All of Dr. Birdbrain's Comments + Replies

A perhaps more interesting interaction is with wills that are managed by trusts. My understanding is that you can put conditions on how the money in a trust will be disbursed to your heirs, for example "as long as they maintain a minimum GPA in college". I have heard lawyers make outrageous jokes like adding a clause that says "as long as they don't marry that person".

It's quite reasonable to expect that some will add a clause to their trust that says "this only pays out if they have placed themselves on the lifetime no-gambling list".

a google search suggests desoxyn might be just be a brand of pharmaceutical-grade meth

Would you mind publishing the protocol?

5George3d6
I'm getting longer term results on all 17 people and will publish everything soon~ish (1-2 months tops)

It has been 3 months, is there an update?

6George3d6
Had 20 people that were interested in replicating (well, more, but 20 got to a signal group) -- I gave them the protocol and nobody did it (because taking 1/4 to 1/3rd of your day to do something is hard) I have data in n=17 people (but like, only 6 did the protocol, 1 dropout) - That looks pretty good and I want to have everyone retake the tests at some point to see if the effect holds over time.   However I took on a lot of projects in the meanwhile so I kinda lost track of this one.

I like (and recommend) creatine. It has a long record on the research literature, and its effects at improving exercise performance are well known. More recent research is finding cognitive benefits—anecdotally I can report I am smarter on creatine. It also blunts the effects of sleep deprivation and improves blood sugar control.

I strongly recommend creatine over some of the wilder substances recommended in this post.

Actually I think the explicit content of the training data is a lot more important than whatever spurious artifacts may or may not hypothetically arise as a result of training. I think most of the AI doom scenarios that say “the AI might be learning to like curly wire shapes, even if these shapes are not explicitly in the training data nor loss function” are the type of scenario you just described, “something that technically makes a difference but in practice the marginal gain is so negligible you are wasting time to even consider it.“

The “accidental tast... (read more)

3[anonymous]
Was referring to "let's not post ideas in case an AGI later reads the post and decides to act on it". Either we built stable tool systems who are unable to act in that way (see CAIS) or we are probably screwed so whatever. Also even if you suppress yourself if an AGI is looking for ideas on badness it can probably derive anything necessary to solve the problem.
[anonymous]109

This is the https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/LHAJuYy453YwiKFt5/the-salt-in-pasta-water-fallacy

An example of something that technically makes a difference but in practice the marginal gain is so negligible you are wasting time to even consider it.

Creatine is an incredibly powerful intervention. It improves energy management and decreases fatigue at the cellular level, in every single one of your cells. I expect you will notice cognitive enhancements as well as improved energy. However, I personally experience sleep disruptions if I take it on days when I do not exercise. Your mileage may vary, just a note that you might experiment with how much you take and how often you take it if you experience sleeplessness, night sweats, and/or vivid nightmares :)

In my personal experience, cutting carbs makes s... (read more)

2Tim Liptrot
This is helpful. I started taking creatine but got lazy about it, I'll get back on it. As far as strength training, I started getting great female attention before I put on much muscle. I've become much more time constrained because I work like 55 hours a week anyway, so I only work out once or twice a week. Thanks for the recomendation on the youtube channel.

I wear my backpack on my front rather than my back, and hug it as I run.

I started doing this after a trip to Tokyo, during which it was brought to my attention that it was rude of me to get on the subway and let my backpack on my back become a hazard to people around me, since I could not see what it was doing behind me.

I don't know enough about your situation to say anything productive. I know that the PhD journey can be confusing and stressful. I hope you are able to have constructive conversations with the profs at your PhD program.

I wonder if it in fact provides useful orientation?

  • Sometimes people seem clueless just because we don't understand them, but that doesn't mean they are in fact clueless.
  • Does this framework actually explain how diffusion of responsibility works?
  • This framework explicitly advises ICs to slack off and try to attain "political playing cards" in an attempt to leapfrog their way into senior management. I wouldn't consider that to be a valuable form of orientation.
  • In the absence of a desire to become part of the "sociopath class", the model seems to advice ICs to
... (read more)
6romeostevensit
I think part of the issue might be you not being the target audience. My sense is that the people most helped by realpolitik explanations (of which this is a particular instance) is that they help scrupulous people who are being taken advantage of by the fake narratives of companies.
2crl826
I suppose you aren't using his suspect definition of Clueless. But your point is potentially valid either way.  It's also true that something can seem "excessively cynical, inaccurate" or "counterproductive" doesn't mean they are, in fact, excessively cynical, inaccurate, or counterproductive. The framework alone doesn't but reading the whole thing does.  You can also check out some of my shortforms for some summaries.   You clearly don't like his advice and certainly don't have to follow it. I have found it very helpful (at understanding some previously confusing situations and getting promoted).  I'm not the only one in this thread either so I humbly suggest it might be worth updating priors on how good or bad the framework is.
5romeostevensit
I read it as much more descriptive and less prescriptive but maybe I forgot about there being advice parts?
7Tim Liptrot
Those are some really strong critiques. The framework did do something valuable for me. I have a few professors at my PhD program who are properly clueless. I've been trying to speak straight talk to them for a while, with negative results. It just strains the relationship. After reading this, I will try some babytalk. Frame my research agenda with some woke jargon, stuff like that. Also the passage on woke talk and professors is spot on.

It seems to me that the SCL framework is unnecessarily cynical and negative. When I look out at my company and others, the model seems neither accurate nor useful.

  • The framework suggests that an IC/loser can get promoted to senior management/sociopath by underperforming and "acquiring playing cards". I have never seen anybody get promoted from IC to senior management, much less by first underperforming. I have of course heard anecdotes of underperforming ICs that get promoted to middle management, but I have never heard of the leapfrog to senior management.
... (read more)
8Hazard
Rao made his framework by combining his consulting experience with the TV show The Office. I don't believe he was trying to describe all corporations, which leaves me with the question "How would I determine which workplaces have these dynamics?" The world he describes doesn't seem incompatible with the corporate world that the book Moral Mazes depicts. I've not been in the working world long enough to have any data on what's common or normal, and haven't been at my current workplace long enough to have a sense for if it matches Rao's frame (it doesn't seem like it does). You also don't think your work place fits the bill. Have you interacted with any work places that seemed to match up? How many work places have you interacted with enough to feel confident making the judgement either way? I'm very interested to get more data points.
5crl826
I strongly suspect you are incorrect.  Having read much of Rao's work, he pretty explicitly advocates becoming more sociopathic (per his definition). One of his other books is called "Be Slightly Evil" As far as underperformers getting promoted, Luthans has published work on the difference between successful managers (defined as getting promoted) and effective managers (defined as having high performance teams). The reality is that they do very few of the same things and there is very little overlap between the two. Evidence shows that 'doing well' at work is not the best way to get to the top. https://www.boardoptions.com/successfulversuseffectivemanagers.pdf

You likely work in a well above average functioning company. The appeal of the framework is that it helps orient people who are totally bewildered by the sclerotic company culture they find themselves in by explaining key things like why the middle managers seem....well, clueless and the way diffusion of responsibility works.

Thanks--could you elaborate on what was fixed? I am a newbie here. Was it something I could have seen from the preview page? If so, I will be more careful to avoid creating unnecessary work for mods.

2habryka
Every line had a manual linebreak in it, instead of naturally wrapping when it filled the full line. Also, the tables were completely gone and you just had the contents of the cells spilled out on a single line.

Scott Alexander's "Meditations on Moloch" presents several examples of PD-type scenarios in which honor/conscience-style mechanisms fail. Generally, honor and conscience simply provide additive terms to the entry of the payoff matrix. These mechanisms can shift the N.E. to a different location, but don't guarantee that the resulting N.E. will not produce negative effects of other types. This post was mainly meant to provide a (hopefully) intuitive explanation of N.E.