Live data from Hacker News

Anxiety as an algorithm

adamjuliangoldstein.com

31–40 of 50 posts

Re: Anxiety as an algorithm

#31

I have noticed a tendency (especially amongst HN articles and readers) to continually compare our bodies, minds, souls etc. to machines, as if they could be "biohacked" into perfection with just the right patches or software updates. Or that we could easily be replaced by the "correct AI" algorithm, if we could just get the simulation close enough. Not that I don't believe we aren't complex systems, we are, to be sur…

Totally agree. I think it comes from people who have a narrow technical background trying to extrapolate to humanities by analogy to what they know. They only have a hammer and see nails everywhere.. But HN is the wrong place to expect anything different :D

The original blog post is a pretty fantastic piece in support of teaching humanities in CS, I'd say!

Re: Anxiety as an algorithm

#32
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Totally agree. I think it comes from people who have a narrow technical background trying to extrapolate to humanities by analogy to what they know. They only have a hammer and see nails everywhere.. But HN is the wrong place to expect anything different :D

The original blog post is a pretty fantastic piece in support of teaching humanities in CS, I'd say!

Only when the humanities get taught a bit of science.

Re: Anxiety as an algorithm

#33

I have noticed a tendency (especially amongst HN articles and readers) to continually compare our bodies, minds, souls etc. to machines, as if they could be "biohacked" into perfection with just the right patches or software updates. Or that we could easily be replaced by the "correct AI" algorithm, if we could just get the simulation close enough. Not that I don't believe we aren't complex systems, we are, to be sur…

I didn't read the article as being about how to hack your brain for an extra 10% job performance, I read it as a model for dealing with mental illness and a prescription at the end which bears some resemblance to existing therapies.

There are anxiety disorders which can have a crippling effect on someone's ability to function and turn their life into a living hell. There are many entrepreneurs who suffer from them. Entrepreneurs tend to be out there on the fringes of what is neurotypical, with all the attendant pros and cons.

I suspect if your reaction is "personally I'd rather be myself than think this way," you're simply not the target audience of the article.

Re: Anxiety as an algorithm

#34
I have a problem where I have a very minimal experience of anxiety. It has always cause me issues with deadlines or forgetting things and I've generally been ok motivating myself through other means. I remember asking a psychiatrist about ways of increasing my anxiety -- he looked at me like I was nuts.

However, in the past few years I've experienced more of a general malaise from a sensitivity to being in a state of flow; when not being in one, i feel a sort of shame for squandering my time.

In short, I respect anxiety as an effective way of getting things done. Everything in moderation.

Re: Anxiety as an algorithm

#35

I have noticed a tendency (especially amongst HN articles and readers) to continually compare our bodies, minds, souls etc. to machines, as if they could be "biohacked" into perfection with just the right patches or software updates. Or that we could easily be replaced by the "correct AI" algorithm, if we could just get the simulation close enough. Not that I don't believe we aren't complex systems, we are, to be sur…

Evolution is a very simple self-optimising algorithm that's been allowed to run for a very long time. The way I see it, algorithms often have room for improvement. Turns out, self-optimisation with no oversight for 400M years produces something with a lot of room for improvement.

Re: Anxiety as an algorithm

#36

I have noticed a tendency (especially amongst HN articles and readers) to continually compare our bodies, minds, souls etc. to machines, as if they could be "biohacked" into perfection with just the right patches or software updates. Or that we could easily be replaced by the "correct AI" algorithm, if we could just get the simulation close enough. Not that I don't believe we aren't complex systems, we are, to be sur…

Evolution is a very simple self-optimising algorithm that's been allowed to run for a very long time. The way I see it, algorithms often have room for improvement. Turns out, self-optimisation with no oversight for 400M years produces something with a lot of room for improvement.

See, I don't buy this (I'm not arguing with you, just initiating a conversation).

There is no doubt we are incredibly complex, so much so that we've not been able to crack the puzzle that is "us". We invent crude medicines to carpet-bomb some bacteria/virus, which can potentially harm another part of the body, we staple cadaver-parts onto our knees to move well again, we're incredible crude in a bio-hackish way.

We've not even begun to understand what goes on in our heads.

Room for improvement? I'm not sure we are there yet. Room for understanding what is going on? A lot of room there. Its a massive empty hangar to put all our future knowledge into.

Bottom line is ... I don't think we should go about pulling strings without caution because it will not happen without consequence.

Re: Anxiety as an algorithm

#37

I have noticed a tendency (especially amongst HN articles and readers) to continually compare our bodies, minds, souls etc. to machines, as if they could be "biohacked" into perfection with just the right patches or software updates. Or that we could easily be replaced by the "correct AI" algorithm, if we could just get the simulation close enough. Not that I don't believe we aren't complex systems, we are, to be sur…

Evolution is a very simple self-optimising algorithm that's been allowed to run for a very long time. The way I see it, algorithms often have room for improvement. Turns out, self-optimisation with no oversight for 400M years produces something with a lot of room for improvement.

What even is 'optimal' though. As far as evolution is concerned, we are surviving to pass our genes on to the next generation, so we already are 'optimal'. Going any further than that is just bringing in social and cultural biases about what 'optimal' is.

Re: Anxiety as an algorithm

#38
I'd love to know why my algorithm cannot finish the work and lead me to mostly positive path and yet allow me to suffer negative context repeatedly. What's the theory behind that ? broken maturation process ?

Re: Anxiety as an algorithm

#39

I have noticed a tendency (especially amongst HN articles and readers) to continually compare our bodies, minds, souls etc. to machines, as if they could be "biohacked" into perfection with just the right patches or software updates. Or that we could easily be replaced by the "correct AI" algorithm, if we could just get the simulation close enough. Not that I don't believe we aren't complex systems, we are, to be sur…

I have two thoughts on this:

- I believe the sophistication and complexity of what makes us feel living forms is still way outside the current science radar and that all that think they're onto an improvement are myopic

- the dig down process of improving the somatic layer (bodies, cells) seems backward to me, our "souls" live on another plane, and doesn't really need much improvements down below. I'd rather see a cultural effort toward.. well culture. Simpler, leaner bonds and sharing.

Re: Anxiety as an algorithm

#40
I think this post makes some interesting points, but anxiety is a slightly more complex subject. As a founder of a big company, there are ways it can go wrong, and being worried about those things is probably correct. A rational anxiety is not really an anxiety at all, but a fear. When the fear response is decoupled from threats in reality, that is when a response is considered anxious. Unlike in the case of the immune system, where more is better, with anxieties, the reverse is true. "Optimal human performance" exists at the point of accurate threat detection, for example if you were out hunting for your tribe and you heard something odd, it would be very useful for you to speak up, if would not be useful for you to suffer from a (non real) social anxiety, worry about making a fool of yourself and not say anything. The noise in the bush = potential real threat. The social anxiety = inaccurate mentalised threat.

Inaccurate mentalised threats are constructed in the brain for very good reason. Typically they are real when they form, and are required in order to stabilise the caregiving environment when young. (If mum/dad gets very angry when I make a fuss trying to get what I want, I quickly develop a fear of standing up for myself. This fear is useful to placate mum/dad, but not useful when I'm an adult and getting walked over.)

Strangely, the brain seems to have its own method to explain to the owner what these inaccurate mentalised threats are - dreams. And I can assure the author that the cure to nightmares is not as simple as recognising they are not real - there is a cure to them though. Dreams were extremely important to my own development/de-anxious-ing, so I wrote a paper on this function during my Msc in Psychology. It is free to download here: https://psyarxiv.com/k6trz, and was discussed on HN here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19143590

Post reply on HN