(I have signed no contracts or agreements whose existence I cannot mention, which I am mentioning here as a canary)
Drake Morrison
Karma: 831
jeweler’s loupe
small tape-measurer
monocular
lifting straps for moving furniture
See the event site for more details
name three examples.
(You’ve said you didn’t want to get into this, so I’d consider it understandable if you don’t. Maybe that’s a later post you intend to write, or have already written? I just want to push back a bit on the implicit consensus of “community elites” without examples)
Immediate taxonomy of subskills that came to mind:
designing for consumers vs designing for producers
technical breadth vs technical depth
managing up vs managing down
Physical strength vs physical dexterity
Dang it, now I wanna read/write posts for all of these
If It’s Worth Arguing, It’s Worth Arguing With Whiteboards
If You’ve Never Bought a Tool You Didn’t Need, You’re Not Buying Enough Tools
Carpathia Day
Plans are Not Promises
You’re referring to the Vickrey-Clarke-Groves mechanism?
Meaningful Questions Have Return Types
Uninterrupted Writing as Metric
I ended up here in desperation after trying a couple of other ways to write up my thoughts as posts. I tried narrating, stream-of-consciousness style, into Claude hoping it would help me, but then it wrote a whole essay itself. It was too much Claude, and not enough me. I didn’t like it. I did find the structuring work that Claude did useful, so I asked it to do this instead. I found it much easier to respond to questions that are already structured than to extemporize right out of my head the heap of chaotic thoughts about a topic.
Claude Interviews Me About Writing
The original, best interface for using a computer. The terminal! Let’s go back to when computers were good, and you didn’t have to bother with that stupid mouse accessory.
I agree it seems bad for a quick take to immediately collapse if as few as five people downvote, but I do think the downvotes mean something important.
I don’t want to hesitate to downvote a quick take that I think should be downvoted.
Would it make sense to have the auto-collapse happen after 24 hours? Or perhaps a time-discounted thing based on number of votes?
I like the collapse feature in general, and think it’s great for hiding bad comments/not drowning bad comments in downvotes.
Here’s my vote for Epistemic Roguelikes. It seems like a riskier path, but with a lot more upside.
I really like A Crisper Explanation of Simulacrum Levels as another way to explain simulacrum levels.
I found this to be the most concrete post from the feedbackloop-first rationality sequence. I really appreciated the empiricist sort of frame of actually going out and trying to do a simple toy experiment to test some assumptions. Hope is blinding, and I remember more often to double-check my thinking for it after reading this post.
I had a great time playing with you then, and I would gladly have kept at it for hours and tried novel things as stuff got boring. But I was working and had to move on.
I think this obstacle comes up a lot when trying to make spontaneous playfulness happen in a way that keeps its momentum or grows, people have shit to do. When I was a kid I had all the time in the world, now… not so much. I’m reminded of Playing in the Creek