= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
satt comments on Rationality quotes January 2012 - 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 (462)
Yes, a look at it in context in the essay confirms that — but isn't it a strange belief for someone like Paul Graham to have? It looks false to me (although "truth is common property" is ambiguous). I think a group could make itself very distinct by believing certain truths and doing certain rationally justified things.
I don't know whether it's strange for Graham to think this; I haven't read much of his stuff.
I found the phrase "common property" odd too. I associate the phrase with "commons," as in tragedy of the commons.
I think LessWrong is distinctive, and part of its distinctiveness comes from its members' attempts to do the above.
Most groups of weapon developers probably hope to keep their knowledge distinct from that of other groups for as long as they can...
What? I don't get this. Also, why should weapons developers care whether their products are distinctive? Having better weapons helps, and being better is being distinctive, but so is being worse.
I apologize. I should have been clearer. I mean that if a group of weapons developers, such as, for instance, the Manhattan Project, discovers certain critical technical data necessary to their weapons, such as, for instance, the critical mass of Pu-239, they will often prefer that these truths not spread to other groups. For as long as they are able to keep this knowledge secret, it is indeed a set of truths that makes this set of weapons designers distinct from other groups.
Oh, I see now. Thanks for clarifying.
But if other developers are incorrect, then you'd want to be correct; and if other developers are correct, you'd still want to be correct. Put game-theoretically, accuracy strictly dominates inaccuracy. By contrast, isnt' distinctiveness only good when it doesn't compromise accuracy?