points [-]

I've seen "tech" for "technology" but not for "technique". Interesting.

Comment author: RichardKennaway 30 August 2010 10:26:19AM *  3 points [-]

"Tech" is used in Sci*nt*l*gy jargon for the supposed mental technology that they claim to offer, and it raises my suspicions whenever I see it elsewhere. Specifically, the suspicion that the author is speaking in code to insiders, not for mere in-group fuzzies, but to communicate in plain sight of the outside world things that outsiders will not realise are being communicated.

Comment author: katydee 29 August 2010 07:33:19PM 1 point [-]

I've also heard 'nique (neek?) for "technique," which seems less confusing.

Comment author: whpearson 29 August 2010 07:34:22PM 0 points [-]

I've only come across it playing Chrono Trigger not in real life.

Comment author: NihilCredo 30 August 2010 12:23:20PM 0 points [-]

It's also standard jargon in strategy games for any system involving the gradual acquisition of upgrades to your tools through some representation of "research".

Comment author: wedrifid 30 August 2010 03:53:11AM *  1 point [-]

Bah. Those two abbreviations are terrible. People use those? There is no context where tech(nique) is used in which the existing use of tech(nology) wouldn't be appropriate, given that techniques can be considered technology. Why oh why would you not use 'nique' or 'niq'? I suspect I would be willing to signal myself as an outsider so as to avoid sacrificing my dignity like that!

Comment author: Mercy 08 December 2010 07:44:25PM 0 points [-]

I suspect the ambiguity in tech is deliberate, it's trendy in certain circles to reframe habits, attitudes and knowledges as mental technology, the whole life-hacking thing is one example but activists often use a similar jargon (I think it comes from anthropology?) extending it to social techniques (cultural technology) as well. It's maybe an attempt to hijack consumerist/shiny object collecting drives, maybe an attempt to signal practicality.

I have a feeling this technique, of using an abbreviation to refer to an umbrella of concepts which could be abbreviated to that, is quite common, though the only one that springs to mind right now is Trans.

Comment author: wedrifid 30 August 2010 03:50:10AM 0 points [-]

I like the sound of it and it seems like a word that deserves a monosyllabic version.

The word already has a monosyllabic version (exp) but it is interesting to note that an "ence" variant is probably still warranted. I would still use 'experience' in the places where people may abbreviate to ence, because it feels right to my intuitions. "Exp" is a resource that I acquire but experiences, they are things to be savoured. I want to be fully present, in the moment for the full three syllables. In the same vein I would 'ship' combinations I was somewhat distancing myself from or perhaps considering particularly abstractly but I would never consider using that jargon in relation to Harry and Hermione for example. If I didn't use 'relationship' I would rephrase the context such that another word or phrase (connection? or 'author conveyed a bond between'?) fit the context.

Comment author: jimrandomh 31 August 2010 04:27:25AM 2 points [-]

I like Ence as a separate word from Exp for two reasons. First, Exp is very strongly tied to a meaning in games that is in important ways opposite from the meaning we would want Ence to have. And second, I don't think "exp" counts as properly monosyllabic; the monosoyllabic prononciation /eksp/ has a consonant cluster that many languages and English dialects don't allow in speech, causing speakers to automatically expand it to /ek.spi/.

Comment author: TobyBartels 01 September 2010 01:42:58AM 0 points [-]

I always pronounce it /ek.spi/ anyway (actually /eks.pi/), since I spell it ‘XP’ (which, strictly speaking, stands for ‘experience points’, not just ‘experience’). Indeed, I didn't realise that anybody said ‘Exp’ for this game mechanic! (Or are y'all talking about something else entirely?)

Comment author: wedrifid 30 August 2010 03:59:17AM 0 points [-]

I however did -- because I didn't find my correct guess plausible. (An apostrophe would help: " 'ship ".)

I had to look it up too, but I do note that the changed usage of ship vs relationship makes leaving off the apostrophe appropriate. 'Relationship' can't be used as a verb!

Comment author: Pavitra 29 August 2010 06:21:54PM 0 points [-]

In this context, it means something like "name" or "denote".