I think if he were optimizing his own reputation really well, we wouldn’t be having this conversation in the first place.
My own exposure to Tim Ferriss has been very limited, but while I don’t know if I would go so far as to say that he gives me a “scummy” vibe, I get the feeling that I ought to be treating him with more than a little suspicion.
Maybe it’s impossible to maximize popularity in our population while still appealing to people who’re skeptical or inclined to critical thinking. I’m reminded of this experiment, where the winning estimate is one that assumed a very low level of recursive thinking in the average participant. Trying to account for “smarter” participants would only have resulted in a less accurate answer. But Tim Ferriss’s reputation is not so glowing that I expect that a person with the same resources at their disposal couldn’t do better.
I think part of the problem is that he’s openly manipulative and exploitative, which regardless of whether it works, is going to put people off—if only because they don’t want people to think they are like Ferriss too. (Though they still pay close attention; it’s all very Hansonian.)
For example, I have something of a standing invitation from an assistant to write a post for the Ferriss blog about brain training and dual n-back; no compensation, of course, since the traffic is supposed to be worth it to me. And it probably is, because it’s a popular blog—I suspect just a link in the footer to my DNB FAQ and other pages would result in a traffic spike greater than I’ve ever gotten from Hacker News or Reddit or LessWrong. But nevertheless, I’ve found it hard to motivate myself to write such a post and haven’t written it yet.
I think if he were optimizing his own reputation really well, we wouldn’t be having this conversation in the first place.
My own exposure to Tim Ferriss has been very limited, but while I don’t know if I would go so far as to say that he gives me a “scummy” vibe, I get the feeling that I ought to be treating him with more than a little suspicion.
Maybe it’s impossible to maximize popularity in our population while still appealing to people who’re skeptical or inclined to critical thinking. I’m reminded of this experiment, where the winning estimate is one that assumed a very low level of recursive thinking in the average participant. Trying to account for “smarter” participants would only have resulted in a less accurate answer. But Tim Ferriss’s reputation is not so glowing that I expect that a person with the same resources at their disposal couldn’t do better.
I think part of the problem is that he’s openly manipulative and exploitative, which regardless of whether it works, is going to put people off—if only because they don’t want people to think they are like Ferriss too. (Though they still pay close attention; it’s all very Hansonian.)
For example, I have something of a standing invitation from an assistant to write a post for the Ferriss blog about brain training and dual n-back; no compensation, of course, since the traffic is supposed to be worth it to me. And it probably is, because it’s a popular blog—I suspect just a link in the footer to my DNB FAQ and other pages would result in a traffic spike greater than I’ve ever gotten from Hacker News or Reddit or LessWrong. But nevertheless, I’ve found it hard to motivate myself to write such a post and haven’t written it yet.