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.

drethelin comments on New censorship: against hypothetical violence against identifiable people - Less Wrong Discussion

22 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 23 December 2012 09:00PM

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

Comments (457)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: drethelin 23 December 2012 09:08:40PM 19 points [-]

Got it. Posts discussing our plans for crimes will herewith be kept to the secret boards only.

Comment author: timtyler 24 December 2012 02:52:42AM 6 points [-]

I believe the traditional structure is a clandestine cell system.

Comment author: David_Gerard 23 December 2012 10:04:15PM 5 points [-]

And the mailing lists, apparently.

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 24 December 2012 02:24:07AM 5 points [-]

The Surgeon General recommends that you not discuss criminal activities, with respect to laws actually enforced, on any mailing list containing more than 5 people.

Comment author: [deleted] 24 December 2012 04:36:10PM 4 points [-]

Why 5?

Comment author: Waffle_Iron 25 December 2012 01:29:10AM 2 points [-]

Have you ever tried to get a group of more than 5 people to keep a secret?

Comment author: [deleted] 25 December 2012 10:39:09AM *  3 points [-]

Have you ever tried to get a group of 4 people to keep a secret?

I'm just wondering where the particular number comes from. Three people can keep a secret if two are dead and all that...

Comment author: AndrewH 24 December 2012 02:57:44AM *  1 point [-]

Intriguing, actual paraphrasing here of a US "The Surgeon General"? I can imagine it is something someone in high office might say.

Comment author: katydee 24 December 2012 11:37:32AM 8 points [-]

The Surgeon General is someone who issues national health recommendations. The implication of Eliezer's post is that discussing criminal activity may be hazardous to your health.

Comment author: Alicorn 24 December 2012 03:04:12AM 4 points [-]

We have a The Surgeon General, but he recommends things about smoking and whatnot; I'm pretty sure he doesn't issue warnings about mailing lists.

Comment author: David_Gerard 01 January 2013 10:05:27PM 0 points [-]

I was thinking of the London list, and this thread, about a drug which isn't actually illegal in the UK (it's prescription-restricted, but not illegal at all to possess) but selling it in public in a pub as if it is. I mean, WHAT. There's stupidity that isn't actually illegal but is nevertheless blithering.

Comment author: FiftyTwo 01 January 2013 11:38:24PM 0 points [-]

That seems sensible enough, you are allowed the drug if a competent expert has determined it is in your best interests to have it, but as you are not yourself qualifies to make that decision you can't transfer ownership to others.

Comment author: Kawoomba 23 December 2012 09:13:16PM 2 points [-]

Back in line with you!