= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Konkvistador comments on Detecting Web baloney with your nose? - 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 (21)
I count three that apply to Eliezer's sequences and another that can be applied to lukeprog's posts. And in addition to all four of these a fifth (poor spelling) that apply to my own posts.
Would you care to clarify how much you mean "... so Eliezer and Luke are crackpotty" and how much you mean "... so these aren't a very good guide"? (For the avoidance of doubt, I don't think either argument is obviously crazy, though actually I think Eliezer and Luke aren't crackpots and those are useful crackpot indicators.)
Which one applies to Luke?
Too much irrelevant data and references.
Which three?
Well Eliezer was found of italicizing words in his text, doesn't provide references for most of his statements and wrote quit a few walls of text. I mean the sequences are huge.
I wouldn't call Eliezer's emphasis excessive, nor would I call the sequences "walls of text". This is an example of both: http://files.abovetopsecret.com/files/img/yj5053f092.png
My question is: if you didn't know any English, could you still infer that this is more likely to be baloney, or not?
That extreme? Yes it is evidence that the author has low competence and that is evidence of being false.
Without knowing English, I would suggest that only the excessive repeated bangs and interrogation marks are high-value. The excessive ALL CAPS is likely mid-value, and the lack of paragraph breaks is low-value.