= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Jonathan_Graehl comments on Anti-Akrasia Reprise - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (24)
In an online setting, wouldn't most people lie in order to avoid paying the forfeit? Other than things like "this won't be the top post in two weeks" which can be checked by anyone, only people who really don't want to feel like a liar would ever take their punishment.
If you have a (real-world) friend involved then I don't think this is a problem. I could be naive though. But even if you know deep down that when push comes to shove you'll lie to avoid the penalty, that's still a definite disincentive and may keep you on track.
In any case, lying isn't an issue with the friends and family of mine who are trying it so far. I'd love to have more LessWrong folks try it. If you use the invite code LESSWRONG and indicate that you're willing to try a monetary commitment device, I'll guarantee to set up the first 10 beta applicants right away.
People are mostly (monetarily) committing to things they want to do and know they can do. Lying only enters into it if they try and fail. Perhaps they'll fudge a little if they're just off target.
I'll grant that knowing that doesn't completely destroy the incentive, which is interesting. Someone who finds and uses this tool will likely want to succeed without lying.