Randaly comments on CFAR website launched - Less Wrong

33 Post author: lukeprog 03 July 2012 03:01PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (77)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Randaly 05 July 2012 12:00:40AM 16 points [-]

I recommend that you change Eliezer's profile to first mention that he is a Research Fellow at the SI, as writing fan fiction and a blog are not high-status

Comment author: beoShaffer 05 July 2012 09:51:20PM 3 points [-]

The phrase popular science writer would might be useful. It's not super high status, but it is better than blogger and clearly connects to his CFAR position.

Comment author: beoShaffer 05 July 2012 10:06:56PM 9 points [-]

Thinking about it a little more I would recommend something like

Eliezer is a AI theorist and popular science writer, known for both his non-fiction and educational fiction explorations of rationality. Including the highly popular Harry Potter and the Methods of rationality.

Comment author: wedrifid 05 July 2012 10:16:34PM 0 points [-]

I like it!

Comment author: wedrifid 05 July 2012 10:05:43PM 2 points [-]

The phrase popular science writer would might be useful. It's not super high status, but it is better than blogger and clearly connects to his CFAR position.

This would particularly be the case if Eliezer published those books he started. Writing 'popular science writer' based on his OB blogging would be accurate but would still give haters an excuse to insult him and claim that "He isn't even a pop sci writer like he says he is. He's just a blogger."

Comment author: beoShaffer 06 July 2012 01:16:29AM 1 point [-]

Hater gonna hate :) but seriously as a non-retorical question how much ammunition would that give them for convincing people who don't have a pre-written bottom line on the subject. Also does anyone know if/when he's going to get those books published.

Comment author: wedrifid 06 July 2012 01:25:44AM 1 point [-]

but seriously as a non-retorical question how much ammunition would that give them for convincing people who don't have a pre-written bottom line on the subject.

Very little.