Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

In response to Sidekick Matchmaking
Comment author: Rukifellth 20 February 2015 03:24:10PM *  9 points [-]

Does anyone else find the terminology for this discussion strange? I know LW likes to use words with more emotional-colouring when describing concepts and motivations, but now it's being used to describe people, in a semi-official way.

Comment author: Rukifellth 20 February 2015 03:17:48PM 0 points [-]

Just to be clear, do these multiple-universes have the same qualities as the universe that we inhabit?

Comment author: HungryHippo 17 February 2015 08:11:28PM 3 points [-]

plan iss for you to rule country, obvioussly This one sounds important now that we know it is definitely true (or at least was at the time).

What does "you" mean, though? Tom Riddle? In which case Quirrell could just as well be speaking of himself. The physical body others designate "Harry"? In which case Quirrell could just permanently transfigure himself into Harry's body using the stone, shoot Harry and vanish the body and claim "Quirrell" had urgent business elsewhere.

Comment author: Rukifellth 18 February 2015 01:29:58PM 1 point [-]

What if Quirrell is so good at dissociation that he can lie through parseltongue by convincing himself that what he's saying is true?

Comment author: V_V 23 November 2014 06:01:54PM 3 points [-]

I don't read /sci/ therefore I don't understand what you mean.

Comment author: Rukifellth 25 November 2014 02:09:31AM 0 points [-]

Do you know of it?

Comment author: V_V 23 November 2014 12:03:30PM *  5 points [-]

It doesn't appear to be censored in this thread, but it was historically censored on LessWrong. Maybe EY finally understood the Streisand effect.

Comment author: Rukifellth 23 November 2014 04:03:32PM -1 points [-]

He might do it less for the "danger" and more for "bad discussion". The threads I see on /sci/ raising questions about high IQ come to mind.

Well, most threads I see on /sci/ come to mind.

Comment author: Rukifellth 29 April 2014 11:33:12AM 2 points [-]

I experienced what wikipedia calls 'ego death'. That is I felt my 'self' splitting into the individual sub-components that formed consciousness. Acid is well-known for causing synaesthesia and as I fell deeper into meditation I felt like I could actually see the way sensory experiences interacted with cognitive heuristics and rose to the level of conscious perception.

I've recently come into a deep spiritual terror after such an experience I had while sober (albeit in a slightly manic state from sleep deprivation and some caffeine). Afterward, I refused to speak to prevent any unnecessary harm to whoever I'd seek advice from. This is the first time I've seen anybody describe the experience like this, and I was wondering if you knew any resources or persons of experience.

Comment author: Gunnar_Zarncke 20 November 2013 12:15:01AM 1 point [-]

I don't understand how that increases attention span.

The trade-off that I see is

  • having multiple sites open which you use often saves open/close times
  • tabs can be ordered by window and tab thus structuring your work
  • having distracting (procrastination sensitive) pages open may cause redirecting attention to these

Maybe you mean the latter?

Comment author: Rukifellth 20 November 2013 09:13:12PM *  0 points [-]

Yes.

I take it you've rarely fallen victim to wiki walks and random googling?

Comment author: Rukifellth 19 November 2013 10:07:51PM 2 points [-]

I've decided not to have more than 3 tabs open on my internet browser at any given point, as a way of increasing my attention span.

Comment author: Rukifellth 18 October 2013 09:34:44PM 6 points [-]

Before a discussion on corporeal punishment is started, I want to caution against this happening. It might be that children of people who find corporeal punishment effective are similar enough to their parents to respond well to it, and vice-versa.

Comment author: Rukifellth 04 October 2013 05:17:12PM *  4 points [-]

Read literature with an old writing style, especially if you dislike said writing style. The more opaque and complicated, the better.

I find that I'm a very fidgety reader, unconsciously skipping words, or even whole sentences, skimming over words I don't actually know the meaning of, and failing to connect the context of words that I do know the meaning of with the rest of the narrative or lecture. This I do with both literature and more importantly, when reading science. I've decided to read At The Mountains of Madness and penalize myself for every time I lose track of the narrative, and reward myself for every time I recognize when one sentence adds or contributes to something implied by another sentence earlier on in the paragraph, and so on. Furthermore, I will do this for only literature, and not with learning new scientific concepts, or even old ones that I have already learned. The problem is with reading comprehension, not with understanding concepts, and exercising two skills at once prematurely may cause problems. I hope this will instill genuine patience, so that being careful and observant becomes a natural thing, rather than the uncomfortable thing I wrestle with.

View more: Next