= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
IlyaShpitser comments on Open thread, Nov. 16 - Nov. 22, 2015 - 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 (185)
I don't think that's the right explanation in this case.
I understood the comment differently: The OP did write the post because the purpose of the Times article was spot on - not because the 'right' people got the credit.
I did not mean to suggest that anyone had been slighted or denied any due credit when I stated that neither EY nor LW was mentioned. As I read the article, I had just been looking for mentions of EY or LW, and I figured that others might as well, so that is why I mentioned it.
No article can cover everything. As Gunnar stated, I thought it was a great article!