Unfortunately, there's now a group of people who read this thread between 0437 and 0600, who were lead to think that MIRI is miscalibrated, doesn't care about its goals, but still somehow takes their work too seriously.
That's what happens when one speculates without evidence.
There wasn't speculation without evidence. A specific set of comments was made. It raised concerns. Those concerns were addressed (in a fairly satisfactory fashion). What you are saying seems very close to saying that we shouldn't raise concerns because if those concerns are responded to then there's a chance someone will happen to only see the initial issue and not the response. It should be clear why that's not a great approach if one wants open discussion and doesn't want any sort of evaporative cooling of beliefs or similar problems.
There wasn't speculation without evidence.
Of course there was! Why would you have asked Luke for clarification otherwise? The next three sentences don't support this claim, either -- being "a specific set of comments" does not contradict those comments being vapid speculation.
What you are saying seems very close to saying that we shouldn't raise concerns because if those concerns are responded to then there's a chance someone will happen to only see the initial issue and not the response.
Why should there be a response? Does Luke have a mor...
So I hear MIRI had another math workshop this past week. Given the recent results, I'm on the edge of my seat to hear how it went. Has anything been written up? Would anyone in the know like to comment on how it went?