All of Pendertif's Comments + Replies

Then Oliver Habryka came into the room, took a look, and said “man, your information hierarchy here is all over the place.” Then he fiddled around for 20 minutes and found something dramatically better than what I had at the time. 

I do wish to see a before after for what you mean, as i struggle to picture the diffference between a bad information hierarchy and a 10x better one

I’d be interested to see a cognitive consciousness model built around

• considerations, the state space of consciousness. These are zallerian style associations of words and phrases that are either positive or negative
• tracking. This is the active-conscious activity which is triggered an input
• input. This of course is an element of the input space, either language or the union of language visual

“ taxonomy is not automatically a great category for regular usage.”

This is great, and I love the specific example of trees as a failure to classify a large set into subsets.

Something that’s not exactly the same problem, but rhymes, is that of genre classification for content discovery. Consider Spotify playlists. There are millions of songs, and hundreds of classified genres. Genres are classified much like species/genus taxonomies— two songs share a genre if they share a common ancestor of music. Led Zeppelin and the Beatles are different, but they bo... (read more)

Staring into the abyss means thinking reasonably about things that are uncomfortable to contemplate, like arguments against your religious beliefs, or in favor of breaking up with your partner. It’s common to procrastinate on thinking hard about these things because it might require you to acknowledge that you were very wrong about something in the past, and perhaps wasted a bunch of time based on that (e.g. dating the wrong person or praying to the wrong god).

I strongly disagree with this, for the reason that words are not reality. For most people, the... (read more)

Instead of flatly offloading responsibility the "throw me out whenever" way, invite the other person to discuss the modalities of the question together, by e.g. raising the question of when you should leave and then figuring out together what factors this depends on and how you want to make that decision

This fails the sniff test of "bad moods as a fragility test for social norms".  You critique Ask Culture for responsibility offloading, but ignore its upside-- much greater computational kindness than "inviting the other person to discuss the modalitie... (read more)

People often act like this, and they tend to assume they're doing the other person a favor by being so open and flexible. After all, this way the other person will have to make no trade-offs and can spend their time exactly as they please. The problem with this however is that it's computationally unkind: it offloads all the effort

Computational kindness by this definition is equivalent to Emotional Labor, no?