Lol that graph is from a survey from Nootropics users (i guess they
dont actually mention where this survey took place) and they just added
the data from the previous ssc nootropics survey to theirs.
Cargo cult science.
(Yeah the rest isn’t much better, ‘survivorship bias isn’t important
because the effects are big’ what?)
I didnt even want to sneer at that, because it was so predictable.
I also liked the part where the ceo admits that their 60h work week is actually just 40 because they count socializing and eating as work hours. (Which is exactly what people always say when rich people stans go 'they work 128 hours a week!').
But if a white collar workers naps 2 of their 8 hours at work they get fired. Hell they get in trouble if they take a long lunch.
man this is peak rationalist/EA brain: using a chart and poorly-defined terminology in a misleading way, on the assumption that no one will click the link and read through the actual "data" and "collection methods" and "analysis"
the linked survey also has a "probability of positive effect" chart, which presumably would have made more sense to reproduce/cite *if it supported the argument*, which it doesn't (weightlifting has the highest probability of positive effect but ewww then we would have to be jocks!!! outgroup!!!!!)
combined with my quick ctrl-F for "psychosis" (0 hits) and skimming for any mention at all of potential side effects (likewise 0)........................ [seems like cult shit](https://www.vox.com/world/2015/11/20/9769264/captagon-isis-drug)
Someone posted it in /r/SSC and is citing anecdotes of young, successful friends with “preposterous” levels of stimulant abuse. If you can’t trust random anecdotes from Reddit users with auto-generated usernames about their stimulant-addled friends being successful, can you really trust anyone at all?
its always incredibly telling to me what these people think
constitutes ‘Great work’.
Hint, it always, always comes down to how much money you make.
Granted their whole movement is geared towards earning money, but
pure profit generally a bad indicator of value.
not to mention that taking this advice seriously is likely to
significantly reduce ones lifetime. Have they run an analysis on high
wage earners and their earnings over time and figured out whether a
longer life nets more sustained profit? of course not.
I just woke up and can‘t be bothered to finish my thought, but the
gist is that Wolf of Wall street is not a realistic model for sustained
growth and profitability.
It gets worse. They focus a lot on earning more money because they reasoned at the start of EA that it is actually a lot easier to find people who want to do good than to find the finance to let them do good. (their proof was something like charities value donations higher than people offering to volunteer).
But, if you glance at EA from time to time (which is about the depth of my research on them btw) they actually have a lot of problems finding the people to give money to. So one of the foundational ideas of EA is actually a wrong assumption. (And so, if they have ever convinced somebody to not go into medicine to go work for doctors without borders, and convinced them to go into finance instead they prob made the world a worse place (in practice it seems they do both, try to convince people not to become docs to join docs without borders, nor give them the money (which could be used to pay for the western docs, and the local docs (of which they hire a lot more people it seems btw))).
I agree with Lynette Bye that most of the working hours literature is
poor—I’m even more skeptical than she is about agenda-driven research on
Gilded Age factory workers—and that gaining an impression from anecdotes
of top performers is better.
Ignore data that conflicts with my priors, uncritically accept
anecdotes that conform with it.
>and that gaining an impression from anecdotes of top performers is better.
IIRC this is already what the Gilded Age researchers did (take the highest output of the best performer, then add another 10% on top of that and claim we should expect all workers to produce that minimum).
Well it is (according to my uni courses (epistemicstatus!)). But a lot of that is iirc due to all kinds of network effects. All the tech companies are close to each other, the various security teams people all do the martial arts courses. The ceos golf at the same place etc. So in that way a lot of information just flows quickly. Which helps with problem solving issues and generates new ideas. (Which is also why removing all slack (as in free time not the chat tool) from your employees is such a bad idea). Also helps that all these people are usually both tech enthusiasts as well as tech people. So any new bullshit stuff, like soylent quickly spreads among the techies giving you a quick userbase.
Not sire how much of that is still true today btw, esp with the uberfication of tech companies and other bs.
Soylent initially also forgot a few nutrients in their 'total 100% meal replacement' stuff, so it also could make you sick. [Couldn't find the source for that but did find something else](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/vp3bRZdfkbHvnsC5j/link-soylent-crowdfunding). Check the comments, esp look at the person expressing doubt (and their shitty arguments), and then the glorious and obvious correct rebuttal. So yeah, I gotta hand it to Gwern here.
> I'm tired of eating
This is quite funny because surely the appeal for all those food replacements is the lack of preparation/cooking. I don't think many people, outside of maybe the very high end of sport, are sick of eating
You may say, it is impossible for a man to become like the Machine. And I would reply, that only the smallest mind strives to comprehend its limits.
- Fabricator General Kane
Meditation addiction is a real thing and it can strike you at any time. People have died giving in to their urge to meditate while operating heavy machinery. In fact it is illegal in Germany to operate heavy machinery if you have ever meditated. The risk is just too great.
Winners dont do meditation!
I mean things like psychosis. Its come up in their twitter discussions and I’ve been previously affiliated with people who chewed their brain up with rationalist bs.
(Its funny tho)
Meh how many of those people who meditate and end up with psychosis, are also the type of people to experiment with recreational drugs?
I find it's much more likely to that be the source and individuals blaming it on meditation.
I can’t remember the term now, but I do remember reading about a certain phase in vipassana where one allegedly begins to apprehend the nothingness of the self/reality or whatever and how it can cause mental crisis. Not sure how common it actually is, but from what I recall its apparently something that has been talked about in Buddhism for a long time. At least, there was a Sanskrit derived term for it.
Worrying, but also that would increase the lifechanging factor of meditation.
"probability of life-changing effect" doesn't seem to track if that is positive or negative.
[deleted]
Lol that graph is from a survey from Nootropics users (i guess they dont actually mention where this survey took place) and they just added the data from the previous ssc nootropics survey to theirs.
Cargo cult science.
(Yeah the rest isn’t much better, ‘survivorship bias isn’t important because the effects are big’ what?)
“Do meth so EA can buy a third castle! It’s for the greater good, I assure you.”
its always incredibly telling to me what these people think constitutes ‘Great work’.
Hint, it always, always comes down to how much money you make.
Granted their whole movement is geared towards earning money, but pure profit generally a bad indicator of value.
not to mention that taking this advice seriously is likely to significantly reduce ones lifetime. Have they run an analysis on high wage earners and their earnings over time and figured out whether a longer life nets more sustained profit? of course not.
I just woke up and can‘t be bothered to finish my thought, but the gist is that Wolf of Wall street is not a realistic model for sustained growth and profitability.
Ignore data that conflicts with my priors, uncritically accept anecdotes that conform with it.
Why yes, I am a rationalist. Why do you ask?
[citation needed]
Meditation injuries are interesting.
i do coke
so i can work longer
so i can
lick the boots of capitalists betterearn moreso i can do more coke
I like that the literal first link in the article is to…Caroline Ellison.
This just goes to show that LW is ridiculous to anyone who isn’t in that cult…