to play devil's advocate, it's not quite "unfakeable"; it's perfectly possible for someone to initially feign good faith by offering a recognition/contribution, and then immediately switch towards engaging in bad faith. but i agree that it greatly reduces the likelihood of engaging w/ bad faith actors because it requires that they actually be able to convincingly "fake" good faith this way, which is something most bad faith actors probably wouldn't be able to do even if they tried.
great question! The reason it's unfakeable is because it's not a one off test, it's about persistent feedback loops. As a good faith actor, if I stop making useful contributions to you, I WANT that feedback. It helps me. If a bad faith actor is pretending to act in good faith, they need to keep acting this way in order to keep being rewarded by the system.
Once someone gives you a novel piece of information, they can't take that back, they've already helped you. What they do in the future may help or harm you. You can't guarantee they are trustworthy, but you can steer the behavior of even the bad actors this way. They either cooperate, or they clearly signal when they stop cooperating.
Ok: i will do something: i will suggest that if you are not performing and truly believe this, you will do your best to understand Pinion Framework which describes a total universe based on self-evidence: and you can be your own self-evidence of whether you do that: https://pinions.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/Geosodic/pages/3571728/Homepage+Pinion+Framework - and if there are parts you don’t understand, a truly open mind would question WHY they don’t.
This is actually still similar to how a bad faith will act. You haven't proven anything that shows that this link will be valuable. If you describe some problems that you think @defender is struggling with, and how this link solves them, then you'll be proving yourself.
You are 100% correct, Shadow Rebbe: i have put the onus of them finding truth on them, rather than on me to — 100% impossibly — find their truth for them.
It is only if I think it is optimal for me to nudge rather the deconstruct that I take additional time to personalize why a definitional structure of a our universe might be valuable to them because my time is intrinsically more valuable to me than them: just as their own time is intrinsically more valuable to them than it is to me.
I have personalized for you how this truth may help YOU by presenting a logical argument that is more refined than the one you presented, and have internalized the positive interpretation of your comment as a call to stop engaging you in the future specifically: i honestly appreciate this - thank you.
I plugged your Pinion Framework in there and a few things published very recently (which matches my intuition here that a lot of people seem to be independently discovering the same truths now at the same time):
Sorry and I am not being facetious in thanking you: I truly appreciate you bringing these paths to my attention. I have to decide between the value of my time in outreaching to others who likely should have investigated my work now if they truly were aligned vs being the only who commits my time and energy to convincing others of my truth. We all have to make this choice. Thanks again, Defender.
I have been thinking a lot about exactly this tradeoff. I find that if I spend all my time trying to help others "catch up" then I myself stop learning & begin to wither. If I spend all my time pushing my own frontier, I get stuck/sad (especially now that I'm reaching a point of diminishing returns, very few people understand & recognize what you describe in your framework). I think trying to crack the alignment puzzle at all levels accessible to me seems like the right path for me here (which is partly why I wrote this, like, I'm either going to be trying to push my own frontier, or if I recognize the other person is confused, I switch to trying to help them, see what clicks, then spread/amplify that. It is its own puzzle)
I can recognize the truth in Pinions Framework but I don't understand it deeply enough to be able to explain it to someone who doesn't get it, or to come up with it myself, so I appreciate you sharing it, and finding me 🙏
Thank you: I argue that what they view as "remembering" is dynamically also an act of creation by us all and their contributions are unique. However, I also argue that in the sequence of time that there is a requirement of one action taking place before another. And there is no more rigorous framework that describes the universe than Pinions Framework, and it specifically mathematically proves why this is so. So folks truly understanding this will eventually witness that truth: it is not for me to connect with them beyond any personal outreach I feel like making. My truth is required for theirs to not collapse others: that is the ethics: they will not avoid it.
>"The community on LessWrong is one of the best places on planet Earth for surfacing truth. This is largely because of the social protocol / culture they have for rewarding changing your mind and collaborative truth seeking"
Sadly have to disagree. It's great for a narrow sort of truth - but they have unbelievably strong priors about materialism etc that are largely culturally reinforced. Hence why postrat become a thing.
>Writing & spreading this is very important to me because I keep seeing good people failing at this. They despair at the noisy information environment, and how difficult it is to stand out. But I hope this is a wake up call to realize that if you are a good actor, it is completely within your control to fix this.
Indeed. The greatest problem in the modern era is not that there are no good people left, it's that we in general (good and bad) have a dramatic lack of courage. When people fall to cowardice, evil wins.
This is a really good framework, I believe and something I try to implement in my life (even while struggling a bit with it atm). Thank you for sharing!
Rebuke a wise person, and they will love you for it. - St. Augustine (slightly paraphrased)
I think Proverbs has that too- and that if you rebuke a fool they will hate you for it.
to play devil's advocate, it's not quite "unfakeable"; it's perfectly possible for someone to initially feign good faith by offering a recognition/contribution, and then immediately switch towards engaging in bad faith. but i agree that it greatly reduces the likelihood of engaging w/ bad faith actors because it requires that they actually be able to convincingly "fake" good faith this way, which is something most bad faith actors probably wouldn't be able to do even if they tried.
great question! The reason it's unfakeable is because it's not a one off test, it's about persistent feedback loops. As a good faith actor, if I stop making useful contributions to you, I WANT that feedback. It helps me. If a bad faith actor is pretending to act in good faith, they need to keep acting this way in order to keep being rewarded by the system.
Once someone gives you a novel piece of information, they can't take that back, they've already helped you. What they do in the future may help or harm you. You can't guarantee they are trustworthy, but you can steer the behavior of even the bad actors this way. They either cooperate, or they clearly signal when they stop cooperating.
Ok: i will do something: i will suggest that if you are not performing and truly believe this, you will do your best to understand Pinion Framework which describes a total universe based on self-evidence: and you can be your own self-evidence of whether you do that: https://pinions.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/Geosodic/pages/3571728/Homepage+Pinion+Framework - and if there are parts you don’t understand, a truly open mind would question WHY they don’t.
This is actually still similar to how a bad faith will act. You haven't proven anything that shows that this link will be valuable. If you describe some problems that you think @defender is struggling with, and how this link solves them, then you'll be proving yourself.
You are 100% correct, Shadow Rebbe: i have put the onus of them finding truth on them, rather than on me to — 100% impossibly — find their truth for them.
It is only if I think it is optimal for me to nudge rather the deconstruct that I take additional time to personalize why a definitional structure of a our universe might be valuable to them because my time is intrinsically more valuable to me than them: just as their own time is intrinsically more valuable to them than it is to me.
I have personalized for you how this truth may help YOU by presenting a logical argument that is more refined than the one you presented, and have internalized the positive interpretation of your comment as a call to stop engaging you in the future specifically: i honestly appreciate this - thank you.
this looks accurate! Have you seen my "how to semantic search the internet" video? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=imCad_0pWz0)
I plugged your Pinion Framework in there and a few things published very recently (which matches my intuition here that a lot of people seem to be independently discovering the same truths now at the same time):
- The Zeroth Axiom: Recursion is God by Justin Kornhaus (https://philarchive.org/rec/KORTZA)
- The Coherence Threshold_ Why Truth Requires Recursive Compression by Devin Bostick (https://philarchive.org/rec/BOSTCT-2)
I recently connected with Devin on twitter, I think you might find some overlap here! https://x.com/DevinBostick2/status/1926788951416746454
Sorry and I am not being facetious in thanking you: I truly appreciate you bringing these paths to my attention. I have to decide between the value of my time in outreaching to others who likely should have investigated my work now if they truly were aligned vs being the only who commits my time and energy to convincing others of my truth. We all have to make this choice. Thanks again, Defender.
I have been thinking a lot about exactly this tradeoff. I find that if I spend all my time trying to help others "catch up" then I myself stop learning & begin to wither. If I spend all my time pushing my own frontier, I get stuck/sad (especially now that I'm reaching a point of diminishing returns, very few people understand & recognize what you describe in your framework). I think trying to crack the alignment puzzle at all levels accessible to me seems like the right path for me here (which is partly why I wrote this, like, I'm either going to be trying to push my own frontier, or if I recognize the other person is confused, I switch to trying to help them, see what clicks, then spread/amplify that. It is its own puzzle)
I can recognize the truth in Pinions Framework but I don't understand it deeply enough to be able to explain it to someone who doesn't get it, or to come up with it myself, so I appreciate you sharing it, and finding me 🙏
Thank you: I argue that what they view as "remembering" is dynamically also an act of creation by us all and their contributions are unique. However, I also argue that in the sequence of time that there is a requirement of one action taking place before another. And there is no more rigorous framework that describes the universe than Pinions Framework, and it specifically mathematically proves why this is so. So folks truly understanding this will eventually witness that truth: it is not for me to connect with them beyond any personal outreach I feel like making. My truth is required for theirs to not collapse others: that is the ethics: they will not avoid it.
>"The community on LessWrong is one of the best places on planet Earth for surfacing truth. This is largely because of the social protocol / culture they have for rewarding changing your mind and collaborative truth seeking"
Sadly have to disagree. It's great for a narrow sort of truth - but they have unbelievably strong priors about materialism etc that are largely culturally reinforced. Hence why postrat become a thing.
>Writing & spreading this is very important to me because I keep seeing good people failing at this. They despair at the noisy information environment, and how difficult it is to stand out. But I hope this is a wake up call to realize that if you are a good actor, it is completely within your control to fix this.
Indeed. The greatest problem in the modern era is not that there are no good people left, it's that we in general (good and bad) have a dramatic lack of courage. When people fall to cowardice, evil wins.
This is a really good framework, I believe and something I try to implement in my life (even while struggling a bit with it atm). Thank you for sharing!
Thank you for yet another banger!