I don't see a special problem...evaluate the arguments, try to correct for biases. Business as usual. Or do you suspect there is a new type of bias at work here?

I took it. Thanks for this, I'm excited about the results.

Typo in the title!

Good Translation! I'm through the whole text now, did proofreading and changed quite a bit, some terminological questions remain. After re-reading the original in the process, I think the english FAQ needs some work (unbalanced sections, winding sentences etc). But as a non-native speaker, I don't dare.

At least 29 and 32 are process advice, too.

31: Anything can be done in dialogue (cf. Plato), but probably shoudn't.

22: Reader of blogs or of papers? What's the target audience?

Further points:

• Avoid formulas
• Use key words, catch phrases, highlighting.
• Use a Summary and/or Conclusion where possible.

First approximation: Make your writing similar to a blockbuster movie.

Since the Universe’s computational accuracy appears to be infinite, in order for the mind to be omniscient about a human brain it must be running the human brain’s quark-level computations within its own mind; any approximate computation would yield imperfect predictions. In the act of running this computation, the brain’s qualia are generated, if (as we have assumed) the brain in question experiences qualia. Therefore the omniscient mind is fully aware of all of the qualia that are experienced within the volume of the Universe about which it has perfect knowledge.

Suppose an entity with qualia emerges in the Game of Life. Surely the omniscient being doesn't have to have those qualia to predict perfecty (and, it seems, to have perfect "physical" knowledge of the simulation)?

I promised to give you feedback on your wikibook. Some quick thoughts:

There is a ton of at false or at least controversial stuff (e.g., "Disappointment is always something positive"; "instrumental rationality" = "instrumentale Rationalität" (wheras it's "instrumentelle Rationalität") or stuff that cannot be understood without further knowledge (what is your average reader to make of the words "The Litany of Gendlin"?).

The preface is lacking footnotes, links or an outline.

You're obviously just getting started on this project, so maybe you should rather wait for EY's book(s) on rationality and try a translation thereof?

Me too.

Let's meet September 10th in Munich (see http://www.doodle.com/u49xxi6z4zqbihqa) Maybe we can attract a few more people with a definite time and setting.