About

Intro

The komusō - monks of empty, priests of nothingness. They came from rags and from nobility. By the order of shōguns they were granted the right of free travel. They had no faces, no identity. Fungible. In their flute-induced trance they had no names for they are all Kosh.

I’m the second guy from the left.

Or am I?

Hello, friend. Now that your tabula has been rasa I invite you on a journey.

About personality traits

Personality traits seems like a reasonable foundation since they’re fairly stable and tend to explain a lot.

Or maybe you have been somewhat troubled by how this peculiar term personality […] has become a repository of so many adjectives - one that violates Aristotle’s cardinal metaphysical rule against reducing a substance to its properties.
~ Sorting the Self, Christopher Yates

I’m referring to the Big 5 or O.C.E.A.N. model, since it’s the crown jewel of modern psychometry. In fact all other models that depend on self-reporting are a subset of Big 5 done with varying levels of quality. In this section some words, like Extroversion, although have a meaning in the everyday language, should rather be interpreted as precise terms from said model. I’ll attempt to capitalise them to further denote that. Equivocation is the mind-killer.

The quotes in this section, unless stated otherwise, are from Understand Myself report of yours truly and the adjectives (“high”, etc.) denote “relative to a [non-existing] perfectly average human”. I aimed to pick out the fragments that apply to me the most.

I’d try to highlight the lowlights as well - trait manifestations are neither good nor bad, they’re a particular trade-off.

High Extroversion

People with high levels of extraversion are comparatively enthusiastic, talkative, assertive in social situations, and gregarious. […]. They tend to speak first and most often in meetings. They can be captivating and convincing. They will often be the first to act. […] They are positive and optimistic. They warm up quickly to other people.

although,

People high in extraversion are more dominant in social situations, particularly if they are also low in agreeableness. Less agreeable extraverts tend to be self-centered. […] They don’t generally wait for others to lead the way. They can be more impulsive than average, and can act without thinking.

In other words: I have a strong bias for action, maybe not this strong bias for action… yet? I laughed while reading about it though. I may take charge when needed (though actually prefer second-in-command). And “when needed” is often subject to my own interpretation.

Drive on straight through the roadblox
Let me see, let me see what you’ve got
~ The Prodigy

This means I perform best with either a lot of freedom, autonomy and resources at my disposal (so much can depend upon a wheel barrow) or a strong, competent leader who’s not slacking. Preferably both.

I have 0 problem with talking to people, talking to people on the phone (I’m aware that some folks hate that), talking to a lot of people at once (see my talks!). Also: I need to talk to people. Participate. Interact.

High Neuroticism

I have it on good authority, from different sources that it’s not immediately obvious that I score high on trait Neuroticism.

High levels of neuroticism may interfere with both success and satisfaction in relationships and career. […] They are also more likely to be unhappy, anxious and irritable when just thinking or remembering, and when they encounter a genuine problem. […] They tend to experience somewhat higher levels of doubt and worry, become embarrassed a bit more easily, are self-conscious and may get discouraged more rapidly in the face of threat and punishment.

Seems awful, right? Well, check this out:

People with high levels of neuroticism are more likely to think that things have gone wrong in the past, are going wrong now, and will continue to go wrong into the future.

Now that’s pretty useful! Though this gift of sight comes at terrible price. I mean it in some sort of crude sense, which no vulgarity, no humor, no overstatement can quite extinguish.

They can be stirred up and upset and, once angry or irritated, take a longer than average time to calm down. They can be argumentative and lose their composure.

In practice I’m quite good at handling short-lived, concrete stressful situations (think fire!). I hate perpetual vague sense of something’s-not-right though. My working theory is that my negative emotion baseline is elevated so a spike is not as disturbing by comparison, yet and additional constant effect is just too much.

Individuals high in volatility [an aspect of neuroticism] tend to vary in their mood.

That’s accurate. Miłosz Brzeziński defines emotional stability (kindly please notice: lowercase) as the time to recover after reacting to disturbing event. I think mine is significantly lower than average.

I highly encourage reaching out if you believe this part might be problematic in our upcoming venture. It may, that’s a fact, but likely in a vastly different area and not nearly as much as you might initially think.

Brief intermission

Let me interject for a moment. ~~What you guys are referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux…~~ You may be reasonably confused at this point. I’ll go on more about it at the end. Doesn’t positive emotion mean no negative emotions and vice versa? Well, no.

Being high in scores of positive emotion is generally an element of the independent trait of extraversion. Neurotic extraverts, for example, would experience high levels of both positive and negative emotional states, a kind of “emotional roller coaster”.
~ Wikipedia back by a journal

Is it as fun as it sounds, especially when you add low Agreeableness to the mix? Yes!

Moderately high Industriousness (Conscientiousness)

I’m explicitly split the subdimensions of conscientiousness - they seem to make more sense this way, although I see how they’re connected.

Moderately industrious people […] are generally quite dutiful and tend not to put things off or mess them up. They also tend to finish what they start, pretty much on schedule. Moderately industrious people have some genuine interest in considering how to accomplish more in less time, with fewer resources, and can focus consistently on the task at hand. They don’t live to work, however, and do not always have to be doing something useful.

In a room of 100 people around 30 would be more industrious than I am. So I’m not the best grinder, but no slacker either.

Moderately industrious people are quite likely to judge shirkers or people who are incompetent in a negative manner.

Indeed.

Very high Orderliness (Conscientiousness)

Very orderly people are uncommonly disturbed and disgusted by mess and chaos. They keep everything neat, tidy and organized. […] They make and stick to schedules. They like everything exactly where it should be – and very much want to make sure that everything stays where it belongs. They are detail-oriented to a degree that can border on the obsessive. They can be very good at ensuring that complex sensitive processes are managed properly and carefully.

Pretty balanced IMO.

They are strikingly rule-abiding, and insist that rules are scrupulously observed. They require and crave routine and predictability. […] They want to do things by the book.

Well now, inflexible much? ~~Au contraire!~~ maybe a bit. I wouldn’t say it’s exactly “craving” routine. More like ordering the affairs of the day until an optimal blueprint is produced. Same goes for the “rule and book” thingy - it’s true, however it is by no means obvious which code I’m such a meticulous follower of.

Exceptionally low Agreeableness

Agreeableness is a very complex trait, with marked positive and negative elements all along its distribution. Because of this, higher scores and lower scores need to be explained at the same time. People high in agreeableness are nice: compliant, nurturing, kind, naively trusting and conciliatory. However, because of their tendency to avoid conflict, they often dissemble and hide what they think. People low in agreeableness are not so nice: stubborn, dominant, harsh, skeptical, competitive and, in the extreme, even predatory. However, they tend to be straightforward, even blunt, so you know where they stand.

If this sounds hard-core to you - it’s not as extreme. But no picnic either. My Neuroticism and Orderliness keeps me in check more often than not - so don’t expect tantrums or scenes. I’ll reiterate - this is not agreeableness as in “getting along”, this is Agreeableness the trait.

As mentioned earlier - the traits are relative to the “average” and there are bounds on a person that functions in a society - too agreeable will be clinically codependent, not agreeable enough will end up killed or in jail. What I mean is that the differences aren’t that staggering and you’ll not see immediately low Agreeableness markers. In fact an appearance study I did (n=6) supports this claim.

My “nice” behaviours may be just coming from a different place than the hyperuranic niceness.

They […] will happily sacrifice peace and harmony to make a point or (if conscientious) to get things done. People may find them painfully straightforward and blunt.

In other words:

Because of their tendency to engage in conflict, at a moment’s notice, people exceptionally low in agreeableness do not sacrifice medium to long-term stability and functionality for the sake of short-term peace.

Better.

They let you know exactly what they think, when they think it, whether you want to know it or not. […] People exceptionally low in agreeableness are therefore less likely to suffer from resentment or to harbour invisible anger.

Maybe not instantly. But it’s likely to get to that. Unless…

They make certain their own needs and interests are attended to, and are extraordinarily unwilling to sacrifice for the sake of other people’s comfort.

What if our interest align though? What if my success is contingent on your success?

Very high Openness

People with very high levels of openness are extremely likely to be characterized by others as uncommonly smart, creative, exploratory, intelligent and visionary. They are strikingly interested in learning, and are constantly acquiring new abilities and skills. They are very curious and exploratory. They are very interested in abstract thinking, philosophy, and the meaning of belief systems and ideologies. […] They are very imaginative, and love to daydream and reflect on things.

Oh, stop, you’re making me blush. Have you noticed “hyperuranic” though?

People very high in openness can see old things in strikingly new ways. They can formulate any single problem in an uncommonly diverse range of ways, and can generate an atypically large number of problem-solving solutions. […] They are very radical thinkers. They shake things up, particularly if they are also disagreeable and assertive.

Sooner or later I’ll take you for a ride. I’ve seen worlds where crypto cats own their crypto hats!

They will continually seek change, often to make things better, but also just for the sake of change. They require an outlet for their creative ability, or they cannot thrive.

Yeah, but remember the Industriousness - I’ll get tired eventually. A little later than most, a bit sooner than few. There are also a lot of things that can be tinkered with and have I mentioned that everything is interesting? I’m building Theseus a new ship… or am I?

They can be impractical […]

And needlessly theatrical.

And redundant. And repetitive. And redundant. And repetitive!

And then the dragons arrived.

On systems

Knowing many stories is wisdom.
Knowing no stories is ignorance.
Knowing only one story is death.
~ Past Grand Archdruid John Michael Greer

I’ve told you a few stories, but what you interact with will be a system. Alan Kay has put it beautifully in this keynote. A person is a system, more than the sum of parts for the parts have relationships with regards to one aother. In fact it’s sometimes useful to think about a persona as a collection of dreadfully distinct subpersonalities.

When individuals are extraverted and conscientious, they are more productive than if they are introverted and conscientious.

The stories will twist and tangle in a myriad of colours and swarm of shapes. In my case apply one additional spin to the resulting image. I consider myself not only a special snowflake, but a also particularly complex one.

I exhibit neurodivergency markers and treat my own sanity as an elaborate balancing act rather than a given. This is how you find madness in methods and method in madness.

Going forward it’s more of a loose collection of notes rather than a coherent page - work in process, though

About values

I’ve mentioned “the code” earlier Strong opinions weakly held <- ish? Likely much less stable than personality What are values and how they’re different from beliefs -> values are somewhat a predecision -> values dictate action -> values means you value something more than something else, without comparison it’s just a wish

I can do an infinite amount of no work in no time at all

Priority: finding better truth

…

That is, while there is value in the items on the right, we value the items on the left more.

Learning/exploring over exploiting

…

But there was now no man to whom AC might give the answer of the last question. No matter. The answer – by demonstration – would take care of that, too.
~ The Last Question

Impact over making money

The Harkonnens have not water enough to buy the smallest child among us.

…

Humanity over structure

… Fairness is treating different people differently …

Calculation over apperances

Directness over clever plots

…

Last but not least: important people should wear some kind of accessory designating their status. Like fancy hats. CEOs should wear fancy hats!

About profession and specialisation

Specialization is for insects.
~ Robert Heinlein

I’ve been asked on a number of ocasions:

How many years of experience do you have flopnaxing the ropjar?

Well, that’s not a very sophisticated question. First of all, in the last 4 months ropjar was entirely transformed and no longer resembles anything flopnaxable. I’ve worked with ropjar 2 years ago, I reconfigured the rilkef about 3 times over the course of 6 months, each time it took 5 days. What number is right? 2? 15/365? 0.5? If you want a real number - that’d be Π, but I might have something perfect [for you] - 3!

Now it is demanded you are specialist first, generalist second, especially since programming is perceived as this “super hard thing” to learn that most people figure it impossible to know more than a few things at once. While developers understand it isn’t, people recruiting them believe such stuff […].
~ hn comment

Aside from being immensly unclear and loaded - it also doesn’t matter! I’ve had 0 years of experience with icalendar, but I can read RFCs, so ~3 hours later I’ve produced this. Don’t focus on the Python thing. It could’ve been LISP or Haskell or…

In software, things change so often and so rapidly that you need people that can succeed at just about any programming task that you throw at them. ~ Joel

Additional recommended: Master Foo and the Recruiter

About what can I do for you

I’m a shaman. We live in a capitalist, nominally meritocratic, somewhat classless, post-industrial society. And a shaman, unlike a kitchen appliance - does not exist with the specific purpose of being useful.

The question “what can I do for you” is loaded. For the people that want to go beyond I’d say: think one thought and then think “acquisition of insight”. Think “psychotechnology”. If your mind does the mental equivalent of a crisp ding, ding, ding - proceed to the next section.

According to Inner War Saga, shamans were (also?) circumventing the analytical mind to either explain the world or to allow the aformentioned insight to actually reach a person. There are writen records of native people of Australia ignoring HMS Endeavour when it first came, because it was so radically different from anything they’ve ever seen.

More keywords that resonate with me: research, high leverage, open-ended, prototype, interactive, participatory, meaning, system, learning, knowledge, cognitive, stories, myth, finance

What does that mean?
~ Julia

If you don’t get the above (some will, some won’t - no worries) let’s try this way: I solve problems. This is a gross oversimplification, but may be easier to work with. We need to talk markets at this point.

There are many general problem solvers on the market. Some have access to vast networks far exceeding mine. Some will be far more efficient at certain classes of problems. Some will be cheaper. Every one of them will have their limitations though. I do too. It might just happen that for a particular endeavour my limitations are the only acceptable ones.

Entering into the realm of probabilities: I think I might help you the most with idiosyncratic problems. Problems that are not very well defined. Where the way forward is by no means obvious. Heavily constrained solution space. Weird. Abstract. Dissipative systems. Because sometimes you just need to

Make it personal.
~ Quellcrist Falconer

I have some expertise in programming computers. I can think; and write what I think; and speak what I wrote. I know how to do a few other things. Apparently I’m an engineer after all. And will learn whatever is necessary to get the job done. I hope by now you see know how missing the point “what exactly do you do” is. It just happened that so far I’ve used computers the most.

Never mind computers. Ira, the most sophisticated machine the human mind can build has in it the limitations of the human mind. Anyone who thinks otherwise does not understand the Second Law of Thermodynamics.
~ Lazarus Long

TODO: The deal from the end of-> to my page -> https://paulgraham.com/gh.html

About ethics - what I won’t do for you

Also: I’m unbelievably bad at enumerating past events in a chronological order. It’s just how my mind works. If the past is connected to something it is there - it’s just doesn’t stand quite well on it’s own for me. So I totally abhor the practice of status reports. I’ve got no idea “what’s up”. I can use tools to probably reconstruct it. Don’t love it.

About what next

I’ve been thinking about this stuff very seriously for over a decade, and I love that you’re the first person who’s really let me implement it.
~ Sean Coates on Matter’s privacy approach

When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be. ~ Lao Tzu

v- TODO: a page like this https://chelseatroy.com/are-you-hiring/ v- TODO: approach to work https://alexanderobenauer.com/work/ https://www.leanessays.com/2019/04/what-if-your-team-wrote-code-for-737.html?m=1 gardener, but also an engineer xD http://chrisaitchison.com/2011/05/03/you-are-not-a-software-engineer/ also explain: raven ring

v- TODO: inspiration of sorts? https://aliceininternet.medium.com/who-am-i-what-do-i-do-1e496c4222cf

Interaction points, np: zinzino

I shall be telling this with a sigh Somewhere ages and ages hence: Two roads diverged in a wood, and I— I took all of them.