wedrifid comments on Making History Available - Less Wrong

49 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 31 August 2007 07:52PM

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

Comments (81)

Sort By: Old

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: komponisto 13 November 2011 05:25:35AM *  0 points [-]

As it happens, I disagree.

I think your model of someone who enjoys "classical masterpieces" as much as I do is wrong to the extent that it suggests they can't enjoy Weird AI as much as you do. And you invoke this model when you claim to have an aesthetic disagreement with them.

Comment author: wedrifid 13 November 2011 05:30:27AM *  0 points [-]

As it happens, I disagree.

That's a little surprising. It was the basis for any agreement I had with you regarding how having a different aesthetic evaluation of art could be offensive.

I think your model of someone who enjoys classical masterpieces as much as I do is wrong to the extent that it suggests they can't enjoy Weird AI as much as you do.

Not something I've said (or something that can be derived from what I've said.)

Comment author: komponisto 13 November 2011 05:48:45AM 0 points [-]

It can be derived with the additional assumption that the only reason a person would have for explicitly comparing things as different as "classical masterpieces" and Weird AI would be that aesthetic enjoyment is held by the person to be fixed-sum and uncompartmentalizable (i.e. they in effect had no choice but to make a comparison to Y when expressing enthusiasm for X). An assumption which in turn follows from the assumption that the person understands the signaling value of explicit aesthetic comparisons, and wouldn't want to send such a signal unless logically forced.

I suppose in retrospect the great-grandparent could be interpreted as a denial of the latter assumption. Alas.

Comment author: wedrifid 13 November 2011 06:00:16AM *  0 points [-]

I suppose in retrospect the great-grandparent could be interpreted as a denial of the latter assumption. Alas.

It took me a while to realise what you were saying there - I wasn't expecting an indirect insult!

Let's just say we are in complete disagreement about both the subject and about the validity of the arguments used and leave it at that, shall we?

Comment author: komponisto 13 November 2011 06:13:34AM 0 points [-]

I suppose in retrospect the great-grandparent could be interpreted as a denial of the latter assumption

It took me a while to realise what you were saying there - I wasn't expecting an indirect insult!

In that case I'm not sure I was clear: the comment could be interpreted as a denial specifically of the "and wouldn't want to send such a signal" part. In other words, it conveyed that you didn't mind being insulting. (Perhaps you consider "I suppose you were willing to be insulting after all" to be itself an insult, in which case the parent is consistent with my having communicated successfully.)

Let's just say we are in complete disagreement about both the subject and about the validity of the arguments used and leave it at that, shall we?

At this point I really don't know exactly what we are in disagreement about, if anything, and more to the point I'm not sure I actually want to know. So "leaving it at that" may indeed be optimal for now.