= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Douglas_Knight comments on Abuse of Productivity Systems - 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 (57)
What video does youtube want me to watch after watching your video? "Don't abuse your dogs."
"Don't abuse X" is not very useful advise because it is a tautology because "abuse" is a negative word. It is not entirely useless because the existence of the statement warns you that it is common for people to abuse X (if you trust the author). And I guess that is your first message. Your second message is the symptom of a common form of abuse of productivity systems: ceasing to use them. But your main message is how to think about and thus prevent a common form of abuse. Perhaps it would be better if the title made that clearer. For example: "What does it mean to abuse a productivity system?" Or even just "Abuse of Productivity Systems."
What kind of empirical observsations would you expect to see in a world where "Abuse of Productivity Systems." is a more effective headline than "Don't abuse Productivity Systems"?
I don't know what Douglas_Knight was thinking, but I can see now that YouTube suggestions have indeed changed after changing the title of the video. Now the suggestions look more like popular philosophy or whatever than animal abuse. It's a very empirical observation, though it has nothing to do with reactions of humans.
Accepted your suggestion, thanks a lot!
I think "don't abuse X" has more value as a slogan, and it's more memorable (partly because of its tautological wordiness?). That's the reason I chose it initially, but your point of view convinced me that it's worth signalling intellectuality in this case.
I have a non-specific recollection that, generally speaking, phrasing directions in the positive imperative ("Treat dogs well") rather than a negative imperative ("Do not treat dogs badly") leads to better rates of recall / compliance.
If it interests you I'll ask around and find a proper reference.
Thanks, I heard about this too, so it's OK without a reference. Though in this case "treat your productivity systems well" makes for a poor title :)
I think it might be memorable because of the imperative. I'm skeptical that tautology or wordiness are productive, even of memory.