How long since you first drew these graphs? Have you since considered where you are standing on the graph? Does the graph look (or rather feel) like you initially thought?

Ok, I wanted to play it, but the word are too big and/or the textbox is too small. graphics don't run well, and it really needs an exit button. I'm using windows 8. other than that, I think the idea is great.

that's amazing!, Great compilation. So many posts I didn´t know even existed.

I have seen that before, I think was a lw rationalist project but I'm not sure. From what I remember the web page was pretty dull, so maybe that make it fail(or prevent it to grow).

P.S. I will post a link If I can find the site.

That's missing the point of this question, which is "if I read all the academic books on CFAR's list, are there blog posts that contain things I will not have seen in the books?"

Fiction Books Thread

Also done. The results may be interesting.

I always thought that the "most civilizations just upload and live in a simulated utopia instead of colonizing the universe" response to the Fermi Paradox was obviously wrong, because it would only take ONE civilization breaking this trend to be visible, and regardless of what the aliens are doing, a galaxy of resources is always useful to have. But i was reading somewhere (I don't remember where) about an interesting idea of a super-Turing computer that could calculate anything, regardless of time constraints and ignoring the halting problem. I think the proposal was to use closed time like curves or something.

This, of course, seemed very far-fetched, but the implications are fascinating. It would be possible to use such a device to simulate an eternity in a moment. We could upload and have an eternity of eudaimonia, without ever having to worry about running out of resources or the heat death of the universe or alien superintelligences. Even if the computer was to be destroyed an instant later, it wouldn't matter to us. If such a thing was possible, then that would be an obvious solution to the Fermi Paradox.

Comments in the aggregator makes much more sense to me--no trivial inconvenience to posting a comment, and people can read the comments to determine whether or not to follow the link, and it means every link has access to Reddit-quality commenting (karma, threads, etc.) regardless of how the source is set up.

It does make it harder for the content creator to see those comments.

ESRogs just made this.

Pros of having it on Reddit:

1. It's a clearly neutral place, with no history or baggage.
2. It's a bit more cleanly set up for link posts.
3. Instead of a potentially costly change to the LW codebase, it's already done.

Cons of having it on Reddit, instead of on LW (see this other comment of mine for suggestions on how that could be done):

1. It requires a different account, and a new account for anyone who doesn't already use Reddit.
2. It doesn't inherit the good parts of the history, like tying the Yvain of SSC links to the Yvain of Generalizing From One Example.
3. It creates a new source of gravity, potentially diffusing things even more, rather than consolidating them. Instead of conversations in SSC comments and tumblr and Facebook and a LessWrong link post, we now might have conversations in SSC comments, tumblr, Facebook, a LessWrong link post, and Reddit.