So, in addition to raw comprehension rate, there's also what kind of knowledge you want to foster. This probably varies from text to text. In some cases it's best to absorb a broad base of material rapidly. In other cases it's more useful to get a really detailed understanding, questioning all of the author's conclusions, working through everything yourself.

I tried to take a stab at when to do which model in this post.

I think Gerald is making the point that perhaps the slope is asymmetric because the risk is asymmetric.

Ahh that makes sense.

In particular, spaced repetition software with judicious use of machine learning on the backend. Technically this breaks the rule of "Same level of technology as today

I'm pretty sure this definitely exists today in apps like Duolingo and Khan Academy, at the very least the originator of spaced repetition wrote an article about it in 1998: https://www.supermemo.com/en/archives1990-2015/english/ol/nn_train

Yeah I mean it's pretty clear to me when I'm talking about things that make me "cheerful" that my feelings are fairly scope insensitive

It seems to me there was some causal factor that caused the switch to flip to me (maybe it was reading about UDT or something), and I should be seeking to cause that same causal factor in other similar brains.

How does this acausally increase their chances?  I still don't get TDT it just seems obvious that the only way this would increase their chances was it if somehow effected someone else through culture or something.

Ahh interesting, I replied with a potential counterexample to your attempted reconciliation, curious about your thoughts!

In my homo-economicus worldview, there exists a single price at which I'm exactly indifferent and then my cheerfulness goes up smoothly/continuously from there. It feels very arbitrary to pick something on that continuum and call it "the" cheerful price I have.

When I think about cheerful prices, I don't think this necessarily fits my experience.  For instance, in this comment, I talk about how even at absurdly high prices, I wouldn't be cheerful (even if I thought it was "worth it") because I would still be sad about the thing I was paying for. 

I get how honor is a spiritual concept but don't really get how reputation is. It seems like reputation is precisely the thing PR is concerned with while it ignores honor.

This is very confusing to me when Anna in the original post talks about "reputation" "honor" and "brand" as equivalent. Reputation and brand are precisely worrying about how others think of you (PR), whereas Honor is about how you think of yourself.