[Previous] Podcast Discussion | Home | [Next] Errors Merit Post-Mortems

Open Discussion (2019)

This is an open discussion topic. Discuss whatever you want.

How do you find replies? There's a recent comments link in the side bar. You can use an auto refresh browser plugin. There's a Comments RSS Feed. Or use website change notification software.

Details on posting images.

View the latest 30 comments. Use this if there are hundreds of comments and the page loads slowly.

FYI, I also have an email discussion forum which is active (703 posts in the last month). Posting there requires learning how to do plain text email quoting correctly.

Unsure what to discuss? Ask a question. Read some of my writing and comment or criticize. Try my book recommendations and try to analyze what you read and share your notes. Or share some of your life goals, learning goals, or problems you'd like help with, or share anything you think is important.

If you'd like your own discussion, with your name on it, please ask and I'll make a new post for you.


Elliot Temple on April 8, 2019

Comments (30 of 555) (Show All Comments)

#13735 No he doesn't handle it well.

Also, when he claims to answer all criticism now we know he is lying. So when Curi pretends to be an expert in Biology, Psychology, and Philosophy. Know he is being dishonest.


Anonymous at 2:10 PM on October 4, 2019 | #13738 | reply | quote

How an automobile differential works

Around The Corner - How Differential Steering Works (1937)

The above video from 1937 clearly explains how automobile differentials work. The video starts out by explaining the problem the differential solves (how to turn the wheels at different speeds to prevent the wheels from sliding when a car turns a corner). It then introduces the solution in stages.

4 of the top 10 comments are about how much easier this video from 1937 is to understand than videos from today.


Alisa at 11:20 PM on October 4, 2019 | #13740 | reply | quote

> #13733 If you don't care enough to transcribe the key quotes you're replying to, I'm not going to reply. If you won't put work into it, and you chose to create content in a format that's very hard to use, that's your problem, not mine. I don't want to sort through the mess you made.

> Also I can tell from skimming what you wrote, even with lots of missing context, that the quality of thinking and argument is far too low to persuade or educate me. I assume you can't do a 10x better job, so instead I'd suggest slowing way down. To avoid chaos when you lack skill, you need to go one little thing at a time, not try to argue a bunch of complicated points at once.

> If you neither follow this methodology nor criticize it – if you ignore it – then you should expect to be ignored.

> Also if you continue, please pick a name so it's easier to tell you apart from other anonymouses. I didn't think you were writing all the troll comments, but maybe some, idk. Any name, e.g. anon80085, is fine.

Ok, I'll transcribe something specific you talked about on stream and then I will quote what I already asked:

At 39:57-40:04 curi said: "This is just a bunch of socially pressuring euphemisms. I don't want to talk that way, it's evil."

My response to that was:

> What's socially pressuring about this

> "Hey, I'm not sure if you are understanding what I'm saying correctly but we cannot tolerate hostility here, this has to be a healthy environment with good will in order to function properly. I think you are mad at me because of some misunderstandings so I purpose to discuss this with you another day when things are calmer"?

> Where are the euphemisms? I think it's explaining things in a way that is friendly and honest. I think your intuitions about how you should talk to people should change drastically. You should have known that saying "would anyone object to me banning cat?" would led to him leaving. Actually, you probably know what's the normal reaction to that. People usually prefer to leave when they read that (e.g. C_Boss also said that if he was going to be banned for not answering questions then he would leave by himself). Any threat of ban is not helpful when there are other ways of dealing with someone.


anon80085 at 8:03 AM on October 6, 2019 | #13744 | reply | quote

why does curi think that criticisms of his methods or ideas = trolling?

does curi handle criticism well?


Anonymous at 10:00 AM on October 6, 2019 | #13745 | reply | quote

#13685

here is a computer-generated transcript of the stream you linked/commented on. if you decide you want to pursue a serious discussion, this might be useful. it's not accurate enough to paste directly from, but you could still e.g. edit some relevant part for accuracy and paste your edit.

https://pastebin.com/vzgSK2FV


Anonymous at 6:25 PM on October 6, 2019 | #13747 | reply | quote

#13744 did I fail to follow the methodology you suggested? You are taking a little bit to respond and it's becoming tedious to come here to see if you responded.


anon80085 at 2:56 PM on October 8, 2019 | #13752 | reply | quote

#13752 Busy. Haven't read your comment yet. If you decide you don't want to have a discussion and leave, please tell me so I know. Otherwise click on "Discussion info" and learn how to get notifications for new comments.


curi at 4:05 PM on October 8, 2019 | #13753 | reply | quote

Seconds pendulum

A seconds pendulum is a pendulum that swings through its middle position once per second. On Earth, the length of a seconds pendulum is roughly 1 meter, so if you can measure a time period of 1 second, you can easily make a pendulum that measures a length of about 1 meter.

Due to its simplicity and accessibility to people around the world, the seconds pendulum was once a leading candidate for a standard of length. It was proposed for that purpose by the Royal Society around 1660 [1].

In 1790, future U.S. president Thomas Jefferson, then serving as the first U.S. Secretary of State, submitted to the U.S. House of Representatives a report entitled "Plan for establishing uniformity in the Coinage, Weights, and Measures of the United States". This technical document proposes basing the standard of length on a seconds *rod* (similar to a seconds pendulum) and discusses various physical factors, including latitude and altitude, that affect the length of a seconds rod [2].

In 1791, however, during the French Revolution, the French National Assembly abruptly and mysteriously accepted a different standard of length, defining the unit that would come to be known as the *meter* as 1/40 000 000 of the "Paris meridian", i.e. setting 1 meter equal to the length of the arc from the North Pole to the Equator going through Paris. How this came about is examined in "Why does the meter beat the second?" by Agnoli and D’Agostini (2004).

[1] So Wikipedia claims, but I haven't been able to find a primary source. The proposal, or something similar, *might* be in a 1662 paper by Robert Hooke titled "The measuring of a degree, & the universal standard of measure, & of the use of the pendulum", but I haven't been able to view the paper's contents.

[2] "... the scientific matter in the report had been carefully reviewed and confirmed by [the astronomer, clockmaker, mathematician, surveyor, and scientific instrument craftsman] David Rittenhouse before the document was submitted to Congress." Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, "A HISTORY OF THE METRIC SYSTEM CONTROVERSY IN THE UNITED STATES" (1971)


Alisa at 1:35 AM on October 9, 2019 | #13754 | reply | quote

Correction: "setting 1 meter equal to the length of the arc from the North Pole to the Equator going through Paris" should be "setting 1 meter equal to 1/10 000 000 of the length of the arc from the North Pole to the Equator going through Paris."


Alisa at 1:38 AM on October 9, 2019 | #13755 | reply | quote

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-10-09/pg-e-cuts-power-across-northern-california-as-winds-bring-critical-fire-danger

> Large swaths of Northern California woke up without power early Wednesday as Pacific Gas & Electric began its sweeping plan to shut off electricity to about 800,000 customers in a desperate attempt to avoid wildfires sparked by wind-damaged power equipment.

They count one home or business as one customer, so it's millions of people without power.

In huge ways, California is failing at both power and water. There are also many unsafe, unsanitary streets and parks. California was one of the best places in the world, but it's destroying itself due to bad ideas.


Anonymous at 10:39 AM on October 9, 2019 | #13756 | reply | quote

Vindictus

Playing Vindictus again. It's a good game for practicing mastery (of boss fight patterns). Single player when you prefer, on your own schedule. Lots of overlap with speedrunning where you can run the same thing a bunch of times in a row and try to learn all the details, figure out a good strategy, and practice until you're consistently doing it really well. The combat is sort of like a much better version of dark souls boss fights. I don't know any alternative games with similar combat which is half as well made.

There is a challenge mode (Ein Lacher) with 80 different bosses to solo. Gold medal for taking 3 or fewer hits.

The game has many minor downsides but no dealbreakers. It's a bit old (2010 release), is Korean (we get content in NA with like a 3 month delay), freemium with some questionable but not game-ruining pay2win elements, and in order to focus on the latest content they made most of the older content really easy and made leveling up much faster, which is partly good but makes it boring and leveling up to the new content still takes like 10 hours (it's not boring for your first time playing, that's not nearly enough time to learn your way around the game). The game also has quite complicated itemization systems that were incrementally built up over the years. Combat remains streamlined.

A lot of people, playing games in general, want to fight every boss once (maybe replay a few bosses a few times), and win they just barely manage to win, they declare victory and move on. Vindictus expects you to fight the same bosses many times and try to get better at them.

Example gameplay solo (you can play in a party vs. bosses too, there are also regular enemies):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0W5q5RMvx68


curi at 12:01 PM on October 9, 2019 | #13757 | reply | quote

#13753 You don't seem to want to have this conversation. Maybe you think it is not important, idk, you don't tell.


anon80085 at 12:11 PM on October 10, 2019 | #13764 | reply | quote

#13764 I have a many-year history of getting to things on my schedule, not claiming to be interested then ignoring. As I said, I haven't read your comment yet, so I don't even know if I'm interested. I can tell you, reliably, that I will read it and say at least one sentence (even if I'm not interested, I can say so, np).

Your comment is saved on a short todo list which I do fully catch up on periodically, it doesn't just grow indefinitely.

I don't operate on your schedule. Not my job. I'm in philosophy for the long term. If someone loses interest fast, I don't care if I talk with them.

Stop being pushy and demanding with me, and stop treating me like a random, disorganized idiot or liar. If you want to talk with me, give me the benefit of the doubt, treat me with some good will, etc. And don't say things like "you don't tell" after I already did tell you the status of the issue, and you did not actually engage with what I said. Similarly, don't psychologize me with no quotes or reasoned analysis.


curi at 12:33 PM on October 10, 2019 | #13765 | reply | quote

https://mises.org/library/californias-energy-meltdown

California's power policy sucks. Old article by George Reisman.


Anonymous at 8:29 PM on October 10, 2019 | #13768 | reply | quote

> Ok, I'll transcribe something specific you talked about on stream and then I will quote what I already asked:

> At 39:57-40:04 curi said: "This is just a bunch of socially pressuring euphemisms. I don't want to talk that way, it's evil."

> My response to that was:

>> What's socially pressuring about this

>> "Hey, I'm not sure if you are understanding what I'm saying correctly but we cannot tolerate hostility here, this has to be a healthy environment with good will in order to function properly. I think you are mad at me because of some misunderstandings so I purpose to discuss this with you another day when things are calmer"?

>> Where are the euphemisms? I think it's explaining things in a way that is friendly and honest. I think your intuitions about how you should talk to people should change drastically. You should have known that saying "would anyone object to me banning cat?" would led to him leaving. Actually, you probably know what's the normal reaction to that. People usually prefer to leave when they read that (e.g. C_Boss also said that if he was going to be banned for not answering questions then he would leave by himself). Any threat of ban is not helpful when there are other ways of dealing with someone.

For example, saying "this has to be a healthy environment" pressures people to act in a "healthy" (according to you) way, says that "has" to happen (= must, = hard requirement or rule, just like the aggressive "cannot tolerate" statement which is basically saying there is no limit to how much you will escalate to get your way) and insults anyone who disagrees as unhealthy. It's an aggressive way to attack anyone who disagrees with you without acknowledging it's a disagreement or treating it as an area for truth-seeking. And the word "healthy" is a euphemism that doesn't refer its literal meaning of physical, bodily health, but instead refers certain moral and intellectual values.

The issue here is not merely ignorance of the meaning of what you wrote. Partly you wrote it because you do understand what it means and what it communicates to others and how they react and so on. By writing something which you actually know pressures people, then asking what's pressuring about it and claiming it's "friendly and honest", you're being dishonest. If you continue to be dishonest *and* adversarial at the same time, expect this conversation to end fast. If you could manage to friendly/cooperative *or* honest, I'd be more interested in trying to help you.


curi at 8:49 PM on October 10, 2019 | #13769 | reply | quote

>> #13465 how do you want it to work? And use the quote link instead of scrolling up for quotes.

> The quote link is fine for quoting one comment but if you want to look back over other comments while replying and also read/include stuff from other comments you need to scroll up. Same if you accidently delete stuff while replying.

> Focusing the comment box shouldn't cause other text to rescale and go off the side of the screen. When I hit reply/quote the comment box is initially about half the screen width with tiny text. Everything magnifies and rescales after focusing. So I suggest make the comment box have text in the same font as everything above and initially at the width of the screen so it doesn't rescale on focus.

I don't expect scrolling back up and quoting from multiple comments to be convenient on mobile. If you want to do that, I suggest you use a mobile text editor app and compose your comment there. I think that will work better overall and will avoiding scrolling down to the textarea then back up again.

I see that it zooms way in when I focus the textarea on my iPhone. I don't like that. It zooms in so much you don't even see the whole text area at once.

I Binged briefly and didn't find any useful guide for how to make a textarea work well on mobile with CSS.

If anyone wants to figure out some better CSS, I can add it.


curi at 9:02 PM on October 10, 2019 | #13770 | reply | quote

#13770 I added this tag:

> meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1, maximum-scale=1, user-scalable=0"

Seems better for me. Tell me if you have problems.


curi at 1:06 AM on October 11, 2019 | #13771 | reply | quote

>> Ok, I'll transcribe something specific you talked about on stream and then I will quote what I already asked:

>> At 39:57-40:04 curi said: "This is just a bunch of socially pressuring euphemisms. I don't want to talk that way, it's evil."

>> My response to that was:

>>> What's socially pressuring about this

>>> "Hey, I'm not sure if you are understanding what I'm saying correctly but we cannot tolerate hostility here, this has to be a healthy environment with good will in order to function properly. I think you are mad at me because of some misunderstandings so I purpose to discuss this with you another day when things are calmer"?

>>> Where are the euphemisms? I think it's explaining things in a way that is friendly and honest. I think your intuitions about how you should talk to people should change drastically. You should have known that saying "would anyone object to me banning cat?" would led to him leaving. Actually, you probably know what's the normal reaction to that. People usually prefer to leave when they read that (e.g. C_Boss also said that if he was going to be banned for not answering questions then he would leave by himself). Any threat of ban is not helpful when there are other ways of dealing with someone.

> For example, saying "this has to be a healthy environment" pressures people to act in a "healthy" (according to you) way, says that "has" to happen (= must, = hard requirement or rule, just like the aggressive "cannot tolerate" statement which is basically saying there is no limit to how much you will escalate to get your way)

Again, try to see things in context. This was an equivalent way to express what I saw your beliefs were. You didn't tolerate his behaviour and you escalated to a threat of a ban. Given that, I gave this suggestion which I thought expressed your beliefs in a fair way. Now you are disagreeing with the morality of what I tried to made equivalent.

> and insults anyone who disagrees as unhealthy. It's an aggressive way to attack anyone who disagrees with you without acknowledging it's a disagreement or treating it as an area for truth-seeking.

That's a pretty lax use of the word insult. Why do you think people get offended with that? Why do you think people don't get offended by the way you speak? Is offensiveness important to you? If you think that matters, I suggest you to stop expressing what (you think) people are. If you think someone is an asshole, you don't need to say that. If you think that something I said is "shit" as you said on stream, do not say that too, what's the matter with you? People get offended by that, do not say those bad things without any silver lining.

I don't think people, generally, get insulted by anyone saying "this has to be a healthy environment". I think this is a bad choice of words by you. People can disagree about that, sure. I disagree with that also. But that was not the point I was trying to make with that suggestion as I already said.

> And the word "healthy" is a euphemism that doesn't refer its literal meaning of physical, bodily health, but instead refers certain moral and intellectual values.

See:

https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/healthy

Or

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/

healthy can be used the way I used it. You did not even go search the definition of a word after I asked you to do an effort responding to me. You are trying to find a mistake and exposing it like it makes all of what I said wrong. You think you don't owe me your effort and I don't want to loose my time trying to explain things to whom does not want to see or try any harder. You're arguments are flawed and are not in register with what I am really saying. You are diverting this conversation in really unhelpful ways to you. I believe you are doing this unconsciously. I've already got what I was trying to get with this discussion. So, if you think I'm delusional and you are making 100% sense don't bother to respond. I have to be positively surprised to reply.


Anonymous at 1:42 PM on October 11, 2019 | #13774 | reply | quote

#13774 I'm not interested in helping you since you were both dishonest and unfriendly again, in addition to being confused, low skill, and not seeking to improve.


curi at 1:49 PM on October 11, 2019 | #13775 | reply | quote

#13775 Curi losing debates in the most ungraceful way possible.


Other Anon at 12:06 PM on October 12, 2019 | #13777 | reply | quote

why is Curi still not addressing this?

> why does curi think that criticisms of his methods or ideas = trolling?

does curi handle criticism well? Doesn't seem like it.


Anonymous at 12:13 PM on October 12, 2019 | #13778 | reply | quote

#13778 He's ignoring you because he thinks you are being hostile but in reality he's do one doing the hostility for not responding


Anonymous at 4:19 PM on October 12, 2019 | #13779 | reply | quote

#13779 the one*


Anonymous at 4:19 PM on October 12, 2019 | #13780 | reply | quote

Well that sux

I am surprised by this. Is curi Rude? yes. Unfriendly? You bet! But someone who avoids criticism is not something I thought applied.

Disappointing.


A at 8:41 PM on October 12, 2019 | #13782 | reply | quote

#13782 I'm really surprised too, unfortunately he is not the man he purpots to be.


Anonymous at 11:14 AM on October 13, 2019 | #13786 | reply | quote

Good comic on double standards for parenting and transsexuality:

https://www.reddit.com/r/JordanPeterson/comments/dh11dg/pretty_much_sums_it_up/


Anonymous at 11:24 AM on October 13, 2019 | #13788 | reply | quote

#13798 Related:

http://curi.us/1298-some-of-richard-feynmans-wonderfulness

> Feynman went to speak to the [math] teacher, who didn't know who Feynman was and treated him like an idiot. The teacher even accused Feynman of not knowing anything about math. [...] In the long run he had to teach math to his daughter personally.


Anonymous at 11:32 AM on October 15, 2019 | #13800 | reply | quote

(This is an unmoderated discussion forum. Discussion info.)