Comment author: thelittledoctor 28 May 2012 12:13:24PM 0 points [-]

I'm fond of Perl as a first language, for a couple of reasons. Foremost among them is that Perl is fun and easy, so it serves as a gentle introduction to programming (and modules) that's easy to stick with long enough to catch the bug, and it's versatile in that it can be used for webapps or for automating system tasks or just for playing around. But I wouldn't recommend making it anybody's only language, because it IS a scripting language and consequently encourages a sort of sloppy wham-bam-thank-you-ma'am approach to coding. Start with it, learn the basics, then move on to Python, and after achieving competence there learning new languages pretty much just feels like fun and games. Perl remains my favorite language for anything to do with SQL, and also for hammering out quick scripts to automate boring tasks.

Lisp is probably not necessary, but IS fun to learn. I don't know whether if it makes you a better programmer. I'm definitely better now than I was before I learned it, but I don't know how to differentiate between "I gained experience" and "Lisp fixed my brain".

My first languages were C++ and Java, incidentally, and I would say that I became a decent programmer in spite of that rather than because of it. C++ was too much all at once, at least for twelve-year-old-me, and Java by contrast is so gentle and coddling that it became a kind of tarpit from which I almost did not escape.

I think more than anything what reliably converts you to a higher value programmer (provided you already have good math skills) is going through the larval stage as many times as possible.

Comment author: thelittledoctor 18 May 2012 04:11:43PM 3 points [-]

What a silly thought experiment. The fact that two people use one word to refer to two different things (which superficially appear similar) doesn't mean anything except that the language is imperfect.

Case in point: Uses of the word "love".

Comment author: ninelier 09 May 2012 03:33:41PM 5 points [-]

Yup. I think "force of habit" undersells it, except to the extent you are a collection of habits. Plus trying to encourage truth-seeking as opposed to truth-labeling as a goal. That is, the phrase you like is "We often say, here, that that which can be destroyed by the truth should be"

But you're not destroying her belief by the truth, you're destroying a belief and replacing it with the truth (ish). At least, as you describe yourself. Other stuff (that is, I think this is one of dozens of arguments for why this way of thinking is foolish: more interesting to me is the degree to which the sensible upvoted comments on this page - be nicer and more respectful - lack explication or mechanism).

Comment author: thelittledoctor 09 May 2012 03:49:12PM 1 point [-]

Okay. Thank you very much for your insight; I do appreciate it.

Comment author: [deleted] 09 May 2012 03:18:33PM *  1 point [-]

Do you get his Noble Phantasm? "Knight of Honor" is potentially one of the most powerful hougu in Fate/Zero.

In response to comment by [deleted] on The ethics of breaking belief
Comment author: thelittledoctor 09 May 2012 03:24:35PM 3 points [-]

I... Was not even aware that such a game existed; I was referring to The Once And Future King. But clicking through the wiki a little bit has me fascinated by the tangle of mythological references.

Comment author: shminux 09 May 2012 03:00:47PM 1 point [-]

I certainly wouldn't be nearly as ethical in your place

Comment author: thelittledoctor 09 May 2012 03:14:41PM 1 point [-]

Just call me le Chevalier mal Fet.

Comment author: eightlier 09 May 2012 02:45:50PM 1 point [-]

No, the pretense is not that they're trying to manipulate you in the other direction, but that they're manipulating your manipulation. That is, Gwern was being tested on his fairness as a experimenter of fairness. You are being tested on your truth-seeking as an experimenter in truth-seeking. Of course, you are, just not by J.

I had two reasons for asking about age (you're right on one). Your narrative sounded pretty juvenile even in its self-description. I was hoping that was true (for both your sakes).

Here's another game for you to play: Your brain learns whereof you know not. What general rules is it learning as you interact with J? Someday, if you're luck enough, you can plan on being quite slow. The virtues you currently rely on (roughly: quick-witted) will have left you. You should be investing as quickly as you can in cultivating other personal virtues. Don't plan on the world changing enough that that can be avoided. I can't seem to avoid a patronizing attitude (bad sign for me, similarly: I'm out).

Comment author: thelittledoctor 09 May 2012 03:13:21PM 2 points [-]

You make an interesting point. To be sure I've understood: Behave in a more truth-seeking manner in general, because if I do so I will be a more truth-seeking person in the future from force of habit, and if I do not do so then I will be less of one? If the force of habit is really so potent in cases like this then it's a very convincing argument; I wouldn't want to give up the ability to be rational just to be a tiny bit better at manipulation.

Comment author: eightlier 09 May 2012 02:04:56PM 1 point [-]

Not really, although it's a more careful reading than I expected. I think that would be a distinction without a difference. No, as with Gwern, I think the main issue here is you. What sort of person is Gwern training himself to be?

Like Gwern, you act like you're conducting a study on someone, but it's really just two people talking. Pretend, for a moment, the other person is actually much smarter than you and conducting a test of the exact same principle you are testing. In Gwern's case, that leads to a much more interesting interpretation of the incident, since he's clearly horribly biased (the test really does have a result). In your case, you're not at all truth-seeking. I would advise you seek to truth in your relationship with J first (either by self-modification or greater honesty of the unmodified)

Here's my frivolous question: How old are you and how old is J? (you can make it approximate if you think it would reveal personal info).

Comment author: thelittledoctor 09 May 2012 02:19:53PM 0 points [-]

Both twenty-one. But that is a less useful statistic than emotional maturity, which I think is what you're getting at, so I should note that there is a definite discrepancy in terms of how well we handle feelings - I have a great deal more emotional control than does she. So despite being the same age, there is a power imbalance in a sense similar to the one you're asking about. Of the two undescribed parties, one is older than me (22) and one is younger (19).

Actually, I don't quite have to pretend that the other parties are attempting manipulation in the other direction; they've all been fairly transparent in their attempts (albeit with varying degrees of persistence; of the three, J sits in the middle in terms of time spent attempting to convert me).

Comment author: faul_sname 09 May 2012 06:10:35AM 6 points [-]

The last of those 3 (mine), at least, is in the process of being developed. I'm still mostly focusing on reading the relevant literature. I have the rough draft of 3 posts, but since it looks like there will be 10 to 15 of them plus a large post of miscellaneous techniques of influence, I am not posting yet (I will probably reorganize before I post).

Comment author: thelittledoctor 09 May 2012 02:05:35PM 1 point [-]

I look forward very much to seeing your sequence.

Comment author: RobertLumley 09 May 2012 01:56:42PM 9 points [-]

I have two words for this: planning fallacy.

Comment author: thelittledoctor 09 May 2012 01:59:31PM 1 point [-]

This is a very valid point, but I'm less interested in whether such a plan is practical than in whether, assuming feasibility, it is ethical.

Comment author: sevenlier 09 May 2012 06:43:36AM 1 point [-]

Obvious solution:

Give her all the comments from here (or point her to your post here), saying it's you (I checked that your past posting offers no other reason for avoiding this). If your influence/friendship/etc with her is not destroyed by the truth, you may carry on.

Dumbest line in your post: "though for some reason she has no problem with consumption of shellfish"


Go back and read Gwen in his experiment. Older posts suggest bias (http://lesswrong.com/lw/bs0/knowledge_value_knowledge_quality_domain/6db0), even ignoring complete stupidity of actual result. Gwern's been here a while. Gwern expresses potential martyrdom for LessWrongian principles (http://lesswrong.com/lw/c5f/case_study_testing_confirmation_bias/6hw2) to approbation, but then is shocked by even the mildest of pushback (http://lesswrong.com/lw/c5f/case_study_testing_confirmation_bias/6i9i), and reasons like an idiot. The legalistic parsing of "quoting" also moderately disgusting.

Serious question: If Gwern had access to personal info on you in a professional capacity (e.g., private e-mails as Sys Admin or some such), would you trust him not to misuse it? (as you would define "misuse", and he might not)

TLD, here is my conclusion to your story.

J, after reading this exchange: How could he think that about me? I would never think that way about him. This really hurts (tearing up). Is this really what people think about me?

All truthful, moreso than you. Your interaction with J should be humble, perhaps with a bit of self discovery: http://www.overcomingbias.com/2012/05/what-use-far-truth.html

In any event, as appropriate punishments, I call your behavior Gwernian.

Comment author: thelittledoctor 09 May 2012 11:20:32AM 2 points [-]

Explicitly declaring "I am going to try to convert you" to any of these people would definitely eliminate or minimize all potential avenues of influence, and I do not think I am nearly subtle enough to work around that. Still, if I understand what you're saying correctly, it's more an issue of informed consent of study participants than of letting people decide whether they want their buttons pushed. Is that an accurate understanding of your perspective?

View more: Next