= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Raemon comments on Leveling IRL - level 1 - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (91)
This is more practical sounding than I was expecting it to be. I think it'd be best to have seperate skill tracks (i.e. level 1 Strength, level 1 Social, etc). So people who don't feel the need to memorize a passage don't need to.
At the same time, you DO want to encourage diversity, so maybe "To become a level 1 Human, bring four separate skills up to rank 1 in the space of a month."
What mostly concerns me, though, is this. Relevant line:
We could have an explicit norm that you can't consider yourself at a given level unless you can pass the relevant test(s) at the time. That seems thoroughly reasonable to me - it allows for saying things like "I used to be at level 6 strength, but I've been so busy at work this year that I haven't gotten to work out hardly at all, and I've slid to level 4".
This sounds good.
Another way to look at it is to say that the levels always come with a timestamp. Once you attain them, you can mentally award yourself a nice badge, like so:
But the badge is only valid for that year; like car tax discs and food truck permits you must keep it up to date.
I think a norm that makes you lose your level is less useful than a norm that actively encourages you to keep it. For example, each month I briefly attempt to better at the "Self Control" skill. I've successfully done it once a few months ago. Since then I don't think I've done the full 8 days.
I don't want to be able to say "I am capable of working solidly in 2 hour chunks 8 times a month," I want to actually have done that, on a continuous basis (and frankly I want to do better than eight 2 hour chunks, but from my own experience I think it's a pretty decent level 1 achievement, embarassing as that may be.)
Well, if you haven't tested yourself at least semi-recently, you can't properly say that you can do a given thing, so there's not all that much difference between these two, I think. Either way works for me.
I like the idea of "Have X skills at Y level, and be considered a level Y human"
Honestly, I like the "Level" requirements because I can grade them myself, though. I can see I'm already Level 1 on most of these metrics, and work the others or not as I choose :)
Hah, I actually considered using that quote as the epigraph to the post, but eventually settled on Heinlein :-) For what it's worth, I thought about the chance of each task becoming a long-term upgrade if you do it just once, and chose the tasks with that in mind. They're not like washing dishes. Also, it might be too early to think of that, but presumably there will be a level 2 and so on.
Upvote for a hyperbole and a half reference in an surprisingly relevant manner.
Please see my comment below, second paragraph, for my take on this problem. ( http://lesswrong.com/lw/71r/leveling_irl_level_1/4mro )