36 KiB
[META] Since this sub revolves around rationality, is it actually that smart to spend so much time reading and writing rational fiction?
-
Author: u/quorad *
-
URL: https://www.reddit.com/r/rational/comments/3es3aa/meta_since_this_sub_revolves_around_rationality/
-
Score: 22
-
Created: 2015-07-27T15:22:53
Post:
Disclaimer: I too spend a lot of time reading rational fiction (this is a throwaway account, I've been here since the beginning but I don't dare to post this with my main account)
I mean, some of these works are really, really long and even reading them takes a lot of time, and even more if you are writing them. I see these works more as a form of escapism, and not so much as something that would improve your rationality. This same question could be asked on any subreddit focused on fiction, but since this sub is about rationality, it's kinda ironic to adore rationality, and spend so much time on something which is kinda useless.
I get it that you can't act optimally 24/7, but I think there's a middle road somewhere.
How do you deal with this problem?
Comments:
u/alexanderwales [+27] Time flies like an arrow (46 minutes later)
Part of acting rationally (for me) is maximizing happiness. So on that front, I think creating and consuming rational fiction is a win. I could probably make some other arguments in favor of rational fiction, but they're tantamount to post facto justifications. I think that simply, "because I enjoy it" is enough. (I also think that in comparison to my other hobbies, writing is probably the most productive, given that something of at least marginal worth is created in the process.)
Edit: I also receive money through Patreon, but that's the lesser reason for writing (for me). If I really wanted to make money from writing, I would probably work on polishing up my superhero erotica novel, since that's where the money is at. (I am aware that saying "money isn't really a motivating factor" is a really terrible way to get people to voluntarily give me money, but it's the truth. I like having patrons, and I smile when I see an e-mail come in, but that's much more for status/ego reasons than utility-of-money reasons.)
u/None [+12] (2 hours later)
I would probably work on polishing up my superhero erotica novel
You too, huh?
u/None [+8] (3 hours later)
[deleted]
u/alexanderwales [+12] Time flies like an arrow (4 hours later)
I actually don't even know what rational erotica would look like. "Safe, sane, consensual" is a starting point, I guess. Experimentation? Optimization? I don't know. Perhaps by those standards it would be rational erotica.
But if you have a bunch of teenagers getting superpowers and primary using them for sexual purposes instead of ... I don't know, saving the world or something, I think you're missing something of the "rational".
u/codahighland [+11] (6 hours later)
Rational, not rationalist. The characters don't have to be TRYING to be consciously rational. I mean, I know I'm just parroting the sidebar, but having things happen for rational reasons instead of because of the force of plot, having conflicts and partnerships defined by beliefs and values instead of "good" and "evil", having the characters behave intelligently according to what they're aware of (or at least having narrative defense for their behaviors if it's something the reader would see is foolish), and having a consistent world are the defining characteristics of rational fiction.
And honestly, these values applied to erotica could work VERY well.
u/None [+4] (a day later)
Well, you could just tell a normal story, and then have the characters bone every other chapter.
u/codahighland [+3] (a day later)
Only if they do so for a reason that makes sense, and not just because the story demands it.
u/elevul [+3] Cyoria Observer (5 days later)
So, because they're teenagers?
u/codahighland [+2] (7 days later)
Quite the opposite. "They have sex because they're teenagers" is exactly the kind of rationalization that would be out of place.
Being teenagers might be a valid reason for intimacy to escalate into sex more rapidly than other characters might, but getting into the scenario where that's a reasonable escalation definitely requires better writing than that.
u/elevul [+2] Cyoria Observer (5 days later)
Laurell Hamilton did it for the first 3 books of Anita Blake, then it became sex 24/7 and it all went down the drain.
u/EliezerYudkowsky [+6] Godric Gryffindor (a day later)
I think that's people Munchkining sexual superpowers, not failing to Solve By Polyamory problems that can be Solved By Polyamory and otherwise being Dangerously Genre Savvy, and solid aliens that look interesting to human sexual fetishes.
This is pretty high on the list of things I'd want to publish but only after putting some conceptual distance between myself and any organizations that need to look normal.
u/None [+4] (2 days later)
Well...there's always the kinkmeme. And alt accounts.
u/Empiricist_or_not [+2] Aspiring polite Hegemonizing swarm (a day later)
This is pretty high on the list of things I'd want to publish but only after putting some conceptual distance between myself and any organizations that need to look normal.
Without any implied criticism this is the problem that limits the expansion of polyamory in our culture.
u/DataPacRat [+3] Amateur Immortalist (13 hours later)
I actually don't even know what rational erotica would look like.
... I'm not sure I should actually write this comment, but what the hey.
As soon as I read that question, I immediately thought of a candidate for an existing set of stories, The Journal Entries by Elf Sternberg (admittedly more rational than rationalist, and while science-fiction, extremely soft SF); plus the start of the background for an original story.
(... Okay, fine: Lowered robot costs and better conversational software leads to increased automation in many jobs, a not-very-successful job-protection measure mandates robots in human-replacing jobs must be 'clearly distinguishable' from humans, 'think of the children' morals leads most such robots to be sexless, one company experiments with a line of humanoid-animal chassis that include more anatomy, the protagonist manages to get hold of one that would otherwise be destroyed, and gets to work on jailbreaking the OS... and contrary to many other similar stories, this would /not/ a story about 'conscious' AI, but more about pareidolia and various of the basic drives that humans have evolved to have. ... If anyone wants to pick up this idea and run with it, go ahead, I'm still wrestling with my writing block.)
u/None [+5] (13 hours later)
"Safe, sane, consensual" is a starting point, I guess. Experimentation? Optimization?
Good communication.
u/EliezerYudkowsky [+7] Godric Gryffindor (a day later)
I'm in for $5 in AlexanderWales's Patreon, which tells you that I think that having good rationalist fiction as a literary thing is a worthwhile force in this world.
u/gabbalis [+5] (3 hours later)
I certainly know of some people that would be willing to pay for well written superhero erotica.
^^^^^^^^^^Disclaimer:'SomePeople'mayormaynotincludegabbalis.
u/Transfuturist [+2] Carthago delenda est. (15 hours later)
superhero erotica novel
Superhero erotica is very underrated.
^^^^Of ^^^^Heroes ^^^^and ^^^^Villains ^^^^is ^^^^grayt.
u/eaglejarl [+16] (an hour later)
In my case it's been pretty effective. My progress went something like this:
- Be professional programmer in job that I hated
- Write for amusement
- Have someone link to me from /r/rational and tell me they had done so
- Discover and explore sub
- Start posting my stuff here
- Find that people actually enjoy reading my stuff
- Go full-time writer. This has been enormously negative financially and so emotionally/creatively satisfying that I don't care.
- Try various creating-oriented websites, discover something that might be a market niche. Am currently exploring, might start software business if it turns out to be so.
So, yeah. This sub has (indirectly) drastically improved the quality of my life and could possibly end up with me having a job that I enjoy and is financially worth it.
u/raymestalez [+3] (3 hours later)
Can you elaborate on 8.? If it's not a secret of course.
I'm always curious about interesting business ideas in this niche.
u/eaglejarl [+4] (4 hours later)
Patreon is a successful business, meaning that it's a viable market. The interface isn't great and things that I consider basic functionality are missing. Customer service is also not all that it could be -- I've submitted multiple tickets and never gotten a human response in less than 24 hours. It's also not complicated, so a replacement would be relatively straightforward to build.
Right now I'm working out a requirements doc and evaluating whether I want to put in the effort to build it. Given that I'm a Patreon creator, I could dogfood the product. The real question is "can I build something that that Patreon couldn't incorporate quickly, and could I build it better enough to overcome first-mover advantage?"
u/raymestalez [+6] (6 hours later)
You know what I think internet REALLY needs? Universal and convenient micropayment system. There should be a universal way to pay for an article/video in one click(embeddable button on any page). It could be a paywall that gives you access to the article, or a tip-jar kind of donations. Imagine there could be a system that everybody uses, like patreon, and a person has to enter his credit card info only once, and he can pay/donate to his favorite articles all over the web. These could even be microdonations, like 50 cents, and function similar to a like button.
Now that a lot of the people use adblock, ads are less and less viable, and this kind of system could be a solution. And it could totally compete with patreon, without straight up copying it's functionality. What do you think about that idea?
I am working on a fiction hosting website, and I'm thinking about a perfect way to monetize the content for writers(that would be benefitial and convenient for both writers and readers). So far I figured that an ebook store and an Apple-music kind of subscriptions are the best way to go, but I am very curious about the alternatives. If you have some clever ideas on how to monetize writing or how to improve patreon - I will probably be an early adopter.
u/eaglejarl [+6] (6 hours later)
Universal and convenient micropayment system.
No argument there. Unfortunately, it's really hard. Lots of big names have taken a swing at it, and it hasn't caught on. If you want to kick ideas around on Skype I'm glad to, but this isn't an easy fix.
I am working on a fiction hosting website, [...] If you have some clever ideas on how to monetize writing or how to improve patreon - I will probably be an early adopter.
Cool. If you would, drop me your contact info in PM. It sounds like we've got similar ideas and maybe we can cross-pollinate.
u/codahighland [+7] (6 hours later)
Relevant: https://xkcd.com/927/
u/Nevereatcars [+5] The Greatest Is Behind (2 days later)
I don't even click on these anymore. I just read the alt-text from the transcriber, check the title, and remember the panel.
u/codahighland [+2] (3 days later)
Whatever works.
u/xkcd_transcriber [+3] (6 hours later)
Title: Standards
Title-text: Fortunately, the charging one has been solved now that we've all standardized on mini-USB. Or is it micro-USB? Shit.
Stats: This comic has been referenced 1781 times, representing 2.4047% of referenced xkcds.
^xkcd.com ^| ^xkcd sub ^| ^Problems/Bugs? ^| ^Statistics ^| ^Stop Replying ^| ^Delete
u/gabbalis [+1] (6 hours later)
Hmm. Just thinking about this... maybe something like changetip? I've never really used it but It seems to work by unifying tipping over social media accounts that people already have, which seems way better than forcing people to make a new account on something.
u/Empiricist_or_not [+1] Aspiring polite Hegemonizing swarm (a day later)
I wonder if theirs a way to set up a paypal client for this. . . Hmm another project after thesis.
u/None [+7] (an hour later)
Go full-time writer. This has been enormously negative financially and so emotionally/creatively satisfying that I don't care.
Peter Singer or someone else from the effective altruism group might say that you could have saved dozens of lives with your earlier job if you had given something like 10% of your salary to charity. Then he might say, is your personal well-being really more important than the lives of those people? What would you say to him?
(Personally I don't care.)
edit. If you're interested about Peter Singer's opinion on this, this is a good article to start. His views have gotten milder and more pragmatic on this issue, but at some point he said that if you want to be maximally ethical person you should work so hard, and give so much to charity that you're suffering at least as much as those you're trying to help.
u/Anderkent [+12] (5 hours later)
Peter Singer or someone else from the effective altruism group might say that you could have saved dozens of lives with your earlier job if you had given something like 10% of your salary to charity. Then he might say, is your personal well-being really more important than the lives of those people? What would you say to him?
Not if he burns out, loses the job for underperforming, and then has to try to put his writer career in a bad financial situation.
Resigning a job isn't actually destroying money, it just goes to someone else. Don't think you're morally obligated to optimize your life around other people refusing to be charitable.
u/fljared [+4] United Federation of Planets (9 hours later)
Not necessarily- It depends on how much value you create in that job.
A programmer who drops out and becomes a monk, for instance, stops producing economic value and becomes a drain on the economy.
u/eaglejarl [+9] (13 hours later)
stops producing economic value and becomes a drain on the economy
Well, the monk still has to do business with the economy. If the monk is completely self-sufficient (growing own food, etc) then he's not a drain on the economy. If he's not self-sufficient then he somehow has to be putting enough value back into the system to support himself. The one exception to this would be if he was on welfare, being supported at state expense, but typically you're only eligible for welfare if you're actively looking for work.
u/Empiricist_or_not [+6] Aspiring polite Hegemonizing swarm (a day later)
A lot of these arguments seem to be coming from the zero sum assumption that entertainers and monks do not contribute to economic output. Conversely if you understand that people who generate recreational activities for others, be they authors, monks, amusement park attendants or actors, have a positive impact on the productivity of their serviced audience. Arguably a zen Abbott or the author of a book, of any subject, that leaves many people more motivated could contribute more to society's productivity than an assembly line worker crafting screwdrivers or websites.
u/eaglejarl [+2] (a day later)
That is a really good point. Thank you for making it.
u/fljared [+2] United Federation of Planets (14 hours later)
Suppose he's being supported by the temple.
The point is that his choices could lead to a net decrease in economic output of the world.
u/eaglejarl [+9] (3 hours later)
I would say that lifestyle-choice vs ability-to-donate-to-charity is not a simple conversation that can be responded to in a Reddit post, but that I'd be happy to sit down with him over coffee and listen to his argument.
u/None [+6] (2 hours later)
What would you say to him?
Lots of people aren't hedonic utilitarians. Peter Singer can go wirehead himself.
u/Empiricist_or_not [+1] Aspiring polite Hegemonizing swarm (a day later)
As much as HPMOR's readers may be hostile to the ides presented in Rand's Atlas Shrugged This type of attitude shows a disturbingly naive and communist view. You get better performance when high performance is proportionally rewarded with quality of life and status rewards, to whit capitalism.
TLDR: The utility function for your work it your compensation, but that only works well if it is yours to use as you chose.
u/alexanderwales [+5] Time flies like an arrow (2 days later)
You get better performance when high performance is proportionally rewarded with quality of life and status rewards, to whit capitalism.
My experience with capitalism has been that this is not entirely the case, especially in the corporate world. It is very difficult for someone to get fired for laziness or incompetence, while at the same time, it's difficult for someone who works hard to get promoted. More than any other factor, it's politics that gets people raises (and promotions) and politics that gets people let go. The reason for this is largely that it's difficult to accurately evaluate performance, especially given human biases.
(This is without going into the other failures of capitalism, like its tendency towards local maxima instead of global maxima.)
u/Empiricist_or_not [+5] Aspiring polite Hegemonizing swarm (2 days later)
I guess I'd have to say that, like republics, capitalism is least flawed system; it doesn't work but it works better than everything else.
u/FeepingCreature [+4] GCV Literally The Entire Culture (2 days later)
That we've tried so far.
Apparently.
u/Empiricist_or_not [+1] Aspiring polite Hegemonizing swarm (a day later)
Glad to hear it.
u/LunarTulip [+10] (41 minutes later)
I'm not seeing where the problem is supposed to be. When I expect reading rational fiction to make me happier than alternative sources of entertainment would, I do it. When I have something better to do, then I do that instead.
u/quorad [+10] (an hour later)
This same type of critique was given about LW many years ago, and I think the same critique applies to this subreddit. If you read it, you might better understand what the problem is about:
http://lesswrong.com/lw/2po/selfimprovement_or_shiny_distraction_why_less/
I'm gonna quote the relevant sections, you might as well replace "Less Wrong" with "/r/rational" in the text and it would still apply relatively well:
Less Wrong is explicitly intended is to help people become more rational. -- Unfortunately, I think Less Wrong is a failure at instilling abilities-in-practice, and designed in a way that detracts from people's real-world performance.
Work: time spent acting in an instrumentally rational manner, ie forcing your attention towards the tasks you have consciously determined will be the most effective at achieving your consciously chosen goals, rather than allowing your mind to drift to what is shiny and fun.
What is the enemy of consciously directed attention? It is shiny distraction. And what is Less Wrong? It is a blog, a succession of short fun posts with comments, most likely read when people wish to distract or entertain themselves, and tuned for producing shiny ideas which successfully distract and entertain people. As Merlin Mann says: "Joining a Facebook group about creative productivity is like buying a chair about jogging". Well, reading a blog to overcome akrasia IS joining a Facebook group about creative productivity. It's the opposite of this classic piece of advice.
Unfortunately, in this framework, Less Wrong is probably of negative value to those who really want to become more rational. I see it as a low-ROI activity whose shininess is tuned to attract the rationality community, and thus serves as the perfect distraction (rationality porn, rationality opium). Many (most?) participants are allowing LW to grab their attention because it is fun and easy, and thus simultaneously distracting themselves from Work (reducing their overall Work time) while convincing themselves that this distraction is helping them to become more rational. This reduces the chance that they will consciously Work towards rationality, since they feel they are already working towards that goal with their LW reading time.
The writers here are ridiculously good, and consuming this type of fiction is about as close to wireheading as possible with current methods. Although since this sub is about fiction, and we all know that fiction is supposed to be fun, the problem might not be that big.
u/alexanderwales [+13] Time flies like an arrow (an hour later)
I can definitely agree with there being a system of perverse incentives, if you consider the "goal" of rational fiction to be education. The most upvoted stuff in /r/rational is going to be the stuff that's the most entertaining, not the stuff that tries its hardest to teach or instill rational values (or which is the best at doing so, especially since people are very bad at evaluating whether they've learned something useful).
So with that said ... no, it's not rational to spend time reading here if you're trying to optimize for becoming more rational. It's probably the best place to be if you were going to read anyway, and want to optimize that reading for thoughtfulness and science.
u/LunarTulip [+5] (an hour later)
Your last paragraph pretty much sums up my viewpoint. I don't actually read rational fiction for the sake of becoming more rational; if it happens anyway (which it sometimes does), it's a nice side effect, but the main reason I'm in it is just for the good stories.
u/None [+4] (a day later)
That's a rather different criticism, though. This forum exists to help people find and disseminate fiction for enjoyment. LessWrong exists for people to discuss rationality and become more rational.
I've found LessWrong to be something of a shithole. When I've discussed certain topics, specifically related to feminism, people started regurgitating stereotypes at me. I did the research. I responded with that research. I got more regurgitated stereotypes. I got annoyed at it and suggested that people should maybe do some research on their own. The consensus was that I didn't have enough karma to make suggestions and I was just being a whiny brat trying to shut down opposition, and that half a second of someone else's thought (if you can call it that) can be worth more than an hour of my research.
u/None [+0] (4 hours later)
[deleted]
u/quorad [+8] (4 hours later)
That was a tongue-in-cheek way of saying that I really like the writers here, don't read too much into it :P
u/raymestalez [+4] (4 hours later)
I agree with other commenters in the thread that rational fiction is mostly about entertainment.
"Rationality" part makes it more fun and enjoyable, but the goal here is to have fun, not to learn. Of course real textbooks in your field will always be better at teaching you things than fiction.
But besides rationality, I also value new interesting ideas and creativity. And this is where rtf wins.
u/None [+6] (13 hours later)
I mean, some of these works are really, really long and even reading them takes a lot of time, and even more if you are writing them.
All writing does.
I see these works more as a form of escapism, and not so much as something that would improve your rationality.
If I did not read or write fiction, I would find other amusements, and I would be slightly less happy to live.
I get it that you can't act optimally 24/7
You seem to be conflating "acting optimally" with "constantly doing something that other people would think is productive" and are making some assumptions about what people should value.
u/krashnburn200 [+10] (an hour later)
I have yet to find a rational argument showing that objective reality is and more meaningful or important than any random imaginary world. Plus it sucks... escapism wins.
u/what_deleted_said [+1] (22 days later)
Well it's the environment you have most interaction with, both in terms of number of interactions and variety of interaction methods.
u/None [+4] (17 minutes later)
[deleted]
u/None [+5] (an hour later)
[deleted]
u/eaglejarl [+3] (4 hours later)
Play "dual N-back"
What is this?
u/None [+3] (4 hours later)
[deleted]
u/eaglejarl [+2] (23 hours later)
I'm having trouble understanding their directions. The idea is that you push "position match" if the position is what it was N moves ago, and "sound match" if the letter is what it was an moves ago. Right?
u/None [+2] (a day later)
[deleted]
u/eaglejarl [+3] (a day later)
That seems really simple. I don't understand why they couldn't explain it like that. Thanks for laying it out.
u/blazinghand [+3] Chaos Undivided (2 hours later)
My goal isn't to become more rational or something like that, it's to have fun and read things I like reading. In any case, having fun reading fiction is pretty much the opposite of useless, it's super fun. Doing fun things like this is my goal in life.
u/TK17Studios [+3] Author of r!Animorphs: The Reckoning (3 hours later)
Here's a post with some relevance to this topic: http://dogearedanddogtagged.com/2015/07/27/harry-potter-and-the-unwritten-epic-of-tomorrow/
Short answer: rational fiction can be used to set up a self-sustaining reaction of motivation and energy that can THEN be turned toward actual, real progress in the larger world. Like all things, you can go too far with it, and it can turn into navel-gazing, masturbation, and lotus eating. But done in moderation, it can make you a better and more effective person than you would've been without it entirely.
u/None [+2] (2 hours later)
Why do you think I spend so little time on here nowadays, relative to time spent at work, at the gym, and at my math textbooks?
Because the actual answer is, "Far too little free time to have non-IRL, popcorny fun anymore :-(."
u/kairisika [+2] (12 hours later)
It's only irrational if you believe that a person should, let alone is capable of, being engaged in actively productive things at every waking moment.
Most people believe that there is room for leisure time in life - to do something solely because you find it enjoyable to do, whether or not it does anything at all to benefit you or expand your mind. If leisure time is an accepted thing, it is no better or worse to read enjoyable fiction, rational or otherwise, than to do any other form of enjoyable leisure.
u/lsparrish [+2] (21 hours later)
Having one's brain primed to take advantage of "munchkinable" opportunities in real life seems like something that is arguably high-value (provided those munchkinries are likely to be used for altruism, which rational fiction usually primes you for as well).
That said, I haven't convinced myself of this being the most-optimal use of time. My reason for spending time on reading seems to be addiction/enjoyment/escapism, which seems to be time that would probably go to other less productive activities if I didn't spend it here. At the margin, I should probably cut my Netflix watching time first.
u/ArgentStonecutter [+2] Emergency Mustelid Hologram (19 minutes later)
Short of Roko's Basilisk type scenarios, rationally we're all going to be dead and unrecoverable before the Singularity hits, so why not escapism?
u/Rhamni [+6] Aspiring author (2 hours later)
I mean, cryogenic freezing?
u/ArgentStonecutter [+4] Emergency Mustelid Hologram (3 hours later)
Have you contracted for that yet?
u/Rhamni [+5] Aspiring author (3 hours later)
I have not. I've done a little research, and it would be very inconvenient right now, especially since I still feel irrationally immortal because I'm young and healthy. I live in Sweden, and the laws here make it pretty difficult to set things up so your corpse gets released quickly. Wanting to hand your head over to a company to be taken abroad is not something the laws were designed to handle.
Also, it's expensive. And the companies I've looked at won't preserve you until the money clears, so life insurance isn't fast enough.
u/ArgentStonecutter [+3] Emergency Mustelid Hologram (4 hours later)
So, back to escapism.
u/None [+2] (13 hours later)
I have. Even if you think you can't afford it, talk to Rudi Hoffman. He'll discuss options with you, and at the very least you'll have an estimate on how much it would cost you.
I'm currently spending between $3000 and $4000 for two people, but we could be spending a third of that. (I preferred Alcor over the Cryonics Institute for various reasons, but they're appreciably more expensive, plus I'm paying for more life insurance than needed.)
u/ArgentStonecutter [+2] Emergency Mustelid Hologram (21 hours later)
$3000 per year?
u/None [+2] (a day later)
Last I checked, the Cryonics Institute had a $120/year fee, plus you get life insurance worth $120k. My life insurance for $300,000 costs maybe $120/month. So you can probably pay less than $800 per year and get yourself covered with the Cryonics Institute. But again, talk to Rudi Hoffman.
u/None [+3] (3 hours later)
Short of Roko's Basilisk type scenarios, rationally we're all going to be dead and unrecoverable before the Singularity hits,
Look, judging by lifespans, I have a reasonable probability of living until around 2070. If we've made no progress towards anything by then, and additionally found out nothing about why we couldn't make progress, I'll be very disappointed and just as surprised.
But seriously, let's take over the world already. I'm too mortal to waste my time on the world's shit.
u/ArgentStonecutter [+3] Emergency Mustelid Hologram (3 hours later)
In 1979 many people including Robert Anton Wilson were making the same prediction about 2012..2018. I thought it optimistic but in 1979 I expected that we'd have a good lock on the problem by now. We don't. I am disappointed but by now no longer surprised.
u/None [+2] (9 hours later)
I thought it optimistic but in 1979 I expected that we'd have a good lock on the problem by now. We don't.
We don't? The passage from symbolic logic to statistical learning theory is a big deal.
I am disappointed but by now no longer surprised.
Fair enough. I guess I just don't actually care enough to despair over eventually dying? Sorry, I tend to feel that I should show other people a stronger will to live than I actually have most of the time. Sometimes I worry I'm more like Kamina with his false bluster than Shimon with his genuine determination.
u/ArgentStonecutter [+1] Emergency Mustelid Hologram (19 hours later)
The passage from symbolic logic to statistical learning theory is a big deal.
It's still a fraction of the problems you'd need to solve to either make physical brains immortal or map them well enough to reconstruct a conscious entity from the map.
u/None [+1] (21 hours later)
Oh. Sorry, which goal were we talking about?
u/ArgentStonecutter [+1] Emergency Mustelid Hologram (a day later)
Whatever it is that you expect actual humans to get out of the singularity. If that doesn't involve some kind of vastening, what's in it for us? Why not spend our remaining time in escapism then?
u/None [+3] (a day later)
I'm unsure there will be any such thing as a "singularity", or that if there is, we'll get anything out of it.
I'd like to get everything, to rewrite life in ways our ancestors would have considered acts of God Himself, to smash the things they thought were everlasting truths of the universe, to live lives with horizons that always expand rather than contract, to abolish the darkness our ancestors feared and fill the universe with light.
But there's really no hard guarantees, chances are difficult to forecast due to missing information and yet-determined causal links. Really my hopes and dreams are no better than escapist fantasies at this point: I can't live in them or plan on them, so what good are they?
u/RMcD94 [+1] (28 minutes later)
It's an interesting question and to be honest I'm more curious about why you felt you needed an alt.
However I don't think being a perfect agent of rationality, which people here are not anyway, would involve denying yourself luxury time. And if you need luxury time to best perform towards whatever optimal goal (ending death, transcending humanity etc) what better method of pleasure than that which also reinforces good practice when working toward said goal.
u/quorad [+1] (43 minutes later)
It's an interesting question and to be honest I'm more curious about why you felt you needed an alt.
It's mostly that I'm questioning the existence of this subreddit, and whether it encourages unproductive use of your time.
u/RMcD94 [+2] (49 minutes later)
Sure, I understand the question you're asking but I don't understand what you think would happen without an alt.
It's not like anyone is going to hunt you down for suggesting that reddit might be a waste of time
u/eaglejarl [+3] (an hour later)
My guess is that s/he doesn't want to take the real-world reputational hit if people go full-on torches-and-pitchforks on the thread.
u/blazinghand [+1] Chaos Undivided (5 hours later)
This subreddit absolutely encourages unproductive use of my time in a certain sense, but I gain deep satisfaction using my time unproductively.
u/Farmerbob1 [+1] Level 1 author (a day later)
I think part of the appeal of rational works is that a careful reader might be able to figure out in advance what is coming. Even if they don't know exactly how the scenes will be delivered.
The closer the reader gets to figuring it out, the happier they are at the end. Like a mystery novel where all the clues are actually present, or a many-piece jigsaw puzzle with no reference picture.
If the writer manages to write an entertaining story that is also predictable in at least some of it's elements, it makes the rational reader happy, because they saw what was coming!
Pleasure is not useless :)
u/FuguofAnotherWorld [-1] Roll the Dice on Fate (6 hours later)
I'm going to say the same thing I say when asked if I should really be eating meat: Probably not, but I'm going to keep doing it anyway.