I think from the outside view, people will adapt much easier than they expect. For the longest time, people were not only fine with a God being able but not choosing to solve all their problems (until they died of course, in which case all their problems would be solved), but derived literally all the meaning of their life out of that God existing and having a plan for them personally. So much so that many, even now, are scared to acknowledge that God's non-existence out of fear of losing that meaning.
From this perspective, in what sense is an AI god different from... you know... the actual god people theorized to exist? For one, the AI god will likely be a lot nicer (if all goes to plan)!
I guess my point is that the fact the 2022 version sucks is predicted on my model from the fact that we just don't use too much complicated etiquette anymore. The fact the sentences are hollow is a fact more about the subject being written, not the skill of the author.
Concretely, using the Wikipedia page for modern handshaking in the US I think gives better prose than the modern 2022 version of the etiquette guide
The handshake is commonly done upon meeting, greeting, parting, offering congratulations, expressing gratitude, or as a public sign of completing a business or diplomatic agreement. In sports, it is also done as a sign of good sportsmanship. Its purpose is to convey trust, respect, balance, and equality.[10] If it is done to form an agreement, the agreement is not official until the hands are parted.
[...]
In the United States, United Kingdom and Canada, a traditional handshake is firm, executed with the right hand, with good posture and eye contact. A handshake where both parties are standing up is deemed as good etiquette.
Yeah, I agree that the modern version of Ettiquite is worse, but that's just because we don't have very complicated ettiquite! They need to waste space here, because everyone already knows what a handshake is, and you need at most a one-sentence description. If you didn't turn every sentence into a paragraph the book would quickly turn into a blog post.
The solution is not in fact to add more flowery prose or complicated sentences, its to write about something else.
I also don't know whether those reading in 1922 would say the same thing. We read the 1922 version and think "Oh wow! So informative!", but perhaps the girls forced to read the book at a 1922 finishing school were thinking the same thing, or maybe ettiquite in 1922 was just a lot more complicated than it is today (it is).
Perhaps, similarly to the hypothetical bored girl in finishing school, in 100 years the future will look at the modern version and think "So informative!".
The more recent versions here just seem like better writing to me honestly. Short simple sentences which communicate a single idea are good.
If that makes them easy to read for the less literate, so much the better; they're even easier to read for the more literate, no?
2
1I don't think I understand the constraints here, taking the anger case as a concrete example. My initial thought is to 1) talk openly about the anger which is different from actually releasing the anger, then 2) find a safe way to release that anger which hopefully doesn't harm the partner, generic examples would be a rage room, taking a defense class, hunting, maybe voice acting(?), or directing the anger toward productive ends, eg using it to be more assertive or motivated (eg by spite).
But these all seem like things you would've thought of, so what am I missing? Is the constraint that the temper must be expressed toward those the person cares about?
2I mean it really just sounds like you have ADHD is what I mean.
But what's the reason to be productive beyond my natural abilities?
You are complaining about not being productive enough, presumably you care about productivity, why care also about whether its "natural". If you think you have depression instead of ADHD, then the reason is so that you feel better! If Nature decided to make you miserable or distractable, then imo Nature had it coming.
I fear I would just use it all to make even more money, which doesn't matter to my wellbeing at all.
You can always stop (modulo slowly decreasing your dosage so as not to trigger withdrawal if necessary)? For depression, clearly if you treat that with medication, your wellbeing will just definitely go up, regardless of whether you use your extra motivation to make more money.
The admiration of others? That would be cheating.
Plenty of people take drugs to treat mental illness, that is not "cheating" any more than antibiotics, surgery, or any of the other modern miracles we're able to use to better the human condition.
Self actualization? I don't think depression will go away by just doing more stuff, the problem isn't not doing enough, it's not enjoying the results
Then try an anti-depressant. Note also that this is an incorrect theory of depression, depression does indeed get better by doing stuff, and it is a common bias that depressed people have to believe nothing they do will work. If you think you have depression rather than ADHD, then take some antidepressant or something, or actually try to treat what you think you have.
I suggest you stop trying to come up with silly excuses not to fix your problems. That is not to say that there aren't better options than medication, but each of your excuses here either reveal an ignorance about what treatments of mental illnesses actually do, or boil down to "but here's a big brain reason why if it worked that'd actually be bad, therefore I will continue to wallow in misery for my whole life".
Obvious suggestion which I will say anyway: Have you tried adderall?
Looks like Leading the Future is not as skilled as Fairshake was, so I am not so concerned anymore.
I strongly disagree, I think LessWrong has become a much more vibrant and active place since Inkhaven started. Recently the frontpage has felt more... I can't think of a better word than "corporate"... than I'd like. Maybe what I mean is that the LessWrong posters have started catering more and more toward the lowest-common-LessWrong-denominator.
For example, here are the top posts from September 2025 (I think October had a reasonable amount of Inkhaven spirit, considering all the people doing Halfhaven)
Tomas is always nice and refreshing, but imo the rest of this is just really extremely uninteresting and uninspired (no offense to anyone involved, each post is on its own good I think, but collectively they're not that interesting), and seem very much catering to the lowest-common-LessWrong-denominator.
Contrast this selection with the following
I have not read as many of these (because there were more overall posts and these are more recent), but collectively the range of topics is so much more interesting & broad, you still get some lowest-common-denominator catering, but collectively these posts are so much more inspired than they were just two months ago.
I really would very much enjoy a world where each person participating in Inkhaven continued posting every day even after Inkhaven.
Edit: I would also say that concretely this has changed how I use the website a whole bunch too. In September I think most of the interesting parts of LessWrong discussion was happening inside shortforms, but now I think most of the interesting discussion has moved to posts again, which I consider very healthy.