|
It certainly worked for me. When I was 20 I was very lonely. So lonely it was causing mild depression, though it took me many years and spreadsheets to discover this When I realized that I wanted more friends and to get along better with people, I set as a goal that I wanted to be able to invite 10 people to my birthday the following year 14 years later I'm an extrovert who's learned she doesn't like parties, but I could invite hundreds to my party. And a sort of person who can land in Rwanda and not know a single soul and immediately make friends and form connections with people around me And this wasn't magic I just applied nerd skills to socializing I read books. I talked to people who are more skills than me and peppered them with questions. I did deliberate practice. I did a lot of trial and a lot of error. It took a lot of effort and time, and some places are a lot easier to make friends than others. For example, I come from the West Coast of Canada, and people are a lot more standoffish than say, San Juan, where it's hard not to make friends with anybody you meet. But work with what you have. Put the effort into finding friends that you would put into finding a good relationship. It's similarly important for your happiness. And just like with relationships, it's better to be proactive instead of just waiting and hoping that somebody approaches you who is good Social skills resources that I liked:
But everybody will need different books and ideas. Some need to learn to listen more and better. Others need to learn to speak more. Some need different advice entirely] Read more: All
0 Comments
 "Minimum Viable Coup" is my new favorite concept. From Dwarkesh interviewing Paul Christiano, asking "what's the minimum capabilities needed for a superintelligent AI to overthrow the government?" Read more: All I have a tool for thinking that I call “steelman solitaire”. I have found that it comes to much better conclusions than doing “free-style” thinking, so I thought I should share it with more people. In summary, it consists of arguing with yourself in the program Workflowy/Roam/any infinitely-nesting-bullet-points software, alternating between writing a steelman of an argument, a steelman of a counter-argument, a steelman of a counter-counter-argument, etc. In this post I’ll first list the benefits, then explain the broad steps, and finally, go into more depth on how to do it. Benefits
Strawmanning means presenting the opposing view in the least charitable light – often so uncharitably that it does not resemble the view that the other side actually holds. The term of steelmanning was invented as a counter to this; it means taking the opposing view and trying to present it in its strongest form. This has sometimes been criticized because often the alternative belief proposed by a steelman also isn’t what the other people actually believe. For example, there’s a steelman argument that states that the reason organic food is good is that monopolies are generally bad and Monsanto having a monopoly on food could lead to disastrous consequences. This might indeed be a belief held by some people who are pro-organic, but a huge percentage of people are just falling prey to the naturalistic fallacy. While steelmanning may not be perfect for understanding people’s true reasons for believing propositions, it is very good for coming to more accurate beliefs yourself. If the reason you believe you don’t have to care about buying organic is that you believe that people only buy organic because of the naturalistic fallacy, you might be missing out on the fact that there’s a good reason for you to buy organic because you think monopolies on food are dangerous. However – and this is where steelmanning back and forth comes in – what if buying organic doesn’t necessarily lead to breaking the monopoly? Maybe upon further investigation, Monsanto doesn’t have a monopoly. Or maybe multiple organizations have copyrighted different gene edits, so there’s no true monopoly. The idea behind steelman solitaire is to not stop at steelmanning the opposing view. It’s to steelman the counter-counter-argument as well. As has been said by more eloquent people than myself, you can’t consider an argument and counter-argument and consider yourself a virtuous rationalist. There are very long chains of counter^x arguments, and you want to consider the steelman of each of them. Don’t pick any side in advance. Just commit to trying to find the true answer. This is all well and good in principle but can be challenging to keep organized. This is where Workflowy or Roam comes in. Workflowy allows you to have counter-arguments nested under arguments, counter-counter-arguments nested under counter-arguments, and so forth. That way you can zoom in and out and focus on one particular line of reasoning, realize you’ve gone so deep you’ve lost the forest for the trees, zoom out, and realize what triggered the consideration in the first place. It also allows you to quickly look at the main arguments for and against. Here’s a worked example for a question. Tips and tricks That’s the broad-strokes explanation of the method. Below, I’ll list a few pointers that I follow, though please do experiment and tweak. This is by no means a final product.
Conclusion In summary, steelman solitaire means steelmanning arguments back and forth repeatedly. It helps with:
Read more: All If they're not conscious, we still have to worry about instrumental convergence. Viruses are dangerous even if they're not conscious. But if they are conscious, we have to worry that we are monstrous slaveholders causing Black Mirror nightmares for the sake of drafting emails to sell widgets. Of course, they might not care about being turned off. But there's already empirical evidence of them spontaneously developing self-preservation goals (because you can't achieve your goals if you're turned off). Read more: All  I recently faced a series of public attacks and it hurt a lot. Here’s what I did to feel better and get back on my feet.
First I checked to see if the attacks were justified and if there was anything I could do to improve. It’s important to follow this step, because nobody’s perfect and if you’re doing something wrong, it’s better to acknowledge and course correct, rather than insisting that the people attacking you are just dumb and bad. Even if they say something in an unnecessarily hurtful way, don’t let that stop you from learning and improving. In this case, one of the cases was a justified attack, another was not. For the justified attack, I spent time problem-solving and issued a public apology and explanation of how I was going to do better. This got a lot of positive feedback and also made me feel a lot better. It feels awful to have gone against your values. Sincere apologies can be really healing. For the unjustified attack, that was a little harder. It led to real life consequences that will likely permanently affect my ability to do my work. This was harder to deal with. At first I tried to just take some time off, which did make me feel happier in the moment. However, when I came back to work, the problem was still there, and so I went straight back to feeling awful. Whenever I thought about work, I’d feel anxious and sad, then retreat to some distraction. I tried talking to my friends about it, which was nice, but didn’t fix it. I tried reframing the issue (e.g. I’ll still have lots of impact, I should expect setbacks, advocates in the past used to suffer mob mobs, not just internet mobs, etc). I believed all of these in a certain way, but it didn’t fix the feelings of sadness and hopelessness. I tried pushing through it and hoping that time would just heal all wounds. But even if I could push through some waves of sadness, eventually one would knock me off course. I tried stoic practices. I compared my situation to people who had worse off situations or situations in the past that were much worse for myself. I tried dismissing public opinion. I tried reading a biography of an advocate who went through much worse than I did (Frederick Douglass). It was informative but did not help solve the emotions I tried gratitude journaling. I tried listening to motivational music and getting into a “shoulders back, stiffen your spine, get back in the ring” mindset. I systematically kept trying different techniques until I found something that worked. Which is actually the general practice that everybody should do when they are feeling bad and it doesn't go away naturally. Eventually the things that got me out of the funk were three-fold:
Sometimes you’re unhappy because of actually bad things in the world. Sometimes your feelings of sadness or anxiety are pointing you towards the problem you should work on solving.
Here’s quick instructions on how to do it . They say it’s about “meridians” and what not, but I just ignore that. I feel *immediate* benefits and that’s all the evidence I need. Tips on how to do it: In my experience, positive emotions can arise within two seconds of tapping the correct spot. The effective tapping locations seem to vary between individuals. Some spots may consistently yield no response and can be omitted from your practice. For effective spots, it may be necessary to adjust the tapping location slightly (for example, by moving about a centimeter) until the desired effect is achieved. The optimal spot may shift subtly, and on some days, tapping might not work at all. If a spot has not produced a positive response after at least five attempts, consider discontinuing its use. If results are inconsistent, experiment with nearby areas but refrain from prolonged use on days when the technique is ineffective. I did loving-kindness practice and tapping for about 30 minutes. I felt healing while I was doing it. Then, when I came back to the real world, I hit a small unrelated obstacle and immediately felt terrible again. However, something had shifted. I felt better and better throughout the day, still with waves of sadness, but the waves were diminishing in intensity and frequency. By the next day, I was back to normal. I did another self-loving-kindness and tapping session, just to be sure, but otherwise, I was back at it. Of course, different advice will work for different people. I most recommend the underlying strategy: systematically keep trying different methods until you find something that works. Read more: All I say this a bit tongue in cheek but it is also accurate The problem with most people is they usually try just one or two things and then give up. That, or they just try to do more of the technique that is not working (E.g. just meditate more, just exercise more, just avoid the problem more) If you keep trying eventually one of them will work. There are a bajillion different things you can try, but here is a list of things that might help:
Read more: All I've met a couple of people now who became addicted to ketamine after taking it for depression and it's ruined their lives. Not saying don't ever take ketamine for depression. But consider not taking it if you know you have addictive tendencies. Or only take it in a context where it would be hard to become addicted to it (e.g. have a strict rule of only doing it in therapeutic settings. Never do self-guided or buy it on your own, etc) Read more: All 
He had a falling out with one abolitionist leader and faction, who then spent time and money spreading rumors about him and posting flyers around each town in his lecture circuit, calling him a fraud. Usually this was over what in retrospect seems really trivial things, and surely they could have still worked together or at least peacefully pursue separate strategies (e.g. should they prioritize legal reform or changing public opinion? Did one activist cheat on his wife with a colleague?) Reading his biography, it's unclear who attacked him more: the slave owners or his fellow abolitionists. In-fighting is part of every single movement I’ve ever read about. EA and AI safety are not special in that regard. “I am not at all surprised when some of those for whom I have lived and labored lift their heels against me. Since the days of Moses such has been the fate of all men earnestly endeavouring to serve the oppressed and unfortunate.”
It doesn’t mean internet mobs aren’t also terrible to deal with, but it reminds me to feel grateful for our current state. If you do advocacy nowadays, you must fear character assassination, but rarely physical assassination (at least in democratic rich countries).
Quote from the book where some other abolitionists thought he was bad for the movement because he wasn’t arguing about obscure Constitutional law and was instead trying to appeal to a larger audience with vaguer messages. Reminds me of the debates over AI safety comms, where some people want things to be precise and dry and maximally credible to academics, and other people want to appeal to a larger audience using emotions, metaphor, and not getting into arcane details
Emphasizes that humor is a way to spread your message. People are more likely to listen if you mix in laugher with getting them to look at the darkness.
He was a leader, and he knew that without hope, people wouldn’t fight.
He was ahead of the curve on women’s rights, which is no small feat in the 1800s. But he was also a temperance advocate, being against alcohol. And he really hated Catholics. It’s a good reminder to be humble about your ethical beliefs. If you spend a lot of time thinking about ethics and putting it into practice, you’ll likely be ahead of your time in some ways. But you’ll also probably be wrong about some things. Remember - the road to hell isn’t paved with good intentions. It’s paved with overconfident intentions.
Moral suasion is a persuasive technique that uses rhetorical appeals and persuasion to change a person or group's behavior. It's a non-coercive way to influence people to act in a certain way.
Loved this excerpt: Treated as a “deserter from the fold,” he nevertheless, or so he claimed, let his colleagues “search me and probe me to the bottom.” Facing what he considered outright lies, he stood firm against the hailstorm of “side blows, innuendo, dark suspicions, such as avarice, faithlessness, treachery, ingratitude and what not.” Whistling in the graveyard, he assured Smith proudly that he felt “strengthened to bear it without perturbation.” And this line: “Turning affliction into hope, however many friends he might lose“
“I would unite with anybody to do right,” he said, “and with nobody to do wrong.” “I contend that I have a right to cooperate with anybody with everybody for the overthrow of slavery” “Stop seeking purity, he told his critics among radicals, and start with what is possible”
He cheated on his wife. He was racist (against the Irish and Native Americans), prejudiced against Catholics, and overly sensitive to perceived slights. And yet, he is a moral hero nevertheless. Don’t expect perfection from anybody, including yourself. Practice the virtues of understanding and forgiveness, and we’re all better off.
Not a lesson learned really, but had to be said. Seriously, the book has a gorgeous cover, has the cool roughcut edges of the pages, has a properly serious looking “Winner of Pullitzer Prize” award on the front, feels just the right level of heavy, and is just the most satisfying weighty tome. Referring to the hardcover edition of David W Blight’s biography. Read more: All We had a whole class of people for ages who had nothing to do but hangout with people and attend parties. Just read any Jane Austen novel to get a sense of what it's like to live in a world with no jobs. Only a small fraction of people, given complete freedom from jobs, went on to do science or create something big and important. Most people just want to lounge about and play games, watch plays, and attend parties. They are not filled with angst around not having a job. In fact, they consider a job to be a gross and terrible thing that you only do if you must, and then, usually, you must minimize. Our society has just conditioned us to think that jobs are a source of meaning and importance because, well, for one thing, it makes us happier. We have to work, so it's better for our mental health to think it's somehow good for us. And for two, we need money for survival, and so jobs do indeed make us happier by bringing in money. Massive job loss from AI will not by default lead to us leading Jane Austen lives of leisure, but more like Great Depression lives of destitution. We are not immune to that. Us having enough is incredibly recent and rare, historically and globally speaking. Remember that approximately 1 in 4 people don't have access to something as basic as clean drinking water. You are not special. You could become one of those people. You could not have enough to eat. So AIs causing mass unemployment is indeed quite bad. But it's because it will cause mass poverty and civil unrest. Not because it will cause a lack of meaning. (Of course I'm more worried about extinction risk and s-risks. But I am more than capable of worrying about multiple things at once) Read more: All |
Popular postsThe Parable of the Boy Who Cried 5% Chance of Wolf
The most important lesson I learned after ten years in EA Why fun writing can save lives Full List Categories
All
Kat WoodsI'm an effective altruist who co-founded Nonlinear, Charity Entrepreneurship, and Charity Science Health Archives
February 2025
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed