Bryan-san comments on LessWrong 2.0 - Less Wrong

89 Post author: Vaniver 09 December 2015 06:59PM

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

Comments (312)

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

Comment author: RichardKennaway 19 December 2015 05:03:29PM 1 point [-]

Near as I can tell LW 'faded' because it was initially created to sneak

fnord

obsession

fnord

with a particular flavor of AI apocalypse into the minds of as wide an audience as possible under the guise

fnord

of a rationality movement so as to make money

fnord

for the singularity institute, and now there are actual

fnord

institutions which are more lucrative

fnord

potential funding sources. That, and the ai safety subtext

fnord

that underlaid everything has gone nowhere at the institute itself to all outward appearances.

To put that another way, Eliezer founded LessWrong in order to attract people capable of understanding and learning from the material that he posted, in the hope that some few of them might be capable of functioning at the level he considered a prerequisite to work on the problem of FAI. I believe he said this at the time. And it worked. LessWrong operated exactly as it was intended. MIRI and CFAR have their own traction now and LessWrong has completed its function. It still has a certain usefulness as a community locus, a discussion forum, and a place for relevant announcements, but it cannot be again what it was in the days of the Sequences.

Comment author: gjm 21 December 2015 10:39:37AM 4 points [-]

fnord [...] fnord [...] fnord

Those aren't fnords, they're overt criticisms.

Comment author: IlyaShpitser 08 January 2016 02:42:25PM *  0 points [-]

I agree those are fnords (unnecessary negative affect words used together to produce a signal).

I don't disagree with the underlying criticism if reexpressed in neutral language, however.