CarelessSmirch

I think there are two unethical aspects to this: Firstly, less money spent will harm the economy, and, secondly, if lots of people do it, the system will adjust to lower salaries until it is not feasible anymore, i.e. this cheatcode depends on most other people still working their entire lives and constantly spending lots of their incomes.

Such intrinsic interest to that extent was sexually selected for, so we're doing it only because of that. That's all I'm saying.

Intrinsic motivation makes sense to learn about the world to some extent, but there was not much to learn for hunter-gatherers to survive.

I'm not smug. I'm concerned about dysregulation due to ignorance of basic motivational drives.

Long-term planning/deferred gratification. You were setting up a career as a source of status later in life.

I think it's accurate. There is no doubt about it. I also don't see that there is anything is wrong with it. I think you have simply internalized modesty memes, but that ultimately makes you ignore fundamental motivations which in turn leads to dysregulation.

You risk getting bad reputation if you don't care about your offspring and social environment. People care about their reputation to be socially included (because that enables access to sex, among other reward signals of course, but sex is the strongest).

> Obviously, you're only saying that to get laid, so who can trust you?

That's correct, but why would that reduce trust?

Either it's a flaw in the engineers (lack of social skills to admit a mistake accurately) or in the working climate (fear of unreasonable repercussion make the engineers defer disclosure of failure). I'm undecided. Eitherway it seemed surprisingly inefficient way of communicating.

Quitting is embarassing, certainly often locally a downward slope on the status landscape.

Some individuals are perhaps purely intrinsicly motivated, but I think it's a very tiny minority. I also think there is a good chance that intrinsic motivation itself is a status enhancing adaptation, evolved by runaway selection. So ultimately, you are executing this adaptation whether you want or not, much like this fish carefully creating beautiful patterns in the sand, not knowing why he is doing it. It's all about sex.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B91tozyQs9M

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisherian_runaway

Most normal people decide at some point that math is not for them in order not to embarrass themselves by claiming competence in a domain in which they are not confident at all. And hence, compared to nerds or seriously talented individuals who can confidently claim this status, they never spend much time on math and eventually seriously lack skills even in simple logical reasoning. This is basically math anxiety. Nerds, on the other hand, are incentivized to gain social status via math skills as a potential escape of their low status. I think this mainly explains the author's observations that these two skills are not correlated very much, basically an introversion vs extroversion polarization based on social expectations and incentives. Math is also intimidating, so I'd imagine someone with some experience in it also develops overall higher inhibition and hence is a worse verbalizer.

There is a huge literature on the relation between logical reasoning and verbalizing, which the author sadly ignores.

On the upside, the dying process of oxygen deprivation seems to be quick and painless.

https://jme.bmj.com/content/36/3/174

Would someone be willing to provide a brief summary for those who cannot watch the video at the moment?

What does your magit workflow look like?