TheOtherDave comments on We are not living in a simulation - Less Wrong

-9 Post author: dfranke 12 April 2011 01:55AM

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

Comments (211)

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

Comment author: TheOtherDave 13 April 2011 05:56:24PM 4 points [-]

A note on indignation: although it's a greasy social psychology point, indignation isn't the correct response unless it is a community norm.

Leaving aside semantics around "correct," I agree that getting indignant over X when most people around me think X is unobjectionable often has results I don't want.

That said, sometimes things become community norms as a consequence of the expressed indignation of individuals and the community's willingness to align with those individuals.

Predicting when that second result is likely is easy to get wrong. Sometimes it's worthwhile just to try and see.

Comment author: shokwave 13 April 2011 06:04:03PM 1 point [-]

Yes. I feel that is an extension on my parenthetical about the other interpretation of correct response - that it could lead to changing the environment.

Predicting when that second result is likely is easy to get wrong.

I'd like to put it down in writing somewhere that I predict a community norm of using nongendered speech, at least on the level of the norm of "read the Sequences", to be fully formed and applied by six months from now.

Comment author: [deleted] 13 April 2011 06:58:37PM 2 points [-]

By nongendered to you mean ve, ver, vis? Conditional prediction: If there is a move away from "he,she,etc." I predict "they/them/their" will dominate.

Comment author: shokwave 14 April 2011 05:01:01AM 1 point [-]

By nongendered speech, I mean speech that does not indicate male or female gender. So they/them/their, ve/ver/vis, ey, or any other gender-neutral pronouns. It also includes my preferred way of avoiding gendered speech - you, the poster, and using the poster's name. Yes, it's fairly broad :P

Comment author: TheOtherDave 13 April 2011 06:17:34PM 0 points [-]

Huh. Confidence interval?

I totally endorse that, and I'm pretty good about it myself (at least, I think I am), but I'd be very surprised if it ever became a reliable LW community norm.

Comment author: shokwave 13 April 2011 06:26:32PM 3 points [-]

It's pretty uncalibrated but let's say 90% confidence interval of 2 months to 2 years.

Comment author: TheOtherDave 13 April 2011 07:29:54PM 1 point [-]

Upvoted for being willing to put numbers to it. I'll never remember to come back and check, though.