Less Wrong is a community blog devoted to refining the art of human rationality. Please visit our About page for more information.

owencb comments on CFAR's new mission statement (on our website) - Less Wrong Discussion

7 Post author: AnnaSalamon 10 December 2016 08:37AM

Comments (13)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: owencb 11 December 2016 01:24:27PM 12 points [-]

I don't know who the intended audience for this is, but I think it's worth flagging that it seemed extremely jargon-heavy to me. I expect this to be off-putting to at least some people you actually want to attract (if it were one of my first interactions with CFAR I would be less inclined to engage again). In several cases you link to explanations of the jargon. This helps, but doesn't really solve the problem that you're asking the reader to do a large amount of work.

Some examples from the first few paragraphs:

  • clear and unhidden
  • original seeing
  • original making
  • existential risk
  • informational content [non-standard use]
  • thinker/doer
  • know the right passwords
  • double crux
  • outreach efforts
Comment author: MrMind 12 December 2016 10:56:42AM 2 points [-]

I got the same feeling, and I would add "inside view" to the list.

Comment author: Benito 13 December 2016 09:26:52PM *  1 point [-]

I also think that 'inside view' might be a bit of an overloaded term. However, the meaning I think CFAR meant, was 'gears based models' and that's even worse CFAR jargon.