Topic: Mappers vs Packers. Why Most People Don't Get Bitcoin (Read 11114 times)

[citation needed]

I  50%
N 56%
t  25%
P 11%
the description is not so far from me but intj fit as well... but i prefer to be in the p group regarding to the famous ppl ahah
the proportion of N here is intresting but loads of factors (independant of bitcoin itself) can explain it.
Bitcoin is not widespread and just a few very lucky educated tech-enthusiast ppl had the chance to hear about it. This "universitarian" population is already very oriented in their profile for exemple

Why most people don't get bitcoin is because bitcoin is presented mostly as a new kind of money (which it is).

Money is a complex topic loaded with lots of cultural bias: this kind of terrain is often hostile for innovations.

If bitcoin is presented as a new internet technology for transaction processing (which it is also), acceptance is facilitated.
Obvious benefits can be outlined in comparison to legacy banking systems a la PayPal.

Only then, when the merits of the technology and network are understood and field tested, can we hope to win people over a new currency system.

The euro was successfully introduced in Europe in this manner: it circulated first (between 1999 and 2002) as a meta-currency in parallel with national currencies. Only in 2002 when people felt it was proven, the euro became a full fledged currency with retail prices expressed in euro.

I know this sounds ironic today with the current circumstances prevailing in Europe.

Just took this test scored

E: 11%
S:1%
T:38%
P:11%

but I have also taken another personality test (Meyers-Briggs I think) and I got I/ENTJ (took it twice and got different results) I happen to consider myself a mapper the way it describes thinking is almost exactly the way I describe the way I perceive the world, kinda weird really.

INTP
56   75   50   11

I don't put much stock in this stuff but their career identifier did nail it, not that surprising though I suppose.

Many people don't get PC,
But they get iPad.
 
What can i say? Keep on working.

Vandroiy, I like your thinking on this. But some people are more open to context switching, devil's advocate, and persuasion in real time (like children and brilliantly creative scientists), while the majority of adults are set in their ways and become more stuck as they age.

I never claimed something different. In fact, what I tried to explain in my post is that all of us think "packer" way virtually all of the time. The "Mapping" is only setup, training, learning. The symptomatic difference between "Mappers" and "Packers" is not so much how their brain runs when they make decisions, but how they learn.

I'm just saying that this is an important difference. The "Mappers vs Packers" model sounds as if "Mappers" would match their knowledge to a situation in a totally different way from "Packers". I don't believe that is correct; on the contrary, I think the difference during that phase is only very subtle.

The real difference is how they re-organize their thoughts and beliefs when they have time to think or are asleep.


Edit: Okay, I've been persuaded that the terminology might be useful despite the things I pointed out. There is a clear barrier from with a person starts consciously applying "Mapper" technique and therefore can learn with increasing efficiency. This creates an instability, which might cause people to fall into two distinct groups.

This instability might also explain the huge gap in logical capabilities between scientists and the average population. I know it by a different name, "the scientific method", I'm fine with using "Mapper thinking" as a synonym though.

Still there might be variations in the ways of thinking. Mappers/packers sure is far from perfect but it is an interesting start.

There are plenty of problems that can be solved more efficiently the packer way.

This is interesting. I didn't think about it before because I didn't know he was the Pirate Party founder. He's a manipulator. An actual one. He bought, hyped it with an unreasonably optimistic "throw all your money in" article, abusing his position, then sold. Heh.



@Thread:

"Mappers vs Packers" is oversimplified. I know I almost always think "Packer" way, yet my output resembles that of a "Mapper". For example, it was easy to use my mind's pattern recognition / breadth search to see the huge implications of Bitcoin; I can't remember any delay between reading the information and deciding to become a follower. This is "Packer" type thinking, the associative search function of our brain we use all the time. It's normal operation of the hardware we have, there's little magic available to change that.

In fact, for all I know about the brain, it can do the "Mapper" functions only in electrical short-time memory or while sleeping!

In short: one can't simply choose to think like a "Mapper" while his mind is working on something. The only way is to take a step back and slowly purge your mind of bad lines of thought by reflecting upon your thoughts. Then, slowly over time, the ability to think about unknown situations improves. The "Packers" are just people who never did that. The word is unnecessary, because there already is another word with the same meaning:

idiots.

Of course, arguing against this is silly. You answer the questions yourself about your own preferences. Westkybitcoins' chocolate analogy is pretty well on the mark.

	I like fried liver
	I like vanilla
✔	I like chocolate
	I like rat poison

"Oh my gosh, the test says that I like chocolate, and predicts that I'll enjoy M&M's. Amazing! But I don't believe it until I read a peer-reviewed article showing that my preferences are predictably my own preferences."

What I think would be more interesting is taking a survey of people's reaction to bitcoin correlated to their Jung-Myer-Briggs personality indicators. As mentioned earlier, members of a very different mailing list took the test and produced statistically significant divergence from the general population, similar to here on this thread. But it would be interesting to tweeze out the noise; Those who would bother reading this thread and bother to take a test are not necessarily an even cross section of the total population or those who might be interested in bitcoin.

- ENTP

ENTP - wikipedias description also fits pretty well

I doubt anyone here is invested in educating you personally. It's not like these are obscure methods. How's your German? Carl Jung, "Psychologische Typen", Zurich, 1921. Otherwise, start with Wikipedia and follow the citations if you're still interested.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myers-Briggs_Type_Indicator
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personality_type

Similar type of abstraction, well respected in psychology:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits

I'm not invested in this setup... the types may not be all that descriptive. Also, I'm not knowledgeable enough to know much more than to check out Google or Wikipedia for my own reading.

But surely you acknowledge that general personality categories do exist, right?

Show me a peer reviewed journal (or article in such a journal) of the personality analysis you are defending. I may reconsider my position.

Well, if personality analysis is useful, how is it a crutch? I don't think anyone here lives their entire life trying to following their Jungian/whatever expectations, or rigidly expecting others to consistently follow theirs. (Let's hope not, at least.)

And I think at times there's no reason to NOT recognize the categories people fall into. If I decide to sell chocolate, there's no point in refusing to acknowledge that everyone is, exclusively, either (1) someone who loves chocolate, (2) someone who hates chocolate, (3) someone who has no strong feelings either way, or (4) someone who's never tried chocolate. Everyone's either a L, H, N or X.

I'm not choosing to categorize people that way, I'm just recognizing and admitting that those categories already exist in reality. (But of course, it's how we react to the categorization that can cause problems.)

INTJ

89% - 75% - 88% - 78%

Not that I'm that familiar with this, but it seems like it'll be an interesting read.

INTJ

Strength of the preferences %
100   100   38   78

You would lose money on that bet.


Two million assessments annually. Here is the frequency breakdown in the United States: http://www.capt.org/mbti-assessment/estimated-frequencies.htm iNtuition represents 25-36% of the general population. 25-30% of females and 28-35% of males.

I bet 75% of society will test as N. There's no mention of the normal social breakdown of these labels. Fools!