There's a community norm against most things I write (due to compounding perceptions of my not even trying to communicate with people and then getting frustrated when they don't understand things, among other things (like how my inability or unwillingness to communicate implies that I don't have anything to communicate and am just being masturbatory with all my hyper-abstract semi-technical talk)). It's not a strong one but strong enough such that my comments average about 1 to 3 less votes than they did like 6 months ago. As a result it would be unwise to generalize to other situations that don't involve me.

I find it interesting that you're aware you're being perceived this way without being able to change it (or do you not want to?).

In any case, upvoted for candid self-awareness, two qualities that should intersect more often.

Resources for quantum decision theory research

by Will_Newsome 1 min read14th Sep 201112 comments


(pdf) ber=5391327

I wrote out some paragraphs about how these are very incomplete and unordered but useful and blabla bla disclaimers and trading quantum information between superintelligences that'd seemingly been lost to the environment and trading between quantum branches and bla bla and how cosmological natural selection is relevant but Less Wrong ate it and I can't convince myself to rewrite it. So, here. My not-passive-agressive apologies for being schizotypal. The marginal cost of my efforts is probably higher than your model suggests, but I realize that nonetheless I'm promoting suboptimal norms for what does or doesn't get to count as a well-intentioned effort at communication. I accept all downvotes as justified.