Hul-Gil comments on How To Lose 100 Karma In 6 Hours -- What Just Happened - Less Wrong

-31 Post author: waitingforgodel 10 December 2010 08:27AM

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

Comments (214)

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

Comment author: Hul-Gil 26 July 2011 01:19:09AM *  1 point [-]

Hi there, Vaniver. I figured I'd ask you about this, because others seem too disturbed by the idea for me to want to bring it up again. Anyway, I've been reading through old threads, and encountered mention of this "basilisk"... and now I'm extremely curious. What was this idea that made so many people uncomfortable?

Edit Update: On the advice of several people, I am leaving this alone for now. If I do go ahead and read it, I'll edit this post again with my thoughts.

Comment deleted 26 July 2011 02:05:53AM [-]
Comment author: Hul-Gil 26 July 2011 03:03:07AM 1 point [-]

Thanks! I had been wishing for a PM system... and here we had one all along.

Comment author: wedrifid 26 July 2011 05:21:43PM 2 points [-]

Thanks! I had been wishing for a PM system... and here we had one all along.

I know, it took me months to realize that the 'someone replied to me' envelope was actually a re-purposed indicator for a feature I had no idea existed.

Comment author: drethelin 26 January 2012 05:41:32AM 0 points [-]

I actually prefer conversations to be public if possible. It doesn't really harm anyone and it helps understanding of long dead threads to see more discussion of them

Comment author: wedrifid 26 January 2012 06:31:53AM 0 points [-]

I actually prefer conversations to be public if possible. It doesn't really harm anyone and it helps understanding of long dead threads to see more discussion of them

Some conversations are more personal and wouldn't be appropriate if public.

Comment author: drethelin 26 January 2012 06:44:49AM 0 points [-]

we don't disagree

Comment author: Alicorn 26 July 2011 01:37:36AM 5 points [-]

Please abandon this project, for your safety and comfort, that of people you might tell, and that of others who your "benefactor" might be disposed to tell if you succeed in weakening someone's resolve to keep it safely secret.

Comment author: Hul-Gil 26 July 2011 01:41:29AM *  1 point [-]

Since several posters reported that they were not affected by the basilisk, I am thinking my mental safety and comfort might not be affected. (I'm assuming you're referring to the possibility of anxiety, etc? I do suffer from anxiety, but I've had to learn to deal with fairly horrific things, so I am not easily disturbed any more.) I certainly won't tell anyone, even if I had someone to tell, and if someone has resolved to keep it secret I doubt they will tell me in the first place.

I'm not too worried about finding out, though; if no one wants to say, I won't pressure anyone to. That's why I have asked someone who wasn't affected: they will surely be able to judge without fear making them irrational. If they still don't want to say, I'll just live with being curious.

Comment author: wedrifid 26 July 2011 05:26:35PM 2 points [-]

Since several posters reported that they were not affected by the basilisk, I am thinking my mental safety and comfort might not be affected.

I encourage you to accede to the tribal wishes and not tell anyone about the idea at least within the tribe and the scope of where lesswrong can claim any influence whatsoever (as you've already agreed). As you say, you don't sound like the sort of person who could be harmed by reading it personally so need not be concerned for your own sake.

Comment author: lessdazed 16 August 2011 05:31:56AM *  0 points [-]

It seems like it would be easy to predict an individual's reaction to the thing by looking for correlated reactions between that and some other things from people who have seen it all, and then seeing how a given innocent reacts to those other things.

I bet some pretty strong patterns would emerge, and we could predict reactions to the thing. I do not think that protecting people from harm now is a true objection, for it could be dealt with by identifying vulnerable people and not making the whole topic such forbidden fruit.