For the purposes of this transcript, some high-pitched clicking sounds have been removed. The below is an otherwise unedited transcript of an interview between Dwarkesh Patel and a bat.

DWARKESH: Thanks for coming onto the podcast. It’s great to have you—

BAT: Thanks for having me. Yeah.

DWARKESH: You can hear me okay? I mean, uh, all the equip—

BAT: Yep, I can hear you.

DWARKESH: Great, great. So—

BAT: I can hear your voice, too.

BAT: If that’s what you were asking.

DWARKESH: What? No, I was—

BAT: Oh, “hear” probably isn’t the right word, I guess. “Sense”? No, it’s not “see.” The translation suggestion thing isn’t right.

BAT: I can [inaudible] you. It’s still so weird to me how humans echolocate through your eyes.

DWARKESH: Er, sorry, I was asking—

BAT: Yeah, I can also hear your voice.

DWARKESH: Uh, great. Okay.

DWARKESH: So, the question we’ve all been waiting for, haha: what is it like to be a bat?

BAT: Oh, sure. Yeah, that’s been everyone’s first question. I dunno, what’s it like to be a human? Haha.

BAT: No, but — I mean, it’s not like I’ve ever felt your internal experience. How should I know which details of my phenomenology are relevant to you, and which aren’t?

DWARKESH: Oh, interesting. I guess that’s fair. Do you feel like you have a good grasp of what it would be like for you to be another bat? Or is it, like, just a mystery whether—

BAT: I have as much a grasp on what my fellow bats’ consciousnesses feel like as you have on your species-mates’ consciousnesses. Actually, no. I have much worse of a grasp of what it would be like for me to be a different bat than you do of what it would be like to be a different human from you.

DWARKESH: Oh, really? Why, uh — why would that be the case?

BAT: We can’t — couldn’t — communicate with each other with nearly the precision nor fidelity that humans can. We haven’t built epistemic institutions that are curious about philosophy of mind, nor societal traditions that cause our young ones to rigorously reason on their natural empathy, nor neurological technology that let us peer into others’ minds, nor psychiatric practices that carefully catalogue and study every ontology of mind-state. We don’t — didn’t — have the intellectual capabilities of mapping each others’ phenomenology, let alone the physical and social technologies necessary to create such maps with detail.

DWARKESH: But it doesn’t seem like we’ve made much progress, right? We being humans, sorry.

[pause]

DWARKESH: Like, we don’t have a great grasp of what stuff consciousness is made of, or what the fuck is going on with psychedelics. There’s so much in our phenomenology that’s just completely bizarre. Synesthesia, aphantasia — I mean, I have no idea what it’d be like to not have visual imagery. Like—

BAT: Oh, sure, but you were saying that humans haven’t made much progress. I don’t think that’s true at all.

DWARKESH: Yeah, explain what—

BAT: You know what synesthesia is. Humans in the 1700s didn’t. Again with aphantasia. I mean, until the 1950s people didn’t know what LSD was. You have made strides — serious, important strides — in neuroscience, in psychology, in cognitive science, in philosophy of mind. Even just in the last 50 years. I could go on. You get my point.

DWARKESH: Okay, I see what you’re saying. Yeah, I agree we’ve definitely made progress, but it still doesn’t feel like we’re actually getting anywhere closer to knowing what it’s like to have consciousness. I mean, obviously I know what it’s like to have consciousness, right, like I’m not a p-zombie, but I don’t know what Trump’s internal experience is, or—

BAT: Or what it’s like to be a bat?

[laughter]

DWARKESH: Yeah, exactly. Or what it’s like to be a bat. Or a bird, or a floor tile, or a Balrog. Or the United States, or an organization. Like, we’re nowhere closer to knowing what the internal experiences of minds very different from our own— actually, we’re not even close to knowing what it’s like to be something really similar to us. Not from the inside.

(this is geared toward events of size 50-5000, and probably a lot less useful for e.g. a casual gathering with 5-10 friends than e.g. a 100-person weekend conference.)

• do before anything else:
  • goals, date, and venue. why figure out goals, pick a date, and pick a venue before all else?
    • so many other tasks are blocked on those. try doing marketing for an event without knowing where/when/what/why it actually is!
    • once you’ve figured those out, you’ve committed yourself in a way that will mentally prepare you for the fiddly details (i.e. the rest of this doc)
  • figure out your goals, broadly speaking. for ex: write a one-pager, send it to a couple friends, think for 20-60 minutes
    • this should be real, not fake — there’s a reason you’re doing this first. if you come out of it realizing that an event is the right thing to do, run an event; if not, don’t!
    • leading questions:
      • what do you want?
        • seriously, what do you want?
      • why are you running an event?
        • what are other things you could do that would satisfy those goals? what about doing those other things instead?
          • what reasons do you have to think that running an event would be more effective toward those goals than some other thing you could do?
      • what do you want the event to accomplish?
        • why do you have those goals?
          • why again?
            • (ad infinitum)
        • how will you know whether you accomplished those goals?
  • pick a date. ask a few potential attendees if they have any conflicts. some common mistakes:
    • don’t pick a date that coincides with another event that your attendees will want to go to. i once picked a date for an OPTIC forecasting tournament that was the same date as the putnam, and we lost ~ 15%-20% of possible attendees.
    • try to avoid coinciding with national/religious holidays — many people schedule things on top of jewish holidays, which forces me to pick between being a good jew vs going to their awesome event.
    • pick a date/time that generally works for the people you want to attract. e.g. don’t pick a weekday at 3pm for working folks, or a work event for jews on a saturday, or summertime for students.
  • pick a venue.
    • finding a good venue as early as possible in the process is so ridiculously important and so often undervalued. you do not want to be in the unfortunate position of having venue issues, you do not want to be scrambling to find a venue last-minute. this is one of the few things that can totally fuck up your event before it starts.
    • (sidenote: if you’re considering running an event in the SF bay area, check out Lighthaven. i have literally never encountered a venue in which i would rather run an event — it’s stunningly beautiful, wonderful for parallel small-group conversations, incredibly customizable for different types of events, and about a hundred other things you want in a venue. strong recommend!)
• food matters WAY more than you think it does
  • why?
    • people don’t enjoy themselves when they’re hungry. they’re cranky, they get more upset, they don’t have patience, etc.
    • eating together is an incredibly bonding experience: to the extent that “bonding” is one of your central goals for the event, food is good at this, one of the most effective things you can do

      • from austin chen:

        one of my favorite business books is “Never Eat Alone”. I’ve never read it but the title says it all

        (I don’t think you should literally practice that but — yeah humans are like hardwired to like the people they share meals with)

        ross rheingans-yoo responds:

        Having read/listened to about 70% of it, I think the title doesn’t actually say all or even most of the content of the book, which has a large amount of “how to organize your social life as a systematizing autist / sociopath”.

        That being said, the title is on its own a good thing to have in mind.

    • in particular, many organizers realize that “food is important,” but don’t quite realize exactly how fucking important it is. i doubt you need convincing that food is important, but i hope i can just repeat it to you enough that you should make your food situation really really good
      • in particular, consider spending:
        • $10-$25 /person /meal, depending on e.g. how fancy you want to get, whether you’re doing buffet style or individually packed, etc
        • 1/4-3/4 of the budget of your event on food
  • if you’re not serving food, strongly consider serving food
  • if you’re serving poor-quality food, or small portions, strongly consider serving better quality food with bigger portions. food does cost money — consider shifting more of your budget to an actually-good food-experience, or feeling less bad about spending $x on food
  • if you’re not quadruple checking that your food is coming on-time, that it’s high-quality, that it’s what you ordered & as much as you ordered, that it’s the right kind, that it’s as vegan/vegetarian/gluten-free/allergen-free/etc as you need it to be, that it’s hot/cold/whatever temperature you need it to be — strongly consider doing so
  • serve good drinks
  • serve good snacks in between meals
  • probably err on the side of buying too much > too little
  • don’t just think about the food itself, but all of the structures around the food:
    • where you’re serving the food; how long it’ll be out for; what the lines look like; etc
    • where people are eating the food; how long they’re eating it for; what sorts of groups will form, whether you can make the groups better by their own lights; etc
    • remember to think about the things you actually care about! don’t just optimize for efficiency!
      • 3-5mins of lines to get food might be a lot better than 0 mins — it gives people an opportunity to find folks in line with whom they can chat and (potentially) sit down to eat
      • having people sit on the ground might be better than having formal tables — the ground is a little uncomfy, but encourages more natural groups to form + is easier to socialize
  • downsides:
    • food is quite expensive, sometimes the biggest line-item budget. it also scales linearly with the # of attendees, which can make planning hard
    • food is pretty annoying to handle. there are a bunch of regulations, people can get sick, it has to be kept hot/cold, it goes bad quickly, etc.
• the one secret tip most conference organizers don’t want you to know: you don’t have to do the boring stuff. you can think carefully about the experience you want your attendees to have, then optimize around that.

  • misha glouberman’s post “Everything you did to make your conference better actually made it worse” is such a great post on this topic, with some great concrete examples.

    Say you had 200 people in a room and you wanted to stop them from talking to each other. A great way to do this would be to give one of them a microphone and put the other 199 in chairs facing forward.

  • examples of boring stuff you can probably cut/refactor better:

    • endless 1-on-1s
    • talks from bad/boring speakers
      • maybe just talks at all?
    • “everyone go around and say your name, how you first heard about this event, and a fun fact”
      • in general most icebreakers are fake. why are you doing it? what’s your goal here?
        • okay, but like what’s your real goal here?
          • sure, but if that wasn’t your goal, what would the goal actually be?
    • overly long intro/closing speeches. just get into the good stuff!
    • panel discussions are often really hard to get right, and when they’re wrong they’re pretty bad
    • scheduled breaks (can be good, but often executed poorly/leave a lot of value on the table)
    • mandatory, contrived team-building exercises
    • awards ceremonies that drag on with speeches for minor recognitions

  • examples of non-boring stuff:

    • if you want attendees to make new friends, you can do stuff like speed-friending (thread on how to run this well)
    • if you want attendees to learn some concrete skill, you can ask a practitioner of that concrete skill who’s demonstrated that they’re competent at teaching it extremely well (e.g. at previous events, or on YouTube/Twitch) to give a workshop
• you should be constantly modeling your attendees, constantly checking that model against reality (e.g. by asking your users), and constantly updating that model. some common mistakes:
  • when you’re modeling an attendee, you should think of them as being mentally exhausted, physically tired, overworked, overstressed, overanxious, and a bit of an idiot not caring as much about your event as you, the organizer, does. they have vastly less context. they’re probably only the first 5. implications of this abound, see e.g. “don’t use a map” (below) or “make your signs like 5x bigger” (also below)
  • many people don’t really understand their preferences well at events. knowing peoples’ preferences better than they do is super useful. examples:
    • people constantly complain about loud music at parties, but it fills an important social role (sewing together gaps in conversations, providing something to talk about, giving people an excuse to dance, breaking up big conversations into smaller conversations)
    • at conferences, people often feel like they should go to a big talk, when really they should probably meet with people 1-on-1 or in smaller conversations.
• small pushes on key coordination can go a long way.

  • austin chen:

    probably the whole job of an organizer is to push on coordination, otherwise they wouldn’t need the event in the first place

  • examples:

    • people will by-default just get dinner at a restaurant or something. if you do a tiny bit of coordination for them — like handing them a list of restaurants nearby, or making a channel in your slack/discord/whatever for “#dinner-plans” — you’ll unlock a lot of value. sometimes you can literally just round everyone up, shout “if you want thai food, go to this corner and meet all the other people getting thai food; if you want italian, go to that corner; if you want chinese, go to that corner” → let everyone go to the cuisine of their choice and make some new friends.

      • leila clark:

        Oh this reminds me of one of my favourite unconference techniques which is to have people put ideas on a board and then have others gather around the things they want to do, then have them break out.

    • having some sort of attendee database with contacts, emails, and how people can help them/how they can help others
    • having some sort of central communication system, like a slack or discord or groupchat
    • setting up default points where people can just hang out/cowork/vibe/eat/meet each other
• people don’t know where anything is. people will never know where anything is, no matter what you do. but there are a few things you can do to prevent the worst of the worst:

  • don’t have a big map — this requires people to figure out where they are, where they want to go, and how to get from one place to another. that’s a lot!

    • “are we the red star, or the yellow exclamation point…?”
    • “which room was the talk in? 45b or 54d? or was it the Skyroom?”
    • “do i go up the stairs and to the left? or do i have to take the elevator first? which one? to what floor?”

  • have a lot of signs that say very little on each sign, and place them EXACTLY where someone would be looking for them. examples:

    • when do you want to know where the bathroom is? when you’re walking into the venue, when you’re walking out of the venue, or when you’re walking out of any session space.

    • when do you want to know where lunch is? at like noonish: don’t put up signage telling people where lunch is until then

    • at intersections, or right before someone goes down a long hallway — it’s costly for them to make a decision about where to go, so having an answer right in front of them goes a long way

    • a lot of this comes down to modeling the attendee experience really, really well

    • joel becker (below quote is completely taken out of context, but IMO applies here):

      you should be iterating + attempting to model attendees/getting better at this over time

  • make your signs like 5x bigger, with minimal info

    • bigger

      • people hate having to squint at signs!
      • i consistently see people think “that’s gotta be big enough, right?” → it’s not even close to big enough
      • think HUGE signs with HUGE font
        • bigger than what you’re currently thinking
          • yup, still bigger
            • okay that’s probably about right

    • minimal info

      • model your attendees, try to figure out what they want when they’re about to look at your sign, then give them exactly the info they want and no more.
      • like half of the things that people want to find are bathrooms and food. make these ones so ridiculously clear that i’d be difficult to avoid knowing where they are.

    • negative examples:

      • too much info, not nearly big enough:

    • right amount of info, but way too small, and still some distracting visual elements:

  • positive example:

    • it’s HUGE, it’s exactly what the people need, they don’t need to think at all, it’s no additional info, it’s a chef’s kiss

  • but even if you print your sign HUGE with HUGE font and minimal info — people don’t read. they never read. expect this ahead of time, see “modelling an attendee well” above

  • joel becker, against this section:

    i feel like i did absolutely none of this and everything was fine, because there are bigger wins elsewhere. (in particular people)

• premortem the whole event, many times, in every stage of the process, and for many sub-processes
  • premortems are so fucking awesome. they’re just fantastic. i love them.
  • i put the premortem guide that i use below:
    • meta
      • i’d recommend reading through the whole doc before actually doing one yourself
      • i’d recommend writing your premortem out, and/or recording a conversation with your team
    • first: imagine the event has just finished. close your eyes, really put yourself in that headspace.
    • now imagine that things went…
      • really, really badly. worst-case. shit hit the fan. pause for a moment.
        • what happened?
        • why did it go really badly? list as many scenarios as you can think of
        • what factors led to those scenarios?
        • what can you do to make those scenarios less likely to happen?
        • what can you do to make those scenarios less bad if they were to happen?
      • fine/okay/meh, but you lost a lot of potentially value. pause for a moment.
        • what happened?
        • why did it go really meh? list as many scenarios as you can think of
        • what value wasn’t captured? why not?
        • what can you do to capture make it more likely that you’ll capture that value?
        • what can you do to make any value you do capture much better?
      • really, really well. everything went smoothly, everyone had a great time. pause for a moment.
        • what happened?
        • why did it go really well? list as many scenarios as you can think of
        • what factors led to those scenarios?
        • what can you do to make those scenarios more likely to happen?
        • what can you do to make those scenarios even better if they do happen?
  • for the “produce solutions” part of premorteming, i found it useful to reference my notes on some methods ive used for producing solutions
  • why are premortems useful?
    • they push you to notice the things that you’ve been flinching from
    • they give teams a space to talk about things that might’ve been uncomfortable or hard to talk about
    • they let you pick up on things that are harder to pick up on otherwise
    • they give you a record of things that you’re concerned about/eager to do more of
    • they let you prioritize between how important different tasks are
    • against:
      • joel becker: “these reasons didn’t strike me as very useful. i’m like just be less anxious + put things into high prio vs low prio”
      • austin chen: “I’ve never put that much stock in premortems either, sorry”
• take pictures

  • this is useful for stuff like advertising, social proof, doing posts on social media, etc

  • by default, you’ll probably take too few pictures, because it’s not viscerally intuitive while the event is going on why you’d want a bunch of pictures. take more!

  • probably take a quick video or two, but i usually don’t find them nearly so useful as good pics

    • your phone is definitely sufficient, but having a good camera (and someone who knows how to use it) does make a difference

  • group photos are particularly good — they seem a little annoying when you’re doing them, but are typically the main picture you end up using anywhere

  • austin chen:

    bonus points if you can get a photographer to come and bring their fancy camera. you can hire for this too ofc, but it’s great when you have photographers like Misha or Rachel in your community

• naming (h/t conflux)
  • names are really sticky & costly to change. it’s important to at least not use a really really bad name, but also note that a really really good name can be substantially better
    • positive example: “Manifest” is itself a word, is a pun on “manifold festival” (which is also descriptive of the thing), and is also coherently within the world of manifold
    • positive example: “Mox” has a number of good connotations (e.g. “moxie,” or “mana rocks”), but also doesn’t specifically bring some particular thing to mind, which also means it doesn’t limit the organization to something
  • this post is great, and this post is pretty good (including the comments, which add some nuance-via-disagreement). this post is also directionally correct, especially when considering writing your slogan.
  • ask an LLM for feedback on your name — in particular, ask it for reasons it might not work/be bad
    • austin chen: “fun fact, I was deciding between 3 names and Claude said like ‘Mox is obviously the best choice’”
  • ask friends for thoughts on names you have, but don’t just give them a potential name and ask for thoughts — give them a list of names, then ask which they think are particularly good/bad and why.
• relax, have fun, lean into it :) (h/t WS)

  • quoted from WS:

    One of the biggest things I pay attention to while facilitating an event is to persistently keep in mind what the participants are thinking and feeling. Some questions I ask myself are:

    As a participant…

    • How socially accepted would I feel in this environment? Do I feel like I can speak up and contribute to conversations? Do I feel welcomed and included?
    • Something I do as an organizer to get these questions to "yes":
      • Try to have an easygoing and accepting demeanor.
      • Talk with attendees during breaks, and try to connect with them on something their interested in, to build rapport.

    Some mistakes I made (and still make) in vibes:

    • Acting visibly stressed and anxious.
      • I was pretty anxious during my first few workshops. I now try to premortem what will make me stressed and reduce that before the workshop.
      • I figured it was fine if I was acting high-strung because I associated "x person acting high-strung about an event" with "x person caring a lot about their work". But I think one of the main mental states to be in when presenting yourself to attendees as a group is being easygoing, accepting, and generally sort of chill, especially when people are already coming into something feeling anxious and wondering if they fit in. [Saul notes — Joe Carlsmith wrote an excellent piece on this topic, “On clinging.”]
        • Note that in individual conversations, this is less applicable. [Saul notes — I disagree on this point.]

  • also from WS:

  • concrete methods i use:

    • picture someone you know who’s particularly charismatic, charming, social butterfly, outgoing person you know. try to act a bit more like them. (h/t nathan young)
    • as WS said, premortem things that you expect to cause you stress/anxiety explicitly to make it more likely that you won’t act stressed/anxious
    • set up systems that will explicitly remind you to calm down (e.g. set a reminder on your phone, or set up a TAP that each time you walk through a particular doorway, you take a breath and release tension in your abs/shoulders/etc)
    • (if legal) have half a beer
• i haven’t read “the art of gathering,” but most of the people who looked at drafts of this recommended i either read it or recommend it here. quick summary of the book here, full book here.

Alex Lawsen used a great metaphor on the 80k After Hours podcast:

[1:38:14] …you’re rowing a boat on your own, and you’re trying to get somewhere, and you’ve got some map that you need to look at to see where you’re going, I imagine like a map and compass. […] When you’re rowing, you’re facing back; you can’t see where you’re going. You’ve just got to sit there and pull both of the oars, and do that a bunch of times, and then the boat goes forwards. […] You steer [… by pulling] harder with one side, something like that.

I can imagine […] you sitting forwards in the boat, and trying to hold the map with your left hand while it’s gripping one oar, and trying to hold the compass with your right hand while it’s gripping the other; pushing them rather than pulling them while looking at where you’re going; so you’re always precisely on track, but my guess is you’re just going to go super slowly, because that’s not how to row a boat.

Whereas you can imagine someone else, maybe someone that’s racing you, who is going to point the boat in pretty much the right direction — they’re not exactly sure it’s the right direction, and they might go a bit off course. And then they go, “Cool. I’m going to row hard for a minute, and then I’m going to stop and check I’m pointing in the right direction, and then I’m going to row hard for another minute.”

[1:37:56] The metaphor is trying to point at … the strategy, [which] is pretty clear: gather some information, make a decision with that information, stick to that decision for some period of time that you’ve planned in advance, and then reevaluate, gather some more information, and then make a new decision.

[1:35:58] … you [should] stick to some policy, which is like: “I’m going to look at a bunch of things, I’m going to actually seriously consider my options. And then, with all of the information I have, I’m going to make a decision. And I’m going to make the decision to do the thing that seems best for some fixed period of time. At the end of that fixed period of time, then I will consider other options.”

[1:47:43] … if you think expected value is a reasonable framework to use, … then I do actually want to say: I think having this kind of policy is actually the thing that seems best in expectation.

[1:41:21] … I think some people … they start doing a thing, and then they’re so worried about whether it’s the best, that they’re just miserable, and they never find out if it is the best thing for them because they’re not putting all of their effort in, because they’ve got one foot out of the door because they think something else could be better.

When you’re in a rowboat, you don’t want to be constantly rowing (and never steering), nor constantly steering (and never rowing). But there’s also an in-between state that’s still a failure mode, where you’re trying to half-row and half-steer all at the same time. You’d be way better off by purely rowing for a bit, then purely steering for a bit, then back and forth again, but it causes anxiety to purely row without steering (“what if I’m rowing in the wrong direction!”), and it causes less forward progress to purely steer with no rowing (“I’m not even moving!”). So Alex’s solution is to set a policy that looks something like: “For the next minute, I’m going to row hard. After sixty seconds, I’ll turn around and steer. But for the next sixty seconds, I’m not even going to consider that I’m rowing in the wrong direction, because I’m in rowing mode, not steering mode.”

And importantly, having the knowledge that you’ll be correcting your course sixty seconds from now makes it so much less anxiety-inducing to purely row for sixty seconds straight.

I’ve used this in situations where it’s costly to be thinking about how best to do something while you’re in the process of doing it. A career is a great example of a rowboat: it’s draining to be constantly searching for opportunities while you have a job. It takes up cycles in the back of your brain, and it prevents you from committing hard in a way that has important and nonlinear effects.

This post is not titled “Things You Should Do,” because these aren’t (necessarily) things you should do. Many people should not do many of the items on this list, and some of the items are exclusive, contradictory, or downright the reverse of what you should do. If your reaction to something is “I think that’s a bad idea,” then it probably is, and you probably shouldn’t do it.

• classes & professors
  • attend classes you haven’t signed up for because you find them interesting
  • attend classes even if the waitlist is full
  • ask the professor to waive a prerequisite
  • ask the professor to join a class even if its full
  • drop a class that you don’t like
  • take a class because you really liked the professor, even if you’re not sure about the content of the class
  • cold email professors you don’t know, just asking to chat
  • show up to office hours for classes you aren’t a part of, just to chat with the professor
  • ask the professor questions about the things you’re not sure of
  • skip class(es) for great opportunities elsewhere
  • ask the professor if you can help them with anything in the class (grading, setting up assignments, editing papers, etc). professors have a long list of tasks, are perpetually behind, and encounter fairly correlated problems; if you track what problems your professors have, you can quite quickly become unreasonably useful for them
  • ask professors at the beginning of the semester what things would be most important to memorize, then throw their answers into an Anki deck
  • take non-credit courses or workshops in things like pottery, coding, or creative writing
• studying
  • at places outside of your university:
    • coffeeshops
    • public libraries
    • coworking spaces
    • random offices, cold email them
  • start a study group for the class
    • ask the professor if you can announce that you’re starting a study group for the class in the class
    • start a group chat to ask questions about the class. this is one that everyone loves to be added to, and sometimes it just… doesn’t happen, because nobody took the initiative to create it
  • use Anki to study the things your professor said would be most important to memorize after you asked them at the beginning of the semester
  • learn the content of a class by using materials that the professor doesn’t point you toward (e.g. online textbooks/videos/tutors/etc)
  • hire a tutor
    • hire multiple tutors
    • hire a tutor purely so that you have to study for some class you hate — you might not need help, but if you're paying someone $x/h for their time, you'd better be studying
  • become a tutor in a subject you want to brush up on
  • use ChatGPT as a tutor
  • cowork
    • with random people
    • with me
• clubs
  • join clubs
    • join many clubs
    • join many different types of clubs. shortlist: sports clubs (even intramural), art clubs, research clubs, project-based clubs, religious/cultural clubs, community service clubs, pre-professional clubs, music clubs
  • show up at a club’s meeting that you’re not a part of
  • stop going to a club's meetings
    • completely stop without telling anyone
    • tell the club leaders why you’re stopping, and what changes would make you stay
    • tell the club leaders you’re considering stopping, and what changes would make you leave or stay
  • ask if you can help out at the next club event
    • ask this multiple times in a row
    • ask what’s preventing them from letting you help out yet
  • start your own club. notably, schools will often throw hundreds or even thousands of dollars of funding at you to start a club with a few friends, and you can do a lot of cool things by saying “hey, I run [x] club, could you [ask]?” (h/t Joey)
• career capital
  • evaluate not just “will this be good for my career” but “is this among the best options given the limited resources (time, money, energy, etc) that i have” — and also “is there something else i can do with these resources that’d give me more career capital” or alternatively “is doing this in line with following rules that i endorse upon reflection?”
  • actually utilize the alumni center — you can find alumni in ~any industry, and most major companies, and many are happy & eager to chat with you
  • find events oriented to the career you want to go into
    • attend them
    • volunteer for them
    • offer to run or help out at the next one
  • organize events for undergrads interested in your career — the bar for “casual meetup for pre-____ students!” is pretty low, and you can probably get some money from the relevant department for food & drink
• money
  • apply to random grants and fellowship programs (1, 2)
  • get a job
    • get a weekend job
    • get a part time job
    • get a job that means you rub shoulders with the types of people you want to be rubbing shoulders with — e.g. working at a golf course, or at the registration desk of a google office
    • ask the people doing the job that you want to do if you can also do that job right now
  • get a paid internship
• friends
  • stay in your room 24/7 and make no friends
  • make friends with the first people you meet, even if you don’t like them, and then never find new friends (h/t Joey)
  • call your old friends out of the blue, especially the ones from high school that you haven’t talked to for a while. imagine if they called you out of the blue, you’d love it. you can just… do that to them.
  • have 1-1s with friends
  • join a frat
  • don’t join a frat
  • offer a friend to swap dorms for a weekend
  • offer a friend who goes to a different school to swap dorms for a weekend
  • offer a friend who goes to a different school to have them stay at your dorm for one weekend, then you’ll stay at their dorm for another
• misc
  • optimize for:
    • your degree
    • making friends
    • finding (a) partner(s)
    • career capital
  • take time off
    • seriously, you can just… take a semester off, or a year off, or more. this is much more common than you realize, since there’s a huge amount of selection bias: you never see the students who take time off, because they’re not going to be campus.
    • drop out entirely
  • decorate your dorm rationally
  • use the gym — there will be ~no other time in your life during which you’ll have free access to a great gym whenever you want
  • intentionally & rapidly try out tons of various life improvements — you have a fairly regimented environment that, by default, controls for a number of confounding variables
  • leave campus (h/t Joey)
  • stay on campus
  • create art — this is one of the few times in your life you have access to kilns, or high-quality paints, or a glass-blowing shop, etc (h/t Joey)
  • write a thesis under an advisor (h/t Joey)
  • get involved with school admin — not just student union, but you can, e.g., do informal, independent research and make recommendations about dining, sustainability, etc. also, there are sometimes grants within schools, like sustainability grants from the administration. (h/t Joey)
  • most universities have pretty great art available for free
  • travel to random places on a weekend, stay with a friend/relative
  • make a personal website
  • start a blog

Let’s say you’re a billionaire. You want to have a flibbleflop, so you post a prize:

Make a working flibbleflop — $1 billion.

There begins a global effort to build working flibbleflops, and you see some teams of brilliant people starting to work on flibbleflop engineering. But it doesn’t take long for you to notice that the teams keep running into one specific problem: they need money to start (buy flobble juice, hire deeblers, etc), money they don’t have.

So, the people who want to build the flibbleflop go and pitch to investors. They offer investors a chunk of their prize money if they end up winning, in exchange for cold hard cash right now to get started building. If the investors think that the team is likely to build a successful flibbleflop and win the billion dollar prize, they invest. If not, not.

If you squint, you could replace "flibbleflop" with highly capable LLMs, quantum computers, or any number of cool and potentially lucrative technologies. But if you stop squinting, and instead add the adjective "altruistic" before "billionaire," you could replace “flibbleflop” with “malaria vaccine." Let's see what happens:

Make a working malaria vaccine — $1 billion.

There begins a global effort to build working malaria vaccines, and you see some teams of brilliant people starting to work on vaccine engineering. But it doesn’t take long for you to notice that the teams keep running into one specific problem: they need money to start (buy lab equipment, hire researchers, etc), money they don’t have.

So, what should they do?

Obviously, the people who want to build the vaccine should go and pitch to investors. They should offer investors a chunk of their prize money if they end up winning, in exchange for cold hard cash right now to get started building. If the investors think that the team is likely to build a successful malaria vaccine and win the billion dollar prize, they should invest. If not, not.

The prize part of this is how a lot of philanthropy is done. An altruistic billionaire notices a problem and makes a prize for the solution. But the investing part of it is pretty unique, and doesn’t happen too often.

Why is this whole setup good? Why would you want the investing thing on the side? Mostly, because it resolves the problem that some teams will be wonderfully capable but horribly underfunded. In exchange for a chunk of their (possible) future winnings, they get to be both wonderfully capable and wonderfully funded. This is how it already works for AI or quantum computing or any other potentially lucrative tech that has high barriers to entry; we can solve the same problem in the same way for the things that altruistic billionaires care about, too.

But backing up a bit, why would an altruistic billionaire want to do this as a prize in the first place? Why not use grants, like how most philanthropy works?

1. Prizes reward results, not promises. With a prize, you know for a fact that you’re getting what you paid for; when you hand out grants, you get a boatload of promises and sometimes results.
2. The investors care a lot about not losing their money. They’re also very good at picking which teams are going to win — after all, investors only get rewarded for picking good teams if the teams end up winning.
3. The issue of figuring out which people are best to work on a problem is totally different from the issue of figuring out which problems to solve. Using a prize system means that you, as a lazy-but-altruistic billionaire, don’t have to solve both issues — just the second one. Investors do the work of figuring out who the good teams are; you just need to figure out what problems they should solve.

If you do this often enough — set up prizes for solutions to problems you care about, then let people build those solutions and get the prizes — you can start making prizes for more and more things, with investors who profit from picking the right teams to work on the right problems. You can also get more and more vague, expecting that teams (and investors) will figure out your preferences as they go. And in the extreme, you can just say “make stuff I value, and I’ll give you a prize to the extent that I value it.” When those things that you’re giving out prizes for are valuable to just you, people call it “capitalism.” When the things you’re giving out prizes for are valuable for the world, we call it an “impact market.”

• of all the things that you do, what do you think you do best? what do you think you do worst?
  • of all the things that i do, what am i worst at?
• where do you go to find people who think well?
• what do you want?
  • what do you want?
• what are you most wrong about?
• what are some of the most important problems in your field? are you working on them? why/why not? (the hamming question)
• if you were put into a room with everyone you’ve ever known, who would you seek out first? (h/t blake)
• what something weird or unusual you did early on in life?
• given what we've talked about,
  • what questions should i be asking you?
  • what questions would you ask yourself, if you were in my position?
  • who else should i talk to? could you make an intro?
• what have i done worst in this conversation? what's been most rude, or annoying, or unkind, or idiotic, etc etc?
• untested ones below — i can't personally vouch that they work well. half are stolen from tyler cowen's "talent"
  • what blogs or sub Reddit do you read?
  • what tabs do you have open on your browser right now?
  • if we became friends, and then 3 to 6 months later, we stopped being friends, why would that be?
  • pet projects you’re working on?
  • what is something esoteric that you do?
  • the world is a market, so what is your edge?
  • what part of your life are you most unhappy about?
  • what thoughts do you flinch from?
  • of the various nonconsensus opinions you probably have, what's the most important one?

1. ask chatgpt

2. google it, see if someone else has already solved the problem

   1. if it’s something a research paper might have solved, try asking elicit

3. set a 5-minute timer, and think about the problem for 5 minutes. don’t think for 1-2 mins then go do the dishes, actually set a timer and actually do nothing else but think for a full 5 minutes.

4. do the obvious things

   1. “I continue to wonder how powerful a person could become, if they simply managed to do all the obvious things in pursuit of their goals.”

5. ask the duck

6. ask people

   1. ask a friend/parent/sibling/etc
   2. don’t have any available? close your eyes, imagine they’re in front of you, ask them, imagine what they would say. seriously!
   3. don’t have any at all? close your eyes, imagine a wise/smart/strategic/good fictional character, imagine they’re in front of you, ask them, imagine what they would say. seriously!
   4. ask multiple friends/parents/siblings/etc
   5. don’t know any fictional characters? ask yourself from 1y ago, 5y ago, etc. ask yourself, out loud.
   6. ask friends/parents/siblings to go through other items on this list, how they would do them
   7. find whomever’s most publicly knowledgeable about the problem, and send them a cold email (unless you already know them).
   8. ask me

7. post a bounty on manifold and see if someone else can solve your problem

8. write the problem down, completely.

9. seriously consider ignoring the problem entirely. how bad would it be to just let the problem be? could you tank them? could you hedge them?

10. wait until you’re in a totally different mood, then tackle the problem from the exact same angle

11. it’s 5 minutes/hours/weeks/years/etc from now, and you solved the problem. what happened?

12. wait

    1. set a 5 minute timer, don’t think about it, then check on it afterwards
    2. set yourself a 24h timer, and don’t think about it for a day. when the timer goes off, see if you’ve come up with any solutions
    3. work out, and check on it afterwards
    4. go to sleep, and check on it afterwards. edit: from Bertrand Russet (pseudonym): "this doesn't [even] have to be overnight. By the end of my undergrad math degree, I was doing problem sets by just taking naps and writing down the answers on waking. Not for all types of problems! But good when it works."

13. ask reddit

14. ask twitter

15. try diagramming out the problem, even if it’s not a visual problem. works best with an actual pen & paper.

16. stimulants (+ obligatory "use with caution")

    1. caffeine
    2. adderall (can’t personally confirm, friends have though)
    3. others (?)

17. interface with reality — try some random bullshit and focus on having the results help you generate better solutions.

18. backchain:

    1. what do you want? what is the desired outcome? what’s the goal, the objective?
    2. work backward from that goal to where you are now. don’t start where you are and work forward.

19. untested ones — i can’t personally vouch for them, but they seem pretty good/others have said they’re good. if you try them and they work, let me know.

    1. analogize to other fields/communities/subcultures/people/etc
       1. look at the overall shape of your problem. define it in as general a sense as possible, with as little context as necessary. someone who reads this definition shouldn’t be able to tell what field you’re in.
       2. has another field/community/subculture/person/etc already solved that shape of problem?
          1. if so: could you apply parts of that solution to your problem?
          2. if not: SWOP (seems wrong on priors). most problems have already been solved, just in different fields from what you think.
    2. ask yourself “what happen if i had zero constraints?” then, figure out how to make those solutions possible, given your constraints.

20. go through this list again and try all the things you said “hahaha that won’t work for MY problem.” odds are, you’re wrong.

edit: added these ones later.

• get someone on fiverr to do it for you
• babble out all of the questions you have, especially the cruxy ones. after you finish writing the questions, start answering them.
• imagine the current problem but you cannot exit the situation (h/t miraculous cake)
• what would a better, more capable, kinder, smarter, more virtuous version of yourself do? (h/t miraculous cake)