= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Meetup : Boston - Connection Theory
Discussion article for the meetup : Boston - Connection Theory
Mike Raimondi is giving a talk on Connection Theory, a theory of human motivation developed by the Leverage Institute, and a theoretical foundation for goal charting.
Cambridge/Boston-area Less Wrong meetups are every Sunday at 2pm at Citadel (98 Elm St Apt 1 Somerville, near Porter Square), except 2nd and 4th Sunday meetups which are held at MIT.
Our default schedule is as follows:
—Phase 1: Arrival, greetings, unstructured conversation.
—Phase 2: The headline event. This starts promptly at 3pm, and lasts 30-60 minutes.
—Phase 3: Further discussion. We'll explore the ideas raised in phase 2, often in smaller groups.
—Phase 4: Dinner.
Discussion article for the meetup : Boston - Connection Theory
Meetup : Boston - Aversion factoring and calibration
Discussion article for the meetup : Boston - Aversion factoring and calibration
Victoria Krakovna will be running a session on Aversion Factoring and Calibration (based on a CFAR unit). While Goal Factoring is useful for understanding your motivations for things you do, Aversion Factoring helps you analyze the things you are averse to doing.
Cambridge/Boston-area Less Wrong Wednesday meetups are once a month at 7pm at Citadel (98 Elm St Apt 1 Somerville, near Porter Square). All other meetups are on Sundays.
Our default schedule is as follows:
—Phase 1: Arrival, greetings, unstructured conversation.
—Phase 2: The headline event. This starts promptly at 7:30pm, and lasts 30-60 minutes.
—Phase 3: Further discussion. We'll explore the ideas raised in phase 2, often in smaller groups.
Discussion article for the meetup : Boston - Aversion factoring and calibration
Meetup : Boston - Macroeconomic Theory (Joe Schneider)
Discussion article for the meetup : Boston - Macroeconomic Theory (Joe Schneider)
Joe Schneider will be discussing macroeconomic theory, and how to apply it to your world model. Some topics include:
-different colors of money
-idealistic supply/demand curves
-special cases of supply/demand
-actual official definitions (rather than LWisms)
-how markets break (and what you can do about it)
"I am decidedly in the Keynesian camp, but I will include an explanation of supply side theory as well. It is important to at least understand how other people think before rejecting it. If you are a supply sider, please come and correct me.
For those of you already familiar with macroeconomic theory, this will mostly be a review. However, I encourage you to come and share your insights on this critical topic."
Cambridge/Boston-area Less Wrong 2nd and 4th Sunday meetups are at 2pm in MIT's building 66 at 25 Ames St, room 156. Room number subject to change based on availability; signs will be posted with the actual room number. Meetups on other weeks are at Citadel in Porter Sq.
Our default schedule is as follows:
—Phase 1: Arrival, greetings, unstructured conversation.
—Phase 2: The headline event. This starts promptly at 3pm, and lasts 30-60 minutes.
—Phase 3: Further discussion. We'll explore the ideas raised in phase 2, often in smaller groups.
—Phase 4: Dinner.
Discussion article for the meetup : Boston - Macroeconomic Theory (Joe Schneider)
Ritual Report: Boston Solstice Celebration
A week after the large-scale Solstice celebration in NYC, we held a smaller one in Boston at Citadel house, with around 20 people attending. The content was essentially a subset (given below) of the 2012 NYC solstice set list - a mix of silly and serious songs and readings, and following a thematic progression from light to darkness and back to light. We had several people leading songs - Julia, Beth, Janos and me, with Jeff accompanying on the piano, and everyone else singing along using the slides. Here is a video of our rendition of Mindspace is Deep and Wide, courtesy of Julia.
A number of things went well about our celebration. The number of people was just right for keeping it cozy and personal, and fitting into the Citadel living room. It was great to have a variety of lead singers, and the others sang along readily. The piano accompaniment was especially awesome, and created a more solemn atmosphere. A highlight of the evening was Jim's inspirational and touching speech during the Moment of Darkness. The light-dark-light progression worked quite well with this subset of the original set list. The ceremony lasted for 90 minutes, which was a good length for immersing the audience without dragging on for too long. There was a decent amount of free-form discussion before and after the event, with some nice potluck food.
The parts that didn't go as well mostly had to do with last-minute preparation on our part. The event was planned during the preceding week, so we could have used a few more rehearsals of the songs and even more instrumental accompaniment (this time about half were acapella). We also went through the songs a little quickly, and many of them could have used more introduction or explanation. Next year, we will probably involve even more people in leading the songs, and it would be great to vary the set list and add more songs that have personal significance to the people involved. (This year, we added Jewel in the Night, composed on the International Space Station, which worked really well with the event theme.)
Another improvement would be to avoid disruptions caused by latecomers. Both in NYC last year and in Boston this year, there were people who rang the doorbell and came in during intense solemn portions of the event. As Jeff suggested, it would be a good idea to request ahead of time for people to arrive before time X, and to have a sign on the door saying "if it's after time X please come back after time Y".
I am really grateful to everyone who made this event happen, and to Ray for putting together the original materials. Singing rationalist-themed songs with friends felt awesome, and it seems like something we should probably do more than once a year!
Here is the set list we used:
Light
Introduction: The Story of Winter
Why Does the Sun Shine (Part 0)
First Litany of Tarski: If the sky is blue...
Mindspace is Deep and Wide
God Wrote the Sky
Why Does the Sun Shine (Part 1)
Twilight
One Wish
Still Alive
Ballad of Barry the Em(ulation)
Second Litany of Tarski: If I'm going to be outcompeted by simulated brains...
The X Days of X-Risk
Third Litany of Tarski: If humanity will be wiped out by unfriendly AI...
When I Die
Into Darkness
Beyond the Reach of God
Take my Love, Take my Land (Mal's song)
No One is Alone
Serenity
The Gift We Give Tomorrow
Darkness
Moment of Darkness
Dawn
Brighter Than Today
Jewel in the Night
Lean on Me
Light
Move the World
The Sun is a Miasma of Incandescent Plasma
Gonna be a Cyborg
Uplift
Final Litany of Tarski: If human values will survive for five thousand years...
Five Thousand Years
Meetup : Boston - Greens Versus Blues
Discussion article for the meetup : Boston - Greens Versus Blues
Eloise Rosen is giving a talk, "Greens Versus Blues: Why Politics Make People Stupid, And How to Protect Yourself".
Cambridge/Boston-area Less Wrong meetups are every Sunday at 2pm at Citadel (98 Elm St Apt 1 Somerville, near Porter Square).
Our default schedule is as follows:
—Phase 1: Arrival, greetings, unstructured conversation, and maybe even improv games!
—Phase 2: The headline event. This starts promptly at 3pm, and lasts 30-60 minutes.
—Phase 3: Further discussion. We'll explore the ideas raised in phase 2, often in smaller groups.
—Phase 4: Dinner.
Discussion article for the meetup : Boston - Greens Versus Blues
Meetup : Boston Winter Solstice
Discussion article for the meetup : Boston Winter Solstice (Ritual Report)
The winter solstice is a secular holiday. Last Saturday was New York's large-scale celebration, designed by Ray Arnold, and this Saturday we're having a smaller and cozier local one, and putting our own spin on it. This involves sing-alongs, speeches, and contemplating our place in an uncaring universe. It has a fairly intense emotional arc, including some rather dark parts, and is quite inspirational overall.
Dinner (potluck) will start at 6 pm. The ceremony will start at 7:30 pm and last about two hours.
Discussion article for the meetup : Boston Winter Solstice
Meetup : Boston/Cambridge - The Attention Economy
Discussion article for the meetup : Boston/Cambridge - The Attention Economy
Robin Gane-McCalla will be presenting on "The Attention Economy: how our focus determines the future".
Cambridge/Boston-area Less Wrong meetups are every Sunday at 2pm at Citadel (98 Elm St Apt 1 Somerville, near Porter Square).
Our default schedule is as follows:
—Phase 1: Arrival, greetings, unstructured conversation.
—Phase 2: The headline event. This starts promptly at 3pm, and lasts 30-60 minutes.
—Phase 3: Further discussion. We'll explore the ideas raised in phase 2, often in smaller groups.
—Phase 4: Dinner.
Discussion article for the meetup : Boston/Cambridge - The Attention Economy
Meetup : Boston / Cambridge - The future of life: a cosmic perspective (Max Tegmark), Dec 1
Discussion article for the meetup : Boston / Cambridge - The future of life: a cosmic perspective (Max Tegmark), Dec 1
Max Tegmark will be giving a talk, "The future of life: a cosmic perspective", at 3pm.
We may need a larger venue depending on the turnout, so please RSVP on the meetup page: http://www.meetup.com/Cambridge-Less-Wrong-Meetup/events/151129022/
Cambridge/Boston-area Less Wrong meetups are every Sunday at 2pm at Citadel (98 Elm St Apt 1 Somerville, near Porter Square).
Our default schedule is as follows:
—Phase 1: Arrival, greetings, unstructured conversation.
—Phase 2: The headline event. This starts promptly at 3pm, and lasts 30-60 minutes.
—Phase 3: Further discussion. We'll explore the ideas raised in phase 2, often in smaller groups.
—Phase 4: Dinner.
Discussion article for the meetup : Boston / Cambridge - The future of life: a cosmic perspective (Max Tegmark), Dec 1
Meetup : Boston / Cambridge - Systems, Leverage, and Winning at Life
Discussion article for the meetup : Boston / Cambridge - Systems, Leverage, and Winning at Life
Satvik Beri will be presenting on Systems, Leverage, and Winning at Life.
Cambridge/Boston-area Less Wrong meetups are every Sunday at 2pm at Citadel (98 Elm St Apt 1 Somerville, near Porter Square).
Our default schedule is as follows:
—Phase 1: Arrival, greetings, unstructured conversation.
—Phase 2: The headline event. This starts promptly at 3pm, and lasts 30-60 minutes.
—Phase 3: Further discussion. We'll explore the ideas raised in phase 2, often in smaller groups.
—Phase 4: Dinner.
Discussion article for the meetup : Boston / Cambridge - Systems, Leverage, and Winning at Life
How to have high-value conversations
Since I moved into the Boston rationalist house, I've found myself having an overwhelming amount of conversation compared to my previous baseline. The conversations at Citadel tend to be fairly intellectual and interesting, but there is a lot of topic drift and tendency for entertainment over depth, which seems to be a fairly common pitfall. How can we optimize conversations and direct them towards areas of usefulness and insight?
There have been some previous discussions on this topic on LW, e.g. on useful ways to avoid low-value conversations or steer out of them. I would like to focus on the complementary skill of stimulating high-value directions in a conversation.
First of all, what makes a conversation high-value? There are several possible metrics:
- people learning from each other’s expertise and experience
- people getting to know each other better
- exchange of advice and feedback
- generating ideas and insights
All of these involve increasing the total amount of information available to the participants, either through revealing information that is already there, or through creating new information. This is more likely to happen in a topic area where someone has strong opinions or expertise, or, on the other hand, an area that someone finds challenging where they stand to learn a lot.
One effective way to steer a conversation is through asking purposeful questions. The questions should have sufficient depth to lead to interesting answers, but not be vague or put the other person on the spot. In that sense, a question like “What have you been thinking about lately?” is better than “What do you care about?” or “What are you terminal goals?”. It is better if the question leaves a line of retreat and doesn’t make the person feel low status if they don’t have an answer.
The types of questions that are productive and comfortable are generally different for group and one-on-one conversations. Two-person conversations are more conducive to openness, so one would be able to ask personal questions like
- what memes have affected you strongly in the past or shaped your beliefs?
- what has been important to you lately?
- what has been difficult for you lately?
- what eccentric things have you done?
Some questions are likely to lead to interesting topics in an N-person conversation for any N:
- what have you learned recently?
- what surprised you about experience X?
- what have you been reading?
- who are your role models?
- I have been confused about X, does anyone have advice?
It is generally harder to steer a group conversation in productive directions than a two-person conversation, but the payoff is higher as well, since more people’s time is at stake. Since a single person has less influence in a group conversation, it’s important to use it well. Sometimes the most useful thing to do in a group conversation is to split it into smaller conversations. Asking someone about a subject that only they are likely to be interested in might be considered impolite to the others, but often leads to better separate conversations for everyone involved.
Questions do have limitations as a conversation tactic, and can sometimes result in awkward silence or a string of brief uninformative replies. If this happens, it’s handy to be prepared to answer your own question, which might inspire others to answer it as well. It is generally a good idea to have something that you’d like to talk about, perhaps something you've been working on or a concept that puzzles you, that you can bring up independently of whether and how people respond to your questions. Thinking in advance of topics to discuss with specific people is especially useful, e.g. relating to their past experiences or skill areas.
Do people have advice or good examples of directing conversations? Recalling the best conversations you've ever had, what made them happen?
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}