= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Vladimir_Nesov comments on Open Thread: January 2010 - 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 (725)
Wouldn't I say that to be for the best, given that I started the thread by linking to the paper?
That's not excuse for not providing a meaningful summary so that others can gauge whether it's worth their time. You need to give more than "Vladimir says so" as a reason for judging the paper worthwhile.
You ... do ... understand the paper well enough to provide such a summary ... RIGHT?
I was linking not just to the paper, but to a summary of the paper, and included that example out of that summary, a summary-of-summary. Others have already summarized what you got wrong in your reply. You can see that the paper has about 1300 citations, which should count for its importance.