Comment author: kbaxter 22 July 2014 03:24:18PM *  2 points [-]

I know this isn't the point, but I object to the quote at the beginning of your post. Maybe it's just because I'm one of "those who don’t live in that place," but what about people who are optimizing for something other than their career? Is that really such a big "exception?" Or am I taking the quote out of context, or does he think those people are optimizing for the wrong things, or what?

Some examples of alternative things one may be optimizing for when selecting where to live:

  • A significant other's career (or an area compatible with both people's careers)

  • Being near family or friends

  • Convenient access to specific hobbies

  • The weather

Comment author: Algernoq 15 July 2014 12:10:31AM 1 point [-]

Do you argue that calibrating your prediction for high stakes emotional situations isn't a skill worth exploring ...?

No, I agree it's generally a worthwhile skill. I objected to the generalization from insufficient evidence, when additional evidence was readily available.

At LW we try to do something new. The fact that new ideas often fail doesn't imply that we shouldn't experiment with new ideas. If you aren't curious about exploring new ideas and only want practical advice, LW might not be the place for you.

I guess what's really bothering me here is that less-secure or less-wise people can be taken advantage of by confident-sounding higher-status people. I suppose this is no more true in LW than in the world at large. I respect trying new things.

The simple aspect of feeling agentship in the face of uncertainty also shouldn't be underrated.

Hooray, agency! This is a question I hope to answer.

Are you arguing that there aren't cases where a PhD student has a great idea for a startup and shouldn't put that idea into practice and leave his PhD? Especially when he might have got the connection to secure the necessary venture capital?

I'm arguing that it was the wrong move in this case, and hurt him and others. In general, most startups fail, ideas are worthless compared to execution, and capital is available to good teams.

Comment author: kbaxter 16 July 2014 02:28:26PM *  3 points [-]

By what metric was his decision wrong?

If he's trying to maximize expected total wages over his career, staying in academia isn't a good way to do that. Although he'd probably be better off at a larger, more established company than at a startup.

If he's trying to maximize his career satisfaction, and he wasn't happy in academia but was excited about startups, he made a good decision. And I think that was the case here.

Some other confounding factors about his situation at the time:

  • He'd just been accepted to YCombinator, which is a guarantee of mentoring and venture capital

  • Since he already had funding, it's not like he was dumping his life savings into a startup expecting a return

  • He has an open invitation to come back to his PHD program whenever he wants

If you still really want to blame someone for his decision, I think Paul Graham had a much bigger impact on him than anyone associated with LessWrong did.

Comment author: Viliam_Bur 14 July 2014 07:03:17AM *  7 points [-]

The PhD student dropping out of a top-10 school to try to do a startup after attending a month-long LW event I heard secondhand from a friend. I will edit my post to avoid spreading rumors, but I trust the source.

If it did happen, then I want to know that it happened. It's just that this is the first time I even heard about a month-long LW event. (Which may be an information about my ignorance -- EDIT: it was, indeed --, since till yesterday I didn't even know SPARC takes two weeks, so I thought one week was a maximum for an LW event.)

I heard a lot of "quit the school, see how successful and rich Zuckerberg is" advice, but it was all from non-LW sources.

I can imagine people at some LW meetup giving this kind of advice, since there is nothing preventing people with opinions of this kind to visit LW meetups and give advice. It just seems unlikely, and it certainly is not the LW "crowd wisdom".

Comment author: kbaxter 16 July 2014 02:23:27AM *  6 points [-]

Here's the program he went to, which did happen exactly once. It was a precursor to the much shorter CFAR workshops: http://lesswrong.com/lw/4wm/rationality_boot_camp/

That said, as his friend I think the situation is a lot less sinister than it's been made out to sound here. He didn't quit to go to the program, he quit a year or so afterwards to found a startup. He wasn't all that excited about his PHD program and he was really excited about startups, so he quit and founded a startup with some friends.

In response to comment by kbaxter on Optimal Exercise
Comment author: Suryc11 13 March 2014 11:33:42PM *  1 point [-]

Re the growth mindset, exactly! It's really quite gratifying to be able to literally quantify how much you've become a "better" version of yourself through your direct efforts.

I just think it's unfortunate that the rational component and the weightlifter component of self-identity are often not found together, when both can learn so much from each other. (Plus, of course, it's kinda contrarian-ly cool being both a nerd and a gym rat.)

Nice to see a fellow powerlifter here! My first meet was just last month and it was an amazing experience. By the way, those are impressive stats, especially for 6 months.

In response to comment by Suryc11 on Optimal Exercise
Comment author: kbaxter 15 March 2014 02:17:14AM 1 point [-]

Thanks!

Those are my stats after my most recent meet though, about 2 years in. My first meet 6 months in was 180/95/230 @ 123. It's sad how much progress slows down :(

Comment author: gothgirl420666 12 March 2014 06:13:18AM *  2 points [-]

Also, you may have heard this before, but the video game industry for programmers is kind of a shitshow, because lots of people want to do it, enough so that they're willing to be paid less and endure crappy conditions. Being an indie developer might be a better bet, if you can make it work; I have no idea what the odds of success there are.

I did not know that, thanks.

Anyway, I would rather be involved on the artistic side, but I don't really know anything about that career path either, so.... ¯|_(ツ)_/¯

Comment author: kbaxter 13 March 2014 01:34:38AM *  6 points [-]

It's no better in the art department. In fact it's worse because there are fewer career paths out of the industry.

It works out for some people, but you have to be willing to accept relatively low pay and work a TON at the expense of pretty much every other part of your life - exercise, social time, proper sleep, hobbies, meals away from your desk...

I was a programmer in the game industry for 3.5 years and quit just over a year ago. It was exciting, but it wasn't worth it. I'm much happier now. Let me know if you have questions about my experience.

In response to Optimal Exercise
Comment author: Suryc11 12 March 2014 02:31:16PM 5 points [-]

Anecdotal support for exercising:

Exercise (specifically weightlifting) has been the single most valuable lifestyle change I've implemented. It's drastically improved my confidence and self-esteem, instilled in my self-identity usually beneficial characteristics like "able to persevere through hardship for some goal," and greatly increased my social status.

Highly, highly recommend it.

(Cred: meet conditions 375/245/425 @ 140 lbs.)

In response to comment by Suryc11 on Optimal Exercise
Comment author: kbaxter 13 March 2014 01:02:58AM *  3 points [-]

More anecdotal support: I've experienced the same things. For me, it's helped establish and reinforce a growth mindset. Fitness is an area where with consistent effort, you can really see drastic and measurable improvements in a relatively short time.

In 3 months I went from thinking I was a person who "couldn't run" to being able to run 5k nonstop. In 6 months I went from thinking I was a person who "couldn't squat" to competing in a powerlifting meet. This feels awesome and makes me feel like I can achieve anything if I set my mind to it.

(210/115/255 @ 132, female) :)

In response to comment by kbaxter on Optimal Exercise
Comment author: RomeoStevens 12 March 2014 07:11:11PM *  1 point [-]

You don't sit back in high bar squats.

Based on the mechanics of the movement, and the experience of watching many many people do low bar squats with dangerous form, the burden of proof should be on low bar squats. You are focusing on the $100 shoes and ignoring that lower back injuries are pervasive, debilitating, and hugely expensive in terms of quality of life and money. If $100 lowers your chance of a back injury by 1%, it is likely worth it, given that people with injured lower backs would gladly pay 10k to get rid of it. The amortized cost is also extremely low. If you only wear your WL shoes at the gym the will last 5 years.

Also, I can honestly say that WL shoes are worth it for the subjective improvement in how squatting feels alone. And you don't need to buy the shoes to try out the difference. Just get something around .75 high, put your heels on it, and squat with your body weight. The difference is immediately apparent.

Comment author: kbaxter 13 March 2014 12:33:31AM *  1 point [-]

You sit back less in a high bar squat, but you do sit back. Personally when I was first learning to squat I was learning high bar and I wasn't sitting back enough. I've seen this in other beginners, too. It sounds like our anecdotal experiences don't match up and neither one of us has much more to go on, so we probably just won't agree. That's fine.

Personally, I'm all for WL shoes. I have some and I love them. But I also think it's important not to scare people away from trying the sport. If they think they need $100 specialty shoes to get started, they probably won't bother. Putting your heels on a plate or board is great to try it out but I'll admit it makes me cringe a little thinking about how unstable that must be. It's probably fine for someone just starting out with low weight though.

PS - In case it wasn't clear, I really like your post. I am nitpicking over minor quibbles here, but your main points are great. Thanks for writing it.

In response to comment by kbaxter on Optimal Exercise
Comment author: RomeoStevens 12 March 2014 08:09:07AM 0 points [-]

I haven't seen many beginners who can't hit depth on a high-bar or low-bar squat because of ankle mobility issues. If there are mobility problems, they're usually in the hips.

This is exactly the issue I am addressing. Lumbar rounding is not caused by hip inflexibility.

Comment author: kbaxter 12 March 2014 01:05:55PM *  0 points [-]

That's exactly the point I'm disagreeing with - It doesn't match my experiences teaching and watching beginner lifters. Can you elaborate on your evidence?

I admittedly don't have as much experience with beginners learning to high bar squat, and high bar definitely takes more ankle flexibility than low bar. But based on what I've seen, it's hard to believe it's that common a problem even for high bar.

What makes me skeptical is that I have seen many beginners (including myself at one point) believe that they needed more ankle flexibility to squat properly, but actually the problem was that they weren't sitting back enough, like on the left here:

http://www.nerdfitness.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Screen-Shot-2014-02-24-at-4.27.47-AM-713x402.png

That applies more to low bar squats than high bar squats, but it's a common problem for both.

Speaking of which! I don't have strong feeling either way, but you are very convinced that high bar squatting will cause fewer injuries than low bar squatting. I'd love to hear more about your evidence for that, as well. It seems plausible to me based on the mechanics of the movement but I don't know if it's actually true, and how big the difference in injury rate is if there is one.

If you're going to assert that beginners should high bar squat, and that you need $100 shoes to high bar squat properly, you'd better be pretty sure that high bar squats are actually significantly safer than low bar squats. If the difference is small, most beginners are better off saving their $100 and low bar squatting instead.

In response to Optimal Exercise
Comment author: Viliam_Bur 10 March 2014 02:16:43PM *  7 points [-]

Suggestions:

Please put the actionable parts into wiki, and then add a link to this article for those who want to see the full explanation. Please add the links to the youtube videos and tutorials (for convenience, but also because an unlucky reader might google some wrong advice).

you'll see dramatic changes in your appearance in 4 months

Are there volunteers to test this program for 4 months and report the results?

Comment author: kbaxter 12 March 2014 01:31:27AM *  9 points [-]

I can report back about the first ~4 months of my experience lifting weights, doing the Starting Strength program. I'm female though, so my experience was probably very different from a male's.

Basically, I saw huge strength gains but little to no change in appearance. I did have an awesome time doing it, and have kept it up long-term. After 2.5 years of training and slowly gaining 10lbs (on purpose), I now see small changes in my appearance but nothing major: If I'm in a tank top my arms and shoulders look more muscular that most women, and my hamstrings bulge out a little. In normal clothes I really don't look very different.

In short - ladies: if you're worried about accidentally getting too big by lifting weights, stop worrying. It won't happen unless you're trying to get big, and even then it'll be slow and difficult. If you think you might like lifting, go try it. I wish I'd started earlier.

In response to Optimal Exercise
Comment author: maia 10 March 2014 04:43:50AM 1 point [-]

So I'm currently doing Starting Strength: no upper pulls, and different set/rep counts than what you say is optimal. Do you think it's worth transitioning to what you recommend here, and if so, any suggestions on how to do that transition?

In response to comment by maia on Optimal Exercise
Comment author: kbaxter 12 March 2014 01:11:33AM 0 points [-]

Starting Strength includes power cleans, and they can count as an upper pull. Chin-ups are great to add too. If you're not comfortable doing power cleans, rows are a great alternative.

As for the rep scheme, I wouldn't worry about it. 4x4 isn't really much different from 3x5. It probably wouldn't hurt anything to do Starting Strength with 4x4 instead though, if you want to try it.

View more: Next