<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Tale Of Two Tradeoffs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html</link>
	<description>Overcoming Bias is economist Robin Hanson’s blog, on honesty, signaling, disagreement, forecasting, and the far future.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Mar 2010 03:04:37 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Overcoming Bias: Near and Far Thinking &#124; danielmiessler.com</title>
		<link>http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-434988</link>
		<dc:creator>Overcoming Bias: Near and Far Thinking &#124; danielmiessler.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 05:51:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-434988</guid>
		<description>[...] Near and Far Thinking (A Tale of Two Tradeoffs) &#124; overcomingbias.com ] Related PostsOvercoming Bias: Show-Off BiasOvercoming Bias: Semantic [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Near and Far Thinking (A Tale of Two Tradeoffs) | overcomingbias.com ] Related PostsOvercoming Bias: Show-Off BiasOvercoming Bias: Semantic [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Overcoming Bias : Fear of Near Death Thoughts</title>
		<link>http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-434349</link>
		<dc:creator>Overcoming Bias : Fear of Near Death Thoughts</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 04:31:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-434349</guid>
		<description>[...] would succeed a lot more.  Instead, however, we fear thinking about our own death, especially in near mode.  Near mode favors practical analytical reasoning, while far mode favors symbolic creative [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] would succeed a lot more.  Instead, however, we fear thinking about our own death, especially in near mode.  Near mode favors practical analytical reasoning, while far mode favors symbolic creative [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Overcoming Bias : This is the Dream Time</title>
		<link>http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-433814</link>
		<dc:creator>Overcoming Bias : This is the Dream Time</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 17:21:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-433814</guid>
		<description>[...] a near mode designed more for practical concrete reasoning about things up close, and a far mode designed more for presenting a good image to others via our abstract reasoning about things far away.  But our [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] a near mode designed more for practical concrete reasoning about things up close, and a far mode designed more for presenting a good image to others via our abstract reasoning about things far away.  But our [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Just how many people are you, anyway? &#171; Robert Wiblin</title>
		<link>http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-432345</link>
		<dc:creator>Just how many people are you, anyway? &#171; Robert Wiblin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Sep 2009 02:55:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-432345</guid>
		<description>[...] Robin Hanson proposes that the image and action parts of the brain are more integrated and different triggers [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Robin Hanson proposes that the image and action parts of the brain are more integrated and different triggers [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick Tarleton</title>
		<link>http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-388676</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Tarleton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 20:30:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-388676</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t know what happened there - the URL was http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12971028 .
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know what happened there &#8211; the URL was <a href="http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12971028" rel="nofollow">http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12971028</a> .</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick Tarleton</title>
		<link>http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-388675</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick Tarleton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 25 Jan 2009 20:29:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-388675</guid>
		<description>This sounds like an example:
&lt;a href=&#039;http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12971028&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Why people procrastinate &#124; Motivating minds &#124; The Economist&lt;/a&gt;
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This sounds like an example:<br />
<a href='http://www.economist.com/science/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12971028" rel="nofollow">Why people procrastinate | Motivating minds | The Economist</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aron</title>
		<link>http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-388674</link>
		<dc:creator>Aron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Jan 2009 13:46:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-388674</guid>
		<description>&quot;I expect we have a continuum of systems for varying levels of detail.&quot;

Is this supportable? We expect memory and expertise to be encoded in a connectionist fashion. How unfortunate it would be to have to continuously transfer these memories to new systems (read: new areas of the brain) as more detail is made available or our interest in the subject increases. A property of all learning is starting with little detail and going to more detail. Our minds will be optimized for that pattern. In your description this learning process cuts across systems every time.

My opinion here is that near/far (really just concrete/abstract) are a matter really of amount of resources devoted, which in turn is a function of the details available to consume and whether the problem merits the effort. However, it&#039;s all applied on the same basic machinery. If abstract thinking is as far as you get on a subject it is either because:
a) You are unwilling to process the details available.
b) There are no details available.
c) You are unwilling to make-up details.
d) The subject is too complex for you (your concrete conclusions repeatedly fail verification)

The bias towards image making rather than accurate projection of current behavior in far-off descriptions of self is real but seems to require a different explanation. We admit that to synch these up is a hard problem and that may be precisely why it exists. Eating pizza today does not directly falsify the goal to be skinny.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;I expect we have a continuum of systems for varying levels of detail.&#8221;</p>
<p>Is this supportable? We expect memory and expertise to be encoded in a connectionist fashion. How unfortunate it would be to have to continuously transfer these memories to new systems (read: new areas of the brain) as more detail is made available or our interest in the subject increases. A property of all learning is starting with little detail and going to more detail. Our minds will be optimized for that pattern. In your description this learning process cuts across systems every time.</p>
<p>My opinion here is that near/far (really just concrete/abstract) are a matter really of amount of resources devoted, which in turn is a function of the details available to consume and whether the problem merits the effort. However, it&#8217;s all applied on the same basic machinery. If abstract thinking is as far as you get on a subject it is either because:<br />
a) You are unwilling to process the details available.<br />
b) There are no details available.<br />
c) You are unwilling to make-up details.<br />
d) The subject is too complex for you (your concrete conclusions repeatedly fail verification)</p>
<p>The bias towards image making rather than accurate projection of current behavior in far-off descriptions of self is real but seems to require a different explanation. We admit that to synch these up is a hard problem and that may be precisely why it exists. Eating pizza today does not directly falsify the goal to be skinny.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robin Hanson</title>
		<link>http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-388673</link>
		<dc:creator>Robin Hanson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Jan 2009 12:40:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-388673</guid>
		<description>Thanos, I expect we have a continuum of systems for varying levels of detail.  I&#039;ve tried to write everything to be consistent with that.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanos, I expect we have a continuum of systems for varying levels of detail.  I&#8217;ve tried to write everything to be consistent with that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marshall</title>
		<link>http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-388672</link>
		<dc:creator>Marshall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Jan 2009 11:24:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-388672</guid>
		<description>A lovely post!
My own conclusion is that&quot; getting things right&quot; is much more important than &quot;being seen as nice&quot;. Decisions are more important than image. And then I think both systems (near and far) can be used. A map of the underground is a wonderful example of &quot;sparse thinking&quot; and it is at the same time wonderfully useful in the near decison of which platform to stand on.
Thus I would agree with Hal, that the issue of tortue (in this context) is image and should be rejected as a near solution to the question Retired posed on how to use the model in practice. When Hal ends his post with &quot;IMO&quot; this should be regarded as a social (far) signal of near/decisional modesty. When Retired ends his post with &quot;IMO&quot; this should be regarded as a social signal of social imodesty.
In other words my answer to your question, Retired, is to throw away the harvesting of social benefits.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A lovely post!<br />
My own conclusion is that&#8221; getting things right&#8221; is much more important than &#8220;being seen as nice&#8221;. Decisions are more important than image. And then I think both systems (near and far) can be used. A map of the underground is a wonderful example of &#8220;sparse thinking&#8221; and it is at the same time wonderfully useful in the near decison of which platform to stand on.<br />
Thus I would agree with Hal, that the issue of tortue (in this context) is image and should be rejected as a near solution to the question Retired posed on how to use the model in practice. When Hal ends his post with &#8220;IMO&#8221; this should be regarded as a social (far) signal of near/decisional modesty. When Retired ends his post with &#8220;IMO&#8221; this should be regarded as a social signal of social imodesty.<br />
In other words my answer to your question, Retired, is to throw away the harvesting of social benefits.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thanos</title>
		<link>http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-388671</link>
		<dc:creator>Thanos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Jan 2009 03:54:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://prod.ob.trike.com.au/2009/01/a-tale-of-two-tradeoffs.html#comment-388671</guid>
		<description>What of the intermediary decision zone between near and far? e.g. We often make quite detailed plans for vacations and decisions about them having only fuzzy, limited details and vague notions of what we think we would like. Compare to Chess or Go strategy with their opening, middle game, and end game, or even to Delany&#039;s concept of thinking borrowed from earth science: simplex, complex, multiplex.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What of the intermediary decision zone between near and far? e.g. We often make quite detailed plans for vacations and decisions about them having only fuzzy, limited details and vague notions of what we think we would like. Compare to Chess or Go strategy with their opening, middle game, and end game, or even to Delany&#8217;s concept of thinking borrowed from earth science: simplex, complex, multiplex.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
