You seem well-intentioned and interesting. I wish you well on your journeys. I will tell you, my goal is this: to serve God, and to save humanity. My immediate goal is this: to lose credibility as fast as is fucking possible, because the world is way scarier than I thought it was.

That makes sense from a simulationist perspective, you're trying to diminish your impact within the simulation, getting away as far as possible from being a nexus.


So that resources are allocated away from you, if you take the simulation to be a dynamic - if mindless - process?

Or because you are afraid you're otherwise going to ... draw attention to yourself? From ... your simulators? You might call them god, or maybe they might not like that.

You'd have to strike a careful balance, become too insignificant and you might just be demoted to NPC status, being down NICE'ed, so to speak.

2mwengler8yIf you know the Jesuit mottos you must have known that the world is much scarier than you can imagine for a long time. Combining obviously false claims with other claims less obviously false causes me, and I would presume others in your intended audience, to question your less obviously false claims. Certainly the effect this thread has on me is not to reduce your credibility to me. And I would claim that ranting crazily and throwing in semi-obvious errors of fact and logic would be a much more effective way to lower your credibility, and it seems obvious enough that you know this. So your goal is not to lose credibility as fast as is possible (fucking or otherwise). You do lie. I must wonder if your goal is to serve god and to serve humanity or not. So far, we are in a room with a lot of messy hay and horseshit. There MUST be a pony in here somewhere. Is it the fallacy of this kind of reasoning that you are trying to make us realize?
4Eugine_Nier8yI would recommend taking some time to double-check this before doing something hard to undo. Keep in mind Eliezer's mistake with the basilisk. Based on a quick analysis, he decided the best course of action was to stop thinking about it and encourage others to do likewise. The problem (assuming my model of him is correct) is that since he stopped thinking about it, he didn't realize his initial analysis was wrong. In fact as far as I know, he still hasn't realized it.

This post is for sacrificing my credibility!

by Will_Newsome 1 min read2nd Jun 2012347 comments


Thank you for your cooperation and understanding. Don't worry, there won't be future posts like this, so you don't have to delete my LessWrong account, and anyway I could make another, and another.

But since you've dared to read this far:

Credibility. Should you maximize it, or minimize it? Have I made an error?


Don't be shallow, don't just consider the obvious points. Consider that I've thought about this for many, many hours, and that you don't have any privileged information. Whence our disagreement, if one exists?