I want to compile all of my twitter threads that touch on what I care about in a romantic partnership / spiritual collaboration.
This is largely for my own reference.
However, it occurs to me that a bunch of disparate threads, each of which was alive when I wrote it, and each dealing with a different facet, might in aggregate, be a good way of conveying the ephemeral thing-ness of my experience.
I'm increasingly resistant to try and describe what I want in this domain in any kind of top-down way, because when I try, my descriptions often feel "flat" to me, and more-often-than-not I feel missed or projected on.
Maybe this will work better?
[I'll continue to add to this, as I write more of these, if I write more of these.]
A long, branching, conversation about the game theory of "the matching game", and the circumstances under which it is mostly cooperative or mostly adversarial:
The way the aliveness of what I care about seems to slip out of my grasp, but I act in line with it anyway, out of self-trust. And what to do about the whole situation:
My asking how asexual people go from "not knowing a person" to "being in a relationship with them", since in my experience and observation, approximately the only way that happens is if people live together for months first:
Comments on the ever expanding inferential divide that comes with growth and re-ontologizing, or at least the kind of growth and re-ontologizing that I'm doing:
My mom said that one of her friends saw an amazon box outside and suggested they should use other vendors. Her words: "Bezos isn't doing us any favors."
Bezos has personally added more value to my life than almost anyone alive.
I think many of Bernie's policies would be disastrous if implemented (getting the economics right REALLY matters), but I can definitely see why he has such a following.
Granted, he's talking about my pet issue here, but he feels "real", in a way that few politicians do?
It feels so refreshing to listen to a politician respond to things in ways that feel straightforward and obvious, when everyone else is playing political double-speak games.
Even if his polices are pretty bad, I do believe that Sanders really does care about the American people and American workers.
This post is phrased in a way that implies that there are a bunch of people looking at LW, from the outside, thinking "man, I wish they would have less violent rhetoric".
Is that true, or is it mainly/only Critch who thinks this?
Even one other person who agrees, and who has had enough contact with LessWrong to have at least one example (as opposed to secondhand stories of how bad and violent the doomers are) would be helpful for my triangulating here.
I had claude write a dating ad for me. It felt like it was trying to hard to be fun and relatable, so I asked Claude to make a "joyless" version, and got this:
Another one:
(It's not actually true that I "don't socialize recreationally", but I can see why Claude wrote that.)
Vegan male, SF. Six-day workweek minimum. Diet: kale. Leisure: Anki. Seeking woman sincerely committed to the Good for honest, high-meta relationship. Conventional dating activities not offered.
Some thinking about the ethics around people funding me:
I'm working very hard pushing on projects that seem to me to be moving the world towards a better equilibrium. It feels like it does make sense for the broader ecosystem to pour resources into accelerating my efforts.
Wild as it seems, I have more strategic orientation than most, and enough taste to see how a lot of projects could be better, and the energy and agency to make them so.
So it feels not unreasonable or inappropriate for me to absorb more resources. There are people who want to help, I could absorb more resources to generically make things better in a flexible on the ground way.