I might not make it to any hangouts, but this post gets an up vote for having a list of LWers on Google+

I'm here if anyone wants to circle me.

Daughter: Why?

Louis: Well, because some things are and some things are not.

Daughter: Why?

Louis: Well, because things that are not can't be.

Daughter: Why?

Louis: Because then nothing wouldn't be! You can't have fucking nothing isn't, everything is!

Daughter: Why?

Louis: 'Cause if nothing wasn't, there'd be fucking all kinds of shit, like giant ants with top hats dancin' around... there's no room for all that shit!

Daughter: Why?

Louis: Aw, fuck you, eat your French fries, you little shit. Goddammit.

--Louis CK

It's for this reason---(is it it? yes, I think it is)---that I find "What caused you to believe what you believe?" to be a much better fundamental question of rationality than the moral-justification-priming "Why do you believe what you believe?". Same with "What caused you to work on what you're working on?" rather than "Why are you working on what you're working on?" (or variations thereof), at least on a timescale greater than months.

Anyway, all of this falls before the milestone that is Cached Selves, which used to be the second or third highest upvoted post on LW but has slipped since then. I can't help but think some of Less Wrong's purposes must've been lost---but maybe it's just a matter of taste.

What about interesting RSS feeds? Anyone that uses Google Reader for RSS will have a 'shared items' feed that other people can subscribe to. I'm guessing that LW readers would tend to have an interesting 'shared items' feed if they use that feature?

For example, mine is http://www.google.com/reader/shared/wilka.hudson - although most of the stuff I share that would interesting to LW readers actually comes from LW, so maybe it's not such a good idea after all.

Would it be possible for whoever to did the design to also do the layout for this? The style can go in the main .css, otherwise it could interfere with any future layout tweaks of the site.

I like the idea, I just don't like the potential future work of having to go update N signatures when the main site styles are tweaked.

Once robots become more commonplace in our lives, I think we can reasonably expect that people will begin to place their trust into simple AI's - and they will hopefully become less suspicious towards AGI and simply assume (like a lot of current AI-researchers apparently) that somehow it is trivial to make it behave friendly towards humans.

Step one is to use machine intelligence to stop the carnage on the roads. With machines regularly brutally killing and maiming people, trust in machines is not going to get very high.

Fifth result for me.

Rational people should be wary of unreflective reliance on either Google result rankings or Google result counts. :)

N.B. Google personalises search results. For me it's the third hit after Wikipedia:Rationality and Wikipedia:Bounded Rationality.

If anyone is interested in having a look at it, but doesn't have an invite (it's invite only so they can control the rate new users sign up), then you can send me a message or reply to this comment with your email address and I'll send some out.