Drake Morrison

See also: The First Sample Gives the Most Information

Here's my vote for Epistemic Roguelikes. It seems like a riskier path, but with a lot more upside. 

I really like A Crisper Explanation of Simulacrum Levels as another way to explain simulacrum levels.

I found this to be the most concrete post from the feedbackloop-first rationality sequence. I really appreciated the empiricist sort of frame of actually going out and trying to do a simple toy experiment to test some assumptions. Hope is blinding, and I remember more often to double-check my thinking for it after reading this post. 

I consider this idea essential social technology on the level of "the map is not the territory." super basic, but it's everywhere once you learn to see it. I think about and make use of this concept on a weekly basis. Definitely seems worthy of consideration for Best Of to me. 

I think Inkhaven is aiming at quality via the pathway of quantity. See the experiment by Jerry Uelsmann^[1]

1. ^{^}

   https://austinkleon.com/2020/12/10/quantity-leads-to-quality-the-origin-of-a-parable/

Seem like ripe opportunities for posts

Nitter thread (don't need to sign in to Twitter)

https://nitter.tiekoetter.com/DKokotajlo/status/1992316608073847201

For grounding data, I keep thinking of Shop Class as Soulcraft by Matthew Crawford. Doing some kind of wood-carving or pottery or painting or sketching animals on nature walks, or something like that seems well-advised. Also works as a toy problem to practice new skills on. 

I agree, but I feel that there is a distinct imbalance where a post can take hours of effort, and be cast aside with a 10-second vibe check and 1 second "downvote click".

You don't get points for effort. Just for value. 

One way to think of it is like you are selling some food in a market. Your potential buyers don't care if the food took you 7 hours or 7 minutes to make, they care how good it tastes, and how expensive it is. The equivalent for something like an essay is how useful/insightful/interesting your ideas is, and how difficult/annoying/time-consuming it is to read. 

You can decrease the costs (shorter, easy-to-follow, humor), but eventually you can't decrease them any more and your only option is to increase the value. And well, increasing the value can be hard.

When I think of high quality, I tend to think of a high signal to noise ratio. This got me thinking, why isn't karma [net upvotes / number of posts and comments]? Upvotes are relatively good measure of signal, but I don't only care about lots of signal, I also care about an absence of noise to wade through. 

Thoughts?

If they don't tell you how to hold them accountable, its a Chaotic intention, not a Lawful commitment

• Robust communication requires feedback. Knowing you received all the packets of information, and checking whether what you received matches what they sent. 
• Building ideas vs breaking ideas. Related to Babble and Prune, but for communities. Shortform seems like a good place for ideas to develop, or babble. For ideas to be built together, before you critique things. You can destroy a half built idea, even if it's a good idea.