= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Worse, there's a transition on the direction of dreadful writing.
I'm kind of hoping there is a transition in the direction of Richard being dead. Nobody that naive in his position should live.
I stopped reading because I couldn't take the pain anymore, so I don't know.
The Anita Blake books are the only ones that I've read where the character is actually sleeping with most of the monsters chasing her. Mercy Thompson and Sookie Stackhouse have men chasing them, but they only tend to date one at once: they don't have actual harems.
Sometimes the relationships involve sex, sometimes they do not. Enough involve sleeping with the monsters that it would be hard to collect a large sample without encountering them.
As for Anita Blake, over the last few weeks I read the first six. So far she hasn't managed to have sex with any of her harem. She's too busy being a prudish Christian necromancer who thinks a lot about how her men/monsters make her wet. I understand there is a transition at some point in the direction of raw erotica. I'm not sure I'll get that far.
Worse, there's a transition on the direction of dreadful writing.
In response to
Open Thread, May 1-14, 2013
I got a decent smartphone (SGS3) a few days ago and am looking for some good apps for LessWrong-related activities. I am particularly interested in recommendations for lifelogging apps but would look into any other type of recommendations. Also I've rooted the phone.
I personally don't get on with Anki but there are many many positive reports.
We didn't intend to crosspost here. However I do expect LessWrong readers will link to material and arguments such as the recent criticial look at our terminology in "Is “tribalism” a useful concept?" and obviously we will be linking to a lot of rationality related content in our own writing there, both on this site and elsewhere, because we otherwise simply won't be understood by many readers.
Edit: James has since decided to rather start his own blog and moved the article there, edited the link to reflect this. To give another example of a hopefully interesting post for even non-reactionary rationalists, I give Against Moral Progress.
I thought there was enough overlapping interest to be worth linking the launch. and I expect occasional posts may be interesting.
[Link] More Right launched
Various people (including Konkvistador who has been talking about it the most) have launched their blog More Right
"A group blog, More Right is a place to discuss the many things that are touched by politics that we prefer wouldn’t be, as well as right wing ideas in general. It grew out of the correspondences among like minded people in late 2012, who first began their journey studying the findings of modern cognitive science on the failings of human reasoning and ended it reading serious 19th century gentlemen denouncing democracy. Surveying modernity, we found cracks in its façade. Findings and seemingly correct ideas, carefully bolted down and hidden, met with disapproving stares and inarticulate denunciation when unearthed. This only whetted our appetites. Proceeding from the surface to the foundations, we found them lacking. This is reflected in the spirit of the site."
Who is in the clown suit, then?
Serious Marxian and feminist theory, in any sphere. Not that someone's been seriously trying to post about those on LW and met with hostility, oh no - LW in general just can't bridge the inferential distance to those schools of thought, so what we're getting here is a strawman in a clown suit. We aren't so much failing to extract value from those traditions, we aren't even trying - because it's much easier and more fun to mock it all as self-absorbed non-truth-tracking ivory-tower nonsense.
I've been reading lots of good stuff on both fronts lately, and attempting to mark what's appropriate and good for LW (analysis of systemic behavior, self-perpetuating structures of power, etc), so that I can at least provide some good links eventually. Translating any serious insights into LW-speak by myself is a bit of a daunting task; again, a lot of Marxist/feminist context as seriously studied by those schools of thought is nothing like the strawman version that many people have likely absorbed through pop culture.
But at least I can say that, while the inferential gap between the transhumanist/geek discourse of LW and the discourse of left-wing academia that tech geeks love to deride is great, there is a lot to be gained on the other side. We are ignoring some vast intellectual currents here.
I look forward to your further posts.
my limited research on these topics has been very negative.
Genuine question: What do you find appealing about it? I've always found the writing impenetrable and the philosophy unappealing.
The writing, I agree, is pretty bad, and she has an odd obsession with trains and motors. I can just about understand the "motor" part because it allows some not very good "motor of the world" metaphors.
The appealing part is the depiction of the evil characters as endlessly dependant on the hero characters, and their view of them as an inexhaustible source of resources for whatever they want, and the rejection of this.
Time Enough for Love is an even better anti-Atlas Shrugged.
I like my Heinlein, but I don't see the connection.
I don't think that's true? Surely the meaning is an attempt to bring that particular kind of cabbage to my attention, for as yet unexplained reasons.
That's a possible interpretation, but I wouldn't say "surely."
Some other possibilities.
The person picked the word apropos of nothing because they think it would be funny to mess with a stranger's head.
It's some kind of in-joke or code word, and they're doing it for the amusement of someone else who's present (or just themselves if they're the sort of person who makes jokes nobody else in the room is going to get.)
The person is confused or deranged.
But this doesn't seem particularly different from the ambiguity in all language. The linked site seems to suggest there's some particular lack of meaning in isolated words.
= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
I'm looking for more on the should-universe you occasionally see referenced around lesswrong.
So far all I can see is some vague references from EY (eg http://lesswrong.com/lw/2nz/less_wrong_open_thread_september_2010/2k50 )
Anyone got anything?