Skip to content
By using Twitter’s services you agree to our Cookies Use. We and our partners operate globally and use cookies, including for analytics, personalisation, and ads.

This is the legacy version of twitter.com. We will be shutting it down on June 1, 2020. Please switch to a supported browser, or disable the extension which masks your browser. You can see a list of supported browsers in our Help Center.

  • Home Home Home, current page.
  • About

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Language: English
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Hrvatski
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Ελληνικά
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Have an account? Log in
    Have an account?
    · Forgot password?

    New to Twitter?
    Sign up
vgr's profile
Venkatesh Rao
Venkatesh Rao
Venkatesh Rao
@vgr

Tweets

Venkatesh Rao

@vgr

This is my conversational account. For my work follow @ribbonfarm, @breaking_smart, @artofgig. Tweets are 90% vacuous views, apathetically held. Mediocritopian.

Los Angeles, CA
venkateshrao.com
Joined August 2007

Tweets

  • © 2020 Twitter
  • About
  • Help Center
  • Terms
  • Privacy policy
  • Imprint
  • Cookies
  • Ads info
Dismiss
Previous
Next

Go to a person's profile

Saved searches

  • Remove
  • In this conversation
    Verified accountProtected Tweets @
Suggested users
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @
  • Verified accountProtected Tweets @

Promote this Tweet

Block

  • Tweet with a location

    You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more

    Your lists

    Create a new list


    Under 100 characters, optional

    Privacy

    Copy link to Tweet

    Embed this Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Add this Tweet to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Add this video to your website by copying the code below. Learn more

    Hmm, there was a problem reaching the server.

    By embedding Twitter content in your website or app, you are agreeing to the Twitter Developer Agreement and Developer Policy.

    Preview

    Why you're seeing this ad

    Log in to Twitter

    · Forgot password?
    Don't have an account? Sign up »

    Sign up for Twitter

    Not on Twitter? Sign up, tune into the things you care about, and get updates as they happen.

    Sign up
    Have an account? Log in »

    Two-way (sending and receiving) short codes:

    Country Code For customers of
    United States 40404 (any)
    Canada 21212 (any)
    United Kingdom 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Ireland 51210 Vodafone, O2
    India 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonesia 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italy 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » See SMS short codes for other countries

    Confirmation

     

    Welcome home!

    This timeline is where you’ll spend most of your time, getting instant updates about what matters to you.

    Tweets not working for you?

    Hover over the profile pic and click the Following button to unfollow any account.

    Say a lot with a little

    When you see a Tweet you love, tap the heart — it lets the person who wrote it know you shared the love.

    Spread the word

    The fastest way to share someone else’s Tweet with your followers is with a Retweet. Tap the icon to send it instantly.

    Join the conversation

    Add your thoughts about any Tweet with a Reply. Find a topic you’re passionate about, and jump right in.

    Learn the latest

    Get instant insight into what people are talking about now.

    Get more of what you love

    Follow more accounts to get instant updates about topics you care about.

    Find what's happening

    See the latest conversations about any topic instantly.

    Never miss a Moment

    Catch up instantly on the best stories happening as they unfold.

    1. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      You know that line about judging people by their actions rather than their words? What about people whose only non-trivial output is words? (assume their actions are boringly uncontroversial, like say living basic middle class life funded by job at paper factory) Here’s a way.

      8 replies 61 retweets 180 likes
      Show this thread
    2. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      Judge them by topics rather than methods of thought. The thinker’s equivalent of action is choice of topic. Almost always, all the real risk is there (but CRUCIALLY may not be borne by the thinker). Methodology (analytical, empirical, logical, narrative, metaphoric) is secondary

      4 replies 6 retweets 41 likes
      Show this thread
    3. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      There is a particular kind of motte and bailey maneuver where criticism of the risky part (topic/content) is redirected to an innocent-faced defense of the safe part (method). *Especially when the risk of any erroneous conclusions on the topic is borne by others.*

      1 reply 4 retweets 36 likes
      Show this thread
    4. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      “I’m just asking questions”, “I’m doing this with normal rigor”, “I’m just following the evidence where it leads” are telltale signs. The part that needs discussion is choice of topic/content. Methods come after. The riskier the topic, the more safety/competence methodology needs

      1 reply 8 retweets 47 likes
      Show this thread
    5. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      If you study “how stars go supernova” the only justification needed is “I’m curious about it.” If you, as a male, study “are there gender differences in IQ?” in a world circumstantially loaded with male advantage, the burden of philosophical due diligence is higher. Why and how?

      2 replies 15 retweets 94 likes
      Show this thread
      Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
      • Report Tweet
      • Report NetzDG Violation

      The reason is, *if you screw up and others use your results, others will be hurt far more than you.* Worse, there is prima facie reason to believe sloppiness and errors will likely benefit men. Primum non nocere. First do no harm. Ask: “Who suffers most if I screw this up?”

      8:52 PM - 17 Dec 2018
      • 10 Retweets
      • 95 Likes
      • Mathew Ling Jennifer Cabala InfraredArmy🛡 Thiény K David Gerard Malpollyon MightyCapybara Alexa Ellen #wajongerswordenvergeten
      2 replies 10 retweets 95 likes
        1. New conversation
        2. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          You’ve heard “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” Corollary “extraordinary risk to others from thinking errors requires extraordinary care in how you think.” Beware the moral hazards of your topic choices.

          1 reply 43 retweets 150 likes
          Show this thread
        3. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          This isn’t hard. You take more precautions when experimenting with explosives than when experimenting with cookie recipes. You triple check every decision and step if you’re researching “should we bomb this country” but not for “should we hold the event in NY or LA.”

          1 reply 5 retweets 38 likes
          Show this thread
        4. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          Add another wrinkle. Call it the Incumbency Bias of Social Research Under Sloppiness. Other things being equal, sloppiness in research about humans is more likely to suffer errors that lead to conclusions that hurt the weak/validate the position of strong. Sewage flows downhill.

          1 reply 7 retweets 45 likes
          Show this thread
        5. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          Consider a caricature: 2 bad-faith researchers researching “racial bias in police shootings” with intent to find yes and no answers respectively by any means necessary. Are they really equally risky? When should we demand deeper rigor?

          1 reply 0 retweets 19 likes
          Show this thread
        6. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          There is a theory in complex systems called “normal accidents” about how complex systems like nuclear reactors inevitably (Ie “normally”) suffer failures via multiple failures interacting in unanticipated ways. This means some things are fundamentally more risky.

          1 reply 1 retweet 25 likes
          Show this thread
        7. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          The author, Charles Perrow, in fact takes the conservative view that sufficiently complex tech like nuclear reactors with sufficiently high negative failure costs should not be used at all. I’m not that radical, but he has a point. And the point applies to “complex thinking” too

          1 reply 0 retweets 17 likes
          Show this thread
        8. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          If you’re thinking about sufficiently complex topics full of tricky interactions (“Oh Roe vs. Wade led to crime wave ending 20y later...oh wait no, it was taking the lead out of pipes!”) *you WILL make unexpected normal errors*

          2 replies 0 retweets 16 likes
          Show this thread
        9. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          You may moreover be thinking under deep moral hazard of being nowhere near the reactor meltdown zones. In social research this might be: policing, criminal justice, public schooling, nutrition, education, war-making. Entire communities could be deeply screwed by your errors.

          1 reply 2 retweets 23 likes
          Show this thread
        10. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          And this shouldn’t need saying but apparently does. The more powerful you are, the more extreme care you need to take because your casual speculative tweeting could cascade into ill-considered action a few degrees away. Think longer per tweet the more powerful you are.

          1 reply 2 retweets 42 likes
          Show this thread
        11. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          I’m a random D-list blogger. If I tweet speculative dumb shit, very little happens, but there’s more potential for damage than with someone with no following. If you’re a famous academic who has the ear of impulsive CEOs more can happen. If you’re president, wars might start.

          1 reply 0 retweets 33 likes
          Show this thread
        12. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          If you transpose Perrow’s conclusions about nuclear reactors to social science, you would in fact conclude that some subjects should not be studied at all. Because the only people with the methodological competence to study it might be under unacceptably high moral hazard.

          2 replies 2 retweets 28 likes
          Show this thread
        13. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          This is why I’m fundamentally sympathetic to even (say) the most irrational sounding black activists who might want to object to (say) white men studying IQ. The researchers are safe in their nice university jobs. Any errors leading to social policy meltdowns, guess who suffers?

          1 reply 4 retweets 50 likes
          Show this thread
        14. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          There are two ways to bring these nuclear reactor “normal accident” topics into “safe study” zone. First: add more methodological rigor burdens in proportion to risk to others. IRB++. But this won’t be enough to bring more responsibility to say casual speculative tweeting.

          1 reply 0 retweets 13 likes
          Show this thread
        15. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          I like the second approach: increase direct risk exposure (or lower moral hazard). You want a million dollar research grant to study race and IQ? Go for it. We just ask that you live in a black inner city school district while doing so, that will be applying your findings.

          3 replies 0 retweets 33 likes
          Show this thread
        16. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          You want to speculate about sex markets? Great, do it in a sociology department where you have more female peers than male. Better still: include them in proposal. Get skin in the game in proportion to the accidental harm you might do to others.

          1 reply 2 retweets 54 likes
          Show this thread
        17. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          The common response to free-expression absolutism is “freedom of expression is not freedom from consequences”... as in don’t expect people to not yell at you or retaliate. If only it were that simple. The real messy problem is *others may not be free from consequences*

          1 reply 5 retweets 40 likes
          Show this thread
        18. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          To bring it back to the opening point, how do you judge a thinker? By topic, not method. How by topic? If a thinker routinely indulges in morally hazardous thinking where others are more likely to be hurt by erroneous conclusions, I do a double take.

          1 reply 3 retweets 38 likes
          Show this thread
        19. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          If they aren’t adding extra safety or taking on extra risk to compensate, I flip the bozobit. I’m doing this more quickly these days. There’s no excuse for putting others at risk with your bad thinking from relative safety.

          3 replies 1 retweet 34 likes
          Show this thread
        20. Venkatesh Rao‏ @vgr 17 Dec 2018
          • Report Tweet
          • Report NetzDG Violation

          I’m fine with sloppy speculative spitballing and casual, loud, public thinking. That’s my own modus operandi after all. The trick is to then work on harmless topics and/or ones where you yourself are the one most at risk. If you want to move to meltdown topics, harden you methods

          7 replies 9 retweets 66 likes
          Show this thread
        21. End of conversation

      Loading seems to be taking a while.

      Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

        Promoted Tweet

        false

        • © 2020 Twitter
        • About
        • Help Center
        • Terms
        • Privacy policy
        • Imprint
        • Cookies
        • Ads info