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

Comment author: Cyan 12 October 2013 12:47:13AM 4 points [-]

Two, apparently. The cited article was published in 1948.

Comment author: k3nt 12 October 2013 01:00:52AM 1 point [-]

Muchas gracias. Probably should have been able to figure that out myself.

Comment author: k3nt 11 October 2013 10:20:35PM 0 points [-]

Is the Duncan Black who wrote the article cited ("On the Rationale of Group Decision-Making") the same Duncan Black who writes "eschatonblog.com" (the very liberal blog)? It seems unlikely, but how many politically interested Duncan Blacks can there really be?

Comment author: Swimmer963 16 July 2013 10:24:53PM *  2 points [-]

Classical GTD systems -2: High overhead, I don't do a lot of work in front of a desk/computer, when I do it's for fun, and I've frequently done more than 40 hours a week of the kind of work that GTD systems (as usually described) don't help with at all. In nursing, you show up on time, tasks appear, and you do them. Organization is extremely important, and a far from solved problem for me, but by necessity you plan things and do them in the short term, and procrastination isn't a factor. (Also, plans almost never actually end up being executed because shit goes down, so flexibility is more important.) I would come home exhausted from work and start doing projects for fun off a written to-do list, and it made them un-fun.

I think classical GTD systems are likely a good thing in general, and I was applying them to the wrong problem.

Written to-do lists of long term goals +5: Don't have the high overhead, avoid most of the fun-sucking aspects, and keep me accountable/remind me when there's something I actually want to do but haven't booked time for in a while. Probably the most effective change I've made in the past year.

My giant iPhone Note document of random information capture +3: I don't think this is actually a good system, but it's easy, and fairly low-overhead–I just have to read through the list once in a while and delete stuff I've dealt with/has become irrelevant. I recently split my giant Note into about 10 appropriately titled Notes for capturing thoughts when I'm out and about.

RTM +4: It's a clever program, but slightly less flexible than I'd like, and I probably don't use it properly. I have a few large multi-step tasks, like "Apply for California Board of Nursing registration", which will take forever, and thus sit forever in my inbox, as well as quick self-reminders like "renew library books" or "email person X". I literally just figured out how to make separate lists. The list "Home/Computer" is the most helpful, because I frequently have minor tasks, like emailing someone or finding a particular object in my house, that I remember when I'm not at a computer/not at home, and then forget by the time I get home. RTM works excellently for these. It's probably inappropriate for large multi-step goals, but I'm still looking for another iPhone-portable software option. RTM doesn't particularly make me feel like doing things unless they're really easy things like "go to the bank", in which case the little dopamine hit of marking the task as 'done' compensates for the annoyance of getting home 10 minutes later.

Social commitment +2: It works when I do it. It's time-consuming, and you have to have a community of people around you who'll actually hold you accountable and care, and I don't end up getting around to making social commitments a lot of the time.

Rescuetime (site) +1: Keeps track of how much time you spend on different programs or sites, and then gives productivity ratings. It doesn't make a huge difference, and I don't look at it often, but it provides a bit of an incentive to "win" and get good productivity scores.

Physical activity +4: Doesn't fit into any of the categories, but I use it like some people use modafinil. It's not just for productivity–I will literally get depressed if I don't get enough cardio, and it feels like a physiological/neurotransmitter balance thing. But it's also productivity. I can always justify taking an hour or two off working on something to go work out, because I will get much more done in the same period of time, even accounting for the hours I take off.

Comment author: k3nt 19 July 2013 05:45:54PM 0 points [-]

Just a caution: using the Notes program on iphone (the default program that the iphone and ipad come with, with the little yellow and brown icon) can be dangerous. Mine seems to randomly delete notes for no known reason. I stopped using this program entirely after it happened to me once. (In my case, it may have been due to taking too many large-ish videos that were sent to my 'photostream' and overloaded it, but I'm not certain of that.)

Obviously if that's not the program you're using then disregard.

Comment author: Lightwave 21 September 2012 07:34:56PM 1 point [-]

Some of them were general moral principles, but some of them were specific statements.

Trolley problems are also very specific, but people have great trouble with them. Maybe I should have said "non-familiar" rather than just "general".

Comment author: k3nt 22 September 2012 07:29:23PM 1 point [-]

If you read the study, they say that the "specific" questions they are asking are questions that were very salient at the time of the study. These are things that people were talking about and arguing about at the time, and were questions with real-world implications. Thus precisely not "trolley problems."

Comment author: Desrtopa 21 September 2012 06:55:42PM 9 points [-]

I have to wonder if many of the respondents in the survey didn't hold any position with much strength in the first place. Our society enforces the belief, not only that everyone is entitled to their opinions, but that everyone should have an opinion on just about any issue. People tend to stand by "opinions" that are really just snap judgments, which may be largely arbitrary.

If the respondents had little basis for determining their responses in the first place, it's unsurprising if they don't notice when they've been changed, and that it doesn't affect their ability to argue for them.

Comment author: k3nt 22 September 2012 07:22:32PM 2 points [-]

But the study said:

"The statements in condition two were picked to represent salient and important current dilemmas from Swedish media and societal debate at the time of the study."

Comment author: k3nt 19 October 2011 05:54:23AM 7 points [-]

Well I've finally gotten to this point in the series and I have to say how strange it is to have worked through a ton of very hairy quantum physics (which I still don't fully understand, not really, not by a long shot) ... only to have it utilized to bring down a hammer on a thoroughly stupid philosophical argument. Feels a little like using a car crusher to pop a balloon. But the ride has been enjoyable. Thanks.

Comment author: Benquo 14 June 2011 06:12:40PM 8 points [-]

Upvoted for prescience.

Comment author: k3nt 16 August 2011 10:50:31PM 0 points [-]


Comment author: k3nt 06 August 2011 06:16:14PM *  9 points [-]

Thanks for the link. I read the free chapter. The rest of it ... $15+ for a kindle version? Seriously?

Here's a line that spoke to me, toward the end of chapter 1:

"if you like the metaphor of your mind as a government, then “you”—the part of your brain that experiences the world and feels like you’re in “control”—is better thought of as a press secretary than as the president."

For those who haven't paid attention to too many press conferences, the job of the press secretary is to be a lying sack of s**t who will justify anything done by the administration, no matter how repugnant, stupid, immoral or illegal.

Which of course does seem to be the job of our 'rational' selves, way too much of the time.

Comment author: AlexMennen 12 July 2011 02:58:54AM 1 point [-]

One thing I'm a bit confused about: How would weighted probabilities work when there are more than two possible outcomes? "sum Probability(x) = 1" does not imply "sum Weighted Probability(x) = 1", and furthermore, you can get a different weighted probability distribution by grouping similar outcomes and applying the weighting stepwise, first to groups of similar outcomes, and then to specific outcomes within the groups.

Comment author: k3nt 12 July 2011 05:09:38AM 1 point [-]

I think there's probably an interesting point in there but I can't quite parse the text. Can you give an example?

Comment author: Swimmer963 14 March 2011 06:08:39PM 5 points [-]

I am...very impressed. Currently searching for areas in MY life where I can apply this.

Comment author: k3nt 14 March 2011 08:11:17PM 1 point [-]

Me, too.

View more: Next