DjiboutiJon

Wanted to first comment that it's funny that the screen name "pessimizer" is advocating their definition of optimism. That made me crack a smile.

I am not sure where I fall on the above two threads, seemingly strongly felt opinions on both sides. But if I can share what my takeaway from the parent of this reply, infuse it with my own experience, just in case it helps somebody or somebody finds it interesting:

It's that in the deepest moments of anxiety and depression, it can feel incredibly exhilarating to think about all the reasons that one is brought to this place of darkness. And to _know_ them to be correct, especially enticing are the global explanations. I notice this most strikingly in my mother, for whom all explanations need to be terrible, omnipresent, and incurable. "The reason that X treatment will never be available freely is because corporations have existed for all time as gatekeepers and sit in delight that they will never ever help an innocent soul who couldn't pay for it, so unless we have a revolution we should probably all just wait around until we die". These are our "conversations" weekly and have been for years. But I notice this in myself. She's not saying it because she's going to start petitioning against the corporations, she's saying it because it feels satisfactory (I have confirmed this by many a time digging into her rationale). And I do the same thing. In my darkest moments, I can talk endlessly about all the reasons. Quite convincingly, at least to myself, which is all that matters in that internal dialogue.

When I am most depressed, I very painfully make myself begin to exercise, daily or twice daily, and it's never cured me, but it sure helps. I sometimes wish that I could convince my mom that if she used 10% of the energy she does crafting the perfect mental narrative for why the world is unfixable- so why bother, and directed it towards proven things for long-term health, physically and mentally (restarting therapy, considering experimental therapies, exercising, diet, sleep!) that maybe _her_ world wouldn't seem so unfixable. Maybe even _the_ world.

I haven't succeeded yet, but if anyone has any ideas I am all ears.

I wonder myself if the "memory" is just inputting the previous dialogue as input to every subsequent query. I think this would probably get quite slow after awhile however.

As a side note, I tried to use ChatGPT to collaboratively build a Chrome extension. It seemed a little out of date, preferring Manifest V2 and also not entirely "correct" in how it generated code to match my intent.

Has anyone else tried and had luck with this? I wonder if ChatGPT will be limited for niche integration type code (Modding games maybe, Chrome extensions in this example, etc) where there are not as many code examples out there.

Further, the development cycle and ability to test easily for some of these integrations is itself a barrier so I wouldn't put all the blame on the language models.

You rock! Thank you

The download links are broken on the berkeley website, so I am not able to proceed with trying the project out. There also are no examples on the github project of using the code or what sort of output could be expected, which would be very helpful I think.

I think it is great you found something that works for you.

The main point of both your comment + the article (which, I also haven't been able to read yet) is that you need to find what works for you by trying things.

Personally, melotonin only gives me 6 hours of sound sleep (many times I have tried to get more, last night being one of them). But in 6 hours from sleeping almost like clockwork I will be awake- and quite wide awake. It ususally takes another hour to fall back asleep, or sometimes I just decide to be awake.

So personally, moving towards the no-supplement tact is appealing even if it is much harder in artificial environments.

You put into very readable language what I have felt to be true for some time.

What I appreciate about your comment also is you mention the necessity to understand their presuppositions and reason that way (at least sometimes). I feel like the issue with many discourses going on right now is a lack of good faith understanding of the other "sides" presuppositions.

And yet, it can be so painful for someone to even pretend they can identify with the following belief for example this belief

> So if science leads you to the conclusion that life has no transcendent purpose (and it does) then, on their world-view, science must be wrong, full stop

The much easier tact for lets say a standard pro-science metropolitan is to decide the YEC-er person actually knows what is "true" (e.g. what the metropolitan thinks is obvious) but is actively choosing to do wrong. Then you can refute their point as purposely provoking _and_ also put them in the "bad people" box with one little mental facade.

I'm not trying to build a purposely weak example of either group, I think all humans have a simplifying mechanism when it comes to viewpoints/ideas and that we need that to survive in some sense- and that we do it all the time probably in benign ways. But acknowledging what other people believe is a great skill to build I think.

I think that is fair- I can't judge whether it is a tough book, or a poorly written book, or an unusual book even. I still however this this comment is unjustified assuming "bad book" means bad in the all-encompassing sense:

> Honestly it's a bad book and people would be better off literally just reading the Quora question and answer that inspired it.

Disclaimer: I am a great admirer of Jordan Peterson, John Vervaeke, and other professors who are researching meaning.

> he just about admitts that he blames one of his women patients for her own rape

I think you've done a fantastic job strawmanning the chapter and book and man to the first story of the chapter to suit your ideological frame of reference.

The chapter for anyone who wants to read it for themselves is Chapter 9: Assume the person you are listening to might know something you don't. See any irony between that and the immediate shutting down of any insight he might of had because of a biasing mechanism?

> Honestly it's a bad book

I think you are doing many people seeking meaning and stress relief at this time a huge disservice with this comment. It's a tough book, not for everyone. Written for people who like ideas and need wisdom in my estimation. Anyone who wants to understand 12 rules for life better after their first read through- I recommend the youtube series where Jordan goes through the Bible's stories. I know you may have shunted that off because you are not religious. I'm not either but what the series is- is Jordan Peterson basically explaining his life's work into the wisdom and psychology of ancient stories humanity has kept alive for our existence. Take care

> Please don't respond to this if you disagree, just give it a down vote so the discussion stays on topic.

So that the forum stays an echo-chamber? That's not why I come to hackernews. On HN (and sometimes, but less on Reddit) I can be sure there will be a respectful conversation of the all the viewpoints. That doesn't take away from the discussion, it adds to it.

Thank you for the advice. I've been off social media for a year or so, exercise 3-5 times a week, and eat breakfast lunch and dinner. I like the notion of seeking more balance.

Thanks again.

What you say makes sense, and I understand that it may be anecdotal but I was hoping you had some sources that could enlighten a foreigner like myself to why/how the above explanations make sense? I would appreciate it!

I ask because the Americans/South Americans around me seem only to be able react to the media hype/lack thereof.

For example all my friends from SA are on IG all day saying that the paucity of international coverage on the Amazon fires shows marked unfairness, which may be true- but they haven't investigated at all beyond the realm of "forest good, fire bad".

For my own sake, I desire to know the context of this fire, in the society which it is affecting and not from the United States point of view.

Any sources I can read about this?