Keeping secrets is a burden, or so the traditional wisdom goes. I googled: ″keeping secrets cognitive load″. The first result that referenced a sufficiently trustworthy source was a PDF hosted by Harvard uni. It was too fundamental research—experimental based on neuropsychological tests. I vaguely remember a key reason I abdicated from an intelligence analyst interview was reading about the negative consequences of secrecy. Based on the difficulty of finding clarity on this issue, I’ll go with my subjective experience which is that keeping a secret is a mental burden (utility: −2, confidence: 60%)
Now, my name can be found somewhere in my post history. But, in practice my real life social circle is oblivious to my LW identity, including those in my social circles who are in the LW community. I would consider my identity a secret.
On LW, I am a schizotypal, perverted, oft depressed character who shares all. But, I share my mind authentically. In real life, I am well mannered early-career academic (util +7, 20%) with a foot in party politics (selfish util −4, 90%, EA util +12, 25%. Now, academic careers are often apolitical, so I should be fine there, and I’ve recently mentally figured that my involvement in party politics (on the recommendation of 80,000 hours) is sufficiently stressful that dropping that I don’t care for it anymore. However, I am concerned by the possibility of stigmatisation for the self that I have revealed here, by the cohort of people in my social circle.
Doing a quick run through of the utils and likelihoods, it looks to me that I should open up my identities. On the other hand, I feel I no longer am the identity I have evolved from as I have been posting: I have gotten a lot more rational. In spite of this, I have no plans to cross pollinate identities yet.
I post because I am very interested to hear stories from anyone who has cross pollinated, so to speak. Will you share for a moment?
My real-life social circles don’t have much interaction between rationalists and non-rationalists. But my tumblr gives some cross-pollination. My persona there is closer to my rationalish persona than I usually show in public, and it feeds through to facebook, visible only to a group of friends I selected as being unlikely to start hating me for the things I might want to write on it. Many of those friends are non-rationalists.
I don’t know how many of them typically see my tumblr posts. Usually I don’t get any likes or comments on facebook. But occasionally one of them will tell me they enjoy reading them. (This has even happened in the presence of people who didn’t know I had a tumblr, and nothing bad has come of that.)
So basically, this level of cross-pollination has been pretty uneventful.
(My goal is that someone casually stalking me through my real name or my usual pseudonyms shouldn’t discover my tumblr. That’s why I’m posting this from the throwaway.)
It’s pretty easy to find me if you know me in more than one LW-sphere place. I have very little to lose from being a little strange, as I already have that reputation. I wouldn’t call it cross pollination in my case; I am exactly the same person in the LW-sphere as I am in “Real Life.” I try to stay socially appropriate and interjecting an article about fallacies is taken as hostile in many non-LW discussions. Who knew?!
If I ever become more recognizable in either setting, I may have more interesting cross-pollination stories.
I think you should have compared the personal info revealed by them both before setting out to point fingers in public. Clarity is Australian and mixed-race, Gleb is American and white, and that’s just where the differences begin.
I’m not sure how serious you are, but FWIW I think Clarity and Gleb are different people who share some quirks. (And, in particular, I think this is sufficient to explain Clarity’s enthusiasm for some things Gleb has posted that I’m less enthusiastic about.)
For both if true and if not true: do you think posting this publicly is productive or a good idea when Clarity just said he didn’t want to cross pollinate?
This isn’t doxxing, I am not revealing otherwise difficult to get info, like address and phone and social security number, with the aim to harass. In fact, I am not revealing anything, I am just stating a guess. I have no inside info on either Clarity or Gleb.
I don’t see a problem with speculating about whether two anonymous posters are the same person, but pushing the idea that a poster who wishes to remain anonymous is the same person as a poster who’s publicly identified is close to doxing.
If (1) it isn’t too late and (2) this is your reason for departing rather than an opportunity for doing something you’d been kinda wanting to for ages, may I suggest that you not leave? Your presence here is valuable and I don’t think one misstep changes that.
That’s an ingenious conjecture, but I don’t think I believe it. We already know Ilya’s LW name is also his real name; repeating that fact here doesn’t make any sense.
I think that even making guesses about someone’s identity on an anonymous account is in very poor taste and actively discourages participation by people who are attempting to use anonymity as a tool to, “share [their] mind authentically”. I consider that sort of thing doxing similar to doxing because it takes actions on identity outside of the anonymous person’s terms. These days I’m generally against anything that has the potential to decrease activity on LW. (And even if Clarity is a generally ridiculous poster, he does foster discussions on the site at the very least.)
I think it’s a bad idea to have the same person have multiple prolific accounts here. I think calling what I am doing “doxxing” is a fnord. “Fnord” is also a fnord.
I think its important to evaluate the impact of your suspicion being wrong. Calling Gleb Clarity is practically slander. And as I’ve said before my name is mentioned several times in my post history: Carlos.
More ethically questionable is that I started a discussion on the ethics of voluntary identification any my anxiety around the level of association and attention I bring to stress my anxiety here and was ‘outed’ albeit frivolously in this way
No. It would have been bad if you’d been wrong. But you had reason to be confident, and you were right.
Possibly it would have been better to message Nancy privately. But she’s busy, and in the time between “Eugine shows up” and “Eugine gets banned”, I prefer for the rest of us to know he’s here.
Even if Eugine was tied to a meatspace identity, he’s not allowed to be here. He’s still not allowed to be here if he doesn’t admit that it’s him.
Keeping secrets is a burden, or so the traditional wisdom goes. I googled: ″keeping secrets cognitive load″. The first result that referenced a sufficiently trustworthy source was a PDF hosted by Harvard uni. It was too fundamental research—experimental based on neuropsychological tests. I vaguely remember a key reason I abdicated from an intelligence analyst interview was reading about the negative consequences of secrecy. Based on the difficulty of finding clarity on this issue, I’ll go with my subjective experience which is that keeping a secret is a mental burden (utility: −2, confidence: 60%)
Now, my name can be found somewhere in my post history. But, in practice my real life social circle is oblivious to my LW identity, including those in my social circles who are in the LW community. I would consider my identity a secret.
On LW, I am a schizotypal, perverted, oft depressed character who shares all. But, I share my mind authentically. In real life, I am well mannered early-career academic (util +7, 20%) with a foot in party politics (selfish util −4, 90%, EA util +12, 25%. Now, academic careers are often apolitical, so I should be fine there, and I’ve recently mentally figured that my involvement in party politics (on the recommendation of 80,000 hours) is sufficiently stressful that dropping that I don’t care for it anymore. However, I am concerned by the possibility of stigmatisation for the self that I have revealed here, by the cohort of people in my social circle.
Doing a quick run through of the utils and likelihoods, it looks to me that I should open up my identities. On the other hand, I feel I no longer am the identity I have evolved from as I have been posting: I have gotten a lot more rational. In spite of this, I have no plans to cross pollinate identities yet.
I post because I am very interested to hear stories from anyone who has cross pollinated, so to speak. Will you share for a moment?
My real-life social circles don’t have much interaction between rationalists and non-rationalists. But my tumblr gives some cross-pollination. My persona there is closer to my rationalish persona than I usually show in public, and it feeds through to facebook, visible only to a group of friends I selected as being unlikely to start hating me for the things I might want to write on it. Many of those friends are non-rationalists.
I don’t know how many of them typically see my tumblr posts. Usually I don’t get any likes or comments on facebook. But occasionally one of them will tell me they enjoy reading them. (This has even happened in the presence of people who didn’t know I had a tumblr, and nothing bad has come of that.)
So basically, this level of cross-pollination has been pretty uneventful.
(My goal is that someone casually stalking me through my real name or my usual pseudonyms shouldn’t discover my tumblr. That’s why I’m posting this from the throwaway.)
It’s pretty easy to find me if you know me in more than one LW-sphere place. I have very little to lose from being a little strange, as I already have that reputation. I wouldn’t call it cross pollination in my case; I am exactly the same person in the LW-sphere as I am in “Real Life.” I try to stay socially appropriate and interjecting an article about fallacies is taken as hostile in many non-LW discussions. Who knew?!
If I ever become more recognizable in either setting, I may have more interesting cross-pollination stories.
.
I think you should have compared the personal info revealed by them both before setting out to point fingers in public. Clarity is Australian and mixed-race, Gleb is American and white, and that’s just where the differences begin.
Signed, LW’s self-appointed resident doxxing expert
Its true
I’m not sure how serious you are, but FWIW I think Clarity and Gleb are different people who share some quirks. (And, in particular, I think this is sufficient to explain Clarity’s enthusiasm for some things Gleb has posted that I’m less enthusiastic about.)
For both if true and if not true: do you think posting this publicly is productive or a good idea when Clarity just said he didn’t want to cross pollinate?
If true: don’t think it’s a good idea to have this sort of thing as a valid community norm.
I think it’s far from ideal, but that
doxingthings similar to doxing are at least 100x worse as a community norm.This isn’t doxxing, I am not revealing otherwise difficult to get info, like address and phone and social security number, with the aim to harass. In fact, I am not revealing anything, I am just stating a guess. I have no inside info on either Clarity or Gleb.
I don’t see a problem with speculating about whether two anonymous posters are the same person, but pushing the idea that a poster who wishes to remain anonymous is the same person as a poster who’s publicly identified is close to doxing.
I agree. I feel violated, offended and frankly sorry for Gleb. Illya I honestly never would have expected this and from you of all people.
Ok, I removed the post. And I am out myself.
I think your posts are awesome and a much needed breath of fresh air.
In terms of virtue ethics: you are the kind of person we want here. And if someone doesn’t, then that’s a personality failing on their part.
Please stick around.
If (1) it isn’t too late and (2) this is your reason for departing rather than an opportunity for doing something you’d been kinda wanting to for ages, may I suggest that you not leave? Your presence here is valuable and I don’t think one misstep changes that.
(I appreciate that #1 or #2 might well be false.)
I think “I am out myself” here means “my real name is publicly associated with my LW account”, and has nothing to do with leaving the site.
That’s an ingenious conjecture, but I don’t think I believe it. We already know Ilya’s LW name is also his real name; repeating that fact here doesn’t make any sense.
I think that even making guesses about someone’s identity on an anonymous account is in very poor taste and actively discourages participation by people who are attempting to use anonymity as a tool to, “share [their] mind authentically”. I consider that sort of thing
doxingsimilar to doxing because it takes actions on identity outside of the anonymous person’s terms. These days I’m generally against anything that has the potential to decrease activity on LW. (And even if Clarity is a generally ridiculous poster, he does foster discussions on the site at the very least.)I think it’s a bad idea to have the same person have multiple prolific accounts here. I think calling what I am doing “doxxing” is a fnord. “Fnord” is also a fnord.
I think its important to evaluate the impact of your suspicion being wrong. Calling Gleb Clarity is practically slander. And as I’ve said before my name is mentioned several times in my post history: Carlos.
More ethically questionable is that I started a discussion on the ethics of voluntary identification any my anxiety around the level of association and attention I bring to stress my anxiety here and was ‘outed’ albeit frivolously in this way
I apologize if I caused you any distress, that was not my intention.
Why don’t you both guys edit the existing comments and replace the other person’s name with “xxxxxxxx”?
If?
Should I feel bad about this? Granted, neither of those accounts is linked to a meatspace identity, but...
No. It would have been bad if you’d been wrong. But you had reason to be confident, and you were right.
Possibly it would have been better to message Nancy privately. But she’s busy, and in the time between “Eugine shows up” and “Eugine gets banned”, I prefer for the rest of us to know he’s here.
Even if Eugine was tied to a meatspace identity, he’s not allowed to be here. He’s still not allowed to be here if he doesn’t admit that it’s him.
Thanks. Another commenter suggested the same in a PM. I’m going to do that the next time I spot a possible new Eugine Nier account.
How am I ridiculous?
Not all the time. In fact, you display an admirably deep degree of introspection.
BUT there’s this.
And this.
And this.
And whatever this is.
And for the love of Zeus, this,
I’m not Gleb
edited