Claim: “Eternal September” is impossible to avoid.
The way “memetic movements” deal with Eternal September is one of the following:
(a) Dilute and die in the original sense (some of longer living meme complexes did this and are now “mainstream religions”). This might not be so bad. It may be that diluted/dead Christianity saved europe from collapse during the dark ages. In general I can think of many ways in which a counterfactual non-christian europe probably would have been much much worse off.
(b) Create an “inner school/outer school” division. This, again, is not so bad—but you must give up the notion that everyone is helpable. The idea with (b) is there is only so much room on an “ark” and it is not economical to save everyone.
(c) Go secret and stop new users from coming in. This also is not so bad—but you give up the goal of “raising the sanity waterline”/”worldwide baptism”/”nirvana for all sentient beings”/etc./etc.
LessWrong is the outer school. It exists as a magnet to attract those who may be capable of real growth in the Way. As is always the way in such things, it also attracts many others, people who imagine themselves to be capable of learning but who in reality desire only the outward trappings of rationalism, a new vocabulary to express the same wrong ways of thinking, a tribal sign used to flatter themselves at being above the masses outside. The more that LessWrong draws the former while repelling the latter, the more it can fulfil its real function, which is to find candidates who may be capable of membership in the inner school.
The inner school is jocularly alluded to as the Bayesian Conspiracy, in order to give the impression that it does not exist. Some have been members of the inner school for years before discovering that fact, while others falsely imagine themselves to be on the inside while the real inner circle knows that they will never enter within its invisible walls.
The inner school is run by an inner circle, the inner inner school, the Conspiracy beyond the Conspiracy, whose existence is known to none but its own members.
Well, it could be true.
(I’m just applying a standard template for the organisation of secret societies. I don’t actually have a hot line to the One.
Sorry I didn’t incorporate this into the solutions page sooner, Luke. I didn’t check this thread for solutions. I will add this now. (I made a cliff notes version of the suggestions if you’re interested). I question, though, whether changing the karma numbers on the comments and posts in any way would have a significant influence on behavior or a significant influence on who joins and stays. Firstly, votes may reward and punish but they don’t instruct very well—unless people are very similar, they won’t have accurate assumptions about what they did wrong. I also question whether having a significant influence on behavior would prevent a new majority from forming because these are different problems. The current users who are the right type may be both motivated and able to change, but future users of the wrong type may not care or may be incapable of changing. They may set a new precedent where there are a lot of people doing unpopular things so new people are more likely to ignore popularity. The technique uses math and the author claims that “the tweaks work” but I didn’t see anything specific about what the author means by that nor evidence that this is true. So this looks good because it is mathematical, but it’s less direct than other options so I’m questioning whether it would work.
Luke, I am not sure there are mathematical approaches to social problems. For the same reason you can’t solve Google’s problem with just the PageRank algorithm.
The “inner school / outer school” seems to me that correct solution, because:
(a) I don’t want to see the message diluted. The diluted forms are already out there—people behaving rationally only inside the laboratory; people trying to use arguments and evaluate evidence properly except when talking about religion or politics; etc.
(b) I completely agree that many people are beyond help; that is: they don’t even want to become rational, and trying to convince them otherwise is hopeless or at least not cost-effective. Let’s do the rational thing instead, whatever it is.
(c) I support the idea of “raising the sanity waterline”. We can’t make everyone sane, but we should create as much sanity as possible.
In some sense, the (b) already exists. Many people are LW readers, but only some of them are CFAR members. And while the LW readers discuss some minor details, CFAR is organizing rationality minicamps. Some people talk, some people do; and those who do, recognize each other. Rationalist communities materialize in meatspace. Even if tomorrow hordes of trolls would overcome LW, it would be only a temporary setback; and a new discussion forum would probably appear soon if enough old members would feel disappointed.
Claim: “Eternal September” is impossible to avoid.
The way “memetic movements” deal with Eternal September is one of the following:
(a) Dilute and die in the original sense (some of longer living meme complexes did this and are now “mainstream religions”). This might not be so bad. It may be that diluted/dead Christianity saved europe from collapse during the dark ages. In general I can think of many ways in which a counterfactual non-christian europe probably would have been much much worse off.
(b) Create an “inner school/outer school” division. This, again, is not so bad—but you must give up the notion that everyone is helpable. The idea with (b) is there is only so much room on an “ark” and it is not economical to save everyone.
(c) Go secret and stop new users from coming in. This also is not so bad—but you give up the goal of “raising the sanity waterline”/”worldwide baptism”/”nirvana for all sentient beings”/etc./etc.
LessWrong is the outer school. It exists as a magnet to attract those who may be capable of real growth in the Way. As is always the way in such things, it also attracts many others, people who imagine themselves to be capable of learning but who in reality desire only the outward trappings of rationalism, a new vocabulary to express the same wrong ways of thinking, a tribal sign used to flatter themselves at being above the masses outside. The more that LessWrong draws the former while repelling the latter, the more it can fulfil its real function, which is to find candidates who may be capable of membership in the inner school.
The inner school is jocularly alluded to as the Bayesian Conspiracy, in order to give the impression that it does not exist. Some have been members of the inner school for years before discovering that fact, while others falsely imagine themselves to be on the inside while the real inner circle knows that they will never enter within its invisible walls.
The inner school is run by an inner circle, the inner inner school, the Conspiracy beyond the Conspiracy, whose existence is known to none but its own members.
Well, it could be true.
(I’m just applying a standard template for the organisation of secret societies. I don’t actually have a hot line to the One.
Richard, have you ever been in an “esoteric society” before?
Not that I’m aware of. Am I in one now?
Maybe this mathematical approach would work. (h/t matt)
Sorry I didn’t incorporate this into the solutions page sooner, Luke. I didn’t check this thread for solutions. I will add this now. (I made a cliff notes version of the suggestions if you’re interested). I question, though, whether changing the karma numbers on the comments and posts in any way would have a significant influence on behavior or a significant influence on who joins and stays. Firstly, votes may reward and punish but they don’t instruct very well—unless people are very similar, they won’t have accurate assumptions about what they did wrong. I also question whether having a significant influence on behavior would prevent a new majority from forming because these are different problems. The current users who are the right type may be both motivated and able to change, but future users of the wrong type may not care or may be incapable of changing. They may set a new precedent where there are a lot of people doing unpopular things so new people are more likely to ignore popularity. The technique uses math and the author claims that “the tweaks work” but I didn’t see anything specific about what the author means by that nor evidence that this is true. So this looks good because it is mathematical, but it’s less direct than other options so I’m questioning whether it would work.
Luke, I am not sure there are mathematical approaches to social problems. For the same reason you can’t solve Google’s problem with just the PageRank algorithm.
The “inner school / outer school” seems to me that correct solution, because:
(a) I don’t want to see the message diluted. The diluted forms are already out there—people behaving rationally only inside the laboratory; people trying to use arguments and evaluate evidence properly except when talking about religion or politics; etc.
(b) I completely agree that many people are beyond help; that is: they don’t even want to become rational, and trying to convince them otherwise is hopeless or at least not cost-effective. Let’s do the rational thing instead, whatever it is.
(c) I support the idea of “raising the sanity waterline”. We can’t make everyone sane, but we should create as much sanity as possible.
In some sense, the (b) already exists. Many people are LW readers, but only some of them are CFAR members. And while the LW readers discuss some minor details, CFAR is organizing rationality minicamps. Some people talk, some people do; and those who do, recognize each other. Rationalist communities materialize in meatspace. Even if tomorrow hordes of trolls would overcome LW, it would be only a temporary setback; and a new discussion forum would probably appear soon if enough old members would feel disappointed.