Why I never come to visit

[pozorvlak]

Go and read the post Ugh Fields on Less Wrong. To take the author's own tl;dr version: Pavlovian conditioning can cause humans to unconsciously flinch from even thinking about a serious personal problem they have, we call it an Ugh Field. The Ugh Field forms a self-shadowing blind spot covering an area desperately in need of optimization, imposing

Comments

Pull yourself together

[anonymous]

Seeing people in the flesh is a Good Thing. So going to places where that can happen is also good.

I agree that arranging train tickets can be irritating, and actual travel can be stressful. But these problems (and expenses) are quickly outweighed forgotten when getting pissed with your favourite people.

from Norm.

[susannahf]

Ugh fields. Oh yes. (my current thesis chapter is inside an ugh field

[pozorvlak]

my current thesis chapter is inside an ugh field

I'd guess that that experience is almost universal among graduate students...

Find something that makes the travel productive or pleasant.Ah. I think you've misunderstood me. Once I'm sat on the train/bus/car/plane, the hard part is over - I quite enjoy train travel, and I can at least cope with the others. The actual getting-from-A-to-B is not the problem. The problem is (a) working out all the possible ways you can use to get from A to B, (b) working out all the constraints you have to satisfy, (c) working out which options satisfy all the constraints, (d) choosing an option, (e) fighting through whatever booking systems you're faced with and booking all the necessary tickets, ensuring you've got the right number, date, etc, and (e) I think I need to lie down now. Of course, I've made it sound far simpler than it really is, because (a) - (d) are actually interdependent in a complex way - typically some of your constraints will depend on earlier choices, so you're actually having to

[susannahf]

ah. That sounds like you're trying to solve an optimisation problem - am I on the right track?
And yes, with the exception of a few people for whom logistics is a vocation, that's horrid. My main solution is to start at (e) - whose web page or booking people would I prefer to deal with, since that is usually the most annoying bit to me. YMMV. But basically, what it boils down to is, I don't optimise. I decide what form of transport (usually train), what day and time, and then try to book it. Only if that is impossible or atrociously expensive do I go back to my initial axioms. Do I get the best value? No, probably not. But I don't tear my hair out, and that is worth something.

[pozorvlak]

And yes, with the exception of a few people for whom logistics is a vocation, that's horrid.

*cough* MP-J *cough*

But basically, what it boils down to is, I don't optimise. I decide what form of transport (usually train), what day and time, and then try to book it.

Thanks! I shall try this. I'll end up spending more for a bit, but hopefully I can banish the negative feelings that are preventing me from realising opportunities. Once I've got that cracked, I can work on depessimisation.

[gareth_rees]

They're big on cognitive biases, Bayesian statistics, decision theory, averting the impending robocalypse

One of these things is not like the others.

[pozorvlak]

You'd have thought so, wouldn't you? But they seem to think they all hang together.

[Historically, it went "in order to prevent the impending robocalypse, we must get really good at thinking clearly and accurately", hence the rest.]

[gareth_rees]

I'm aware of the history, I just think it's funny that a group of people dedicated to thinking clearly and accurately should be motivated by such a crackpot concern.

(I don't doubt that if AIs can be created, and if those AIs gain access to the power to do great harm, then there's a problem of persuading the AIs to be friendly. But no-one knows how to create AIs, so considered as a serious risk, it seems like something that can be left to our descendants. In the meantime, there are natural intelligences with access to nuclear weapons and we don't seem have a clue as to what to do about them either.)

Wikipedia's article on friendly AI says, "AIs with intelligences or at least physical capabilities greater than our own may concern themselves with endeavours that humans would see as pointless or even laughably bizarre". Pointless or laughably bizarre, eh?

[pozorvlak]

Sounds like we're in almost total agreement. I admit the extreme difficulty of the Friendliness problem, and I suppose I'm glad there are a few smart people thinking about it; but frankly, I think we'll be doing well as a species if we last long enough to experience any kind of Singularity, given the many pressing crises already facing us.

[weaselspoon]

I have an Ugh Field about reading that page on Ugh Fields. It's been open in a tab all afternoon, and now I have to go home. I think I have an Ugh Field about looking at my Ugh Fields, which are many and scary and mostly stupid.

I share yours about travel booking. I manage the train by not booking in advance, but paying more.

[dynix]

you've already done it

you've admitted it and now none of your friends are going to take no for an answer

expect a phone call:)