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

Comment author: arthurlewis 01 March 2012 07:26:32PM 0 points [-]

In case this hasn't already happened, or might happen again, I'd also be interested.

Comment author: arthurlewis 03 June 2009 05:13:21AM 5 points [-]

He's neither celebrity nor academic, but I've always wanted to see a diavlog between Eliezer and PJ Eby.

Comment author: arthurlewis 24 May 2009 08:02:00AM 3 points [-]

In a sense, I think that all creative pursuits are served well by the type of "brute force" you're talking about. You write/play/draw something, decide if you like it, and then work from there. However, narrowing down the search space, as you described, can be easier if you leave it to the unconscious. If you've been listening to the style of music you're composing in, or reading the style you're writing in, etc., it should have at least a few heuristics already loaded up. In the case of your melodies, what happens if you just "hum something?"

I generated a segment by pianistic experimentation (rather than from my aural imagination)

This is how I write most of my music. Every once in a while, a melody or chord progression will just show up fully formed, usually on the subway or in the shower, but it's rare. Most of the other songwriters/composers I know work similarly. You say you don't hear new music in your head; a lot of the time, I don't either. I hear it as it comes out of my mouth or speakers in real-time.

Comment author: John_Maxwell_IV 20 May 2009 11:36:10PM 0 points [-]

I tried the macintosh executable. Double-clicking did nothing except bring the Terminal application to the front. I attempted to execute it from Terminal and was told I didn't have execute privileges. I added the execute privilege, attempted to execute again, and got a segmentation fault.

Comment author: arthurlewis 24 May 2009 06:30:59AM 0 points [-]

It's an Intel binary; perhaps you're on PowerPC?

Comment author: arthurlewis 18 April 2009 03:08:20AM 0 points [-]

3 seems likely to be true, given this Google search for "cronoDAS Battletoads."

Comment author: ciphergoth 17 April 2009 01:23:47PM 6 points [-]

This drives me crazy when it happens to me.

  • Someone: "Shall we invite X?"
  • Me: "No, X is bad news. I can't remember at all how I came to this conclusion, but I recently observed something and firmly set a bad news flag against X."
Comment author: arthurlewis 18 April 2009 12:09:43AM 6 points [-]

Those kinds of flags are the only way I can remember what I like. My memory is poor enough that I lose most details about books and movies within a few months, but if I really liked something, that 5-Yay rating sticks around for years.

Hmm, I guess that's why part of my brain still thinks Moulin Rouge, which I saw on a very enjoyable date, and never really had the urge to actually watch again, is one of my favorite movies.

Compression seems a fine analogy to me, as long as we're talking about mp3's and flv's, rather than zip's and tar's.

Comment author: arthurlewis 17 April 2009 11:43:13PM 0 points [-]

If you had actually donated $400 to PSI, but the rest of the statement were true, would that count as the lie?

Comment author: arthurlewis 16 April 2009 04:13:56PM 7 points [-]
  • Handle: arthurlewis
  • Location: New York, NY
  • Age: 28
  • Education: BA in Music.
  • Occupation: Musician / Teacher / Mac Support Guy
  • Blog/Music: http://arthurthefourth.com

My career as a rationalist began when I started doing tech support, and realized the divide between successful troubleshooting and what most customers tried to do. I think the key to "winning" is to challenge your assumptions about how to win, and what winning is. I think that makes me an instrumental rationalist, but I'm not quite sure I understand the term. I'm here because OB and LW are among the closest things I've ever seen to an honest attempt to discover truth, whatever that may turn out to mean. And because I really like the phrase "Shut up and calculate!"

Note to new commenters: The "Help" link below the comment box will give you formatting tips.

Comment author: PhilGoetz 11 April 2009 03:24:01PM *  1 point [-]

Sometimes history moves slowly. During his life, Bach was best known as an organist; sure, later composers studied and loved his work, but it wasn't until the mid 19th century that he started to get the reputation that he has now.

I thought someone would mention that. I think it's different. Schoenberg et al. were famous while they were alive. Their works were performed publicly, and adored by the cogniscenti, for decades. Bach grew into public favor. Schoenberg fell out of public favor. He had every chance the music establishment could give him, and still fell out of favor.

(BTW, Haydn, Mozart, and Beethoven all made special studies of Bach's music in the 18th century; so I'm skeptical of the "Bach had no reputation as a composer" argument.)

Also note that the time between when Bach wrote the St. Matthew Passion in 1727, and when Mendelssohn "revived" it in 1829, was only 102 years. We've already had 100 years of Schoenberg.

Also note that Bach is always brought up in this context because he is such a notable exception in that way

However, I think there's another factor at play here - "art music" experienced the same academization and post-modernization that we saw in the visual arts. Serialism, musicque concrete, aleatory composition - all these things pushed the boundaries of what "music" actually meant, going against popular sensibilities in ways that (and I could be wrong here) the "art music" of previous centuries did not.

I agree completely.

Comment author: arthurlewis 11 April 2009 04:30:26PM 1 point [-]

I don't think Schoenberg ever had public favor. He may have had the favor of the "elite" music audience, but, as I understand it, the public at large was listening to early jazz. Maybe this is my American bias; I'm not sure.

I see your point about Bach; I always had the impression that composers knew about him, but the masses didn't. I could be wrong. What were people in their homes actually playing in the 18th and 19th centuries? Whose music were they going to see? The question of whether or not "popular music" has replaced the music of the canonical composers from a cultural standpoint hinges on these answers that I don't have.

Comment author: ciphergoth 11 April 2009 01:49:01PM *  4 points [-]

None of your ideas ring in the least bit true for me as an explanation of why I like BDSM. I think the original article is much closer to the mark in linking it to the enjoyment of spicy food, horror movies, rollercoasters, computer games, or intellectual challenges.

Comment author: arthurlewis 11 April 2009 02:10:06PM 1 point [-]

Ciphergoth, I'm proposing that 5 is another option, not that it should replace the ones he's already proposed. I don't know much about BDSM, but I assume it covers a much wider spectrum than the enjoyment of pain. My main point, which I didn't express clearly enough, is that the term "masochism" is being seriously overloaded in the post. Personally, I can see a connection between spicy food and intellectual challenges (both put me into an excited and forward-moving state, although for propbably different reasons), but horror movies and rollercoasters go into a completely different category (just being scary).

View more: Next