Comment author: Huluk 26 March 2016 12:55:37AM *  26 points [-]

[Survey Taken Thread]

By ancient tradition, if you take the survey you may comment saying you have done so here, and people will upvote you and you will get karma.

Let's make these comments a reply to this post. That way we continue the tradition, but keep the discussion a bit cleaner.

Comment author: ahartell 27 March 2016 04:15:20AM 36 points [-]

Just finished. I'm sure my calibration was terrible though.

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 01 August 2015 02:47:14PM 2 points [-]

Podcasts Thread

Comment author: ahartell 02 August 2015 05:45:37AM *  1 point [-]

Hello Internet is a fun "two guys talking" podcast made by two popular youtubers including CGPGray, the guy who made this great video about the future of automation and employment. Low (almost no) informational content, but really enjoyable, and CGPGray will often say things that make it sound as if he's read at least some of LessWrong/Overcoming Bias. At the very least he's a transhumanist.

Comment author: ahartell 24 October 2014 07:07:30PM 38 points [-]

Completed!

Comment author: MrMind 28 March 2013 03:10:32PM 3 points [-]

Any data? Yes. In my personal experience that kind of question were able to kill flirty and touchy behaviour 100% of the time.

Double-blinded, debiased, large sampled data? I don't think, but it might be a fun project for some social scientist out there.

Comment author: ahartell 28 March 2013 05:08:18PM 2 points [-]

There is also the possibility that sex would not have happened anyway but brining it up that that was your intention made them want to distance themselves from the situation. And the possibility that it would have happened if you hadn't asked but only because the flirty/touchy behavior was leading them towards wanting to have sex but asking interrupted the process (this is distinct from the original claim in that the problem wasn't asking but asking too soon).

In response to comment by shminux on Exponent of Desire
Comment author: wanderingsoul 27 February 2013 06:05:57AM *  9 points [-]

I don't really care much about the it

My friends do though, so I often wish I cared more

I'm unsure whether I want to be moved by that consideration though

I really wish I had stronger opinions about things like that

But I don't really know how much good that wish is doing me

At least I give self reflection a shot though, people always say it has good effects

Though I'm unsure whether I should believe the hype

I dislike always being uncertain

Though I admit that dislike has both unpleasant and motivating aspects

And I love just what this drive to dispel uncertainty can do

...

Bonus points to whoever manages to make one recurse on itself and actually get the infinite series

Comment author: ahartell 27 February 2013 08:03:11AM 0 points [-]

Awesome.

Shouldn't the last one refer to the one above it rather that the one two places above it though? I think it should be "and I love being able to recognize the costs and benefits of this uncertainty" rather than "and I love just what this drive to dispel uncertainty can do."

Comment author: buybuydandavis 17 February 2013 03:52:51AM 3 points [-]

But are they sure that the men aren't similarly punished, even when expected to be aggressive?

For example, people may expect men to be aggressive. But other men are expected to be aggressive back. So you can be punished, while still doing what's expected. Basically, it's called losing in a competitive environment.

But there is a problem with our discussion. We're talking an undefined categorical situation. Everyone reading it can insert their own scenario as a prototype, leaving no one talking about the same thing.

This thread on "hostile unfriendly tone" is suffering from a severe lack of concrete details. Without concretes, we're just projecting the situations we find problematic onto the schema.

Comment author: ahartell 17 February 2013 04:08:11AM 2 points [-]

I don't know if they're sure. Mostly I was just responding to the "who are they supposed to have learned that from?". I think there are a lot of social, gender expectation-y things that would lead to women thinking that they were "supposed" to be less assertive.

Comment author: buybuydandavis 17 February 2013 02:42:19AM *  -1 points [-]

I tend to sign my email with an actual signature.
- Dan

Does that make me a horrible person?

Agonizing over a period versus an ellipsis? I recoil in horror at the thought of having such feelings routinely intrude into my consciousness.

It's always interesting to see how the other half lives, even when it's appalling.

Were they saying that women learned they shouldn't be abrupt in the work place?

Who are they supposed to have learned that from? They sure as hell didn't learn that from me. And every man I know wishes women were more to the point. The stereotype criticism is "blah blah blah", not abruptness. If you're in charge, make decisions, and give orders. I'll salute, and we'll get something done.

EDIT: On further thought, for business purposes, most men prefer than women be more abrupt and bossy. On a personal/romantic level, men don't like women to be abrupt and bossy. Personal is probably more motivating than business.

Comment author: ahartell 17 February 2013 03:41:22AM 3 points [-]

Who are they supposed to have learned that from? They sure as hell didn't learn that from me. And every man I know wishes women were more to the point. The stereotype criticism is "blah blah blah", not abruptness. If you're in charge, make decisions, and give orders. I'll salute, and we'll get something done.

No citations, but I've heard a lot of times that women in business positions are punished for being assertive or aggressive in situations where men are expected to do the same. I don't know if this is true (I think it probably is), but either way I've definitely heard it enough times that it doesn't surprise me that women would think they should try not to seem abrupt or bossy.

Comment author: jooyous 16 February 2013 09:07:28AM *  0 points [-]

Here is why your comment strikes me as unfriendly and not particularly rational:

I wonder

You wonder? If you really wanted to know you would either ask me or you could just read through my comment history and determine that, no, I am pretty direct and people still misunderstand me. Or you could identify specific examples where this did happen and let me know in a helpful way where I messed up my argument. Instead, you just sort of demonstratively express your hypothesis so people who already agree with you can see it and pat you on the back. Pretty mind-killery, in my opinion.

But it's okay! I understand! These things happen. =]

Comment author: ahartell 16 February 2013 04:44:35PM *  4 points [-]

To be honest, I'm surprised by the hostility of your comments here. I was bringing a hypothesis to your attention so that you could evaluate it. I suppose I could have read all of your comments but I don't really care that much I guess. "I wonder" was meant to identify this as a passing thought. And in my second comment I updated away from the hypothesis, so I'm not sure why this tone would be present.

I might be misreading it, but your last sentence sounds sort of fake-nice and passive aggressive due to the rest of the comment. I normally wouldn't make an entire comment just about tone, and I actually like the tone on Lessswrong, but this conversation is sort of about it, and like I said, I was surprised.

Comment author: jooyous 16 February 2013 08:45:50AM 1 point [-]

Haha, because words like "sorry" and "thank you" and occasional exclamation marks make my writing completely incomprehensible. =P

Comment author: ahartell 16 February 2013 08:51:50AM 2 points [-]

It doesn't seem like that would be the case, no. I expected your alterations to have been deeper than that, including stuff like softening your disagreement.

Comment author: jooyous 15 February 2013 08:06:50AM *  7 points [-]

Personally, I find the niceness-padding to be perfectly well-calibrated for dealing with disagreements because people are thoughtful and respectful. I find it to be insufficient when dealing with people talking past each other. It's really frustrating! This is a community full of interesting, intelligent people whose opinion I want to know ... that sometimes aren't bothering to carefully read what I wrote. And then not bothering to read carefully when I politely tell them that they misread what I wrote and clarify. So then I start thinking that this isn't a coincidence, so maybe they don't want to read what I write... ? So then I feel like they don't like me even though I like them. Nooooo, sadness.

Currently, the community has a low-niceness-padding standard, which is great for people who prefer that style of interaction, but which sucks for people who would prefer more niceness-padding, and those people are either driven away from the community or spend much of their time here feeling alienated and upset.

Here is how I see the difference: the people who think there's too much niceness-padding feel annoyed that they have to sift through it. The people who think there is insufficient niceness-padding are getting hurt.

This makes me personally err on the side of niceness. And while I understand that excessive niceness turns into clutter, I think that even the lowest of the four levels that you demonstrated doesn't happen as often as it should in some discussions.

Comment author: ahartell 16 February 2013 07:25:06AM 1 point [-]

I wonder if your niceness padding has led to people missing your point and to you being frustrated by their failure to understand you.

View more: Next