diff --git a/blog/2022/10/12/forecasting-newsletter-september-2022/index.md b/blog/2022/10/12/forecasting-newsletter-september-2022/index.md
index 186e28e..469a2c8 100644
--- a/blog/2022/10/12/forecasting-newsletter-september-2022/index.md
+++ b/blog/2022/10/12/forecasting-newsletter-september-2022/index.md
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ Browse past newsletters [here](https://forecasting.substack.com/), or view this
### PredictIt, Kalshi & the CFTC
-
+
America, Land of the Free
@@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ Nostalgebraist looks at [AI forecasting one year in](https://nostalgebraist.tum
[Samotsvety Forecasting](https://samotsvety.org/), my forecasting group, looks at the probability of [various AI catastrophes](https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/EG9xDM8YRz4JN4wMN/samotsvety-s-ai-risk-forecasts) in the future, and at the [risk of a nuclear bomb being used](https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/2nDTrDPZJBEerZGrk/samotsvety-nuclear-risk-update-october-2022) ([a](https://web.archive.org/web/20221012124008/https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/2nDTrDPZJBEerZGrk/samotsvety-nuclear-risk-update-october-2022)) in the coming months (see also a [follow-up](https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/8k9iebTHjdRCmzR5i/overreacting-to-current-events-can-be-very-costly) by Kelsey Piper).
-
+
Taken from [Polymarket](https://polymarket.com/market/will-russia-use-a-nuclear-weapon-before-2023). Note that money is worth less in the event of a nuclear war.
diff --git a/blog/2022/10/17/the-commons/index.md b/blog/2022/10/17/the-commons/index.md
index 6fb4ed6..de2006f 100644
--- a/blog/2022/10/17/the-commons/index.md
+++ b/blog/2022/10/17/the-commons/index.md
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
Sometimes you give to the commons, and sometimes you take from the commons
==========================================================================
-Sometimes you give to the commons, and sometimes you take from the commons. And through this giving and taking, people are able to smooth consumption. This is good because getting more ressources from the commons when you temporarily have fewer of them is more positive than giving ressources away when you temporarily have more of them. Engraving depicting the curse of [Tantalus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantalus)
+Sometimes you give to the commons, and sometimes you take from the commons. And through this giving and taking, people are able to smooth consumption. This is good because getting more ressources from the commons when you temporarily have fewer of them is more positive than giving ressources away when you temporarily have more of them. Engraving depicting the curse of [Tantalus](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tantalus)
Anyways, a phenomenon I've noticed is that sometimes, you can only give to the commons, but you can't take from the commons. This is dysfunctional, and defeats the whole purpose of the commons.
diff --git a/blog/2022/10/31/brief-thoughts-personal-strategy/index.md b/blog/2022/10/31/brief-thoughts-personal-strategy/index.md
index 3b6ee91..ba6bc22 100644
--- a/blog/2022/10/31/brief-thoughts-personal-strategy/index.md
+++ b/blog/2022/10/31/brief-thoughts-personal-strategy/index.md
@@ -9,11 +9,11 @@ Here are a few estimation related things that I can be doing:
Now, within the [Quantified Uncertainty Research Institute](https://quantifieduncertainty.org/) I have been kind of trying to do something like this:
-
+
That is, I have in theory been trying to directly aim for the jugular of growing evaluation capacity directly. I believe that this is valuable because once that capacity exists, it can be applied to estimate the many things for which estimation is currently unfeasible. However, although I buy the argument in the abstract, I have been finding that a bit demotivating. Instead, I would like to be doing something like:
-
+
I think I have the strong intuition that producing value in between scaling produces feedback that is valuable and that otherwise can't be accessed just by aiming for scaling. As a result, I have been trying to do things which also prove valuable in the meantime. This might have been to the slight irritation of my boss, who believes more in going for the yugular directly. Either way, I also think I will experience some tranquility from being more intentional about this piece of strategy.
+
America, Land of the Free
@@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ Nostalgebraist looks at [AI forecasting one year in](https://nostalgebraist.tum
[Samotsvety Forecasting](https://samotsvety.org/), my forecasting group, looks at the probability of [various AI catastrophes](https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/EG9xDM8YRz4JN4wMN/samotsvety-s-ai-risk-forecasts) in the future, and at the [risk of a nuclear bomb being used](https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/2nDTrDPZJBEerZGrk/samotsvety-nuclear-risk-update-october-2022) ([a](https://web.archive.org/web/20221012124008/https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/2nDTrDPZJBEerZGrk/samotsvety-nuclear-risk-update-october-2022)) in the coming months (see also a [follow-up](https://forum.effectivealtruism.org/posts/8k9iebTHjdRCmzR5i/overreacting-to-current-events-can-be-very-costly) by Kelsey Piper).
-
+
Taken from [Polymarket](https://polymarket.com/market/will-russia-use-a-nuclear-weapon-before-2023). Note that money is worth less in the event of a nuclear war.
diff --git a/blog/2022/10/17/the-commons/index.md b/blog/2022/10/17/the-commons/index.md
index 6fb4ed6..de2006f 100644
--- a/blog/2022/10/17/the-commons/index.md
+++ b/blog/2022/10/17/the-commons/index.md
@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
Sometimes you give to the commons, and sometimes you take from the commons
==========================================================================
-Sometimes you give to the commons, and sometimes you take from the commons. And through this giving and taking, people are able to smooth consumption. This is good because getting more ressources from the commons when you temporarily have fewer of them is more positive than giving ressources away when you temporarily have more of them. 
+
That is, I have in theory been trying to directly aim for the jugular of growing evaluation capacity directly. I believe that this is valuable because once that capacity exists, it can be applied to estimate the many things for which estimation is currently unfeasible. However, although I buy the argument in the abstract, I have been finding that a bit demotivating. Instead, I would like to be doing something like:
-
+
I think I have the strong intuition that producing value in between scaling produces feedback that is valuable and that otherwise can't be accessed just by aiming for scaling. As a result, I have been trying to do things which also prove valuable in the meantime. This might have been to the slight irritation of my boss, who believes more in going for the yugular directly. Either way, I also think I will experience some tranquility from being more intentional about this piece of strategy.