This is the same misunderstanding as the one that leads to angst at interview selection. You don't have a social obligation to do anything. It's just that you share some characteristics with a lot of kooks.
For instance, I have a few views that would flip the bozo bit on most people (I am anti-organ-donation, pro-lower-quality-healthcare, anti-Office-of-the-First-Lady, and I think people tried to scapegoat Andrew Wakefield for a lot of shit) so I don't usually state those views and attempt to explain until people know I'm not a bozo.
I know that P(bozo | having these views) is pretty high, so I first have to demonstrate that P(bozo) is low in the first place.
P(can't write code | can't write code in an interview) is pretty high. P(isn't that good | claims to be good) is pretty high.
You know you so you know you are not a bozo, that you can write code, that you are good. But the other party is operating in the space of not-just-you. It's just an information asymmetry that works against you. So, if the social validation matters to you, you have to symmetrify that in a trusted fashion. And honestly, life is short, no human has infinite time to evaluate another human, so your symmetrification had better be speedy if you want the effects you desire.
What does that mean? What bigger goal lies behind that?
> you have to symmetrify that in a trusted fashion.
Yes I think so too. And I suppose sometimes someone who, say, wears formal clothes and a suite, does that not because s/he wants to dress like that, but because s/he knows about this too
Haha we both know it's probably best for me not to elucidate here but the gist of it is that I'm convinced that cutting healthcare requirements can vastly increase healthcare access and that access to bad care is far superior to inaccessible good care and that we are in a situation where we are forcing the trade-off. I don't really care to speak more of it on this forum because it's hard to get the nuance out in text.
> And I suppose sometimes someone who, say, wears formal clothes and a suite, does that not because s/he wants to dress like that, but because s/he knows about this too
Almost suspected you knew me. Except that I've since developed an appreciation.
For instance, I have a few views that would flip the bozo bit on most people (I am anti-organ-donation, pro-lower-quality-healthcare, anti-Office-of-the-First-Lady, and I think people tried to scapegoat Andrew Wakefield for a lot of shit) so I don't usually state those views and attempt to explain until people know I'm not a bozo.
I know that P(bozo | having these views) is pretty high, so I first have to demonstrate that P(bozo) is low in the first place.
P(can't write code | can't write code in an interview) is pretty high. P(isn't that good | claims to be good) is pretty high.
You know you so you know you are not a bozo, that you can write code, that you are good. But the other party is operating in the space of not-just-you. It's just an information asymmetry that works against you. So, if the social validation matters to you, you have to symmetrify that in a trusted fashion. And honestly, life is short, no human has infinite time to evaluate another human, so your symmetrification had better be speedy if you want the effects you desire.