I happen to be studying lojban at the moment, and I think the designers have defined linguistic ambiguity not as the opposite of specificity (one of the first lojban words I learned was "zo'e" /ZO.he/, which means something like "contains contextually sensitive information that makes this utterance true, the exact value of which is irrelevant or obvious"), but rather as a linguistic property whereby a semantic construct cannot be pinned down to communicating a specific value. The classic English language example is "time flies like a banana", in which any of the first three words can be the verb.
Whoa, it never occurred to me that time could be the verb there.
Thanks for putting this together!
I googled "kapogen" and didn't find any relevant results. Maybe a misspelling?
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 :)
I thought upvotes were used for that purpose.
By design, upvotes don't show public approval. Commenting +1 does.
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
Less Wrong Study Hall: Now With 100% Less Tinychat
Eight months ago, I announced that the Less Wrong Study Hall, a virtual coworking space where people do pomodoros together, has moved to Complice. Complice is a software system I made to help people achieve their goals. About 20% of rationalists who've tried it have started using it full-time, which by my math gives signing up positive expected value. Anyway...
What follows is a brief history of the LWSH's development thus far. If you just wanna try it, click here: complice.co/room/lesswrong
By embedding the original tinychat window within a larger page, I let users see what the pomodoro timer was up to as soon as they joined, and the page also doesn't let breaks run overtime because the timer just keeps ticking. Also, users could now show a persistent status of what they're working on.
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.
I agree 100%. Those were mostly-unrelated remarks.
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.
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.
Also: is your work area too bright? Turn off a light.
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
Couple of notes...
What is that metric?
I think this is a dangerous path to take. If you stay on it, I suspect that soon enough you'll come to the conclusion that absence of appropriate "caring" is irrational and should be fixed. And from there it's only a short jump and a hop to declaring that just those people who share your value system are rational. That would be an... unfortunate position for you to find yourselves in.
It wouldn't surprise me if they didn't want to publish it because some of the aspects of the measure might be gameable, allowing people to pretend to be super useful by guessing the teacher's password.