Well, the position you're advocating here is certainly not one I - or other smart cryo advocates - agree with, but there is room for debate to be had. Let me keep it short for this comment though.

First of all, cryonics aims to vitrify people, not freeze them. This means they - ideally - turn into glass, not ice.

As such, they could not be thawed.

Going up a step in complexity, most cryo advocates don't believe that they will be revived in the same body, rather that the information that makes them who they are will be extracted and used to construct a real or virtual or robotic body.

Also, this:

They don't really know how to do this yet. How far along are they now? Have they frozen and thawed a mouse yet,

Putting aside that cryonics is not about freezing and thawing, there is the issue of wanting to wait until the revival side of cryonics is perfected. Well, sure, by the time science has advanced to that point, you would no longer have to make a probabilistic decision. But by that point, medical conditions - including aging - will probably have been eliminated. If you survive that far, good on you. But suppose we reach that point in 200 years' time. If you refuse cryonics because it's not yet proven, you will be dead by the time the proof comes.

So you have to make the decision right now: do you want to lose $1/day if cryonics doesn't work, or do you want to gain your life back if it does?

And this:

I won't let them freeze me earlier than that, because there's essentially no chance I'll be even able to walk and talk

I'm confused here. If you are cryopreserved (please, not frozen) at date X, and then at a later date X+100 they invent better revival technology, you can have that better revival technology used on you, even if it hadn't been invented when you were deanimated and cryopreserved! This seems so obvious to me that I'm confused about why you're objecting to it. Help me out?!

Because if you put a high value on your life, this amounts to Pascal's Mugging.

No, it doesn't, not unless you're talking about valuing your life at $10^(10^10000000) or something ridiculous.

Also, 1/10 chance of cryonics working is ridiculously optimistic.

There's a bit of room for disagreement here, but I haven't heard a convincing argument for anything much lower. What did you have in mind?

Just to elaborate, I noticed a long time ago that when I was grading every day with a 1-10 pain rating, it made everything seem extremely dismal, especially since almost no day was ever scored "zero". Recasting this so that I also took note of when I was feeling really great (even if it was just in the morning, etc.) allowed me to see a more balanced and realistic picture of my state.

Sure, avoiding negative feedback loops is easier said than done. Sometimes things are just that bad. All I can say is that I seem to have cultivated a reflexive, aversive reaction to ruminating. I'm almost more scared of ruminating, and the places that leads, than I am scared of pain. I don't know if this is a psychologically healthy stance, but it keeps my thoughts mostly in a place that I like.

I do not seem to have the knack for lucid dreaming, but I have used meditation to some minor success.

This made me think of this cartoon: http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?n=1174.

Right now, I'm grateful for coffee.

Do you mean the pronouns used to address your character are automatically edited to be what you want?

It would be interesting if people could put up lists of the pronouns they prefer, and that would give them a tool for roughly judging how much trouble people are willing to go to to appear to be on their side.

Are there any games which encourage a you/thou distinction?

What are your favorite puns?

It turns out that a lot of color blind people can see their difficult colors a little bit, and technological aid helps.

http://wearecolorblind.com/article/oxy-iso-glasses-review/

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-eyewear-could-help-people-with-red-green-color-blindness/

They don't seem to help (most?) people as much of the more enthusiastic early reviews said, but aren't totally useless, either.

so it is still possible to run out of the resources

Yes, but I would rather see this as a sign that you hit a wall with your motivation-creating skill, than a limitation on how much motivation you can have or how quickly you can achieve it. There seems to be plenty of evidence for people having success spirals that are very quick and powerful.

Also, the correct meta-strategy when you have little motivation seems to be to direct as much of it as you can towards exploring ways to get more motivation. I expect most people are not strategic about their motivation, so I point it out whenever I can.

[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.