= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Kaj_Sotala comments on Playing the Meta-game - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (44)
My reaction was kinda the same. The story was interesting, and a post with the story alone might have gotten an upvote from me. But the rest sounded a bit too much like an applause light. I didn't feel like the end provided any new information. It just vaguely declared that rationalists could win by thinking outside the box and linked to a bunch of old posts.
I turned the lights out. Thanks for the suggestions!
I can certainly understand re: the applause lights; I suppose I was too positively affected by the Schelling-pointmas.
I probably should have framed the post as a reaction to the recent discussions about contrarianism, as I was in part hypothesizing that rationalism's widespread adoption is impaired by being seen that way.
You should try writing a one-line self-contained description of the idea you wanted to communicate in the post, followed by a one-paragraph abstract and a several-items plan -- that'll help to focus the idea, bringing it closer to a legible explanation.