Stupid Questions Open Thread Round 4

lukeprog

This is for anyone in the LessWrong community who has made at least some effort to read the sequences and follow along, but is still confused on some point, and is perhaps feeling a bit embarrassed. Here, newbies and not-so-newbies are free to ask very basic but still relevant questions with the understanding that the answers are probably somewhere in the sequences. Similarly, LessWrong tends to presume a rather high threshold for understanding science and technology. Relevant questions in those areas are welcome as well. Anyone who chooses to respond should respectfully guide the questioner to a helpful resource, and questioners should be appropriately grateful. Good faith should be presumed on both sides, unless and until it is shown to be absent. If a questioner is not sure whether a question is relevant, ask it, and also ask if it's relevant.

Ask away!

Previously: round 1, round 2, round 3

From the original thread:

This is for anyone in the LessWrong community who has made at least some effort to read the sequences and follow along, but is still confused on some point, and is perhaps feeling a bit embarrassed. Here, newbies and not-so-newbies are free to ask very basic but still relevant questions with the understanding that the answers are probably somewhere in the sequences. Similarly, LessWrong tends to presume a rather high threshold for understanding science and technology. Relevant questions in those areas are welcome as well. Anyone who chooses to respond should respectfully guide the questioner to a helpful resource, and questioners should be appropriately grateful. Good faith should be presumed on both sides, unless and until it is shown to be absent. If a questioner is not sure whether a question is relevant, ask it, and also ask if it's relevant.

Ask away!

which fails to credit the importance of strategic contributions

Sorry if that was unclear; I mean to identify the strategists as "philosophers", like this. As you say, I went on to include a large section on strategy.

I certainly agree on the importance of strategy. Most of the research SI and FHI have done is strategic, after all — and most of the work in progress is strategic, too.

I do tend to talk a lot about "hero mathematicians," though. Maybe that's because "hero mathematician" is more concrete (to me) than "hero strategist."

Anyway, it seems like we may be failing to disagree on anything, here.

Sorry if that was unclear; I mean to identify the strategists as "philosophers", like this.

I see. I had interpreted you to mean philosophers as part of a team to build FAI.

I do tend to talk a lot about "hero mathematicians," though. Maybe that's because "hero mathematician" is more concrete (to me) than "hero strategist."

What do you mean by "more concrete", and do you think it's a good reason to talk a lot more about "hero mathematicians"?

9

Stupid Questions Open Thread Round 4

9

9

9

Stupid Questions Open Thread Round 4

9

9