You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Eugine_Nier comments on LW Women Entries- LW Meetups - Less Wrong Discussion

8 [deleted] 20 April 2013 04:52PM

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

Comments (131)

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

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 22 April 2013 01:28:37AM 2 points [-]

That assumes neither party is actively malicious. If one of the parties is in fact malicious abiding by Postel's law makes it more likely that you can be hacked.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 28 April 2013 10:45:18PM 0 points [-]

Yeah, setting the prior toward good will, which seems the proper course in a social get together. There are predators out there, and there are dicks, but better to have a fairly high bar before assuming either in that context, IMO.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 29 April 2013 05:40:24AM 1 point [-]

The question is how much damage can improperly trusting someone cause. In particular the woman in the OP could reasonably be described as ideologically driven.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 29 April 2013 06:34:48AM 0 points [-]

Yeah. Alone in a parking garage with someone - don't extend that trust so easily. Though I'd say it's easy to be paranoid, for me at least, and the expected cost of fear is likely greater than the expected cost from violated trust. A woman could not trust the guy from the meeting who offers to walk her to her car, thereby being alone should someone else be there. There is a safety cost in not trusting people. And just a cost in lost opportunities of connection with others.

In particular the woman in the OP could reasonably be described as ideologically driven.

I have some suspicions of that on my part as well. I'm trying to extend her a little trust, and take her at her word in her latest update.