Search Ideas

Interest 1: It's my yardstick. I want to accomplish more, and I know I can (and we do, often, by staying up "too" late). And staying up is working as much as we can each day without coercion. It's stopping and getting ready for bed that requires coercion!

Interest 2: This measure of productivity is suspect. By whose yardstick is a day not productive enough? This is itself the source of the anxiety. Just work as much as we can each day without coercion. Asking for any more is foolish.

Interest 2: Go to bed around hour 16, to get the full 8 ours we require for good health and functioning! We regret when we sleep too much less than 8 hours, and the cumulative health impact causes us some background anxiety (which is itself unhealthy).

Interest 1: Stay up past 16 hours and do more things! Accomplish more, have more fun today and feel like the day was more productive. Some loss of sleep is okay for the sake of accomplishing more, earlier in life.

Per #5229, here is a debate to find a common preference for the two interests in me.

True, I have a lamp that is warm in color, but probably still has some blue in it. I'll consider looking into redder lamps. I still suspect mental stuff is the main issue.

Checking this out, thanks!

Good reasoning. But I don't go long stretches without eating (no more than 4 or 5 hours), and my weight is stable (or growing, depending on goals), so I can't be undereating in general.

Interesting. But I would guess it only works well for constant sounds. The sensor has to read the waveform to create one that cancels it. Will not do much for short impulses of sound, which are the main offender (my current neighbors are okay, for the record).

Ah, I marked my agreement in #5292 a criticism to neutralize yours, since I corrected #5293. But I should have revised it to additionally have the existing criticism no longer apply. I'll make a new revision with that change.

But HTV is also about art (BoI chapter 14).
A piece of art is a kind of end product. And we could write code to produce art.

AFAIK it creates no physical dependence and you don’t build a tolerance.

I was wrong to submit this criticism in this form; it should be only about the lack of dependence. Otherwise the criticism chain is inverted for #5203.

What’s not to love?

#5203 already says: causes people to wake up early. (Can corroborate.)

The Blind Truth-Seeker:
https://libertythroughreason.com/the-blind-truth-seeker/

~All previous methods of preference formation focus too much on what the ideas say; on their content.

Nobody really knows just how simple an idea is (Occam’s razor) or how likely (Bayesianism), for example. In some cases it’s obvious how ideas compare, but in others not so much.

Adherents of those epistemologies are all fooling themselves into thinking they’re being rational when really they’re still acting on whim. Just fancier whim.

Focus instead on how the ideas relate, on the structure of the current state of the discussion, and preference formation gets much easier and simpler.

Then you can easily see which ideas you can adopt and which you can’t. You can even see exactly which criticisms you’d need to address to change someone’s mind, say.

Beautiful.

… it seems like finding a common preference is the thing to do …

It is.

… (and it seems like it works).

It usually does.

But isn't that the same as compromising?

No. A common preference is a new option everyone involved prefers to their respective original stance. A compromise is an option they do not prefer, but merely reluctantly agree to. And it’s usually not really new in content but resulted from mechanically mixing existing options. See the article linked in #5301.

… a compromise can actually be bad, because it is a new theory that no one was advocating for.

Compromise is always bad. It’s a form of irrationality.

Gemini says Brett Hall...

No it’s TCS: https://takingchildrenseriously.com/how-is-a-compromise-not-a-real-solution/

Time-release melatonin has solved the backfire problem for me. But I don't want to be dependent on it forever to get a good 8 hours.

Not to be nitpicky, especially since you ended up agreeing, but #5234 now has a pending criticism (yours), yet you acted on the idea. (Or rather, on the suggestion implied by it.) Acting on an idea with pending criticisms is technically the definition of irrationality on V.

I’m purposely not marking this a criticism so the flags don’t flip.

Idea: rational discussion graph with recursive criticism evaluation, like Veritula does now. Except the ideas are programs, not natural-language text. And they execute when they have no pending criticisms.

Interesting and disturbing. I still think psychology is the prime suspect for me, though. Runaway thinking. I'll pay more attention going forward, and see if I observe this "alertness signal."

I do use 0% brightness on my monitor and Windows' red night filter at 90% about 90 minutes before getting ready for bed, and I use only a warm-colored lamp. But could do more. Have not messed with the actual monitor color presets (turning off the blue and green channels; not the same thing as the night filter?). No screens at all seems like a smarter habit, which I'll work toward.

I have traveled internationally, and I think jetlag is the same as just staying up very late. Both allow for fast time-to-sleep (<30min). I can fall asleep quickly if I've been awake for 19 hours, say. The issue is trying to achieve that time-to-sleep for ~16 hours of awake time.