You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Grognor comments on Intelligence Explosion analysis draft: introduction - Less Wrong Discussion

1 Post author: lukeprog 14 November 2011 09:50AM

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

Comments (12)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: Grognor 14 November 2011 11:30:37AM -1 points [-]

Note that the target style is serious but still more chatty than a normal journal article.

It is unclear to me why this is dichotomized at all. Eliezer himself often (usually with the analogy of giving a lecture in a clown suit) discriminates between seriousness and solemnity. It appears that what you are looking for is something that appeals to members of academia, while still being readable to the layman.

I have not read very many journal articles, or written any at all, so I can't speak for how it appeals to academia, but I'd say that the readability goal has been very much accomplished, though as a fairly typical Less Wrong user I might be finding it more readable than others; however, if the goal is to make it readable to non-academia of Less Wrong caliber, the style is exactly right. It reads like a less self-referential Selfish Gene (noting also that I haven't read very many books, so this comparison might be worthless).