What is SBF?

My guess is that the ideal is something like a default Ask culture with specific Guess culture contexts when it genuinely is worth the extra consideration.

IMO the ideal is a culture where everyone puts some reasonable effort into Guessing when feasible, but where Asking is also fully accepted.

The huge problem with that is that the extreme deadliness of one of ideologies that has rushed in to fill the void caused by the discrediting of Christianity: namely, the one (usually referred to vaguely by "progress" or "innovation") that views every personal, organizational and political decision through the lens of which decision best advances or accelerates science and technology.

Is this really a widely held ideology? My impression is that the AI race is driven by greed much more than ideology.

I hope you are no longer married to the woman who used to hit you.

Did you ever make this post?

Very interesting post! I have a question: It seems to me that your "Goodness of Reality" hypothesis implies (or is equivalent to) the following corollary:

For any conscious entity E and any circumstances C, there exists some "attitude" or "interpretation" A which entity E can adopt which will allow entity E to be perfectly content and happy while experiencing circumstances C.

Do you agree with my corollary?

(I am not sure whether "attitude" or "interpretation" are good terms, but at least in my own meditation experience and from what I have read, suffering seems to derive largely or wholly from our "attitude" towards experience.)

Sorry, I am not going to read through the comments to look for it.

he did provide some evidence, though little

Can you please point out the relevant part?

the second-order effects of turning off the WiFi are surely comprised of both positive and negative effects

Linguistic nitpick: Strictly speaking the effects comprise both positive and negative effects. Equivalently, the effects are composed of both positive and negative effects. 

The whole comprises the parts. The parts compose the whole.

then they decide to check, and it turned out one of them right and one of them wrong, one person was doing 75% of the work, and the other 25%

1. I am skeptical of this measurement. Your wording suggests that they were able to determine this with 2 digits of precision. I doubt that. Maybe you meant "one person was doing 3/4 and the other 1/4", which sounds much more plausible and implies a much rougher, vaguer measurement.
2. As far as I remember (I did not re-read the OP), John provides no evidence that he did all or most of the work. We have only his word for it.
3. The problem of calculating workload is inherently highly nebulous and partially subjective, because a task can be more painful and/or time-consuming for one person than for another. In general it is not possible to measure workload precisely, not even in principle.