A study found Large Language Models (LLMs) to be more persuasive than humans incentivized to persuade in the context of online discussions. Researchers had both LLMs and humans attempt to change other users' opinions on various topics like soda taxes and ride-sharing regulations. The LLMs generated more persuasive arguments, leading to a greater shift in the audience's stated positions compared to the human-generated arguments, even when those humans were offered monetary rewards for successful persuasion. This suggests LLMs have a strong capacity for persuasive communication, potentially exceeding human ability in certain online settings.
The author reflects on observations gleaned from people-watching, focusing on the subtle ways individuals navigate public spaces. They note patterns in how people position themselves, react to others, and convey emotions through body language and micro-expressions. These observations range from the comical, like the awkward dance of avoiding eye contact on a crowded sidewalk, to the more poignant, such as witnessing moments of connection and vulnerability. The author concludes that close observation reveals a complex interplay of individual behavior and shared social dynamics, ultimately illuminating the unspoken language of human interaction.
HN users generally found the observations in the linked article to be unremarkable, even banal. Some commenters felt the points were obvious or things people already knew, with one calling them "platitudes." Others questioned the value of the list, suggesting it lacked depth or insightful analysis. A few users pushed back slightly, suggesting that while the observations were simple, they could still be useful reminders or resonate with certain readers. One commenter appreciated the author's focus on present moment awareness, while another suggested the piece was meant to be more evocative than groundbreaking. The overall sentiment, however, was one of mild disappointment with the article's content.
The "deathbed fallacy" refers to the flawed assumption that people's priorities on their deathbeds accurately reflect how they should have lived their lives. The author argues that deathbed pronouncements are often influenced by the specific context of dying, including physical pain, medication, and the emotional burden of impending loss. Therefore, prioritizing family and love over career or other pursuits in one's final moments doesn't necessarily mean these were the "wrong" choices earlier in life, when different contexts and physical capabilities applied. A healthy person might prioritize ambition and innovation, while a dying person understandably focuses on the relationships that bring comfort in their last moments. Essentially, comparing deathbed reflections to life choices is like comparing apples and oranges, due to the fundamentally different states of being.
HN commenters largely agree with the premise of the article, pointing out that regrets are often contextual and change over time. Several highlight the importance of differentiating between regrets of omission (things not done) and commission (things done). Some users share personal anecdotes supporting the idea that "deathbed regrets" shouldn't be taken as universal truths for life choices. One commenter suggests the framing of "deathbed wishes" might be a more useful perspective. Another emphasizes the value of actively shaping one's values and priorities throughout life rather than relying on a hypothetical future perspective. A few caution against over-analyzing regrets, advocating for focusing on present actions and intentions.
The author argues that our constant engagement with digital devices, particularly smartphones and social media, has eroded our capacity for daydreaming. This constant influx of external stimuli leaves little room for the mind to wander and engage in the unstructured, spontaneous thought that characterizes daydreaming. This loss is significant because daydreaming plays a vital role in creativity, problem-solving, and emotional processing. By filling every idle moment with digital content, we are sacrificing a crucial aspect of our inner lives and potentially hindering our cognitive and emotional development.
Hacker News users discussed the potential decline in daydreaming due to constant digital stimulation. Some commenters agreed with the premise, sharing personal anecdotes of decreased mind-wandering and an increased difficulty focusing. Others challenged the idea, arguing that daydreaming hasn't disappeared but simply manifests differently now, perhaps woven into interactions with technology. A compelling thread explored the distinction between boredom and daydreaming, suggesting that true mind-wandering requires a specific kind of undirected attention that is becoming increasingly rare. Another discussion focused on the potential benefits of boredom and daydreaming for creativity and problem-solving. Some users also suggested practical techniques for reclaiming daydreaming, such as mindfulness and designated "boredom time."
The blog post "Determining favorite t-shirt color using science" details a playful experiment using computer vision and Python to analyze a wardrobe of t-shirts. The author photographs their folded shirts, uses a script to extract the dominant color of each shirt, and then groups and counts these colors to determine their statistically "favorite" t-shirt color. While acknowledging the limitations of the method, such as lighting and folding inconsistencies, the author concludes their favorite color is blue, based on the prevalence of blue-hued shirts in their collection.
HN commenters largely found the blog post's methodology flawed and amusing. Several pointed out that simply asking someone their favorite color would be more efficient than the convoluted process described. The top comment highlights the absurdity of using a script to scrape Facebook photos for color analysis, especially given the potential inaccuracies of such an approach. Others questioned the statistical validity of the sample size and the representativeness of Facebook photos as an indicator of preferred shirt color. Some found the over-engineered solution entertaining, appreciating the author's humorous approach to a trivial problem. A few commenters offered alternative, more robust methods for determining color preferences, including using color palettes and analyzing wardrobe composition.
The essay "Ghosts and Dolls" explores the uncanny nature of dolls, positioning them as liminal objects occupying a space between life and death, animation and inanimacy. Their resemblance to humans, yet inherent stillness, evokes an unsettling feeling, often linked to folklore and spiritual beliefs about trapped souls or conduits to the supernatural. The author connects this eeriness to the concept of "the double," a psychological phenomenon where a copy or representation triggers existential anxieties about identity and mortality. Dolls, therefore, become potent symbols of this unease, acting as mirrors reflecting our own fears of death and decay. This is further exemplified through their use in various cultural practices, from children's play mimicking life cycles to mourning rituals and magical traditions.
Hacker News users discussing "Ghosts and Dolls" largely focused on the plausibility of the phenomena described. Some commenters expressed skepticism, suggesting the experiences were due to suggestibility, confirmation bias, and the human tendency to find patterns. Others shared personal anecdotes or cited research seemingly supporting the existence of paranormal activity. A few users pointed out the cultural significance of dolls and how that ties into the uncanny valley effect, contributing to the feeling of unease they evoke. The discussion touched upon the role of imagination and storytelling, with some arguing that the value of such narratives lies not in their veracity, but in their exploration of human psychology and cultural anxieties. A compelling comment thread developed around the idea that these experiences, regardless of their origin, offer insight into the human need to create meaning and find explanations for the unknown.
The paper "The Leaderboard Illusion" argues that current machine learning leaderboards, particularly in areas like natural language processing, create a misleading impression of progress. While benchmark scores steadily improve, this often doesn't reflect genuine advancements in general intelligence or real-world applicability. Instead, the authors contend that progress is largely driven by overfitting to specific benchmarks, exploiting test set leakage, and prioritizing benchmark performance over fundamental research. This creates an "illusion" of progress that distracts from the limitations of current methods and hinders the development of truly robust and generalizable AI systems. The paper calls for a shift towards more rigorous evaluation practices, including dynamic benchmarks, adversarial training, and a focus on real-world deployment to ensure genuine progress in the field.
The Hacker News comments on "The Leaderboard Illusion" largely discuss the deceptive nature of leaderboards and their potential to misrepresent true performance. Several commenters point out how leaderboards can incentivize overfitting to the specific benchmark being measured, leading to solutions that don't generalize well or even actively harm performance in real-world scenarios. Some highlight the issue of "p-hacking" and the pressure to achieve marginal gains on the leaderboard, even if statistically insignificant. The lack of transparency in evaluation methodologies and data used for ranking is also criticized. Others discuss alternative evaluation methods, suggesting focusing on robustness and real-world applicability over pure leaderboard scores, and emphasize the need for more comprehensive evaluation metrics. The detrimental effects of the "leaderboard chase" on research direction and resource allocation are also mentioned.
Intrinsic motivation, the drive to engage in activities for inherent satisfaction rather than external rewards, can be cultivated by focusing on three key psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. Autonomy is supported by offering choices, minimizing pressure, and acknowledging feelings. Competence grows through providing optimal challenges, positive feedback focused on effort and strategy, and opportunities for skill development. Relatedness is fostered by creating a sense of belonging, shared goals, and genuine connection with others. By intentionally designing environments and interactions that nurture these needs, we can enhance intrinsic motivation, leading to greater persistence, creativity, and overall well-being.
HN users generally agree with the article's premise that intrinsic motivation is crucial and difficult to cultivate. Several commenters highlight the importance of autonomy, mastery, and purpose, echoing the article's points but adding personal anecdotes and practical examples. Some discuss the detrimental effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation, particularly in creative fields. One compelling comment thread explores the idea of "flow state" and how creating environments conducive to flow can foster intrinsic motivation. Another commenter questions the applicability of research on intrinsic motivation to the modern workplace, suggesting that precarious employment situations often prioritize survival over self-actualization. Overall, the comments affirm the value of intrinsic motivation while acknowledging the complexities of fostering it in various contexts.
The "friendship recession" describes a concerning decline in close friendships experienced by many Americans. Factors like increased work demands, longer commutes, the rise of social media (offering a superficial sense of connection), and societal shifts away from community engagement contribute to this decline. This lack of close relationships impacts overall well-being, as strong friendships offer crucial emotional support, reduce stress, and promote a sense of belonging. The article advocates for prioritizing friendships by dedicating intentional time and effort, nurturing existing bonds, and actively seeking new connections through shared activities and genuine vulnerability.
HN commenters largely agree with the article's premise of a friendship recession, citing personal experiences of difficulty maintaining friendships and making new ones. Several attribute this to a combination of factors including increased social atomization, the decline of shared physical spaces like churches or community centers, and the rise of online interactions as a substitute for in-person connection. Some suggest the pandemic exacerbated these trends, while others point to longer-term societal shifts. A few commenters propose solutions, including prioritizing friendships, actively seeking out opportunities for social interaction, and fostering deeper connections rather than superficial acquaintances. Some skepticism exists, with a few questioning the methodology of friendship studies and suggesting the perceived decline might be overstated or misattributed. One commenter highlights the distinction between friendships and acquaintances, arguing that while the former might be declining, the latter are easily formed online.
The internet, originally designed for efficient information retrieval, is increasingly mimicking the disorienting and consumerist design of shopping malls, a phenomenon known as the Gruen Transfer. Websites, particularly social media platforms, employ tactics like infinite scroll, algorithmically curated content, and strategically placed ads to keep users engaged and subtly nudge them towards consumption. This creates a digital environment optimized for distraction and impulsive behavior, sacrificing intentional navigation and focused information seeking for maximized "dwell time" and advertising revenue. The author argues this trend is eroding the internet's original purpose and transforming it into a sprawling, consumerist digital mall.
HN commenters largely agree with the article's premise that website design, particularly in e-commerce, increasingly uses manipulative "dark patterns" reminiscent of the Gruen Transfer in physical retail. Several point out the pervasiveness of these tactics, extending beyond shopping to social media and general web browsing. Some commenters offer specific examples, like cookie banners and endless scrolling, while others discuss the psychological underpinnings of these design choices. A few suggest potential solutions, including regulations and browser extensions to combat manipulative design, though skepticism remains about their effectiveness against the economic incentives driving these practices. Some debate centers on whether users are truly "manipulated" or simply making rational choices within a designed environment.
A study by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that deactivating Facebook and Instagram for four weeks led to small but statistically significant improvements in users' well-being. Participants reported increased life satisfaction, less time spent on social media (even after reactivation), and a slight reduction in anxiety and depression. While the effects were modest, they suggest that taking a break from these platforms can have a positive, albeit temporary, impact on mental health. The study also highlighted heterogeneity in the effects, with heavier users experiencing more pronounced benefits from deactivation.
Hacker News users discussed the NBER study on Facebook/Instagram deactivation and its effect on subjective well-being. Several commenters questioned the study's methodology, particularly the self-selection bias of participants who volunteered to deactivate, suggesting they might already have pre-existing negative feelings towards social media. Others pointed out the small effect size and short duration of the study, questioning its long-term implications. The potential for social media addiction and withdrawal symptoms was also raised, with some users sharing personal anecdotes about their improved well-being after quitting social media. The financial incentives offered to participants were also scrutinized, with some suggesting it could have influenced their reported experiences. Several commenters discussed alternative research designs that might address the limitations of the study.
Playing "cozy games," a genre characterized by low-stakes gameplay, relaxing visuals, and often featuring themes of community and nature, can offer a respite from stress and anxiety. These games provide players with a sense of accomplishment and control in a safe, predictable environment, contrasting with the pressures of daily life. Experts suggest this escapism, combined with the social connection fostered by some cozy games, can contribute to improved mental well-being, acting as a form of digital self-care.
HN users largely agree with the premise that cozy games can be relaxing and offer a welcome escape. Several commenters share their personal experiences with games like Stardew Valley, Animal Crossing, and Minecraft, citing the calming effect of repetitive tasks and low-stakes gameplay. Some caution against using gaming as a primary coping mechanism for anxiety and stress, suggesting it's best used in moderation alongside other healthy habits. Others discuss the specific elements that make a game "cozy," such as gentle music, pleasant visuals, and a lack of pressure or punishment. The potential negative aspects of gaming, such as addiction and social isolation, are also briefly touched upon.
The blog post explores the different ways people engage with mathematical versus narrative content. It argues that while stories capitalize on suspense and emotional investment to hold attention over longer periods, mathematical exposition requires a different kind of focus, often broken into smaller, more digestible chunks. Mathematical understanding relies on carefully building upon previous concepts, making it difficult to skip ahead or skim without losing the thread. This inherent structure leads to shorter bursts of concentrated effort, interspersed with pauses for reflection and assimilation, rather than the sustained engagement typical of a compelling narrative. Therefore, comparing attention spans across these two domains is inherently flawed, as they demand distinct cognitive processes and engagement styles.
HN users generally agreed with the author's premise that mathematical exposition requires a different kind of attention than storytelling. Several commenters pointed out that math requires sustained, focused attention with frequent backtracking to fully grasp the concepts, while stories can leverage existing mental models and emotional engagement to maintain interest. One compelling comment highlighted the importance of "chunking" information in both domains, suggesting that effective math explanations break down complex ideas into smaller, digestible pieces, while good storytelling uses narrative structure to group events meaningfully. Another commenter suggested that the difference lies in the type of memory employed: math relies on working memory, which is limited, while stories tap into long-term memory, which is more expansive. Some users discussed the role of motivation, noting that intrinsic interest can significantly extend attention spans for both math and stories.
Despite sleep's obvious importance to well-being and cognitive function, its core biological purpose remains elusive. Researchers are investigating various theories, including its role in clearing metabolic waste from the brain, consolidating memories, and regulating synaptic connections. While sleep deprivation studies demonstrate clear negative impacts, the precise mechanisms through which sleep benefits the brain are still being unravelled, requiring innovative research methods and focusing on specific neural circuits and molecular processes. A deeper understanding of sleep's function could lead to treatments for sleep disorders and neurological conditions.
HN users discuss the complexities of sleep research, highlighting the difficulty in isolating sleep's function due to its intertwined nature with other bodily processes. Some commenters point to evolutionary arguments, suggesting sleep's role in energy conservation and predator avoidance. The potential connection between sleep and glymphatic system function, which clears waste from the brain, is also mentioned, with several users emphasizing the importance of this for cognitive function. Some express skepticism about the feasibility of fully understanding sleep's purpose, while others suggest practical advice like prioritizing sleep and maintaining consistent sleep schedules, regardless of the underlying mechanisms. Several users also note the variability in individual sleep needs.
A new study challenges the traditional categorical approach to classifying delusions, suggesting delusional themes are far more diverse and personalized than previously assumed. Researchers analyzed data from over 1,000 individuals with psychosis and found that while some common themes like persecution and grandiosity emerged, many experiences defied neat categorization. The study argues for a more dimensional understanding of delusions, emphasizing the individual's unique narrative and personal context rather than forcing experiences into predefined boxes. This approach could lead to more personalized and effective treatment strategies.
HN commenters discuss the difficulty of defining and diagnosing delusions, particularly highlighting the subjective nature of "bizarreness" as a criterion. Some point out the cultural relativity of delusions, noting how beliefs considered delusional in one culture might be accepted in another. Others question the methodology of the study, particularly the reliance on clinicians' interpretations, and the potential for confirmation bias. Several commenters share anecdotal experiences with delusional individuals, emphasizing the wide range of delusional themes and the challenges in communicating with someone experiencing a break from reality. The idea of "monothematic" delusions is also discussed, with some expressing skepticism about their true prevalence. Finally, some comments touch on the potential link between creativity and certain types of delusional thinking.
Neel Nanda's blog post "Intentionally Making Close Friends (2021)" details a systematic approach to forming deep friendships. He argues that meaningful connections require vulnerability, shared experiences, and consistent effort. The post outlines practical strategies like joining shared activities, initiating one-on-one hangouts, and deepening conversations through personal disclosure. Nanda emphasizes the importance of being proactive, expressing genuine interest in others, and prioritizing quality time to cultivate strong, lasting friendships. He also suggests tracking interactions and setting explicit goals to maintain momentum and foster a sense of intentionality in the process.
HN commenters generally appreciated the article's vulnerability and actionable advice on forming close friendships. Several shared personal anecdotes about their own struggles and successes with making friends, echoing the article's emphasis on vulnerability and shared experiences. Some highlighted the importance of shared activities and hobbies in building connections, while others discussed the challenge of maintaining friendships amid life changes and geographical distance. A few questioned the applicability of the advice to different personality types, particularly introverts, while others emphasized the importance of emotional maturity and self-awareness as prerequisites for deep connections. Some found the "structured approach" outlined in the article somewhat unnatural, preferring more organic friendship development. Overall, the discussion centered around the universal desire for close connections and the challenges of achieving that in modern life.
Research suggests supervisors often favor employees who moderately bend the rules, viewing them as resourceful and proactive. These "constructive nonconformists" challenge procedures in ways that benefit the organization, while still adhering to core values and demonstrating respect for authority. However, this tolerance has limits. Employees who consistently or significantly violate rules, exhibiting "destructive nonconformity," are viewed negatively and penalized. Supervisors perceive a key difference between rule-breaking that aims to improve the organization versus self-serving or malicious violations.
HN commenters generally agree with the study's findings that moderate rule-breaking is viewed favorably by supervisors, particularly when it leads to positive outcomes. Some point out that "rule-breaking" is often conflated with independent thinking, initiative, and a willingness to challenge the status quo, traits valued in many workplaces. Several commenters note the importance of context and company culture. In some environments, rule-breaking might be implicitly encouraged, while in others, it's strictly punished. A few express skepticism about the study's methodology and generalizability, questioning whether self-reported data accurately reflects supervisors' true opinions. Others highlight the potential downsides of rule-breaking, such as creating inconsistency and unfairness, and the inherent subjectivity in determining what constitutes "acceptable" rule-breaking. The "Goldilocks zone" of rule-breaking is also discussed, with the consensus being that it's a delicate balance, dependent on the specific situation and the individual's relationship with their supervisor.
A new study published in the journal Psychology of Music has found that listening to music alone can improve social well-being. Researchers discovered that solitary music listening can enhance feelings of social connectedness and reduce feelings of loneliness, particularly for individuals who struggle with social interaction. This effect was observed across diverse musical genres and listening contexts, suggesting that the personal and emotional connection fostered through individual music enjoyment can have positive social implications.
HN commenters are generally skeptical of the study's methodology and conclusions. Several point out the small sample size (n=54) and question the validity of self-reported data on social well-being. Some suggest the correlation could be reversed – that people feeling socially connected might be more inclined to listen to music alone, rather than music causing the connection. Others propose alternative explanations for the observed correlation, such as solo music listening providing a form of stress relief or emotional regulation, which in turn could improve social interactions. A few commenters also note the ambiguity of "social well-being" and the lack of control for other factors that might influence it.
Ursula K. Le Guin's "The Child and the Shadow" explores the crucial role of integrating the shadow self for healthy psychological development. Le Guin uses the fairy tale of "The Shadow" by Hans Christian Andersen to illustrate how denying or repressing the shadow leads to alienation and unhappiness. She argues that the shadow, representing our darker impulses and less admirable qualities, must be acknowledged and accepted as part of the whole self. Through consciousness and acceptance, the shadow can be integrated, leading to wholeness, maturity, and the ability to connect authentically with others. This process, though potentially frightening, is essential for living a full and meaningful life.
HN users discuss Le Guin's essay on the shadow self, largely agreeing with her premise of integrating rather than suppressing the negative aspects of personality. Several commenters appreciate the Jungian perspective and explore the idea of the shadow as a source of creativity and authenticity. Some discuss the practical challenges of integrating the shadow, noting the societal pressures to conform and the difficulty in accepting uncomfortable truths about oneself. The danger of projecting the shadow onto others is also highlighted, as is the importance of self-awareness in navigating these complexities. A few commenters mention the relevance of Le Guin's essay to current societal issues, such as political polarization. Overall, the comments reflect a thoughtful engagement with Le Guin's ideas.
"Digital Echoes and Unquiet Minds" explores the unsettling feeling of living in an increasingly documented world. The post argues that the constant recording and archiving of our digital lives creates a sense of unease and pressure, as past actions and words persist indefinitely online. This digital permanence blurs the lines between public and private spheres, impacting self-perception and hindering personal growth. The author suggests this phenomenon fosters a performative existence where we are constantly aware of our digital footprint and its potential future interpretations, ultimately leading to a pervasive anxiety and a stifled sense of self.
HN users generally agree with the author's premise that the constant influx of digital information contributes to a sense of unease and difficulty focusing. Several commenters share personal anecdotes of reducing their digital consumption and experiencing positive results like improved focus and decreased anxiety. Some suggest specific strategies such as using website blockers, turning off notifications, and scheduling dedicated offline time. A few highlight the addictive nature of digital platforms and the societal pressures that make disconnecting difficult. There's also discussion around the role of these technologies in exacerbating existing mental health issues and the importance of finding a healthy balance. A dissenting opinion points out that "unquiet minds" have always existed, suggesting technology may be a symptom rather than a cause. Others mention the benefits of digital tools for learning and connection, advocating for mindful usage rather than complete abstinence.
A new study challenges the assumption that preschoolers struggle with complex reasoning. Researchers found that four- and five-year-olds can successfully employ disjunctive syllogism – a type of logical argument involving eliminating possibilities – to solve problems when presented with clear, engaging scenarios. Contrary to previous research, these children were able to deduce the correct answer even when the information was presented verbally, without visual aids, suggesting they possess more advanced reasoning skills than previously recognized. This indicates that children's reasoning abilities may be significantly influenced by how information is presented and that simpler, engaging presentations could unlock their potential for logical thought.
Hacker News users discuss the methodology and implications of the study on preschoolers' reasoning abilities. Several commenters express skepticism about the researchers' interpretation of the children's behavior, suggesting alternative explanations like social cues or learned responses rather than genuine deductive reasoning. Some question the generalizability of the findings given the small sample size and specific experimental setup. Others point out the inherent difficulty in assessing complex cognitive processes in young children, emphasizing the need for further research. A few commenters draw connections to related work in developmental psychology and AI, while others reflect on personal experiences with children's surprisingly sophisticated reasoning.
The New Yorker profiles game designer Jason Rohrer, exploring his intensely personal approach to game creation. Rohrer's games, often minimalist and emotionally resonant, act as a form of self-exploration, delving into his anxieties about death, legacy, and human connection. The article highlights his unique design philosophy, which prioritizes profound experiences over traditional gameplay mechanics, exemplified by projects like "One Hour One Life" and "Sandspiel." It portrays Rohrer as a restless innovator constantly seeking new ways to express complex emotions through interactive media, pushing the boundaries of what games can be.
HN commenters generally found the article interesting and appreciated the designer's vulnerability in exploring his mental health through game development. Some discussed the potential of games for self-discovery and therapeutic applications, while others drew parallels to other introspective games and creators. A few questioned the efficacy of this approach, expressing skepticism about the ultimate value of turning personal struggles into a game. The most compelling comments focused on the blurring lines between game design, art, and therapy, debating the extent to which such deeply personal games can resonate with a wider audience and whether the process itself is inherently therapeutic for the creator. Several commenters also appreciated the article's nuanced portrayal of mental health struggles, moving beyond simple narratives of recovery.
The article "The Prehistoric Psychopath" explores the evolutionary puzzle of psychopathy, questioning whether it's a purely maladaptive trait or if it could have offered some advantages in our ancestral past. It proposes that psychopathic traits, such as lack of empathy, manipulativeness, and risk-taking, might have been beneficial in specific prehistoric contexts like intergroup conflict or resource acquisition, allowing individuals to exploit others or seize opportunities without moral constraints. The article emphasizes the complex interplay between genes and environment, suggesting that psychopathy likely arises from a combination of genetic predispositions and environmental triggers, and that its expression and success might have varied across different social structures and ecological niches in prehistory. Ultimately, the article highlights the difficulty in definitively determining the evolutionary origins and historical prevalence of psychopathy, given the limitations of archaeological and anthropological evidence.
HN commenters largely discussed the methodology and conclusions of the linked article. Several questioned the reliability of extrapolating psychopathic traits based on sparse archaeological evidence, arguing that alternative explanations for prehistoric violence exist and that applying modern psychological diagnoses to ancient humans is problematic. Some debated the definition and evolutionary role of psychopathy, with some suggesting it may be a social construct rather than a distinct disorder. Others pointed out that while some individuals might exhibit psychopathic traits, classifying an entire group as psychopathic is misleading. The difficulty in distinguishing between instrumental and reactive violence in archaeological records was also a recurring theme, highlighting the limitations of inferring motivations from prehistoric remains. A few commenters focused on the article's presentation, criticizing its length and suggesting ways to improve readability.
This 1975 essay by Gerald Weinberg explores the delicate balance between honesty and kindness when delivering potentially painful truths. Weinberg argues that truth-telling isn't simply about stating facts, but also considering the impact of those facts on the recipient. He introduces the concept of "egoless programming" and extends it to general communication, emphasizing the importance of separating one's ego from the message. The essay provides a framework for delivering criticism constructively, focusing on observable behaviors rather than character judgments, and offering suggestions for improvement instead of mere complaints. Ultimately, Weinberg suggests that truly helpful truth-telling requires empathy, careful phrasing, and a genuine desire to help the other person grow.
HN commenters largely discuss the difficulty of delivering hard truths, particularly in professional settings. Some highlight the importance of framing, suggesting that focusing on shared goals and the benefits of honesty can make criticism more palatable. Others emphasize empathy and tact, recommending a focus on observable behaviors rather than character judgments. Several commenters note the importance of building trust beforehand, as criticism from a trusted source is more readily accepted. The power dynamics inherent in delivering criticism are also explored, with some arguing that managers have a responsibility to create a safe space for feedback. Finally, several users note the timeless nature of the advice in the original article, observing that these challenges remain relevant today.
Offloading our memories to digital devices, while convenient, diminishes the richness and emotional resonance of our experiences. The Bloomberg article argues that physical objects, unlike digital photos or videos, trigger multi-sensory memories and deeper emotional connections. Constantly curating our digital lives for an audience creates a performative version of ourselves, hindering authentic engagement with the present. The act of physically organizing and revisiting tangible mementos strengthens memories and fosters a stronger sense of self, something easily lost in the ephemeral and easily-deleted nature of digital storage. Ultimately, relying solely on digital platforms for memory-keeping risks sacrificing the depth and personal significance of lived experiences.
HN commenters largely agree with the article's premise that offloading memories to digital devices weakens our connection to them. Several point out the fragility of digital storage and the risk of losing access due to device failure, data corruption, or changing technology. Others note the lack of tactile and sensory experience with digital memories compared to physical objects. Some argue that the curation and organization of physical objects reinforces memories more effectively than passively scrolling through photos. A few commenters suggest a hybrid approach, advocating for printing photos or creating physical backups of digital memories. The idea of "digital hoarding" and the overwhelming quantity of digital photos leading to less engagement is also discussed. A counterpoint raised is the accessibility and shareability of digital memories, especially for dispersed families.
The article analyzes Erowid trip reports to understand common visual hallucinations experienced on psychedelics. By processing thousands of reports, the author identifies recurring visual themes, categorized as "form constants." These include spirals, lattices, vortexes, and other geometric patterns, often accompanied by visual distortions like breathing walls and morphing objects. The analysis also highlights the influence of set and setting, showing how factors like dosage, substance, and environment impact the intensity and nature of visuals. Ultimately, the research aims to demystify psychedelic experiences and provide a data-driven understanding of the subjective effects of these substances.
HN commenters discuss the methodology of analyzing Erowid trip reports, questioning the reliability and representativeness of self-reported data from a self-selected group. Some point out the difficulty in quantifying subjective experiences and the potential for biases, like recall bias and the tendency to report more unusual or intense experiences. Others suggest alternative approaches, such as studying fMRI data or focusing on specific aspects of perception. The lack of a control group and the variability in dosage and individual responses are also raised as concerns, making it difficult to draw definitive conclusions about the typical psychedelic experience. Several users share anecdotes of their own experiences, highlighting the diverse and unpredictable nature of these altered states. The overall sentiment seems to be one of cautious interest in the research, tempered by skepticism about the robustness of the methods.
The blog post "Ask for no, don't ask for yes (2022)" argues that when seeking agreement or buy-in, framing requests negatively—asking for objections rather than approval—can be more effective. This "opt-out" approach lowers the barrier to engagement, making it easier for people to voice concerns they might otherwise keep to themselves. By explicitly inviting dissent, you gather valuable feedback, uncover hidden obstacles, and ultimately increase the likelihood of genuine agreement and successful implementation down the line. This proactive approach to identifying and addressing potential problems can lead to more robust solutions and stronger commitment from all involved parties.
Hacker News users discuss the nuances of the "ask for no" strategy. Several commenters point out that it's not about literally asking for "no," but rather framing the request in a way that makes it easy for someone to decline without feeling guilty or pressured. This approach is seen as particularly useful in sales, negotiations, and managing teams, fostering better relationships by respecting autonomy. Some argue it's a form of manipulation, while others defend it as a way to create psychological safety. The discussion also touches on cultural differences, noting that the directness of "asking for no" might not translate well in all environments. A few users share personal anecdotes of how this strategy has led to better outcomes, emphasizing the importance of sincerity and genuine respect for the other party's decision.
This 2008 SharpBrains blog post highlights the crucial role of working memory in learning and cognitive function. It emphasizes that working memory, responsible for temporarily holding and manipulating information, is essential for complex tasks like reasoning, comprehension, and learning. The post uses the analogy of a juggler to illustrate how working memory manages multiple pieces of information simultaneously. Without sufficient working memory capacity, cognitive processes become strained, impacting our ability to focus, process information efficiently, and form new memories. Ultimately, the post argues for the importance of understanding and improving working memory for enhanced learning and cognitive performance.
HN users discuss the challenges of the proposed exercise of trying to think without working memory. Several commenters point out the difficulty, even impossibility, of separating working memory from other cognitive processes like long-term memory retrieval and attention. Some suggest the exercise might be more about becoming aware of working memory limitations and developing strategies to manage them, such as chunking information or using external aids. Others discuss the role of implicit learning and "muscle memory" as potential examples of learning without conscious working memory involvement. One compelling comment highlights that "thinking" itself necessitates holding information in mind, inherently involving working memory. The practicality and interpretability of the exercise are questioned, with the overall consensus being that completely excluding working memory from any cognitive task is unlikely.
"Subway Poker" is a silent, observational game played by mentally assigning poker hands to fellow subway passengers based on the first five visible digits of their MetroCards. Players cannot influence the cards they are "dealt" and simply observe the hands around them, comparing their imagined hands to others' to determine a winner. The game offers a discreet and engaging way to pass the time during a commute, adding a layer of amusement to the mundane act of people-watching.
Commenters on Hacker News largely enjoyed the subway poker concept, calling it "charming" and "delightful." Some discussed strategies, like focusing on suits rather than specific card values for easier memorization, or intentionally losing rounds to mislead other players. A few debated the feasibility of the game in real-world scenarios, citing crowded subways and the difficulty of maintaining eye contact. Several expressed interest in trying it themselves, while others suggested variations, like using phone apps or playing with larger groups. Some reminisced about similar silent games played in childhood. The overall sentiment was positive, with the game seen as a fun and engaging way to pass the time on public transit.
We lack memories from infancy and toddlerhood primarily due to the immaturity of the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex, brain regions crucial for forming and retrieving long-term memories. While babies can form short-term memories, these regions aren't developed enough to consolidate them into lasting autobiographical narratives. Further, our early understanding of the self and language, both essential for organizing and anchoring memories, is still developing. This "infantile amnesia" is common across cultures and even other mammals, suggesting it's a fundamental aspect of brain development, not simply a matter of repression or forgotten language.
HN commenters discuss various theories related to infantile amnesia. Some suggest it's due to the underdeveloped hippocampus and prefrontal cortex in infants, crucial for memory formation and retrieval. Others point to the lack of language skills in early childhood, hindering the encoding of memories in a narrative format. The idea that early childhood experiences are too traumatic to remember is also raised, though largely dismissed. A compelling comment thread explores the difference between episodic and semantic memory, arguing that while episodic memories (specific events) are absent, semantic memories (general knowledge) from infancy might persist. Finally, some users share personal anecdotes about surprisingly early memories, questioning the universality of infantile amnesia.
Summary of Comments ( 87 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44016621
HN users discuss the potential implications of LLMs being more persuasive than humans, expressing concern about manipulation and the erosion of trust. Some question the study's methodology, pointing out potential flaws like limited sample size and the specific tasks chosen. Others highlight the potential benefits of using LLMs for good, such as promoting public health or countering misinformation. The ethics of using persuasive LLMs are debated, with concerns raised about transparency and the need for regulation. A few comments also discuss the evolution of persuasion techniques and how LLMs might fit into that landscape.
The Hacker News post titled "LLMs are more persuasive than incentivized human persuaders" (linking to the arXiv paper "LLMs are more persuasive than incentivized human persuaders") sparked a discussion with several interesting comments.
Several commenters discussed the ethical implications of this finding. One expressed concern about the potential for misuse, particularly in manipulating vulnerable populations. They argued that the ability of LLMs to outperform humans in persuasion raises serious questions about the need for regulation and safeguards. Another commenter echoed this sentiment, pointing out the potential for LLMs to be used in propaganda and disinformation campaigns. They suggested that understanding the mechanisms by which LLMs persuade is crucial for developing countermeasures.
Another line of discussion focused on the methodology of the study. One commenter questioned the specific tasks used to measure persuasiveness, wondering if the results would generalize to other contexts. They also pointed out that the incentives provided to human persuaders might not have been strong enough, potentially skewing the comparison. Another commenter questioned the long-term effects of LLM persuasion, suggesting that the initial effectiveness might diminish over time as people become more aware of LLM-generated content.
Some comments delved into the nature of persuasion itself. One commenter argued that the study's findings highlight the superficiality of much human persuasion, suggesting that LLMs are simply exploiting common rhetorical tricks and biases. Another countered this, arguing that human persuasion is often more nuanced and relies on establishing trust and rapport, which LLMs currently lack. They suggested that future research should explore the differences between LLM and human persuasion in more depth.
A few commenters also discussed the potential benefits of LLM persuasion. One suggested that LLMs could be used for prosocial purposes, such as promoting healthy behaviors or encouraging civic engagement. Another pointed out that understanding how LLMs persuade could help humans become better communicators.
Finally, some commenters offered more speculative thoughts. One wondered if the study's findings imply that LLMs possess a form of "intelligence" related to social manipulation. Another speculated about the future of human-LLM interaction, suggesting that we might increasingly rely on LLMs for advice and decision-making.
Overall, the comments on the Hacker News post reflect a mix of excitement, concern, and critical analysis regarding the implications of LLMs outperforming humans in persuasion. The discussion touches upon ethical concerns, methodological questions, and the very nature of persuasion itself.