Vaniver comments on Evaluability (And Cheap Holiday Shopping) - Less Wrong

25 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 28 November 2007 12:37AM

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

Comments (43)

Sort By: Old

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

Comment author: SlyClaw 28 January 2012 07:04:22PM 0 points [-]

"Which is more memorable, a $25 shirt or a $25 candle?" I asked my younger brother and he said the shirt.

Also the 'theory' will only work if that person knows the worth(cost) of the item Or I guess you could leave the tags on.

Comment author: Jiro 02 December 2013 05:15:12PM 0 points [-]

A shirt is going to be more memorable because people use shirts constantly. The candle is used at most once.

Comment author: Vaniver 02 December 2013 05:30:24PM *  2 points [-]

Most of the shirts I've received as gifts I haven't actually worn, because they don't portray the image I'd like to (they're durable signals). A candle, as a private consumable, is something that I might burn even if it's incongruent, because burning it doesn't represent a commitment. (This is a strong, potentially non-obvious reason to prefer consumables over durables when getting gifts for others.)

Beyond that, memorable isn't just "amount of time it's used" but "remarkability." I rarely think about my underwear; I just grab the top one out of the drawer, and I buy the cheapest variety above some quality threshold. I own one pair that's bright green that I bought for the lulz; even though I wear it about a twentieth of the time as the first variety, it's much more memorable because it stands out.

Comment author: [deleted] 02 December 2013 06:20:32PM 0 points [-]

A shirt that does portray the image the recipient would like to is a much better present.

Comment author: Vaniver 02 December 2013 06:44:46PM 1 point [-]

Of course- in large part because the target is smaller, and thus it signals much more precise knowledge about the recipient. If you don't have a strong ability to discern other people's preferences, go with expensive consumables, because that's a broader target and expectations are lower.

Comment author: [deleted] 15 December 2013 09:05:18AM 2 points [-]

Isn't signalling knowledge about the recipient pretty much the whole point of giving presents? Otherwise we'd just give people cash.

Comment author: hyporational 15 December 2013 12:54:21PM 1 point [-]

You can signal various other things too like sophisticated taste or having spent time picking/creating the present etc.

Comment author: Romashka 14 October 2015 07:47:49AM 0 points [-]

When I am given a candle, which I can save for power outages or impromptu celebrations or even just give it to somebody else, I am glad because 1) I'm not likely to buy one for myself but every single time I see it in a shop I think I would, were it only slightly cheaper, 2) it is a focus point, a symbol of voluntary solitude, even a cheap one, and in this way very unlike a shirt (although I have a couple shirts which for me have symbolic significance), 3) I am a twin who likes having her own things even if I don't mind sharing, and I have loaned clothes when other people were in need, and candles when we all were.

So candles trump shirts on all counts!:))