zlacker

Doug was at times blunt, but he was fundamentally a kind and generous person, and he had a dedication to his vision and to the people who worked alongside him that has to be admired. He will be missed.

I worked at Cycorp (not directly with Doug very often, but it wasn't a big office) between 2016 and 2020

An anecdote: during our weekly all-hands lunch in the big conference room, he mentioned he was getting a new car (his old one was pretty old, but well-kept) and he asked if anybody could use the old car. One of the staff raised his hand sheepishly and said his daughter was about to start driving. Doug gifted him the car on the spot, without a second thought.

He also loved board games, and was in a D&D group with some others at the company. I was told he only ever played lawful good characters, he didn't know how to do otherwise :)

Happy to answer what questions I can

>>brundo+(OP)
I don’t know much about him. What makes you start by saying he’s blunt?

>>brundo+(OP)
I would expect lawful good because it would be the most logical.

>>late25+Ab
It was a part of his personality, as it is for many people who are intelligent and opinionated, and some can mistake that for unkindness. But I wanted to emphasize that in his case it wasn't.

>>brundo+lq
Got it. I was merely curious if there were any particular stories, rumors, or legends about his bluntness (like there is Linus).

>>late25+Gr
No, it was never anything at that level. I would describe (pre-reformed) Linus as more than just "blunt"

>>brundo+lq
I haven't read much by Lenat, and haven't seen anything that would lead me to believe he was particularly blunt, I disagree with attributing bluntness to intelligence. Some of the most intellectually blunt people I've met were some of the most conversationally blunt, and some of the most brilliant were absolute social butterflies. Making people needlessly uncomfortable when communicating is a shortcoming regardless of your intellectual capacity. Even if difficulty communicating appropriately and intelligence are correlated somewhat through common neuropsychiatric profiles, the relationship is not causal.

>>chefan+5X
> Making people needlessly uncomfortable when communicating is a shortcoming regardless of your intellectual capacity.

Emphasis on needlessly. Some bluntness is a good thing, even if it makes people uncomfortable. The alternative usually is prolonged awkwardness and beating around the bush, which likely will make people uncomfortable anyways. Just get it over with like an adult. Don't drag an uncomfortable thing out or even risk people not getting the message at all the first time around.

>>zitter+Pe
Why is that?

>>zitter+Pe
That's a very neutral thing to say.

>>chefan+5X
Bluntness is associated for intelligence because when your mind works faster than the room and you reach conclusions that the room is 15 minutes away from making it feels blunt and crude to them.

The socially acceptable thing to do is wait for them to catch up but that gets old.

>>chmod7+T01
Sure— the word choice was deliberate. If someone is known as a blunt person broadly, chances are they sucked at communicating appropriately.

>>willci+Hx1
You've describing the justification for lifelong hubris, not intelligence. I've known a lot of very stupid people who assumed they were doing exactly that when in reality they jumped to a conclusion because they didn't understand the topic's complexities.

A article shared on HN recently: https://www.bihealth.org/en/notices/intelligent-brains-take-....

>>chefan+Rz1
Whenever I hear things like "understand the topic's complexities" from people they are unable to articulate these supposed complexities and we almost always land on exactly the solution I proposed in the first place.

Don't get me wrong other intelligent people are on board with me during these episodes, and they are sometimes able to present their specific concern with the solution and that is valuable. I've been wrong before of course. On the other hand the "think of all the complexities" crowd just spout nuggets of wisdom like that until they are able to comprehend the solution, and that takes about 15 minutes in my experience.

>>willci+fC1
Your anecdote contradicts the study discussed in that article. Given the nature of your argument, this sounds like a great time to exit this exchange.

>>chefan+5X
I suspect you and the person you're responding to have different ideas of what the word blunt means in this context?

>>brundo+(OP)
May i ask, if you believe CYC cannot achieve intelligence / commonsense, what are the main reasons ? Or what are the reasons you believe it could ?

>>chefan+4I1
He was just describing his experience which indeed only a sliver of people knows about, because it’s a very high IQ situation. The study you linked is just one study and cannot be said to encapsulate everyone’s experiences. I can confirm from my own experience that his experience is very possible.

>>chefan+kz1
Germans are known as blunt. I don't think they are collectively being inappropriate.

>>chmod7+ia3
All communication is relative to it's cultural context. Refusal or inability to operate within cultural mores is very different than having a different baseline to begin with.

>>Aerbil+p33
Anecdotally, according to my 3 WISC tests and 10 years working in a research environment along with faculty and staff at a famously rigorous ivy league grad school, I assure you my sample size of interactions with people that have IQs that are several orders of magnitude higher than average is much larger than most. Do you have a specific criticism of the study's methodology or data?

>>willci+Hx1
My mind works extremely quickly, have to stop myself from finishing other people’s sentences. I don’t think it’s a sign of intelligence, just perceiving the world a little bit differently.