Comment author: malcolmocean 05 December 2015 10:04:20PM *  0 points [-]

Thanks for putting this together!

I googled "kapogen" and didn't find any relevant results. Maybe a misspelling?

Comment author: malcolmocean 05 December 2015 10:01:22PM 3 points [-]

I was having a kind of unmotivated day yesterday, and eventually I tried doing an experiment where instead of trying to plan out a bunch of things to do, I just picked one thing, deliberately chosen to not be a super important thing, just a thing I vaguely felt like doing (adding a long-press menu to my app Complice). This led into me doing other useful things, and my day was somewhat recovered :)

Comment author: Gleb_Tsipursky 23 November 2015 06:26:28AM 1 point [-]

I thought upvotes were used for that purpose.

Comment author: malcolmocean 05 December 2015 09:44:53PM 0 points [-]

By design, upvotes don't show public approval. Commenting +1 does.

Comment author: malcolmocean 15 November 2015 05:12:43PM 1 point [-]

Yeah, I don't like any of these. But I don't really wear tshirts that are about text anymore. I care a lot about my clothing being aesthetically attractive. Meaningful is also great, but the only things I wear that have text on them are ones with logos I'm very aligned with... which is basically just CFAR. And even that shirt is elegant (nice cut, nice fabric, and the logo is pretty).

I have this cool old SingInst shirt that has a gorgeous work of art (see the art) on the front and says Towards The Singularity in small letters below. That's the kind of thing I'd like to see, both on myself and on other LWers. Although more up to date, obviously :P

Comment author: ChristianKl 07 November 2015 12:49:39PM 0 points [-]

In general I'm pretty not-into these. I'd prefer shirts that are more designed. Not just for me, but like, yeah, for people around me to be wearing. My impression (given the size of the logo and the omnipresent O-as-lightbulb) is that the primary purpose of these is to promote the intentional insights brand.

I don't think a smaller logo would make the shirt look more designed.

Comment author: malcolmocean 08 November 2015 02:29:19AM 0 points [-]

I agree 100%. Those were mostly-unrelated remarks.

Comment author: malcolmocean 07 November 2015 02:47:10AM *  2 points [-]

Clicked on the first link. First though: it's not the kind of clothes I would buy (I prefer to dress like this) but even if it were, the IntentionalInsights logo is wayyy too big. It masks the intended message.

In general I'm pretty not-into these. I'd prefer shirts that are more designed. Not just for me, but like, yeah, for people around me to be wearing. My impression (given the size of the logo and the omnipresent O-as-lightbulb) is that the primary purpose of these is to promote the intentional insights brand.

Comment author: james_edwards 17 May 2013 04:28:30AM *  5 points [-]

Do you have something to drink? Get yourself some tea, coffee, or water.

Also: Is your work area bright enough? Turn on your desk lamp.

Feels like a free concentration boost to me.

Comment author: malcolmocean 03 November 2015 07:54:39PM 0 points [-]

Also: is your work area too bright? Turn off a light.

Hawthorne Effect

Comment author: knb 27 October 2015 11:43:37PM 3 points [-]

Well, the trend in the second chart is clearly unsustainable, so it's hardly something to get too excited about.

What aspect do you think is unsustainable? The population growth or the reduction in absolute poverty? Over what time period?

Comment author: malcolmocean 30 October 2015 05:20:43AM 0 points [-]

@Daniel_Burfoot's second sentence was "I would be happy if the second chart showed poverty dropping off while total population stayed roughly flat." so I think it's pretty clear he meant the population growth.

Comment author: Gunnar_Zarncke 01 October 2015 09:52:50PM 1 point [-]

My favorite part is the concrete example.

"Either you quit smoking or we break up!"

versus

"I'm realizing that as much as I like our relationship, it's really not working for me to be dating a smoker, so I've decided I'm not going to. Of course, my preferred outcome is that you stop smoking, not that we break up, but I realize that might not make sense for you at this point."

I especially like that it is pointed out that it can be interpreted as an ultimatum of the first kind i.e. as exerting pressure to get ones will despite it being meant cheritably. I have explicitly made this experience multiple times. I guess some people always look for whether and how a situation is controlled. And pattern match both kinds of ultimatums against the pressure form.

Comment author: malcolmocean 12 October 2015 04:53:02AM 1 point [-]

Oh, totally. Some people will only be able to hear the second one as the first one. I definitely don't want to date them.

Comment author: Dagon 30 September 2015 03:39:56PM 1 point [-]

Wait. If you were planning it ("it" being knowledge and communication of immutable preferences) from the outset, why wouldn't you communicate from the outset?

Only in cases of unreliability and distrust does simultaneity matter. If you're just telling the truth, and there is mutual trust that each is doing so, then you should make the statements as soon as you know the facts underlying them.

Comment author: malcolmocean 30 September 2015 05:02:47PM *  0 points [-]

Right, yeah, I think this has to do with trust and immutability of preferences. I guess, the simultaneity thing would make sense for cases with definitely-immutable preferences, and less trust.

View more: Prev | Next