= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Squark comments on Open Thread February 25 - March 3 - 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 (354)
The condescending tone with which he presents his arguments (which are, paraphrasing him, "slightly odd, to say the least") is amazing. Who is this guy and where did he come from? Does anyone care about what he has to say?
Loosemore has been an occasional commenter since the SL4 days; his arguments have heavily criticized pretty much anytime he pops his head up. As far as I know, XiXiDu is the only one who agrees with him or takes him seriously.
He actually cites someone else who agrees with him in his paper, so this can't be true. And from the positive feedback he gets on Facebook there seem to be more. I personally chatted with people much smarter than me (experts who can show off widely recognized real-world achievements) who basically agree with him.
What people criticize here is a distortion of small parts of his arguments. RobBB managed to write a whole post expounding his ignorance of what Loosemore is arguing.
I said as far as I know. I had not read the paper because I don't have a very high opinion of Loosemore's ideas in the first place, and nothing you've said in your G+ post has made me more inclined to read the paper, if all it's doing is expounding the old fallacious argument 'it'll be smart enough to rewrite itself as we'd like it to'.
Name three.
Apparently (?) the AAAI 2014 Spring Symposium in Stanford does (???).