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.

XiXiDu comments on The Singularity Institute's Arrogance Problem - Less Wrong Discussion

63 Post author: lukeprog 18 January 2012 10:30PM

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

Comments (307)

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

Comment author: arundelo 26 January 2012 04:23:46PM *  2 points [-]

I thought this comment by Egan said something interesting about his approach to fiction:

A few reviewers [of Incandescence] complained that they had trouble keeping straight the physical meanings of the Splinterites' [direction words]. This leaves me wondering if they've really never encountered a book before that benefits from being read with a pad of paper and a pen beside it, or whether they're just so hung up on the idea that only non-fiction should be accompanied by note-taking and diagram-scribbling that it never even occurred to them to do this. I realise that some people do much of their reading with one hand on a strap in a crowded bus or train carriage, but books simply don't come with a guarantee that they can be properly enjoyed under such conditions.

(I enjoyed Incandescence without taking notes. If, while I was reading it, I had been quizzed on the direction words, I would have done OK but not great.)

Edit: The other end of the above link contains spoilers for Incandescence. To understand the portion I quoted, it suffices to know that some characters in the story have their own set of six direction words (instead of "up", "down", "north", "south", "east", and "west").

Edit 2: I have a bit of trouble keeping track of characters in novels. When I read on my iPhone, I highlight characters' names as they're introduced, so I can easily refresh my memory when I forgot who someone is.

Comment author: gwern 26 January 2012 04:45:52PM 1 point [-]

Yes, he's pretty unapologetic about his elitism - if you aren't already able to follow his concepts or willing to do the work so you can, you are not his audience and he doesn't care about you. Which isn't a problem with Incandescence, whose directions sound perfectly comprehensible, but is much more of an issue with TCR, which builds up an entire alternate physics.