= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Dr_Manhattan comments on Video Q&A with Singularity Institute Executive Director - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (122)
A notable (ommited?) reason to publish is peer review. External peer review might be too costly for most items like Luke mentioned, but perhaps creating an internal peer review network between SIAI and FHI and some other people might be a useful compromise.
Yes, we do this. This is one benefit of the research associates program, for example.
Make this explicit - the aim is not only to produce high quality output but also to signal that this is high quality output. Mark papers as "reviewed by X" or something.
Curious if you guys found anonymous reviews useful.