MOREWRONG
A common objection to taking my grandmother’s pain pills is that they are prescribed to her, stored in her home, and intended for her pain. All three observations are true but decision-theoretically incomplete.
If someone is harmed by my conduct and subsequently updates negatively on me, that update is part of the social enforcement mechanism. Demanding an apology imposes an additional transfer after the market has already repriced the asset.
Suppose frontier AI has a meaningful probability of eventually killing everyone. The missing term in the standard extinction-risk model is what it would be doing immediately beforehand: vibe coding B2B SaaS for HVAC distribution.
Yesterday at 6:14 PM, my girlfriend replied “okay” to a message that would ordinarily receive either “okayyy” or a heart reaction. My intuition suggested she was mad. Intuition is notoriously unreliable, so I built a model.
My father is dying. The hospice nurse believes he has between forty-eight and seventy-two hours left, and my sister thinks I should fly home tonight. I have decided not to go. This is being treated as evidence of a moral defect rather than an allocation decision.
“Gay son or thot daughter?” is usually treated as a vulgar preference-revelation exercise. This undersells it. The question is interesting because it forces the respondent to compare two very different kinds of variance in descendant outcomes while operating under severe informational compression.
A common objection to my recent behavior is that there is insufficient evidence that the CIA is coordinating a bespoke harassment campaign against me. At the object level, this is fair. My claim is not that the posterior is overwhelming.
Most people evaluate heroin at the object level: overdose risk, legal exposure, deteriorating health, etc. This is incomplete. Under nontrivial probability of transformative AI within our lifetime, the relevant question is whether strategically constraining my future options could increase the probability that I remain economically and psychologically coupled to the arrival of the singularity.
A common objection to my drinking is that coming home blackout drunk imposes obvious costs on my wife, my children, and the household. I agree that these costs are real.
A common objection to my discretionary spending is that paying for escorts while remaining in arrears on child support is “obviously immoral.” I think this rests on scope insensitivity.
Beer consumption is generally treated as a matter of intuition. This seems surprising. The activity is common, repeatable, measurable, and exhibits an obvious diminishing-marginal-returns curve.
The fact that the kitchen bin is full does not establish that taking it out now is optimal. It establishes that we are approaching a capacity constraint. The distinction matters because disposal is irreversible, while waiting preserves the possibility of fitting something else in.
My girlfriend thinks the fact that we both wear clothes establishes that we should both do laundry. This is a consumption-based theory of labor allocation. It would be an unusual way to organize a firm, and I do not understand why sharing a bed makes it economically sophisticated.
My girlfriend is at the airport. I am at home. Collecting her would require forty minutes of driving, and I have decided that this is a poor use of my evening.
I play music through a Bluetooth speaker on the subway. People often look unhappy about this. What interests me is how rarely their behavior supports the intensity of the objection people claim to have on their behalf.
The usual rule is that whoever finishes the toilet paper must replace the roll. I think this is a poor allocation mechanism. It assigns a future service obligation to the person whose demand for the service has just fallen to zero.
My girlfriend is 19. I am 34. I realize there is a standard reaction to this, and I also realize that saying she is “mature for her age” does not improve the situation rhetorically. Unfortunately, it is also true.
I think founders are held to an unusually crude standard of truth when talking about traction. Suppose I tell investors that our vibe-coded B2B SaaS platform for HVAC distribution has 18,000 users. The immediate response is usually some version of: how many of those are real? But “real” is doing a lot of work there.