= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Alexandros comments on Is Google Paperclipping the Web? The Perils of Optimization by Proxy in Social Systems - 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 (104)
Abstract added, thanks for the pointer. I did consider breaking the article in two to reduce size, but decided against it. An abstract would have been a good idea and in fact this is a (heavily) modified version of an academic paper that had an abstract, but somehow it didn't occur to me. Go figure.
To everyone: I feel I have been way too engrossed in the material to be able to competently write a summary that would be helpful to a first time reader, so suggestions on improving the abstract would be greatly appreciated.
Yay! Congrats!
Not sure about "tl;dr", though!
Isn't that what I say when I skip your non-abstracted article...? ;-)
Yeah, it would be, but I've also seen it used to the effect of 'abstract'. I've already added almost all features of an academic paper except for affiliation and references, I just can't bring myself to start the damn thing with "Abstract:"
"tl;dr" seems very casual to me. If your readers are casual and you want them to treat your article casually, that may be appropriate.
Incidentally, if acronyming like that, it should read: "Optimization By Proxy (OBP)"
You can probably skip writing the word "Abstract" - if your first paragraph is isolated, in italics, and obviously starts out with a summary.
YES! Readers shouldn't have to search back to the beginning the first time they see an acronym to figure out what it stands for. The abbreviation should always be explained the first time it is used.
Somehow I found the tl;dr impenetrable, but the actual article eminently readable. Is this deliberate?
It's the best tl;dr I could muster. Probably because I'm too close to the content and have lost sight of what it's like to see it for the first time. If someone can help conjure up a better one, I'd gladly replace it.
Splitting an article in two is also common in academia; the same strategy on LW might result in more karma, if that's the sort of thing one finds worthwhile...
At this point, I'm more interested in adding any sort of value rather than optimizing for karma. I've done a lot of that on HN (and a little bit in academia), but LW is harder than that :)