Hackpads are smart collaborative documents. .
1387 days ago
Unfiled. Edited by Ozzie Gooen 1387 days ago
0) 'What You Do' is an extremely common question and thus probably has some useful purpose.  However, the purpose may not be obvious to us.
1) Language Games & Information.  "What do you do" is a statement to get information about an individual.  This very much determines where the conversation will go and what it may be about.  It also makes sense that "What do you do" is asking for the main profession of an individual and that this is considered an important particularly important piece of information.  Why is this?
6) Many existing answers for knowledge to this seem less relevant.  Personally, I don't have a category that people would understand.  I have trouble saying 'programmer' or 'writer' or 'researcher' or 'business worker' or 'website maintainer'.  
Ozzie G 7) Perhaps we could consider defining some new definitions for 'what I do' that would be more appropriate here.  For instance 'tech-philosopher'.  
Big Issues Here:
1) Clarifying 'What Do You Do?".  It's about getting important new contextual information, and in most cases it's expected that this would come from understanding ones' profession.  
2) The relationship between identity, games, and professions.
3) The bias of identifying with professions for young knowledge workers, and possible ways to choose alternative professional identities in order to compensate.  
1391 days ago
Unfiled. Edited by Ozzie Gooen 1391 days ago
Ozzie G It doesn't have to be this way.  One alternative, for instance, is to propose a definition of success and then represent individuals that match that. 
For instance:
'Student Successes(1)' 
1: 'A student success refers to a student who has spent some amount of time formally studying at this school, and then has succeeded at making at least 3 news headlines in popular journals.'  
Of course, for almost any specific actual definition of success, it would sound a lot more arbitrary and superficial than some pretend objectivity.  But that's how it really is anyway.  One of the worst crimes in the english language is to shadow mediocre claims with ideas you associate with good, or to feign objectivity.  
Games other people people attempt to impose on you
1399 days ago
Unfiled. Edited by Ozzie Gooen 1399 days ago
Ozzie G Against Identity
This is a base for Information regarding the importance of how to understand persons.
The Theory of the Individual in Economics
Identity and Value
John B. Davis
Review here: 
1411 days ago
Unfiled. Edited by Ozzie Gooen 1411 days ago
Optimal Beings Theory
The aim of this paper is to claim that people from a wide array of beliefs should conclude that the future would be better for the replacement of humanity with more optimized species.  Orders of magnitude better than it would be with beings closely resembling humans.  Thus, this kind of future may not only be inevitable, but highly desired.  It asks us to care for not only future species but almost unimaginable beings in the very distant future.  
  • Claims
Ozzie G We first assume that there exists a kind of 'value' that satisfies the following constraints:
  1. Additive.
  1. Little or no speciesism.
  1. Highly or infinitely bound.
Given these constraints, we claim that:
  1. For almost any type of value and choice of resources, there are possible beings (optimal beings) that are significantly more efficient in creating value from those resources than currently exist.
  1. In the distant future, a universe filled with optimal beings would be substantially more value-creating than one with existing species.
  1. If optimal beings are created and maximized in number, than the total value that ever exists will almost entirely be through optimal beings.
This means that:
  1. The best possible universe, by far, would mostly contain very new and different beings.
  • Assumptions
1. Use of an additive value systems 
This essay works for many additive value systems.  This means, that the goodness experienced from two individuals or systems is equal to the sum of the goodness of each individual viewed independently. 
g(p1) + g(p2) = g(p1 + p2).
In this case g() is a function to denote the goodness of a system, and p1 and p2 are two different systems.
For many philosophies, this would mean that the existence of two happy or 'good' people is twice as good as the existence of one happy or 'good' person.
A superset of this, which we believe this paper still applies for (but is weaker), is moral theories that suggest any kind of overall improvement with the addition of more 'good' or 'happy' individuals without the expense of others.  In this case, assuming g(p1) and g(p2) are both non-negative, this means the following.
g(p1) < g(p1 + p2)
For example, this requires just that two planet of net-positive goodness are more good than one planet of net-positive goodness.  If one were not to believe this theory, it would imply that the presence of additional people in the world that experience goodness may have absolutely no value.  
2. Little or no speciesism
There is no reason why humanity itself is particularly valuable outside of its characteristics, which can be present in other forms of life.  For example, we may hope that future beings always think logically, enjoy pleasure, and have similar values from us, but we don't necessitate that they have physical features like tonsils or XXXXXXX.  This leads one to wonder if any biological features of humans have intrinsic importance rather than practical importance.  If not, it may seems like the existing human is one of the most efficient beings so far.  But this does not mean that nothing better is possible or could not be more valuable.
3. Goodness is unbounded or bound highly
There is no cap in important goodness.  Basically, the addition of new units of goodness are always deemed useful.  This is opposed to a worldview that states that after a specific amount of happiness, any extra would contain no more value.  This itself is very well established.
  • Claims of Optimal Beings
  • Resource Constraints
In any world or future world, it is expected that there are limited resources.  Even if there is access to an unlimited number of resources, it still would take time to access them, so at any point the number available is limited.  
  • Consequential Outcomes
(see assumptions)
  • Beings as Conversions of Resources to Goodness
The presence of a creature or being requires a given set of resources R and creates or enjoys goodness G.  Therefor, we can imagine that each creature and thing could have a ratio of goodness per unit of resource allocation, or G/R.  
  • The Optimal Being
  • Designing for Optimality
Assuming Uploading
Assume that human uploading is possible.  In this case we can be simulated and may likely have quite a bit of mental freedom.  For example, our perceptions would be completely artificial, so experiencing a beach would be just as easy as experiencing flight through a star.  This could allow for some very pleasurable and optimized experiences for simulated human minds.
Simulated human minds would definitely take up computer resources.  One could do a calculation to estimate how much processing power it would take to simulate one mind, but no matter what the answer is, it would be expected to be numerous (not 0 or 1).  In this case, it seems likely that the simulation could be made more efficient in a resources to utility sense by changing the mind, which would then make it less human.  Any 'final' optimized result may have completely different senses than a human brain emulation.  It may be dramatically more or less intelligent.  The brain regions may be, and probably would be completely different than a human brain.  More different from a human brain simulation than a human brain simulation is to an ant brain simulation.
In this case it seems rather suboptimal to upload humans at all.  Would one ever consider uploading a rat brain and attempt to upgrade it to human level?  The same can be said for our brains.  Perhaps they are an interesting starting point, but the individual features from one to the next seem rather unimportant.  
In the presence of a optibeing, a human brain simulation would be expected to be dramatically inefficient in comparison.  The uploading or copying of a human brain would take resources not used for optibeings, so would dramatically reduce utility from an optimal state.  Thus it seems like human uploading in the presence of optibeings would be selfish and inefficient in terms of consequentialism.
Assuming Uploading is Wrong or Impossible
  • Claims of Optimal Futures
1. In the distant future, a universe filled with optimal beings would be substantially more value-creating than one with existing species.
  • A Lake Example
  • A Lake Example with New Technology
Is Diversity Important?
Designers vs. Beings
There is no explicit reason why optimal beings would have to choose or propagate themselves.  Perhaps it would make the most sense for a small group of agents to be intelligent enough to improve and spread the number of optimal beings without actually experiencing goodness itself.  
2. If optimal beings are created and maximized in number, than the total value that ever exists will almost entirely be through optimal beings.
Is Diversity Important?
Designers vs. Beings
There is no explicit reason why optimal beings would have to choose or propagate themselves.  Perhaps it would make the most sense for a small group of agents to be intelligent enough to improve and spread the number of optimal beings without actually experiencing goodness itself.  
1417 days ago
Unfiled. Edited by Ozzie Gooen 1417 days ago
Ozzie G Visions of 80,000 Hours
Career advice is about the most dull and tedious discipline for young people.  
Career Researchers.  
Markets:  Rich Parents, people in their late 20s.
We could target people who are considering changing from one career to another.  It could be a premium service.  
If we don't specialize, it seems difficult to know their field better than they.
Networking for the bay.  Existential risk, effective altruist organizations.  Connection people with the right jobs or opportunities to establish connections with organizations.  
Network model.
Career Advice for Good People.
1417 days ago
Unfiled. Edited by Ozzie Gooen 1417 days ago
Ozzie G The Purpose Story
  • "I was going to be a doctor, I was going to be a lawyer, a writer, an architect, an engineer, a newspaper reporter" he said. "There wasn't anything I couldn't be," he said.
  • "And then I got married" he said, "and the wife started having kids right away, and I opened a damn diaper service with a buddy, and the buddy ran off with the money, and the wife kept having kids. After the diaper service it was Venetian blinds, and after the Venetian-blind business went bust, it was frozen custard. And all the time the wife was having more kids, and the damn car breaking down, and bill-collectors coming around, and termites boiling out of the baseboards every spring and fall"
  • "And I asked myself," said O'Hare, "what does it mean? Where do I fit in? What's the point of any of it?"
  • "And then somebody sent me a copy of that newspaper with the story of how you were still alive," said O'Hare, and he relived for me the cruel excitement the story had given him. "And then it hit me" he said, "why I was alive, and what the main thing was I was supposed to do."
The previous is a passage from the novel Mother Night by Kurt Vonnegut.  Reading it reminded me that the dilemma of individual purpose is not at all a recent phenomena but something very ancient.
The story goes as follows.  
Protagonist is born to unusual circumstances, or usual circumstances that he or she looks upon in unusual ways.   The protagonist meets a variety of interesting characters.  The protagonist starts to learn about an important evil of some kind.  The protagonist pursues a long journey to conquer said evil with the tools that only they have uniquely.  
There are trials, challenges, set backs, failures.  But in the end there is a victory of some important kind.  A heroic finale.  
Some call this the Hero's Journey.  Most call it purpose.  
This story is in fact so irresistible that people drive themselves to do absolutely anything to see its completion.  Some become doctors, some rock climbers, a few every so often initiate genocides.  
Heroes are powerful and dangerous.  
They expect pain and suffering.  That's an essential part of the story.  If these don't exist they will be created.  Therefore these people can be expected to 
They require challenges unique to their skills.  What is a hero with a perfectly fine replacement, after all?  A manuel laborer.  
1425 days ago
Unfiled. Edited by Ozzie Gooen 1425 days ago
Academic Movements and Cultural Movement
Consider the following cultural groups; Hippies, Catholics, Ravers, Hackers, Geeks, Transhumanists.  For each one of these try to imagine what a powerpoint presentation would look like, or what the tone of a presentation would be.  What feelings, colors, songs, themes, personalities do you associate with each?
Now do the same for Consequentialists, Python Developers, Spicy Food Lovers.  What comes to mind now?
For each of the first groups mentioned I have a very clear view for how to present that group; what it's values are, what a conference would feel like, what the emotional backing is.  These are cultures.  For the second set, I feel incredibly little in comparison.  These are mostly memes that exist within cultures.  It's important to tell them apart but not always obvious.
Consider the difference between an Academic Movement and a Cultural Movement.  Academic Movements, like scientific revolutions, change opinions within academia and influences future research.  By "academic" I am not referring to specific institutions but rather knowledgeable paradigms that make up a movement; these are first discovered then spread outwards.  
All academic fields would qualify, but also would general memes discussed by modern intellectuals.  For example, I would consider Land Value Taxation, or Online Privacy, or Relativistic Mechanics to be examples of Academic Movements.  All of them have created significant influence and followings.  However, I would say that these don't particularly come across as cultures.  Rather it seems like these were ideas adapted by pre-existing cultures (academics and hackers, for example).  
Cultural Movements are more about social groups and personal identity than Academic Movements.  By nature they are less objective and many are seen as relatively irrational.  But they do provide results via distinct memes and group identities.  Cultural Movements become more about finding distinctive fashion, music, preferences, and so on.  Culture and collective identity are very tightly coupled, at least for the liked and celebrated parts (see Cultural Identity).  
Influential cultures require people to embrace them in place of other cultures, potentially dominating and controlling an individual far more than a few memes ever could.  The presence of goth culture means the replacement of values millions of civilians, values that will in effect cause them to have incredibly different lifestyles from other groups.  
However, the downside is that Cultural Movements are really hard to change.  Cultures aren't about thoughts as much as they are about identities, and people do not want to change their identities.  
The current environmental culture may embrace science, but I bet it would be incredibly difficult to get them to wear suits and ties all the time, even if there were tomes of research supporting the idea for environmental effectiveness.  That's just not how many of themselves see themselves.  
Simply, a culture is created by and belongs to everyone.
 Designing a Culture for Effective Altruism
Members (2)
Ozzie Gooen Thomas Hendrey

Create a New Collection


Move XXX to XXX

XXX will be invited to the XXX on XXX.


Contact Support

Please check out our How-to Guide and FAQ first to see if your question is already answered! :)

If you have a feature request, please add it to this pad. Thanks!

Log in