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

Comment author: ancientcampus 31 October 2014 01:33:10AM 3 points [-]

Nice! I really hope the pendulum doesn't swing that far, though.

Comment author: fubarobfusco 31 October 2014 03:11:33AM *  3 points [-]

Thanks. To explain the joke and/or show my work:

  • The seed idea here was the abolition of copyright in a post-consumerist society — not post-Singularity, but dramatically post-scarcity compared to today. Commercial media stopped being a thing because ① people don't need jobs because post-scarcity; ② noncommercial media descended from fan-works continued to improve in production quality; but ③ people still like good stories, and the most popular stories are often ones based on established, well-known characters. (From Anansi to Hamlet would make a great book title.)
  • The twist was literary theory as a scientific-mathematical discipline. This is an extrapolation from the computational turn in linguistics. In this future, "literary theory" refers to the mathematical study of possible and actual stories; with computational literary theory being the application of computational linguistics and cognitive science to the topic.
  • The bit that I had to go back and rewrite was to consistently use the words "storytelling" and "story" in place of words such as "fiction" and "literature", except in the article title and the academic field "literary theory". This future doesn't consider there to be hard boundaries between "folktales", "genre fiction", "fan fiction", and "literature" — all of these are stories, and this isn't a fluffy postmodern doctrine but a scientific result.
  • It's Whig history. The future writers think of their unitary concept of storytelling as both scientifically proven and obviously true, and the former era's distinctions (and laws) as being both superstitious and wicked. They think of copyright as an unnatural imposition on human culture — but they do so from a standpoint where authors/storytellers don't have to worry about earning a living.
  • Chiyoda is the ward of Tokyo in which Akihabara district is located.
  • E. Mitchell Leonard, of Leonard's Theorem, is E. L. James from a parallel universe.
Comment author: polymathwannabe 29 October 2014 12:38:09AM 3 points [-]

NY Times on the wrongness of political party-related discrimination.

Comment author: fubarobfusco 30 October 2014 08:05:16AM 2 points [-]

I doubt this generalizes very well.

There have clearly been cases in the history of the world where one party made it clear that they really did intend to hurt or kill their perceived opponents. And then, after acceding to power, went on to do just that.

I've seen remarks here on LW from at least one person in a central European country that he or she felt increasingly personally unsafe due to particular political factions in that country producing increasingly violent rhetoric. I would not tell that person that he or she would be wrong to shun people who advocated political violence against him or her.

Here in the U.S., it sure seems that political eliminationist rhetoric (of the "All the Other Party should be killed as traitors" sort) is produced largely as a form of commercial entertainment, not serious political advocacy. But I say that from a position of relative security and privilege ....

Comment author: DataPacRat 29 October 2014 04:07:21PM 4 points [-]

Seeking LWist Caricatures

I've written the existence of a cult-like "Bayesian Conspiracy" of mostly rebellious post-apocalypse teens - and now I'm looking for individuals to populate it with. What I /want/ to do is come up with as many ways that someone who's part of the LW/HPMOR/Sequences/Yudkowsky-ite/etc memeplex could go wrong, that tend not to happen to members of the regular skeptical community. Someone who's focused on a Basilisk, someone on Pascal's Mugging, someone focused on dividing up an infinity of timelines into unequal groups...

Put another way, I've been trying to think of the various ways that people outside the memeplex see those inside it as weirdos.

(My narrative goal: For my protagonist to experience trying to be a teacher. I'd be ecstatic if I could have at least one of the cultists be able to teach her a thing or two in return, but since I've based her knowledge of the memeplex on mine, that's kind of tricky to arrange.)

I can't guarantee that I'll end up spending more than a couple of sentences on any of this - but I figure that the more ideas I have to try building with, the more likely I will.

(Also asked on Reddit at https://www.reddit.com/r/rational/comments/2kopgx/qbst_seeking_lwist_caricatures/ .)

Comment author: fubarobfusco 30 October 2014 07:49:10AM 3 points [-]

The person who airs fringe supremacist (or even eliminationist) views ... then is surprised and offended when members of the targeted groups shun him or her instead of arguing the points as if they were a matter of abstract intellectual interest.

No, wait, that's probably not LW-specific enough.

Comment author: philh 29 October 2014 05:45:09PM 4 points [-]

The person who uses ev psych to justify their romantic preferences to potential and current partners. (There's a generalisation of this that I'm not sure how to describe, but I've fallen into it when talking with friends about the game-theoretical value of friendship.)

Comment author: fubarobfusco 30 October 2014 07:40:05AM 2 points [-]

One possible generalization: Being insecure about personal preferences, and so seeking to show that one's personal likes are rooted directly in something universal — something outside one's own personal history, culture, subculture, upbringing, etc.

Comment author: fubarobfusco 30 October 2014 07:18:11AM *  13 points [-]

Fan fiction is an historical term for certain forms of [[storytelling]] during the [[Industrial-Copyright Era]]. The term was first used within [[early fandom]] to describe not-for-profit storytelling within fandom, but in the late 20th century came to refer specifically to stories told in violation of the era's [[commercial censorship]] laws, under which a commercially and legally recognized "owner" could impose legal penalties on tellers of "derivative" stories.

Subsequent to the international abolition of commercial censorship following the [[Chiyoda Convention of 2023]], the term became one of largely historical significance. Analytic and [[computational literary theory]] does not support a distinction between "fan" storytelling and "original" storytelling in works published before or after the Industrial-Copyright Era.[1][2][3]

While pre-analytic literary theorists had by and large discarded the concept of "originality" as a poor model of the process of story creation, [[Leonard's Theorem]] showed that the classification of authors or works into "original" and "fan" was an artifact of the censorship regime rather than of the creative process itself. The bimodal distributions of βcha and φplot arose from intermediate values being subject to legal penalty.

"Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal; bad poets deface what they take, and good poets make it into something better, or at least something different." —T. S. Eliot, early industrial-era author

"In gist, 'original' stories are just 'fan' stories with the names changed." — E. Mitchell Leonard, analytic literary theorist

Comment author: ZankerH 27 October 2014 01:39:03PM 2 points [-]
  • Technological progress and social/political progress are loosely correlated at best

  • Compared to technological progress, there has been little or no social/political progress since the mid-18th century - if anything, there has been a regression

  • There is no such thing as moral progress, only people in charge of enforcing present moral norms selectively evaluating past moral norms as wrong because they disagree with present moral norms

Comment author: fubarobfusco 28 October 2014 04:06:02AM *  1 point [-]

How do you square your beliefs with (for instance) the decline in murder in the Western world — see, e.g. Eisner, Long-Term Historical Trends in Violent Crime?

Comment author: SolveIt 27 October 2014 09:04:03PM 2 points [-]

Since SG has better health care, education, and infrastructure than the US, and also doesn't invade other countries or spy massively on its own citizens, I think it's fair to say that 22% extra of GDP that the US taxes its citizens is simply squandered.

This is just plain wrong. Mostly because Singapore and the US are different countries in different circumstances. Just to name one, Singapore is tiny. Things are a lot cheaper when you're small. Small countries are sustainable because international trade means you don't have to be self-sufficient, and because alliances with larger countries let you get away with having a weak military. The existence of large countries is pretty important for this dynamic.

Now, I'm not saying the US is doing a better job than Singapore. In fact, I think Singapore is probably using its money better, albeit for unrelated reasons. I'm just saying that your analysis is far too simple to be at all useful except perhaps by accident.

Comment author: fubarobfusco 28 October 2014 01:25:52AM 0 points [-]

Things are a lot cheaper when you're small.

Things are a lot cheaper when you're large. It's called "economy of scale".

Comment author: ChrisHallquist 25 October 2014 02:50:10AM 4 points [-]

Liberal here, I think my major heresy is being pro-free trade.

Also, I'm not sure if there's actually a standard liberal view of zoning policy, but it often feels like the standard view is that we need to keep restrictive zoning laws in place to keep out those evil gentrifiers, in which case my support for loser zoning regulations is another major heresy.

You could argue I should call myself a libertarian, because I agree the main thrust of Milton Friedman's book Capitalism and Freedom. However, I suspect a politician running on Friedman's platform today would be branded a socialist if a Democrat, and a RINO if a Republican.

(Friedman, among other things, supported a version of guaranteed basic income. To which today's GOP mainstream would probably say, "but if we do that, it will just make poor people even lazier!")

Political labels are weird.

Comment author: fubarobfusco 25 October 2014 06:31:46PM 1 point [-]

(Friedman, among other things, supported a version of guaranteed basic income. To which today's GOP mainstream would probably say, "but if we do that, it will just make poor people even lazier!")

Good thing! We're going to end up in a world where robots do the poor-people jobs. (Just as we are now in a world where machines do the horse and ox jobs, like plowing and pulling carriages.) I for one would prefer that the poor people not starve to death as a result.

Comment author: fubarobfusco 25 October 2014 03:56:41AM 0 points [-]

My political views aren't adequately expressed by "libertarian". I call myself a liberal-flavored libertarian, by which I mean that I want the government to hurt people less.

Gotta agree with you there. I describe myself as a center-libertarian based on my Political Compass scores, which put me halfway between the right-libertarians and the left-anarchists.

The possibility that the government is giving too much to poor people is low on my list of concerns. I also believe that harm-causing processes should be shut down before support systems

And that's why, on the survey, I put "social democrat" on the coarse scale and "left-libertarian" on the fine scale. As far as I can tell, actual self-described social-democrats tend to be more libertarian on social and geopolitical issues than actual self-described liberals (which is to say, centrists).

Comment author: Zubon 25 October 2014 02:23:11AM *  3 points [-]

"We found that brainteasers are a complete waste of time ... They don’t predict anything. They serve primarily to make the interviewer feel smart."

Link: Here's Why Google Stopped Asking Bizarre, Crazy-Hard Interview Questions

Comment author: fubarobfusco 25 October 2014 02:44:00AM 1 point [-]

Something to keep in mind is that a large organization (like Google) may have pretty decentralized hiring practices. Even if Engineering interviewers believe that "brainteaser" questions are a bad idea, that doesn't mean Sales or Finance agrees. And a site called "Business Insider" may care more about Sales or Finance than Engineering ....

View more: Next