I haven't tried galantamine, but didn't find the drugless techniques all the same. The standard advice of keeping a dream diary and psyching yourself to have a lucid dream and to do reality checks never worked at all for me. Wake-back-to-bed on the other hand got me dozens of lucid dreams and often worked the first time I tried it after a break. It's also annoying to do because it involves messing with your sleep cycle and waking yourself up in the early morning, and it seems to always stop working if I try to do it multiple nights in a row.

Agree with the other parts though, the lucid dreams are generally pretty short, kind of samey. Maybe it takes a longer dream for the narrative to get properly weird, and the WBTB lucids are more often short dreams that start out of nowhere than becoming lucid midway through an involve dream. They're also too sporadic to get any sort of ongoing active imagination practice going since I don't have any routine of trying to WBTB once every week or something. There's Robert Waggoner's lucid dreaming book that talks more about possible ongoing psychological development you could make happen with repeated lucid dreams, as opposed to just the "hey, lucid dreams are a thing" books, but I guess a regular routine and some kind of intentful approach would help a lot here.

One thing I've been thinking is that the stories about shamanic journeys sound a whole lot like lucid dreaming, so maybe you could take a page from there. Try to travel to the underworld or overworld, meet some spirit entities, ask them what's up and maybe have a nice chat about large integer factorization.

I had the same problem, then I started mixing cottage cheese in the oatmeal and that fixed it.

Back when I read about people claiming a RepRap can reproduce itself, I felt like the claim implied it would build the electronics of the new RepRap from scratch as well and was confused since obviously a 3D printer can't double as a chip fab. The gold standard for a self-replicating machine for me is something like plants, which can turn high-entropy raw materials like soil and ores into itself given a source of energy. I guess you could talk about autotrophic self-reproducing machines that can do their thing given a barren planet and sunlight, and heterotrophic self-reproducing machines that have selling machined components over the internet and using the income to buy CPU chips and hire workers to assemble the skeleton of a new automated workshop as a valid strategy.

It's testing for conformity to folk values, not mythic values.

Great post. I've been trying to find SF reviews that aren't just blurbs to get an idea about what's going on with the scene currently. With the exception of Tchaikovsky, most authors whose names keep popping up seem to still be ones who started publishing back in the 20th century. Unfortunately, I already know about most of the books on this list. So I'm going to write a wishlist of books I've heard of but don't know that much about and would like to see reviews of,

• Radix series by AA Attanasio
• Starfishers series by Glen Cook
• The Gap Cycle by Stephen R. Donaldson
• David's Sling by Marc Stiegler
• The Truth Machine by James Halperin
• Appleseed by John Clute
• Light and Nova Swing by M. John Harrison
• Gridlinked by Neal Asher
• The Quiet War by Paul McAuley
• Silo series by Hugh Howey
• Imperial Radch series by Ann Leckie
• Southern Reach trilogy by Jeff VanderMeer
• The Thing Itself by Adam Roberts
• Too Like the Lightning by Ada Palmer
• Crystal trilogy by Max Harms
• Gnomon by Nick Harkaway
• Stronger, Faster, and More Beautiful by Arwen Elys Dayton
• This Is How You Lose the Time War by Max Gladstone
• The Last Astronaut by David Welligton
• A Memory Called Empire by Arkady Martine
• XX by Rian Hughes
• Termination Shock by Neal Stephenson
• Virtua by Karl Olsberg

James Gleick's Genius cites a transcript of "Address to Far Rockaway High School" from 1965 (or 1966 according to this from California Institute of Technology archives for Feynman talking about how he got a not-exceptionally-high 125 for his IQ score. Couldn't find an online version of the transcript anywhere with a quick search.

How many users you can point to who started out making posts that regularly got downvoted to negative karma and later became good contributors? Or, alternatively, specific ideas that were initially only presented by users who got regularly downvoted that were later recognized as correct and valuable? My starting assumption is that it's basically wishful thinking that this would happen much under any community circumstances, people who write badly will mostly keep writing badly and people who end up writing outstanding stuff mostly start out writing better than average stuff.