From f4c06512eea6a2b8c661743a3fa4a0a183cd063b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "M. Taylor Saotome-Westlake" Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2023 15:46:54 -0700 Subject: [PATCH] =?utf8?q?memoir:=20"Roberta"=20crisis=20to=20=C2=A7=20end?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit --- ...ved-social-control-mechanisms-and-rocks.md | 57 ++++++++++++------- notes/memoir-sections.md | 2 +- 2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) diff --git a/content/drafts/people-evolved-social-control-mechanisms-and-rocks.md b/content/drafts/people-evolved-social-control-mechanisms-and-rocks.md index 590161b..2ca2e4c 100644 --- a/content/drafts/people-evolved-social-control-mechanisms-and-rocks.md +++ b/content/drafts/people-evolved-social-control-mechanisms-and-rocks.md @@ -696,7 +696,7 @@ As part of being less submissive to authorities in general and the medical estab I didn't need it (and didn't end up using it); my regular health care provider got me equipped to [re-start my HRT experiment](/2017/Mar/hormones-reboot-spironotacular/) (including the spiro this time). It was the principle: that I could just buy drugs of my own choice using money, without the pretense of an authority diagnosing me with "gender dysphoria". -I had heard about AllDayChemist from Alice Monday, a local trans woman who wasn't very nice, but seemed to have some Vassar-like insights about penetrating the veil of social reality. It turned out that Alice was facing some bureaucratic obstacles to getting her own HRT refill, so I placed another AllDayChemist order on her behalf on 31 March, for five packs of E and two of spiro. +I had heard about AllDayChemist from "Rose", a local trans woman who wasn't very nice, but seemed to have some Vassar-like insights about penetrating the veil of social reality. It turned out that "Rose" was facing some bureaucratic obstacles to getting her own HRT refill, so I placed another AllDayChemist order on her behalf on 31 March, for five packs of E and two of spiro. ------ @@ -760,39 +760,56 @@ I asked Scott Alexander (whom I had tagged into the thread earlier) if _he_ coul Finally, on the evening of 3 April, inspiration struck: I asked Debbie when visiting hours were. Then I asked "Stacy" to just visit physically. ("Let me know if there's any way I can sweeten the deal for you if this is at all inconvenient. (Eternal gratitude? Cash bounty to be negotiated? Any programming work you need done?)" I added.) The theory here was that the psych prison employees had been programmed not to be helpful over the phone for fear that HIPAA demons would eat them, but that they're not afraid of a physical person on-site, especially a nonthreatening nonmale person (Subject: "a plea to our on-site woman (was: Re: a plea to our inside man)"). -I was not reassured by the staff's claims that "Roberta" could call us back if she was there. I believed that they wrote down the number. (Someone read it back to me on my second call.) I was not confident in "Roberta" actually getting the number and the opportunity to make a phone call. +I was not reassured by the staff's claims that "Roberta" could call us back if she was there. To be clear, I totally believed that they wrote down the number. (Someone read it back to me on my second call.) I was _not_ confident in "Roberta" actually getting the number and the opportunity to make a phone call. -I wrote to the thread: +Scott got back to me. His being a psychiatrist wasn't going to make any difference. All we could do was leave a message; if "Roberta" didn't call back, then either she wasn't there or "doesn't want you meddling". + +I harshly took exception to the notion that the only credible explanation for the lack of a return call was that "Roberta" _didn't want us meddling_. What if the bastards never gave her the message? What if she was too impaired from the psychotic break and the kidnapping to place a call herself, but would _really appreciate_ being handed a phone with someone she knows on the line? + +The "didn't want us meddling" explanation struck me as so absurd, that I immediately offered to bet $500 against it at 20:1 odds: when this was over, if "Roberta" was at Western Psychiatric and got my, "Kyle"'s, and Lex's messages and didn't call back because she _didn't want us meddling_, I would pay Scott $500; if she was there but didn't get the message, Scott would pay me $25; if she wasn't there, no bet (Subject: "in which gratitude and skepticism is expressed; and, a profit opportunity (was: Re: a plea to our on-site woman)"). + +Scott agreed to the bet. It was illegal to keep patients incommunicado; whatever else I thought about psych hospitals, they were sticklers for obeying the rules. + +Just before Scott chimed in, I had written to the thread: > In this situation, I don't think we should be modeling ourselves as people having meaningful conversations with other people over the phone. We are _extracting our friend from the bowels of an unaligned AI_. The reason we're using words rather than force isn't because force would be wrong; it's because we'd lose. Don't be fooled by the fact that the AI happens to use humans as components. -Scott got back to me. His being a psychiatrist wasn't going to make any difference. All we could do was leave a message; if "Roberta" didn't call back, then either she wasn't there or didn't want us meddling. +"Kyle" cautioned that black-arts methodology against hospital personnel was probably not going to help "Roberta", and might make life very unpleasant for people trying to do their absolute best in a difficult job—which might make it _exceedingly_ harder to do something helpful later. Most everyone he had talked to had been extremely polite and helpful (including explaining details about how the system worked, which lead him to UPMC Presbyterian, which had actually given us information). -I harshly took exception to that disjunction. What if the bastards never gave her the message? What if she was too impaired from the psychotic break and the kidnapping to place a call herself, but would _really appreciate_ being handed a phone with someone she knows on the line? +(Nice people doing their jobs!) -(There had been a moment during my psych imprisonment the other month, when I had noticeable diffculty dialing a phone. I was still a _person_, even when not all of my usual cognitive abilities were online.) +Lex seemed to agree with my model, but also agree with "Kyle"'s action recommendations: the general model was that systems are corrupt and unFriendly, responding at every level to incentives for breaking things in order for someone to gain a little more personal power, while most individuals wanted to be good and were just going with the flow. If we could change the flow, they might help us, but they weren't going to see the error of their ways when even _Scott_ had written about lacking the agency to not commit people who shouldn't be committed. -I offered to bet him $500 at 20:1 odds: +I said that I _didn't care_ about not making life unpleasant for people trying to do their absolute best in a difficult job. I wanted "Roberta" out of prison. If the best way of accomplishing that goal was to be nice and make sure a lot of receptionists and nurses feel good about themselves, great. If the best way of accomplishing that goal means meant making a lot of receptionists and nurses feel miserable and guilty to the point where they have their own psychotic break and get locked up by their employer, I was _okay with that outcome_. -(Subject: "in which gratitude and skepticism is expressed; and, a profit opportunity (was: Re: a plea to our on-site woman)") +Of course, I did _instrumentally_ care about not doing anything that would motivate them to make _our_ lives unpleasant. I agreed that I shouldn't try to do any more dark-arts social engineering—not because it would be wrong, but because I wasn't talented enough to pull it off without making things worse. -[TODO: "Roberta" situation - * Steven on increasingly black-arts methods - * Lex: systems are corrupt, when even Scott writes about lacking the agency to not commit people who should not be committed - * Scott: accepts the bet, it's illegal to keep patients incommunicado - * I'm treating this as a kidnapping (Subject: "Hijack Innocent People And Abscond") - * I talk to Karen Robinson, the manager of patient relations, who is a Christian - * Lex says one of us might have to fly to Pittsburg; might think some of us are agents - * I concede the bet based on Chana's testimony - * Scott offers to nullify; I insist -] +Ashley from Patient's Rights returned my call. Allegedly, patients had access to phones, and allegedly, if a patient complains, Patient's Rights would investigate the complaint. + +This was not reassuring. "Roberta" couldn't complain to patient's rights about not getting our messages, if she didn't know that the messages existed. I could believe that the receptionist was honestly trying to do her job and wrote a number down and told someone else about it. But if anything _else_ went wrong in the causal chain (which could involve more than one other person who had lots of other things to do) between "receptionist dutifully writes something down" and "'Roberta' actually gets the message and telephone access", _no one had an incentive to fix it_. + +As far as I was concerned, this was a kidnapping. The fact that the kidnappers didn't have any particular motive and were just doing their jobs and would probably release our friend in 3 or 14 days, made it _much less bad_ than if it were a kidnapping by criminals or terrorists with an actual motive—but I wanted to call a spade a spade (Subject: "Hijack Innocent People And Abscond"). + +I impulsively called up Patient's Rights again and spoke to Ashley, divulging my own recent psych ward story. She eventually forwarded me to Karen Robinson, the Manager of Patient Relations, whose boss was the Director of Regulatory Affairs. She repeatedly told me that the policy was that they couldn't give out information, and I repeatedly told her that I understood the policy, but that I was trying to search for clever strategies that would give me more assurance that "Roberta" actually got the message: for example, Karen herself could physically deliver the message herself, and then not tell me about it. + +Karen told me that I needed to trust people. I said that after my recent experience getting kidnapped by the psychiatric authorities, that no, I didn't actually trust people anymore ... but that I was willing to trust _her_, Karen Robinson, the Manager of Patient Relations, and that I felt better being given assurance by someone with a four-word title. + +I asked her if she was religious. (Religion is a social technology for trust; I figured that people were less likely to mess with you if you reminded them that their deity was watching.) She said that she was a Christian. I admitted that I was an atheist, myself. + +At 8:14 _p.m._ on 4 April, "Stacy" reported in: she visited Western Psych and saw "Roberta", who reported not being unhappy. She wasn't interested in being rescued. "She has received messages (I didn't ask about specific people's), and is in touch with some people," the email specifically said. + +So, that was good news. (Good news about "Roberta"'s welfare, which was more important than my grudge against psych hospitals.) I conceded my bet with Scott and PayPal'd him $500. Scott pointed out that I had offered the bet while I was really angry and traumatized from my own recent psych ward experience; if I thought it wasn't representative of my best cognitive processes, he was happy to call it off and send back the money. + +I _absolutely_ insisted that he keep the money: whether it was my best cognition or not was for reality to judge, not me, and on the specific question of whether the psych prison staff relayed telephone messages, reality had judged. + +(At least, as far as I knew at the time! Keep reading!) + +We didn't want to hold people accountable for false confessions under duress or contracts to sell oneself into slavery, but surely we could handle a measly $500 bet! ------ [TODO: starting to overheat * meanwhile, I had made arrangements with my dayjob to a 2 day/wk contracting on Portal (I had originally said 60/hr, Orion pointed out that was low and went to 75!!); I signed a contract! - * "Roberta" situation wrapped up with Chana's report on 4 April - * I concede my bet to Scott on 4 April * on 2 April, I had sent the wire transfer reciept to AllDayChemist, on 5 April they said, "Please send us the transfer receipt as we are missing that information from your email." * I pick implicitly pick a fight with James, bring up the idea of hiring him as my music teacher * I said that I don't want Michael and Anna to be fighting (Subject: "Anna-Michael realignment project"); I send "cooperate with James Cook (eom)" messages to Michael and Anna diff --git a/notes/memoir-sections.md b/notes/memoir-sections.md index 555c403..ce4600f 100644 --- a/notes/memoir-sections.md +++ b/notes/memoir-sections.md @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ TODO finish before I can vet and ship pt.s 1–3 ✓ proposed credit-assignment ritual ✓ emailing Blanchard/Bailey/Hsu/Lawrence/Cantor/Dreger ✓ tie-off -- "Roberta" situation +✓ "Roberta" situation _ overheating in April, staying at Volterra, Hamilton purchase _ BABSCon _ "my call with Western Psychiatric's Manager of Patient Relations" -- 2.17.1