“Considerate Content” Pitch

Reading time (200 wpm): 2 minutes

There should be better ways to communicate with people of different beliefs and backgrounds. Many books, speeches, and videos only manage to speak to a small percentage of people out there, despite the quality of their content or their authors’ desire to reach as broad of an audience as possible. Previously, the limitations of these static and linear forms of media have been a necessary trade-off to create content that is easily reproducible and digestible. However, with digital tools that manage the presentation and linkage of information, that may no longer be the case. 

What I envision are forms of media that are able to present different arguments with respect to the perspectives of a wide range of people. These media forms might be like the ideal restaurant, whose menu is able to satisfy the palate of most customers that walk in, compared to the one-trick pony of a street food stall. Or like a discussion you’re about to have with a stranger on a particular topic. Would your game plan for that conversation be to just disregard the other person’s responses and stick to an exact, pre-written script? No, you’re not some pre-recorded message. More likely your conversation would ebb and flow as the dialogue developed. In case I’m being unclear, here’s a limited but concrete example of this idea. Imagine something like a digital Choose Your Own Adventure Book. However, instead of supporting the reader’s autonomy in the context of a fictional scenario, however, it will be as they engage with a particular idea or argument.

A key component that would make this media more novel and worthwhile compared to the example given above (which might end up feeling more like interacting with an automated customer service chatbot) is that they also ought to be, to some extent, transparent and navigable. With this, the reader’s experience can be self-directed and more compelling. Ideas and concepts are signaled in advance, empowering the reader to skip over well-trodden arguments at will. Ultimately, the truly curious reader could also explore the experience of engaging with the idea as though they held a different set of views than their own.

I hope you now have a good idea of what I’m looking for, though this concept may not be as feasible or as effective as I imagine. If you know of anyone looking at this topic, I would truly appreciate it if you could let me know. I’d love to get in contact with them and assist them somehow. Thank you for your time.

Never Split the Difference by Chris Voss with Tahl Raz – Reflection

Book Reflection Overview

I’ll write my General Impression of the book first, followed by a Book Breakdown which briefly and loosely describes what occurs chapter by chapter and/or section by section. Then I’ll write down any Stray Musings I might have. These three initial sections of the reflection will be the only ones explicitly written with the general public (especially those who have not yet read this book) in mind. The Takeaway section after will be written mostly for me but could hold some value for others who have read the book. However, as the section’s title implies, do not think that this even covers all the major topics and concepts presented in the book. I’m only writing down here what I wish to retain. The Connections section is where I write down thoughts I had about the book in relation to other materials I’ve learned or read. If you know the two works there might be an interesting nugget for you in there and, if not, perhaps you’ll uncover a nice new thing to experience. Then I might write one or more special sections if the book calls for it. Lastly, I’ll write down whatever thoughts I had about the process of writing this up in my Reflection Reflection.

General Impression

The first things I think about Never Split the Difference are how well-suited it is for mass consumption and how, in my view, it exists as a more tactical companion book to Dale Carnegie’s classic How to Win Friends and Influence People. In comparison, it’s perhaps not quite an all-time classic due to a bit of structural funkiness but I would strongly recommend reading it nonetheless. There’s plenty of wisdom within its pages and the abundance of anecdotes really hammers home the messages in the book. This might be a bit repetitive or tedious for some but, for others reading more casually, it could be a major boon to their understanding of both the underlying concepts and when they’re applicable.

Book Breakdown

• Chapter 1 | The New Rules: Establishes a lot of context. Who Chris Voss is and what he’s done (negotiated down a lot of hostage-takers) so you know why you should trust him. How both the academic study of negotiation and the practical field of hostage negotiation tactics each came about and then developed. Why you should become a better negotiator. What the structure of the book will be.
• Chapter 2 | Be a Mirror: Talks about how to keep things steady and friendly in a discussion, using your voice and choice of language to establish positive feelings while actively listening
• Chapter 3 | Don’t Feel Their Pain, Label It: Talks about the use of labeling to reaffirm positive feelings and dispel negative ones
• Chapter 4 | Beware “Yes” – Master “No”: Talks about getting comfortable with hearing “no” and in fact pursuing it in order to support your counterpart’s autonomy rather than being misled with a fake “yes”
• Chapter 5 | Trigger the Two Words that Immediately Transform Any Negotiation: Talks about the use of summarizing and paraphrasing in order to really demonstrate your active listening and get people “on the same side” to a certain extent
• Chapter 6 | Bend Their Reality: Discusses some aspects of presenting the situation such that the options you offer are attractive to your counterpart
• Chapter 7 | Create The Illusion of Control: Digs deep into calibrated “how” and “what” questions which gently pull your counterpart to coming over to your side through their own thoughts
• Chapter 8 | Guarantee Execution: Covers some pitfalls and tactics to get around those when one approaches the stage of actually executing an agreed-upon deal
• Chapter 9 | Bargain Hard: Goes over the brass-tacks of tough negotiating after all the rapport has been built and information gathered
• Chapter 10 | Find the Black Swan: Mixed with the actual conclusion of the book, this chapter touches on the unknown unknowns and the importance of expecting, seeking, and uncovering the game-changing information that will turn the negotiation on its head

Stray Musings

It’s a loose notion but I can imagine most/all communication with humans is a form of negotiation. It’s just that at times you want more concrete (and emotionally charged) things from people – an item, to make a sale, your son back, etc.

I wonder what negotiations might look like if/when many more people are familiar with these tactics or this “meta” of negotiation. However, Chris Voss does relate a story where even he, experienced as he is, got totally taken in by one of his colleagues at his organization with the same “Mirroring” tactic he discussed in one of the very first chapters. The negotiation style as a whole is compared to various “gentle” martial arts such as tai chi, judo, and perhaps even jiu-jitsu (which I think would be a very appropriate analogy) several times throughout the book and, like those martial arts, the techniques probably remain effective due to the realities of the human body (including mind) even if one is facing another skilled practitioner.

What am I taking away from this book?

Humans, your frequent negotiation partners, are:

• Savvy
  • Therefore, do not be tempted by false “Yesses” and diversionary “You’re Rights”
  • Their pronoun use can tend to be the opposite of reality of their importance
  • Might lie to you – some indications:
    • Overuse of 3rd person pronouns and a tendency to not use “I”
    • (Perhaps unconscious) Overuse larger words and more complex sentences to be convincing
  • Can appreciate when you get the worst out of the way with an Accusation Audit of what the worst, most extreme things they could think about you are
    • “This is a lousy deal. You’re going to think I’m a terrible businessman. You may feel like we’ve treated you unfairly.
  • Might claim that they’re offering something “fair” which doesn’t seem so to you
    • You could claim in response that it seems like they’re ready to explain how it’s fair
  • They might try to hide information that they think will negatively affect the deal or their intended outcome, including what their true willingness actually is
  • They might say “I’ll try” or “You’re right” in order to bury the issue and move on without an intent to execute. However, it’s hard to fake conviction or repeatedly lie. Find ways to test their commitment without being overbearing (vary your language and your level of specificity)
    • You might want to ask them “How” they are going to make this deal work out too
      • This could be the third confirmation from them, after first their initial agreement and then asking them if your summary of the deal (perhaps from their view) sounds right to them
• Want to feel in control
  • Can appreciate responding to an incorrect Label or saying “no”
  • Would like to hear “I’m sorry” from you
  • Wants to have time to think and process your words or to just speak
  • Can appreciate hearing about your own deadline, so they can actually manage to cut a deal – if a deal is good, it’s worse for them (as well as you) if they don’t manage to cut it
  • You might want to establish that you’re looking for to treat them fairly and they can let you know if they feel like something is unfair
  • Might want to feel like they’ve squeezed you for value (see Ackerman Bargaining)
• Want to feel understood, acknowledged, and appreciated
  • Can enjoy their words being Mirrored to them
  • Can enjoy minimal encouragement: “Mmm” “Yea” “I see” “Right”
  • Can appreciate a correct label being applied
  • Can appreciate their argument or viewpoint being summarized
  • Are connected to when they say “That’s Right” instead of “You’re Right”
  • Might feel something is not “fair”
    • In which case you should reiterate that you want things to be fair and suggest we should go back to where the unfairness is
  • Might appreciate you more if they know they have common ground with you
• Vague
  • They might not be clear (with their words or in general) about what they really want or need or what’s affecting them
  • Will say “no” when they have other things in mind e.g. “This doesn’t quite work for me,” “I need to consult someone,” “I’m uncomfortable”
• Reactive
  • Doesn’t like loss – can they somehow come to understand what they stand to lose from this incomplete deal?
  • If you get them to say “Yes,” they might be feeling like they want to say “No”
  • Defensiveness can be triggered towards the status quo, impelling change “Why would you leave behind your old management software?” or “Have you given up on this project?”
  • Once again, the Accusation Audit must be brought up. You present an extreme negative view of yourself/the situation (especially if you suggest that it’s a view they hold) and their reaction is to pull back or reject that due to empathy – “No, we don’t think you’re an asshole.”
  • Can be pressured by deadlines, real and perceived
  • Respond to odd or strange numbers with more credibility than round numbers
  • Respond well to reasonable tones with a “because” explanation, even if the explanations is not very logical e.g. “Can I use the printer first because I need to print 5 pages?”
• Is embedded in complex contexts
  • They might work in a team and asking the right questions might reveal deal-killing issues bubbling under the surface of what seems like a simple two-party negotiation
  • Have reasons for what they’re doing (both to our benefit or not) – maybe not good reasons, but reasons nonetheless
    • For example, they might have bad information, misunderstood aims, or are working under unknown constraints
• The reasons why a deal won’t or shouldn’t work out for your counterpart are far more important usually than why they would make the deal so it’s most important to uncover and address those negative reasons

You, a good negotiator, are often:

• Genuine
  • Lean into your nature as someone who’s either Assertive, an Analyst, or an Accommodator
  • Will seek to speak in-person in order to communicate best with both able to speak with tone, facial expressions, and body language
  • Smile
  • Will humanize myself – “I’m Evan”
  • Can show frustration/anger when it arises but at the situation/deal… but not at your counterpart
• Curious and Sensitive
  • Listen actively
  • Don’t stay committed to ideas, realize the complexity of your counterparts and the world
  • Focus on getting the negatives out in the open so they can be addressed
  • Labels interesting conversational “It seems like…”
  • Can define your counterpart’s desires by discovering their boundaries and what they don’t want
  • Stays observant before and after the “negotiation” happens
  • Reviews what they’ve heard from their counterpart, perhaps in a team
• Calm and Calming
  • Voice: frequently positive; at times slow, deep, and downward when wanting to authoritatively but gently establish a point; rarely direct
  • Has time as your ally. Look to slow things down. Pause to give time to counterpart to react and respond to labels, summaries, firm statements, etc. instead of going on to the next point
  • Don’t get emotional and reactive
  • Don’t feel pressured by deadlines
  • Is not needy and is ready to walk from an unfavorable deal
• Vague
  • Offer price ranges
  • “It seems like…”
• Intent and, when necessary, Firm
  • Once again, the slow and deep “DJ Voice” for when a statement that shall brook no argument must be made
  • Knows how to say “no” without saying “no” for as long as possible while also doing things such as showing appreciation, showing monetary appeasement, showing regret
    • 1) “How am I supposed to do that?”
    • 2) “Your offer is very generous, I’m sorry, that just doesn’t work for me.”
    • 3) “I’m sorry but I’m afraid I just can’t do that.”
    • 4) “I’m sorry, no.”
  • Asks Calibrated Questions to have your counterpart address your problems/issues
    • “How…?” “What…?” and rarely “Why…?” (if pushback is desired)
    • Not close-ended questions “Can…?” “Does…?” “Is…?” or concrete ones “Who…?” “When…?” “Where…?”
    • Offers paths forward while your partner leads the way
• Prepared
  • Is aware of what Leverage either counterpart might have on another
    • Positive: The ability to provide what their counterpart wants
    • Negative: The ability to harm their counterpart (their reputation, their worries)
      • Often should only be alluded to in very subtle and indirect manners
    • Normative: The pull of their own (professed) beliefs based on their identities (social, professional, religious, national) – people rarely want to appear hypocritical or fake
  • Might prepare a One Sheet for a negotiation:
    • Think about worst/best, write down the best (your ideal) in a sentence
    • Summarize the situation (aim for that’s right)
    • Accusation Audit + Labeled statements answering those accusations
    • Calibrated Questions ahead of time to avoid problems
      • Deal-killing issues – “What are we up against here?”
      • Behind-the-table deal killers – “How does this affect the rest of your team?”
      • Goals/questions – “What are we trying to accomplish?” – “What’s the core issue here?” – “How is that worthwhile?”
    • Non-monetary offers (good and token)
  • Can use Ackerman Bargaining when going after nitty gritty number deals
    • 65, 85, 95, 100 of targeted number. Empathy, variable “no”s, precise and strange numbers for a final amount perhaps with a token nonmonetary item
• Flexible and can get over yourself
  • Able to put aside internal issues that might get in the way of negotiation at a moment’s notice: your harmful emotional reactions; your preconceived notions (known knowns); your arguments, strategies, and plans that aren’t working; your view of how the world works; your moral matrices/views of what’s righteous; etc.
  • Can deal with all sorts of people
    • Analysts: Skeptical, sensitive to reciprocity, take their time. Be patient with them, don’t overload with questions, be clear
    • Accommodators: May make promises they can’t deliver. May not bring out the negatives that harm the chances of the deal or their own objections because they “want to get along”
    • Assertives: Love to be heard, love their own viewpoint, love winning, love achievement, love getting it done (so, more practical perhaps than a perfection-seeking Analyst). Might not be willing to listen to you unless they think you understand their viewpoints and/or have been listening to their arguments. Also very sensitive to reciprocity

Connections to other Materials

Chris Voss’s insistence that good negotiators should know their counterpart’s “religion” to know what moves and influences them resembles the message from Jonathan Haidt’s The Righteous Mind that people have different moral matrices or intuitions that are the base of their behavior. They also both speak to commonalities working in favor of communication, activating a sort of tribalism.

Going further with the above comparison, the two aforementioned books (as well as James Clear’s Atomic Habits) seem to emphasize both the power and ubiquity of intuitional or “System 1” thinking.

Another Atomic Habits tidbit – compare the following quotes:

• “When the pressure is on, you don’t rise to the occasion—you fall to your highest level of preparation.” – Chris Voss
• “You do not rise to the level of your goals. You fall to the level of your systems.” – James Clear

As stated in my initial thoughts, Never Split the Difference provides more details in terms of what one should say and look out for compared to How to Win Friends and Influence People but both provide a lot of overlapping advice as well: smile, build rapport with acknowledgment and active listening, try to get to your partner’s perspective, avoid arousing their anger, and to be human/genuine. They also both use plenty of stories of their clients, students, and historical figures finding success by using the methods in the book in order to give you a vivid image and, hopefully, a gut sense for how to use these methods. Another difference, however, is that Never Split the Difference is targeted at a more specific field of communication.

One might characterize this book as opposed to Adam Grant’s Give and Take, where this book is advising you to be a better Taker when Adam Grant suggests that you be a Giver for maximum success. However, I think there are cases where the advice does ring similar. The clearest comparison is Adam Grant’s “powerless communication” which could be described in Chris Voss’s words as (perhaps unconscious or non-calibrated) use of calibrated “How”/”What” questions and good active listening. Another is in terms of trying to work with your partner against the situation (in other words, collaborate) rather than against your partner. Another is that you can still be “Giving” in this negotiation with “gifts” that are high value for your partner but low cost for you to provide and vice-versa, leading to an excellent deal for all.

Reflection Reflection (meta; probably not relevant for you)

Unfortunately, I did not manage to fully time the creation of this full reflection. The total time taken to write it completely would probably be somewhere between 5-6 hours, maybe? I’ll strive to do better with timing my writing in the future.

After giving the entire thing a reread, I’d say that I like the structure more than the first reflection and I think I’ll generally keep it and occasionally modify it.

Atomic Habits by James Clear – Reflection

Foreword

This is my first book reflection. You should expect that it’s gonna be a bit fast and loose. Also, it might be balanced too far to the “useful to me”/”just some personal notes” side of the scale than the “well-polished, intelligible, and useful to others” side.

General Impression

I really liked Atomic Habits. I think it can be a very useful book for many people and I hope that this will be true for me as well. Later on, I’ll be putting that to the test and trying to form some new atomic habits. The book starts off quite personally, with the author sharing his story of being a young man going from tragedy to triumph, allowing us to appreciate just how much he was able to benefit from his knack for forming good habits. He builds upon this personal beginning with two chapters that explain why we also ought to pay attention and learn from the book how to make effective habits for ourselves. Then there’s a chapter that goes over the four rules of building better habits (make them Obvious, Attractive, Easy, and Satisfying) and, conversely, minimizing problematic ones (Invisible, Unattractive, Difficult, and Unsatisfying). Following this initial section, there are four sections, each composed of multiple chapters and dedicated to elaborating on one of the rules (and its inverse). The book then wraps up by having a chapter each on A) the topics of genetic dispositions in relation to habit formation and life direction, B) staying motivated and focused by sticking to the right difficulty level, and C) what one has to be wary of when it comes to building strong habits and identities. Then the book concludes.

I like some specific things about the book (the first few of which I frequently appreciate in the instructional books I’ve been reading lately):

• End-of-chapter summaries and reviews
• Previewing information that will come later in the book
• Calling back to information that has already been introduced
• Effective use of diagrams and figures
• A table with sections for the four rules that are present after each of the respective main sections and slowly gets filled out with all the major points on how to best achieve Atomic Habits
• The use of websites/links within the text make the book less likely to be out-of-date even with new data, changes in the author’s opinion, etc.
• Funny and relatable examples for information

A couple of useful and important topics were brought up but are somewhat outside the internal process of habit-formation: quantity of repetitions is one of the biggest factors in improvement and that it’s important to identify the spots where one is strong, then subsequently apply maximal effort there.

What do I want to retain from this book?

Habit Scorecard: a good exercise to analyze my day and see what I do that’s positive, negative, and neutral.

I should point and call to certain activities to enforce the good ones and also verbalize the negative effects of negative ones.

• Intention Implementations: “I will [BEHAVIOR] at [SPECIFIC CONDITION, usually TIME in LOCATION]”
• Habit Stacking: “After I [EXISTING HABIT], I will [NEW HABIT]”
• Temptation Bundling: + “After [NEW, NECESSARY HABIT], I will [REWARD/HABIT I WANT]” (could also be implemented with variable rewards)

The right culture (they do what I’m hoping to do, I have a form of connection with them), context, and environment have a strong effect on my ability to stick to certain habits. Try to think about affecting my environment in small ways to make the thing I want to do next time easier.

Habits are often associations/relationships with people, places, and things. Being in the context of new people, places, and things with their respective fresh/blank associations can often be a powerful step in changing one’s habits successfully.

Internal willpower/self-control/determination is a renewable but limited resource. It’s better to minimize those expenditures by making a small expenditure of willpower that completely changes the context to on in which it’s easier to do what needs doing (e.g. calling a taxi to bring you to the gym while you’re still groggy from getting up) or by designing your environment (phone locks, fridge locks, automatic internet shut-offs, etc.).

We have even our worst habits for a reason.

I can speed up habit formation by performing more repetitions over a smaller time frame than is “natural.” I want to drop my keys off in the bowl every evening? I can do it 10 times right now to get the ball rolling.

Utilize my own (very human) tendency for laziness/energy-efficiency/desire to maintain reputation.

Identify the critical moments that cascade into desirable vs. undesirable outcomes.

Two-Minute Rule: Do the smallest thing that approximates the goal (or the goal’s beginning) and just do that consistently. It’ll get easier and easier. Once consistent, then work on building it up.

Use technology/invest in my environment/automation tools.

Desire initiates, pleasure sustains. I should do better with tying particular bouts of effort/achievement into rewards, such as by immediately satisfying myself when I’ve accomplished a habit that I want to stick.

Track my habits to make them pleasurable.

Commitment devices, accountability partners, habit contracts.

The questions: What feels like fun to me, but like work for others? What makes me lose track of time? Where do I get greater returns than average? What comes naturally to me?

It’s about longevity/survival, one of the greatest threats to success is not failure but boredom (more generally, interruption – and boredom leads to interruption.

Don’t get too tied to habits/identity, you’ll constantly change and need to review/revise. These are tools for optimization but what is optimal one year might become suboptimal the next. Check what you’ve done every year or so and, on a similar time scale, see if you’re on a path that matches where you’d like to be going.

Connections to other Materials

Trigger Action Plans (TAPs), which I discovered from the rationalist community, are known in this book as intention implementations, habit stacking, and temptation bundling.

Warren Buffet (and/or Charlie Munger) strongly advises and attributes his success to just knowing what he’s good at, sticking to it, and being in a society that strongly rewards his form of talent in (might be the wrong term here) asset valuation.

A connection to my interest in therapy/self-compassion is James Clear’s claim that even the behaviors we don’t like or that we don’t want to do actually have justification. For each of us, they first developed and continue to exist to serve our real and human needs or, at least, our instincts – even if it’s mismatched with what’s actually good for us. In other words, it’s not “all your own fault” and the things you’re doing aren’t “completely useless.”

The practicality of religions and traditional cultures (explored in Jonathan Haidt’s, The Righteous Mind) is supported in this text by making selfish/free-riding behavior less attractive (“You’ll go to hell!”, “You’ll be reincarnated as a lower life form!”, etc.) and perhaps because they don’t need to expend as much willpower/self-control to do things that a lot of people can claim are “good” (“I’ll go to this food drive because it’s what we [religious group] do.”). Of course, the flip side of this is also supported in the last chapter’s warning that negative inclinations and identities can be just as strongly tied.

There were a number of connections with the teachings in “The Psychology of Money”:

• Compound interest/small changes (good and bad) really make a big difference over time in both our finances (with respect to savings -> investment -> return rates) and livelihood (with respect to habits/behaviors -> outcomes -> identity changes)
• You don’t want to unnecessarily interrupt the gradual process of your small changes incrementing – so don’t get overleveraged (even in rare crises) or, in your behaviors, immediately return to your planned strategy rather than continuing what could have been a singular small failure.

My Habits Scorecard

• Wake up =
• Turn off my alarm / sometimes snooze it (inconsistent) -=
• Get dressed =
• Go outside without glasses and eat a banana +
• Ingest vitamin D (inconsistent) +
• Turn on overhead/room light +
• Check communications (including social media) in case something else has come up -=
• Check manga subreddit to save updates for later reading -=
• Look at my Google Calendar/journal/project management software for the day +
  • Desire: Refer less to my journal and more to either my schedule or the project management software
• Log into EA Gather to engage in virtual co-working +
• Put phone screen side down (inconsistent) +
• Work in segments of 25-90 minutes +
• Put on white noise while working (inconsistent) +
• Take breaks (eye-rests, stretches, snacks, grooves, and chores) in between +
• Drink coffee 2 hours after I wake up +
• Dental hygiene (inconsistent) +
• Turn off light around mid-day =
• Lunch (while listening to podcasts) +=
• …
• Write my daily journal entry (gratitude/musings, ongoing topics, incoming tasks) +
• Update my calendar/project management software with tomorrow’s tasks (very inconsistent) +
• Turn off devices and overhead lights (inconsistent) +
• Read +
• Shower +
• Dental hygiene (inconsistent) +
• Go to sleep +

Let’s make some Atomic Habits!

First off, what are the habits or behaviors that I’d like to implement? On the flip side, what is troubling me or that I’d like to stop doing?

• Get back to doing Non Sleep Deep Rest (NSDR) regularly or while going to sleep
• Keep my spaces clean and organized
  • Fold and put away laundry in a more uniform manner
  • Develop Schelling spaces after I’ve moved
• I’d like to update my structures with tomorrow’s tasks more consistently
• I’d like to turn off devices and overhead lights more consistently
• I’d like to ingest Vitamin D more consistently
• I’d like to put white noise on more consistently
• Before writing up a journal entry for my current time period, I want to review my journal entry for the previous one

Now that we have that list, let’s explore how we’re going to use the tools we’ve learned about to address each one of these points!

• Get back to doing Non Sleep Deep Rest (NSDR) regularly or while going to sleep
  • When I get into bed, I’ll make it obvious (and perhaps a bit attractive) by reciting the phrase: “I’m going to sleep and I’ll sleep better by starting off with an NDSR protocol.”
• Keep my spaces clean and organized
  • Two-Minute Rule (Easy): Clean up just one thing per day
• Fold and put away laundry promptly
  • Obvious/Attractive: Put the laundry close to me in a way that hampers my movement so I’ll want to put the laundry away
• Develop Schelling spaces after I’ve moved
  • Accountability partner: Tell my mother I’m going to make Schelling spaces and she’ll check on me to see if I’ve done so during one of our calls – failing to live up to my promise will be unattractive
• I’d like to update my structures with tomorrow’s tasks more consistently
  • Satisfying: Use a habit tracker and mark down every time I journal and then update my calendar + project manager
• I’d like to turn off devices and overhead lights more consistently
  • Two-Minute Rule (Easy): Get up from my chair at 10 o’clock each night
• I’d like to ingest Vitamin D more consistently
  • Obvious/Easy: Leave my pills in front of my keyboard when I go to sleep so they’re right there when I start getting to work
• I’d like to put white noise on more consistently
  • Obvious/Easy: Have Spotify open up automatically when I boot up my computer
• Before writing up a journal entry for my current time period, I want to review my journal entry for the previous one
  • To make writing difficult, I’ll remove my hands from the keyboard and put them into my lap after opening up my journal

And those are all the changes I’ll start with in my quest to have excellent Atomic Habits. I imagine this article is not too useful for people who have not yet read the book but do let me know if you have any comments either way. Have a good one.

Starting With the Man in the Mirror

Read further if you’re interested in learning about Evan Chu as he was on the date of this post.

Perhaps you already have your own idea of who I am, perhaps not at all. I’m going to write a little bit about how I view myself and I hope this gives you a clearer idea of who I am. I’ve chosen to present this as an interview (separated into specific sections to which you can scroll) between myself and myself due to inspiration from “Teaching to Transgress” by bell hooks, my desire to experiment with a writing framework I haven’t used before, and because I believe that I currently communicate more strongly in a conversational style as opposed to a presentational one. Action!

Introduction

EC: I’m here with today’s guest Evan Chu. Evan, I’ll start with one of my typical questions – how’s your energy today?

Evan: Well, I’d say it’s good. I’m a little unsettled-feeling, perhaps. I’ve been slightly anxious regarding my level of productivity recently – and I’m worried I might type the wrong thing here.

EC: I see, I see. Hey, thanks for sharing. And I wouldn’t worry too much about saying the wrong thing. Just let the words flow out naturally and the crew will have plenty of opportunities to fix anything egregious in post, alright? Now, just to give you and the audience a preview of the upcoming conversation, Evan, I’m looking to give you the opportunity to speak on the following subjects: your Background, your Current State, any Short-Term Plans you have, what your Desires are more broadly speaking, and, finally, any Open Questions that you have at this time in your life. Sound good?

Evan: Yeah, sounds good.

---

Reading time (200 words per minute)
Background: 4 minutes
Current State: 9 minutes
Short-Term Plans: 3 minutes
Desires: 5 minutes
Open Questions: 11 minutes
Total: 32 minutes

---

Background

EC: Excellent. So, right now we’re here in Montréal, Québec but I am told that you were born in California. Do you mind walking us through how you ended up from the Golden State to here?

Evan: No problem. Well, I was originally born to two Chinese Canadians who had moved down to California for work. I enjoyed a good childhood. I was privileged to not be deprived of food, shelter, or entertainment at any point in my youth. I was an avid reader of fiction (still am to this day), a watcher of cartoons (ditto), and I enjoyed playing with Legos which, for better or worse, did not end up becoming an adult pastime. While I remember certain details I can’t exactly picture any scenes from my childhood and the idea that I have of myself as a child is largely formed by the accounts of how I was from others. So, one of the things I often find myself saying is that I don’t remember too much of my childhood. At the same time, though, maybe my standards are too high for what counts as childhood memories. And I’m possibly overestimating the vividness of what other people are able to remember. Or… perhaps not?

EC: Perhaps not. And, so, why’d you move up to Canada? Family? Work? To get away from the politics down in the States?

[cheeky look to the audience; studio laughter edited in]

Evan: Ah, uh – sorry. Let me backtrack a bit, ’cause it wasn’t just a straight move from California to Québec. First, in middle school, I spent a year in Spain. That was really impactful – helped me learn Spanish which in turn has helped me learn French up here in Québec. Then, for high school, I ended up moving across the States to North Carolina, which is also where I attended college. In those times, I’d say that I was generally lost and pretty uncritical of my aims and also the whole, you know, “arc” of my life. I’m reading the book Atomic Habits right now – really great book, by the way – and, to borrow James Clear’s terminology, I had the double whammy of having neither outcomes nor identity acting as the foundation for healthy habits. Anyways, I didn’t really have any plans for what to do immediately coming out of college, so I ended up moving back in with my mother for a short period. I ended up learning a bit about web development to help her with managing the website of one of her initiatives during that time. And, when I heard that my uncle was getting quite a bit sicker from early on-set dementia and absent any other direction in my life, I ended up moving to Montréal to assist my extended family in giving care to my uncle.

EC: Ah – wow – sorry to hear that happened to your family. … Well, I’m glad that you were able to do that for them at least. And, now that you’re here, how’s life been for you? Are you still a caregiver?

Evan: No, not anymore. At a certain point, my uncle’s condition meant it wasn’t really feasible for him to stay with the family anymore and so he was moved to a residence. When my uncle no longer needed help in his daily routines, I ended up deciding that, while personal caregiving was suitable for my loved ones, I wasn’t suitable for the profession in general. And so… I had to look for other work. Now, at that point in my life, I was pretty into board games and roleplaying games. I went to game-related Meetups and I eventually became friends with the owner of a friendly local game store. He saw me playing solo games of Terraforming Mars in his shop and invited me to join his playing group. So, once I was no longer a caregiver, I offered my services to him and started working at Three Kings Loot. About a year into the job, COVID hit. We rolled with the punches though and, in the process, I became store manager. But, eventually, I decided I wanted to make some changes in my life and also to intentionally pursue directions that I feel contribute more to civilization. You know, there are elements of Elon Musk’s behavior that I find suspect, and I’m sure there are biases in this portrayal, but I honestly took a lot of direction and inspiration from what I consider to be a pretty good article and visual model on how the man thinks. So I left the store at the end of 2021 once I felt it was in a good spot to adapt to future challenges without my help. And so that’s where I am today: I’m looking for work and starting up some other projects – like this blog, for example.

Current State

EC: Alright. So, the current Evan of today is looking for work. How’s that going for you?

Evan: Ah, it’s going “fine.” I’ve been somewhat selective in terms of the organizations to which I’m applying, keeping in mind the words of Warren Buffett: “Go to work for whomever you admire the most.” Now, my mind isn’t anywhere near being made up in terms of whom I actually admire the most, but I have really been taking the time to look into these organizations and to stick to only applying for organizations whose meanings I could actually feel resonate with mine. I could be wrong but I think I’m producing higher-quality applications than I would have otherwise – you know, if I were operating with lower standards? So far, I’ve really just been seeking operations and operations-adjacent positions – not because I’m certain that that’s what would be best for me to do in the long term but because it’s what I can speak to strongly during interviews and I think they’re the functions in which I’ll be most effective in the short term. Based on the job descriptions I’ve been seeing, a good number of the responsibilities do reflect my experience as a store manager and I’m honestly just keen on getting the ball rolling: making immediate and meaningful contributions and building my skills and connections at the same time. Plus, like many, I’m not exactly certain where I want my career to end up so I’m in need of more information and more perspectives from others. Then I’ll be able to better evaluate my own career and steer it in the right directions. The organizations I’ve applied to so far have been Carbon180, the Centre for Effective Altruism, the Aspen Institute – Aspen Digital Program, Rethink Priorities, the Centre for the Governance of AI, the Ford Foundation, Anthropic, and Open Philanthropy. Also, I was meaning to apply to the Clean Air Task Force but the applications ended up closing for the position I was interested in and, honestly, after I saw the person they ended up hiring and how qualified they were, I’m pretty sure I would not have gotten too far in that particular recruitment process. Almost all of these opportunities were ones posted on the 80,000 Hours Job Board but I’m trying to further diversify my search process. All those positions are quite prominent and, as a result, competitive. Some people might say “Evan, have more confidence in yourself” but I’d like to think I’m just acknowledging how well-respected these organizations really are and also recognizing the caliber of the people applying themselves and trying to make the kinds of difference we both agree are positive. At any rate, I’ve had some invitations, some rejections, and, of course, some non-responses. So, yeah, to sum it all up I’d say the job search is going pretty regularly and that I believe I’ve got a decent process – and that it’s improving.

EC: It does sound like you’ve got a pretty solid game plan going on. So, you said your process is improving – how exactly is it improving?

Evan: Yeah, well, I think that it’s improving because I’m putting out more applications and going through them a bit faster. And I feel like I’m still maintaining a high quality of work in my cover letters and answers. Also, the whole process does feel a bit more manageable now that I’m more familiar with writing applications, corresponding with evaluators, speaking in interviews – all that stuff. On that note, I’ve really been helped out by friends and family that have given me some great perspectives and insights about how I can best share my strong points. … Now that you mention it, though, it’d probably be useful to block out some time to evaluate and more deeply consider how my application process is going. I’ll write that down in my calendar to tackle in the next couple of weeks. I can’t really take care of it immediately, even though it’d probably be pretty useful to do, as I’m sorta “busy.”

EC: Oh – what are you busy with? Do you have a part-time job?

Evan: No, no, nothing like that. Well… I’ve started this blog, for one. Uh, running down the list of other stuff I do every week: I like listening to a lot of different types of music; I’ll often be dancing freestyle at the same time (that’s by far my biggest hobby since I spend 10 hours, at least, on it every week); then, to improve my dancing and for general health purposes I also do a little bit of stretching and resistance training; I’ll try to journal pretty much every day in the evening; I read books, manga, and web serials; take some time to learn new stuff – previously it was Python, right now it’s this “Economics of AI” course on Coursera; I’ve been doing a little bit of volunteer work for The Center for Election Science; watch some Youtube and Netflix on occasion; watch movies with friends/family; play games with friends some times; code on the side a teensy bit; and I attend Regeneration Pollination about once a month in order to get to know people doing interesting sustainability/permaculture work.

EC: Those do sound like pretty full days. And, with all that, are you happy with how your life’s going?

Evan: In some cases – yes, in some cases – no. Many more yesses than nos compared to previous years. I think it depends on the day. I believe there are a lot of opportunities for me out there and I do have security in my life thanks to my privileged background. But with those opportunities and security also comes uncertainty. And with uncertainty, there comes a certain level of anxiety. Am I aimed correctly? Am I executing well? Am I working hard? Or am I wasting (too much) time? Am I good enough to (and for) the people around me? Am I in the right spaces and contexts? Just how blind am I, exactly, to the traits and behaviors that I’m unconsciously maintaining and are keeping me from being the person I aspire to be?

EC: Evan, you and I both know I’m not trying to be rude when I say this but we also both know that those questions and underlying doubts aren’t… really that important. They’re only worth the time and energy in pretty specific modes of thought and only up to a certain point. You seem to be pretty far away from either. Anyways, sorry for interjecting. I’m the one who’s supposed to be interviewing you and getting your thoughts. Not the other way around. Back to the topic at hand, do you have anything else you want to share with us about your current state?

Evan: Hey, no, it’s alright. Honestly, I appreciate those reassurances and it’s important for you to be able to be present in this space too. Well, as you might be able to tell from how I’ve been talking, I’m recovering from some previous low self-esteem. I’m making good progress but, sometimes, negative thoughts do pursue me still. Anyways, because of my improved self-esteem, I’m taking the time to speak to my extended family a bit more; rekindling those relationships I’ve neglected. Simultaneously, I’ve been taking the time to have good moments with people that I’ve connected with in Montréal since I’ll be moving this summer back to the States. Ah, before I forget, one critical aspect of my better mental health is that I’m following a pretty good set of protocols I’ve curated for myself from the information shared on the Huberman Lab Podcast: I immediately go outside for some sun and exercise after I wake up to get my daily cortisol kicking in, I drink a daily coffee about two hours after I wake up, I put on white noise while working or learning, I go outside in the evenings to get some more light from the setting sun which is supposed to “lock-in” my circadian rhythm and make me less sensitive to post-sunset light, and at 10 at night I’ll turn off all devices/bright overhead lights in order to encourage my body to get to bed.

EC: Hey, that’s pretty good! So, if you’re going to bed at 10, you gotta be getting up at, like, 6 or so every day, huh?

Evan: Well… I’m still working on making it permanent. I have a few slip-ups here and there with getting those devices off each night. And even when I do, I still stay up until about 11:30-midnight. But instead of doing anything online, I’m either reading physical books with some smaller room lamps or I’ll be stretching or showering. So, actually, around 8 is when I’m really getting up these days.

EC: Huh. Well, not as impressive but still good. Anyways, we’re just about wrapped up with this section but – really quickly – are there any other things that you might like people to know if they were meeting you for the first time or about how to interact with you in general?

Evan: Yeah, sure. First off, you’ll probably have to get used to some amount of puns being generated while talking to me. I love wordplay. Second, I’d like to encourage everyone to be quite frank with me. From what I can tell, I have a pretty good handle on my emotions and I know how to appreciate other people’s honest or raw perspectives. And, if I’m not actually as even-keeled or grateful as I think I am, I’m definitely interested in getting better and it’ll be a good opportunity for me to practice. Another thing about me is that I prefer getting into the details when thinking by myself or in conversations with others. And, related to that, I can sometimes be overly fixated or spend too much time focused on a given detail – that’s something I need to work on for sure. Ah, another thing about conversations with me is that I tend to listen in long stretches and then speak or type for equally long stretches, rather than listening and speaking in short bursts. Final thing: I really like getting reading recommendations from people! Especially if it’s something that will help me understand what their preferences are or their ways of understanding the world.

EC: Mmm – yeah, I certainly get a sense of that preference of yours based on what you’re presenting to others on your Re: Sources page. Going back a bit, you said that you are moving away from Montréal this summer – why is that and where are you going?

Short-Term Plans

Evan: Well, in the short term, I’m moving back to my mother’s to help her out with a couple of things. In the long term, where I’ll be after that will be pretty significantly influenced by my next position. As for why, well, I’m looking for a bit of a change in scenery while transitioning my career. Who knows, though, I might end up applying for and being offered a position at a Montréal organization. Then I’ll be moving right on back after only a short little while. For now, though, I’m looking to help my mom – take things a step at a time.

EC: Fair enough. Anything else you’re looking to put on your plate in the near future? Any other changes you’re expecting?

Evan: I will definitely be putting up some reflections on books and other impactful content that I’m consuming onto this blog. I’ll start writing the first one for Atomic Habits this weekend. I’m mostly interested in doing this so that I can try to better internalize and recall what I learned through the process of thinking about and writing about the content. Plus, then I’ll be able to refer to my own written-down thoughts at some point in the future – even if they’ve long since left my head. Another thing I’d like to spend time on – and I really need to do better to support this – is to maintain or even moderately improve the French I’ve gained here over the years. In relation to doing better at speaking with people, I’m also going to apply to the Better Arguments Ambassador Program when their Fall 2022 Cohort applications open up. I also have two near-term objectives for my coding hobby. The first is to continue to get better at Python by creating a custom profile/relationship manager which will help me better keep track of the wonderful people in my past, present, and future. My inspiration for this comes from the lovely stories of James Farley, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and many others in Dale Carnegie’s best-selling book How To Win Friends and Influence People. The second is to possibly learn the basics of Javascript. From my understanding, the language is currently pretty ubiquitous for interacting with websites. So, having some knowledge of that seems like it could be useful for my future goals. Another thing that would certainly be useful for my future would be to finally invest my money, probably with a relatively attention-free passive investment strategy (as recommended by Vanguard founder John Bogle). However, that’s also something a little difficult to do right now while I’m both “busy” and living off my savings instead of having a current source of income. So, that remains a plan for the near-ish future instead of the present. On that note, if I don’t receive a job offer within the next month or so, I am thinking of changing my career search process up a bit. I will likely apply to more traditional positions in the private and public sectors. I might also take the time to further interrogate my aptitude and personal fit for software engineering (though I’m not sure in which subfield at this time) – see if that’s a potential path forward for me.

EC: Nice. Well, it seems like you won’t be lacking for things to do in the coming months, whether you find employment or not – good luck with that, by the way. Speaking of which, what do you actually want in your life? Even if it’s the kind of thing that’s years off?

Desires

Evan: Well, I’m interested in exploring the idea of influential or educational content that is highly navigable and reader-directed – in other words, it places a high value on the reader’s time – and is furthermore developed with the intent of reaching many different potential readers by shifting according to their morals, axioms, cruxes, etc. Like… content that, while still relatively planned (as opposed to spontaneously generated), is through its structure able to somewhat simulate for the reader how a natural conversation might go with an empathetic counterpart who really pays attention to their particular opinions, concerns, viewpoints, etc. Given that I haven’t seen this style of content in abstract or in practice, I’m not sure if it already has a name or not. Since I don’t have a name for it, I’m giving it one for now; after considering several options, so far, I’m calling it “Considerate Content.” And what I’ve been telling people about the origin of this concept is that it arose from my frustration in “continuously seeing great ideas presented monotonously.” Anyways, if anybody in the audience happens to know someone that’s planning to or already working on promoting or producing this content, please speak to me – I would love to speak with them or support their work somehow.

EC: Absolutely – if I hear anything about this, you’ll be the first to know. What else have you got?

Evan: Well, I’m interested in finding a partner eventually, though I feel like I still have to work on myself quite a bit before I’m able to be the partner I want to be.

EC: Yeah, that’s a pretty natural desire. What type of partner do you want to be, then?

Evan: The best type, I guess? Sorry, I don’t really want to go into specifics here. I know I’m the one who brought it up but this topic is a little bit embarrassing. Um, to answer your question in a more general sense regarding my relationships, I hope to kinda have a Mr. Rogers vibe? I’d like to be able to truly appreciate all those that I connect with. Appreciate them for just being themselves. And I’d like to be able to express that well too – assure them that they do matter. Simply put, I’d like to be kind, including (and likely most impactfully) to myself as well.

EC: Well, I “kind” of feel like saying something sarcastic here but maybe that goes against the spirit of the thing we’ve got going on right now. Any other desires you’d like to tell us about?

Evan: Hmmm… Let’s see… Alright, here’s one, but it needs a bit of background. So, from my perspective, I think the most valuable parts of anyone’s life have nothing to do with the experiences, emotions, or thoughts that remain internal to them. Instead, it’s about the patterns and structures that we manage to produce. The ripples that we leave in the wake of our passing, not the journey of the ship. Those could be any number of things: an excellent paper written, a thriving community garden, the establishment of cheap and resource-efficient access to outer space, improvements to our governance, maybe even just a good impression or influence that our behavior has left within the minds of those we’ve encountered, and so on. So, with all that said, I want to leave behind a humanitarian legacy that includes numerous such structures.

EC: Right – and I suppose this is why you accepted this interview today. You wanted to leave behind a small pattern whose ripple will spread out? But this is something that you chose, a decision on the bearing of your own personal journey. Doesn’t that mean in your metaphor it’s just as much about the journey of the ship as the ripples? Without the ship and the movements it makes, there are no ripples.

Evan: Right, of course – the ripples produced absolutely depend on the course of the ship. I’m just saying that I think what’s actually important is the former and not the latter. And, you know, I mentioned earlier that I’m pretty uncertain in my life currently. So that’s another thing I’m looking for: to be more certain of my ship’s destination and to have a great process of charting a course for myself. Yeah. … I mean, I definitely want to understand myself better. Actually, I’m hoping to find a good therapist to sit down with once I’m more settled in the future. Ideally, we’ll investigate my blind spots together and help shape up my internal narratives. And I’d also like to understand others better too – and to communicate better with them not just verbally but also in writing, which is part of why I’m typing right now and I’m working on this blog.

EC: Evan, I’m gonna have to ask you to back away from that fourth wall and I can just pretend I didn’t see that, alright? So, it’s been good to hear about your desires so far but they’ve been a bit major, I think. Would you happen to have anything – uh – less intense that you want to do? Like visiting Paris or something?

Evan: Oh yeah, of course. In rough order of priority, I think I’d like to continue bouldering – I didn’t mention it before because I only just started and I doubt it’ll be a highly regular thing, maintain at least some plants if not a garden, go scuba diving, get better at voices/accents, and to attend a convention in a decent cosplay at least once.

Open Questions

EC: Alright, nice. Very fun stuff. We’ve just about wrapped up here so if there’s anything else you’d like to put out there, now’s about the time. For our last section, can you tell me about what sort of things you are pondering about or even just distantly curious about?

Evan: Alright, so here’s a list of some of the things which I’m most curious about: storytelling/communication of ideas, alignment/coordination problems that affect humans, employing human bias/irrationality, the design of human groups, resource use/exploitation, and, finally, how new technologies can open up new opportunities in all of those contexts. Now, I doubt I’ll do more than scratch the surface level of more than a couple of those topics, let alone all, either in the personal or professional sense but they are the sorts of things that pique my interest and tickle my brain. Would you like me to elaborate on any of them?

EC: Definitely. I’ll be asking you to elaborate on all of them. In order, I think. Now, you don’t need to really explain what storytelling is to me but can you at least tell me why you’re curious about it?

Evan: Well, I just think that narratives are extremely important. We’re always telling ourselves stories, telling each other stories. And I think it’s something that we humans have been doing for a long time and that we’re immersed in them today. My feeling is that if I want to affect the world and leave behind a nice legacy, stories can certainly be a powerful tool or lever for that aim, among others. And so, I want to make use of best practices in storytelling and to explore new ways of telling stories. Going back a bit, I think this interest of mine is rooted in my love of fictional tales from a young age. Recently, there are a good number of books, mostly mentioned in my Re: Sources, that have influenced this thinking: Man’s Search for Meaning, Maybe You Should Talk to Someone, Atomic Habits, The Righteous Mind, and Never Split the Difference. Each of them either talk about the mechanisms that form the foundation for human’s attachment to stories or give strong examples of what the right stories in the right place can achieve.

EC: Alright, that makes some sort of sense. Could you share one of those strong examples, maybe?

Evan: Of course, let’s see… Well, this’ll come from what I’m currently reading, Never Split the Difference by Chris Voss and Tahl Raz. Going off memory here, there was this terrorist group in the Philippines in the early 2000s had captured a young American tourist – from a quite poor socioeconomic background, actually – and their megalomaniacal leader, Abu Sabaya, was demanding a whopping 10 million for the guy. Not only was the sum completely preposterous, it was also based on unreasonable claims – that this was a wartime mediation based on an alleged ongoing anti-Spanish colonialism conflict – but Abu Sabaya absolutely refused to be talked down from those claims. As such, negotiations didn’t really go anywhere over a long period of time and the young tourist was getting to the point of being very much at risk of death based on the whims of the terrorist leader. However, there was a critical point before the hostage’s eventual rescue in which the author’s point man for the negotiations (a local law enforcement officer who was able to communicate with the leader in Tagalog) eventually was able to assuage Abu Sabaya and successfully stall for time. He did this simply by listening attentively and completely to the Abu Sabaya’s narrative and then reiterating it back to the leader, showing that he was paying attention and understood the story that he was being presented. And, actually, that just made me think of something. So, the story before is about how the leader was able to be managed since he felt that he was heard and his vision of the world was being respected. Which goes into why I said what I’m interested in is storytelling and not just stories – the method of delivery and the human connection is very important, both in terms of outcome and just how we feel about things as a whole. How often have we heard the phrase “You’re not listening to me!” being thrown around?

EC: Well, I’d like to think that I’ve heard that less than average in my own life but, yeah, I know what you mean. And do you think you’ll use such storytelling to address your next question… “Alignment and coordination problems that affect humans”?

Evan: Well, it might be able to help – though I don’t think it’s highly like that it will be me using such storytelling. However, my intuition is that that class of problems is enormous in size and complexity. Way too big for just storytelling. A lot more work and other forms of work are needed (and is being done!) to address those by various researchers, public intellectuals, toolmakers, civil servants, etc. So, just so that we’re on the same page when talking about “alignment and coordination problems,” I’ll demonstrate with one of the more extreme and frightening cases within this area. People are worried that, in the pursuit of creating artificial intelligence with a lot of the capabilities of a human plus its own strengths (ability to self-modify, faster replication, greater processing speeds, less limited sensory capabilities, etc.), we end up unleashing a monster. A monster that can cause a lot of suffering and death if not outright extinction or, probably worse, the eternal torture of humanity. This has been termed AI alignment or the AI control problem. If there is going to be an extremely powerful agent (or even agents) created, most people would at least want to make sure that the AI either has humanity’s best interests at pretty close to the top of its priorities or that it’s controllable. If there’s instead a misunderstanding between what we think we’ve designed the system to do or what we’re requesting it do and what it actually ends up doing, then that’s an alignment problem (which affects humans). However, to me, I’m more concerned with what’s definitively going on in the here and now: the development and use of moderately powerful and potentially arcane algorithms that have a lot of influence on society and, if not designed or implemented ethically, could end up exacerbating certain negative conditions further. And, setting programs and artificial intelligence to the side, I also think that while it might be potentially disastrous if machines and humans are not aligned, it’s certainly at least a little disastrous that humans and humans (and the organizations they form) are not aligned in the present moment. There’s also a lot of division in the world, right? Between different companies, intranational political parties, countries, movements, ideologies, religions, socioeconomic groups, etc. To me, there’s a certain portion of all those separations that aren’t exactly healthy. The sum of all those unhealthy divisions, I think of as the “human alignment problem.” Which I guess is more on the “coordination” side of problems, actually, since it’s not really realistic or probably even very useful for all of us to be aligned. Better to be safely and constructively misaligned… I think. Anyways, all of those issues like political polarization, potential great power conflict, inequality, AI alignment… All of that sorta stuff is something that I’m generally curious about, despite the ludicrous complexity and scale of it all.

EC: So, you’re kind of talking about group intelligence, right?

Evan: Ah, right, yeah, that’s the term. Sure, I guess you could say I think that advancing our group intelligence, whether the group includes artificial intelligences or not, at different scales is what I find interesting. What was the next thing again?

EC: You said that employing human bias and irrationality was an open question for you.

Evan: Yes! That was it. So, keeping it short, human thinking and behavior is pretty messy and also good at certain things that maybe don’t make as much sense in certain modern-day contexts. Instead of ignoring that messiness or “specialization,” I think it’s cool to acknowledge it and maybe even try to take advantage of it, either on an individual level or more of a collective level. So, it’s kinda related to improving human group intelligence but a more specific method and it can also just be in relation to how a single person operates as well.

EC: And I imagine it’s also related to the next topic you mentioned: the design of human groups?

Evan: Yeah… Perhaps some or all of these three most recent topics could be better defined and delineated somehow… At any rate, having good design of human groups doesn’t just have to do with accounting for biases and irrationality. Things can be set up to take advantage of our logical side or of the local culture or of the physical space the group operates in or of other preexisting structures/symbols or of what the intended end goal is for the group. And then you have an effective group, with greater group intelligence, which is better able to achieve its aims which, hopefully, are good.

EC: Right – and, so, what exactly do you mean by human group?

Evan: Well, that could be pretty much anything. A thinktank, a religion, an online co-working community of effective altruists, a graphic design department, a share house, a Discord server, the state you live in, your Dungeons & Dragons group, you name it. They all can have at least one thing changed about them and that’s design. I think. I’m not a designer. Especially not of human groups. But I think it’s pretty interesting and depending on my exact responsibilities in the future if I work in operations or otherwise, I might end up being able to satisfy my curiosity a bit.

EC: Alright, calm down there, Charles Manson. Sorry, sorry. Poor taste. No, but seriously, I’d better not hear about you getting suckered into a cult and heading off to live in some isolated commune. Anyways, bringing things back to reality, what’s your interest in resource use and exploitation?

Evan: … Damn it, I’ve been trying to think of a response. But it all sounds like stuff a cultist could say. I’m not a – tch, whatever. *sigh* So. My interest in resource use and exploitation is based on Jason Hickel’s Less is More: How Degrowth Will Save the World. Nice entry level book into the topic, presents a compelling story. I wish the name of the movement or philosophy was something a bit sexier than “degrowth” but, whatever. I think I agree that it’s better to try to “catch up” or increase the wellbeing of developing nations and its citizens in a more intentional manner rather than just relying on “the rising tide” or the sometimes-philanthopic whims of uber-rich. And also that we shouldn’t just pursue growth for growth’s sake, since the world’s resources, diversity, networks, and ability to regenerate do have a proper limit to them. Anyways, there’s a lot of disagreements in this area on definitions, intentions, politics, rights, the potential for technology to assist… if my flag is planted, it’s planted lightly, with the ability to change after further investigation. All I can say is that I think, however we do it, it’s quite likely that we can be doing a lot better as a species in using the resources we are lucky to have access to. And that I’m interested in this topic because of all that.

EC: So, you mentioned the potential for technology to assist just now and that was also your last point – the assistance or effect, I guess, of technology on resource use, human group design, employing human irrationality, alignment/coordination problems (or increasing group intelligence), and storytelling. Care to go into that?

Evan: Well, sure, but this is one that’s most vague of all since it’s about a specific, difficult to predict aspect of each of those already vague curiosities of mine. Especially when I’m not an especially big technologist myself. Erm, the major thing that comes to mind and I think could be really cool is virtual or augmented reality in combination with all of those things. People will be able to tell their stories in different ways and maybe to previously difficult-to-reach people through those mediums. Maybe it could somehow increase empathy, parochial mentality somehow being able to be better applied to people outside of “the parish,” or make business/pleasure travel a little less necessary and frequent. Oh, and then those brain-machine interfaces too. Those could be very cool or, on the flip side, just absolutely terrible. Really powerful either way, once achievable! And I’d say those are pretty much all the random open thoughts I have at the current moment.

EC: Great, thanks for sharing all of that and I really do hope you’re able to find satisfaction with at least one of those curiosities of yours. It’s been great having you here, Evan, and thanks to the listeners at home for spending your time with us. This has been EC with the Man in the Mirror, signing off.

Considering Content

I’ve come to believe that I should write and create a bit in addition to reading and consuming. To take stumbling steps into writing. I’ll have a go of it, put down some thoughts, and chronicle certain aspects of my life. I hope to improve in communication and perhaps even create something that others can truly appreciate.

Credit for this decision goes to several people in my life. In particular, I shall refer to my mother who shares herself with her friends/family on her personal blog and long ago inspired me to make my first website way back when. Another person who has inspired me to do this is an admirable internet citizen and aspiring rationalist Xiaoyu He, who believes that people, in general, ought to write more.

Let us begin.