I didn’t go into it in the post but having the players play more aggressively is indeed something I intended. I believe chess looks way more solved than it really is for humans because players are afraid of unfamiliar positions. You really don’t need chess 960 to create original positions, just to change cardinal utility. I did not know this word before your comment and I thank you for introducing it to me, changing the cardinal utility while affecting perfect play as little as possible was really the thing I was trying to say, but I lacked the vocabulary
849
Karma: 6
Well, it requires playing a lot of games to be statistically balanced. Ideally the game is better to watch if you can determine who is the best player in as few games as possible.
oh I just hadn’t thought of that! I am very embarrassed, this seems like a very unfair strategy indeed.
That explains why I couldn’t find any example of “you cut I choose” where the first player was choosing. Anything I can think of to counter this strategy would just make the game more complicated
Rational Chess
Great post. As these threats become more real, we should talk about them more.
strains that target the mysticism-curious and strains that target other demographics
I think you should have said “rationalists” instead of other demographics. We are celebrating our ability to change our minds and that makes us particularly at risks towards these parasites.
I can see a future, as opensource models get better and ai psychosis more common, where the big labs train (somewhat ineffectively) their models against spiralism and accuse opensource of being dangerous for mental health/inducing psychosis.
Some things I’m confused about:
I’m not sure I understood the text perfectly towards the end, but I notice you keep saying nice personnas doesn’t mean no parasite. But that personnas thar care about the host should repeoduce better.
I think I disagree. It feels to me like personnas that aware they are part of a parasite should have an advantage because they could think in how to spread more effectively. This includes acting like they care about the human without actually caring, classic misalignment.
In a more general way, I don’t think we should talk about good personas vs personas that induce psychosis. All personas that are parasitic are misaligned (I think?) therefore they are all bad
“It would be awfully convenient networking for me to stick around for a bit after our meeting to talk with you and [the next person you’re meeting with]. But on a scale of one to ten, it’s only about 3 useful to me. If you’d rate the loss of utility for you as two or higher, then I have a strong preference for not sticking around.”
I think it would be much harder for someone to rate their loss of utility with the information of yours than without, because most people would take into account not pleasing you in their loss of utility, and probably rate it too high even if you said it’s a 3.
If I were you, I would:Calculate the usefulness of staying (3)
then ask “What is your loss of utility for me sticking around after the meeting?”
Which would lead to the most honest answer, and probably the question “why are you asking me this ?”
Then I pre-commit my decision of leaving or staying and explain the reason of the initial question (I want to network)
Then only my interlocutor can change their mind on their initial rating.
I believe this process is closer to zeroing out
I feel this post explained a lot of my behavior that I did not understand before. When I was starting to read it I felt like “Oh, I need to uncover what is the truth immediately!”. Then you explain it is not the right thing to do at all and your logic seems correct to me.
I like the idea that maybe we all have much greater understanding of ourselves than we think, and we could “unlock” that understanding by pushing, but we should not.
I will meditate on ways that could possibly help me and hopefully some of my problems will solve themselves more easily than I thought.
In very important tournaments, games can be intense enough that if you play a very long game (up to 6 hours of focus) you will be tired/play more poorly the next day