On online psychopaths

On online psychopaths

Why giving good universal advice can be bad or I wish I could pre-filter psychopaths

In person, I tune advice to whoever I’m talking to, as advice is context-dependent. On the internet, advice I give is more universal and boring, as context is scarce.

And even the universal, boring advice has exceptions. “Just talk up people on the street” is a potentially life-changing activity, unless you’re socially awkward and/or considered creepy-looking. If you are unable to walk, Take a long walk to clear your head” is useless.

The above examples are mostly harmless offenses, though. There’s a worse category: advice that becomes dangerous in the wrong hands — a.k.a. psychopaths.

Look up which conferences someone attends and show up, people love to hear you came for them” is good networking advice. “Be persistent about meeting them, sending multiple follow-ups if you must, it usually works for me” is great communication advice. Both tips become stalking instructions for a psychopath.

This is a genuine problem. I’ve heard podcasters say they never discuss stalkers on air. Psychopaths are mimetic—talking about psychopathic acts motivates them.

So adding unless you’re a psychopath” to advice doesn’t help. Even worse, it invites the psychopath. So you’re left with two options: don’t give advice, or give it knowing the wrong person might take it to heart.

Related

Two tweets for twenty-sixteen

Two tweets for twenty-sixteen

staysaasy
staysaasy
@staysaasy

If I’m leaving 2025 with any core reflection, it’s that I increasingly believe that the world has no place for those who lack conviction, that mistakes are forgiven while tameness is ignored, that perfection loses to done every time, that commitment and tenacity and audacity and self-promotion and risk-taking compound more than anything, and that all of this always starts with one very achievable next step that looks like a cliff but is much closer to the ground than you realize.

Link ↗︎
gaurav
gaurav
@gaxrav

quit brainrot. unfollow trolls. read essays. go down rabbit holes. have a calendar. maintain a todo list. read old books. watch old movies. turn on dnd. walk with intent. eat without youtube. chew more. train without music. plan for 15 mins. execute. organise your desk. take something seriously. read ancient scripts. act fast. find bread. eat clean. journal. save a life. learn to code. read poetry. create art. stay composed. refine your speech. optimise for efficiency. act sincere. help people. be kind. stop doing things that waste your time. follow your intuition. craft reputation. learn persuasion. systemise your day (or don’t). write. write. write. write more. iterate violently. leave your phone at home. walk to the grocery store. talk to strangers. feed the dogs. visit bookstores. look for 1800s novels. experience art. then love. sit with a monk and offer them lunch. don’t talk shit about people. embody virtue. sit alone. do something with your life. what do you want to create? turn off your mind. play. play a sport. combat sports. notice fonts in trees. fall in love. notice patterns on a table. visualise it. talk to people with respect. don’t hate. be loving. be real. become yourself. cherrypick your qualities. discard the useless. rejections aren’t permanent. invite what aligns. accept what does not. read great people. be different. choose different. do great work. let it consume you. lose your mind. value your time. experience life.

Link ↗︎

All my criticism applies to myself, also

All my criticism applies to myself, also

I don’t want to come across as negative, though I know some posts might read that way. Here’s what happens when I ruminate: I notice patterns in myself and others, try to figure out what’s going on, then post about it. Any criticism applies to me first.

I am a victim of the Exemption Outsourcing Pattern, I tend to overcomplicate things, I like complaining about complainers. I want my posts to read as optimistic, that noticing and learning is powerful, that I can be self-aware enough to change my behavior, and thus change the world.

Just like Make America Great Again” can be read as both pessimistic and optimistic, any criticism holds both challenge and invitation.

The Exemption Outsourcing Pattern

The Exemption Outsourcing Pattern

Two observations about how people interact with differing opinions they encounter:

  • it’s easy to mistake someone else’s opinion for an attack on identity
  • people rarely agree with things that feel like an attack on their identity

Pick a subject, nearly any subject, and there will be people flipping out about differing opinions. Nothing new here, no need to elaborate.

What I find interesting is one subtle way this plays out online. A subtle enough pattern that it’s worth talking about. Let me illustrate the pattern with an example, starting with a person posting their opinion/observation online:

Screenshot of a social media post by @hazn saying 'Most people who say they're too busy to exercise actually have the time, they just don't want to exercise as much as they want not-exercising' with 0 comments and 0 likes

When people encounter something like this, a fork happens: some get offended, some don’t. Most non-offended people agree with the opinion or simply scroll past. It’s the offended people who are more likely to engage with the post. The offended can be split into two groups again:

Tree diagram showing audience breakdown. Top: All people. First split: Non-offended people (scroll past) and Offended people. Second split from offended: People where the observation holds (majority) and People where the observation doesn't hold (minority, shown as single figure)

Here’s the part I find interesting: Someone from that small minority replies, explaining how the observation doesn’t apply to them. The majority, the ones it does apply to, then rally behind that reply/comment.

Flow diagram showing the Exemption Outsourcing Pattern. Original post gets 22 likes. A person where observation doesn't apply (tracy @singlemomlife) comments explaining her situation. Her comment gets 221 likes from hundreds where observation does apply. Result: Original point appears debunked, all offended people feel vindicated, original observation remains mostly true

The majority latch onto the exception case that doesn’t apply to them. I call this pattern the Exemption Outsourcing Pattern. A pattern where people avoid being uncomfortable by hiding behind someone else’s valid exemption. This happens because dismissing the original opinion is cheaper than changing behavior.

Once you zoom out a little, you notice this pattern everywhere. Simpson’s paradox is an example from the statistics world. From the legal world there is the Hard cases make bad law” concept.

On deathbed advice/regret

On deathbed advice/regret

A common social media trope is posting advice from people on their deathbed. Usually about things they didn’t do. “I should’ve been more there for my loved ones” is a classic tune, I should’ve cared less about what other people think” is another hit, usually culminating in the banger conclusion of I should’ve done [a super specific personal thing like opening up a hobbyist store or buying a house in their favorite hinterland].”

I don’t value this kind of advice much, it’s too cheap. Just like complaining is just so cheap. Maybe there are good reasons at the time to not tackle the thing they are regretting, or they were too whiny in the first place to do transformative things. I think that’s my biggest problem with deathbed regrets, it feels like time-travelled whining about your life situation.

When chronic whiners annoy you — those who love non-stop complaining more than solving — mention that their complaint just became a top deathbed regret candidate. Or you can be polite and internalize that you are probably gonna hear about the same person on their deathbed advising the exact opposite of what they’re doing now. That way you can be just like me and whine about other people’s whining.

So yeah I don’t value regrets packaged as advice, especially from people who never acted on their advice — a.k.a. people on their deathbed. “The uncaught fish is always a big fish” is the appropriate Turkish saying1 that captures my mood.

Better advice comes from things people actually did. This is fundamentally because advice doesn’t work that well, but being a role model does.

Anyway, be less on social media” is another advice/regret I am sure will be on people’s lips on their deathbeds. I’m sure because I hear it a lot. People are aware of this regret pre-deathbed and free to act on it now. Or they can just post on social media about deathbed regrets.

Related


Footnotes:

  1. Kaçan balık büyük olur”

Evaluating big life choices might be overrated

Evaluating big life choices might be overrated

Two simple observations and my own two cents

Rational choice models of decision-making suggest gathering information on options and then proceeding with the option that best fits a person’s current preferences and values. Paul argues that such a decision-making process is not possible for some options, called transformative experiences”, because the experience fundamentally transforms the person experiencing it. Paul offers a hypothetical example of a decision to become a vampire. Because a person would be fundamentally transformed by becoming a vampire, they cannot possibly know in advance what being a vampire is like. Other vampires might offer information, but their advice is likely shaped by their own irreversible choice. In this situation, a fully informed comparison of preferences and values is impossible.

~ Wikipedia summary of L. A. Paul’s Transformative Experience”

Folks, you’ve heard it, evaluating too much doesn’t only lead to analysis paralysis, it also sometimes just isn’t possible . The question remains: why should you do something you can’t evaluate?

[Steven] Levitt invited individuals who couldn’t make up their minds about matters both major (like divorce) and minor (such as changing hair color) to avail themselves of a randomized coin toss.

...

Individuals whose virtual coin turned up heads were 25 percent more likely to make a change than those whose coin flip yielded tails. And, based on what they reported in two follow-up surveys over a six-month period, the nudge of a coin toss was just what these participants needed. Regardless of their responses to the coin tosses, participants who decided to make a change reported that they were substantially happier than those who did not.

~ Summary of Working Paper 22487, National Bureau of Economic Research

I have never ever regretted big life choices, even if they didn’t work out. Quitting a job with no money and no backup plan taught me a ton: I improved my network, learned how to ask for favors and introductions, and started to hustle. I learned I can go bankrupt and the value of social welfare systems. Next month I am joining a startup with all the responsibilities I wish I had in my previous job.

Let this post be the coin flip for your life choices.


Should I ?
FLIP COIN

Bureaucracy enables envy, envy begets bureaucracy

Bureaucracy enables envy, envy begets bureaucracy

The classic explanation of growing bureaucracy inside an organization is that the people who benefit from the processes (i.e., bureaucrats) have an interest in perpetuating the growth.

This is probably true, incentives are superpowers and all that. I’d like to add an often neglected point to the discussion: people who don’t benefit — who hate the bureaucratic processes — also push for more bureaucracy.

Here’s an analogy.

During the 2008 housing crisis, many Americans were furious that their neighbors might receive mortgage relief they themselves didn’t get. This resentment helped fuel the Tea Party movement. The same psychology applies elsewhere: I had to work hard, why should others get UBI?” Or: I suffered through a brutal exam, so future lawyers should too.” And it applies to bureaucratic processes too.

Being denied something by bureaucracy creates a kind of mini trauma, one that resurfaces when people see others slipping through gaps the bureaucracy hasn’t yet reached. The people then pressure the powers that be to close the gap, to formalize the exception, to make others suffer the same process.

Of course, there are legitimate reasons to formalize things. But we should also admit that this isn’t fair to the group’ often masks this isn’t fair to me’.

Against auto-update

Against auto-update

People flip out over rearranged or occupied desks at work. Someone moved their stapler, shifted their monitor, took their place, and suddenly it’s a whole thing. I, personally, can handle an occupied or rearranged desk. I flip out over rearranged apps.

Software usually comes with the automatic update” setting on by default. You probably know what I’m going to advocate for. In my opinion, this setting should almost always be turned off.

Reasons against auto-update:

  • I don’t know what changed. The here’s what’s new” popup appears when I open the app to do something, so I immediately click the popup away. I’m more likely to actually read what’s different when I consciously update.
  • Many new changes aren’t really beneficial, sometimes software just gets strictly worse and your muscle memory becomes a liability.
  • Downgrading is hard, sometimes impossible — iOS for example won’t let you go back.

Of course, everything is a trade-off. One reason web applications are popular is because they basically force every user to auto-update.

Reasons for auto-update:

  • Security updates
  • The app version not supported” screen is annoying and you might be forced to update at an inconvenient time

The security argument is strong, however, software providers pivoted to either using a different update channel for critical security fixes or they stop supporting vulnerable apps outright, which is sane behavior. In that sense, the app version not supported” banner might be a good thing, heh.

The tradeoff is worth it in my eyes. Since turning auto-update off, I have more calm about my frequently-used apps and I don’t flip out about someone rearranging my apps.

Related

Timeboxd

Timeboxd

We fetishize time, let’s put it in a nice dress

Getting more done with less is knowing which tasks to delegate (to AI) and which tasks not to do at all. In other words, extreme clarity on the stuff you ought to do, and extreme focus while doing it. The most fundamental way I achieve clarity is by typing down everything, literally everything I do and think about. That’s a story for a longer post. This post isn’t about my typing tips; it’s a tribute to the timebox. And the focus you can achieve with ~dot~ it.

The gist of timeboxing is that you define a task time and set aside a limited amount of time to solve it. Here lies the first benefit of the timebox: actually thinking through what you want to do right now, and how long it should take. Just scribbling down things on the task at hand gets you much closer to working tidy. There are many posts and theories about maximum timebox efficiency, but I keep it lightweight.

I use Session as my timeboxing app of choice1. Mostly because when the timer for the timebox starts, there’s a delightful animation to guide your breath:

I just stare at the dot and breathe, in and out. I always go back to the dot. Don’t want to work? Go back to the dot. Stressed? Go back to the dot. Dot.

Wouldn’t you know, staring at dot is a quintessential meditative and concentration practice. My tip: while breathing in, suck in the upper part of your stomach. It automatically becomes a meditation practice and fixes your posture.

The dot clears the noise so you can actually attune.

After dotting around, I start defining the task. The first timebox timer is for always 5 minutes long in which I fill out the following text form:.

- What should I be doing now?
  - 🔵
- goal@🔵
- async task: 🔵

(hint: "🔵" is my way of marking text snippets as "to fill out")

The generation of the text form is automated. The filling out is not. Basically, I view it as a Socratic monologue with myself about what is currently the highest priority. Like, not what I think is the highest priority, but what actually is the highest priority. Small tasks like replying to messages are done instantly. The highest priority task crystallizes through asking and answering abstract questions, like is there a better way to do this?”.

Having found the task, I timebox it, like goal@8:30 - ship article. The async task field forces me to think about if I can use AI agents to aid me with the task, like doing research in parallel.

Here’s a filled out example from this morning:

- What should I be doing now?
  - Mhh, ship article? Or work on the app?
    - The app can wait, article is more important as I want to write everyday
  - Is there a more important task right now?
    - Nope, ship article
- goal@8:30 - ship article
- async task: Claude deep research breathing techniques

Usually I start working on the task before the 5 minutes are up. Then the 5 minute timer pops, I set the actual timebox for the defined goal, and keep going. When the timer runs out I take a break. The actual evaluation and reevaluation of the work happens after staring at the dot. Rinse and repeat.

I follow this order religiously: breathe first, then decide what to do, then timebox. When the timer dings, I stop. When I don’t follow the timebox and the dot, I have my least productive days. Most online productivity articles impose too much structure for my taste. My workflow is optimized for me, but the steps flow into each other naturally. No predefining of timeboxes and tasks.

Just asking what I should be doing, how long it should take, and what I can skip entirely. Over and over and over and over.

fin

dot

The vasocomputational model for meditation

The vasocomputational model for meditation

see quote below for description

You could see meditation as mental stretching: standard intellectual skills are like training for grip strength, you get better at grasping concepts, but worse at letting them go

This is not just a metaphor, according to @johnsonmxes theory of vasocomputation, we freeze neural patterns (concepts) by constricting the smooth muscles of our blood vessels (grip), we are literally grasping concepts with tiny muscles, and if we don’t stretch and move enough, we lose flexibility and agility, same as with the musculoskeletal system

...

I’ve tried to illustrate the stretching/relaxation process in the diagram [above]:

  • The picture of the cat at the top represents input from our sensory system
  • The triangular network represents our neurovascular system filtering that input so we can fit it into conscious awareness, it’s a dynamic information filter
  • As blood vessels progressively release their grip on neural patterns (left to right), awareness becomes more dynamic and gets more information from deeper (less abstract) layers of the network
  • At the bottom I’ve tried to show the qualitative effects of this: experience feels deeper and richer (indicated by the height of the chunks of perception) and time appears to expand (we can only perceive time by observing change, so a more dynamic awareness creates more distinct moments” in time)

~ Hinterlander

A useful model of combining common experience, psychedelic experience, and insights from deep neural networks. In fact, it’s crazy how much the [above] diagram reminds me of the 101 explainer of how deep convolutional neural networks (CNNs) work:

Yes, my dear reader, you noticed something -- convolutional neural networks do vasocomputation as well! Or rather, in the vasocomputation model, we stretch” the natural neural network, our brain, to be aware of earlier stages of our information processing.

Is this finding genuine consilience? Anyway, as with any model, the goal is to create better questions and models, not to arrive at an answer.

Munger and Godbolt rules for explaining the world

Munger and Godbolt rules for explaining the world

a cropped version of poor richard almanacks illustrated, an illustrated version of benjamin frankling

You can never make any explanation that can be made in a more fundamental way in any other way than the most fundamental way. ... You’ve got to know all the big ideas in all the disciplines more fundamental than your own

~ Charlie Munger, Poor Charlie’s Almanack book

In the book, Charlie uses insights from psychology to explain how one casino slot machine can be made more popular: you leave the misses” rate fixed, but increase the amount of near misses” of the slot machines. “Ah, just a single cherry was missing for the jackpot” and so on. Crude microeconomic models would predict all slot machines to have the same popularity, as all slot machines have the same amount of misses”, therefore the same expected economic value. Charlie, however, considers psychology to be more fundamental than microeconomics.

Munger’s rule has explanatory power bottom up - start from the fundamental disciplines and build up. In complex systems such as software, a different rule might have better explanatory power. Program code is built like a cake with layer upon layer upon layer of abstractions and concepts. The problem to be solved or explained is not always at the most fundamental layer. In these cases, it can make sense to purchase explanatory power by working top-down:

You should know your layer well, but you should also know one layer below it a little bit, and you definitely need to know the shape of the layer that’s beneath that.

~ Godbolt’s rule

In defense of autism

In defense of autism

It is hardly possible to overrate the value, in the present low state of human improvement, of placing human beings in contact with persons dissimilar to themselves, and with modes of thought and action unlike those with which they are familiar.

~ John Stuart Mill

Autistic people are easily accused of lacking empathy, and in some deeper, indirect ways, lacking humanity. Really, few online peeps bother demonstrating empathy and gratitude themselves. When thinking about autism, I try to keep one thing front and center:

  • Autistic people are humans, deserving of dignity

Other considerations when thinking about autism1:

  • Autistic people are treated as outsiders, making them less likely to believe society’s stories around race, nationality, etc.
  • Autistic people are killing it in our most innovative sectors
  • Autistic people are underdog scientists, more likely to follow low-status, high-impact ideas
  • Because LLMs are literal and information-dense, autistic people are better at steering AI
  • Autistic people are the creators of my favorite tools

Hard for me to not have gratitude for the autistic community.

Related:


Footnotes:

  1. With the caveat that you should read autistic people are” as autistic people are statistically more prone to be”

A simple definition of simple

A simple definition of simple

My life changed when I learned what simple really means. Simple comes from simplex. The opposite of complex. Complex comes from complex, the verb that means to intertwine.

This is important. Remember this, dear listener, your life is complex when it is intertwined with dependencies. You are depending on things and things are depending on you. Your life is simple when it is not complex.

~ Derek Sivers

Related

Assumptions in apps

Assumptions in apps

Let me decide what’s best for me

I

Screenshot of Apple Podcasts \"Browse\" section showing two promotional banners: \"2025 IN REVIEW\" and \"BEST OF 2025\" with colorful starburst and bar chart graphics. The interface suggests a curated year-end selection of top podcasts.

Oh, best podcasts of 2025 list in my Apple Podcasts app? Great! Let’s see if I can find some great new things from the vast world of podcasts.

Screenshot of the Apple Podcasts \"Best of 2025\" page revealing Apple's editorial picks. Notably, all eight featured podcasts are German language shows, including \"Die Peter Thiel Story,\" \"Was Bisher Geschah,\" \"Firewall\" (Der Spiegel), and \"God Code: Macht. KI. Drama.\" Despite being a global platform's \"best of\" list, the entire selection consists exclusively of German content across categories like True Crime, History, Comedy, and Documentary.

Oh, they are all from Germany!

The idealist and cosmopolite I am, I expected podcasts from all around the world under the best podcasts” section. At least English speaking podcasts, given the English title of the campaign.

Of course, when I’ve originally opened my App Store account, I’ve set the region to Germany and that’s why Apple shows me German podcasts. I don’t live in Germany anymore. Even worse in some sense, I am not listening to German-speaking podcasts at all.

II

Starting in late 2024, I noticed ChatGPT and Claude subtly changed their behaviors. I had a hunch they knew the physical location I am prompting from. This hunch turned out to be true.

I consider the steering of LLMs the most crucial skill for white-collar workers. Providing information, or rather, assumptions automatically to the LLM is like a backseat driver who grabs the steering wheel and yanks it left, assuming you wanted to turn that way.

Okay, I might’ve gone too far with the analogy there. Though, the fact that I could feel a vibe shift in the answers I got is enough reason for me to be ticked off by this.

I am aware that 2025 LLMs have a slight American and liberal bent by default. I consider this a feature, not a bug. Knowing the default behavior, its vanilla vibe, is a crucial part effective coworking with LLMs.

III

ChatGPT and Claude have a memory” feature, which automatically provides the LLM information from previous chats. This feature also changes the vibe of the answers you get back. I have no qualms with the feature though, as you can just turn it off, to get back to the default behavior.

Underrated reasons to be grateful: podcasts

Underrated reasons to be grateful: podcasts

  1. That subscribe wherever you get your podcasts” is a miracle
  2. That, because Plato was: fuckin jacked, a MMA commentator, taking psychedelics, into stoner theories and learning by asking questions, it means the most popular podcast host is closer to Plato than we appreciate
  3. That looks matter less
  4. That while people play status games about what they read and watch, few people play status games about which podcasts they listen to
  5. That the popularity of non-dubbed American podcasts are incentivizing more people to learn English, pushing humans closer to one universal human language
  6. That Bill Burr’s Shari’s Berries moment exists
  7. That if it’s true that speech is what really set mankind apart, then it is likely that podcasts might be Homo sapiens most unique art form
  8. That podcasts are an art form, and that both highly produced podcasts and lofi podcasts are listened to in equal measure
  9. That podcasts and their respective audience comments are hard to find, we are less captured by groupthink around podcasts
  10. That it’s truly keeping oral culture alive
  11. That podcast interviews are distinctively different from radio interviews, as radio hosts are more likely to try to make their guest appear dumb, while podcast hosts are more likely to try to make their guest appear smart
  12. That we have a more authentic conversation medium than TV and radio
  13. That it proved the world that Mike Tyson is truly the warrior philosopher of our time, he would’ve killed it in the Roman Empire

Inspired by Thanksgiving and Dynomight.