All of IgnatzMouse's Comments + Replies

The rounding of concepts and results is very common in academia, where researchers try to publish results or ideas that are "novel". A common concern in the peer-review process is that the idea is not really new, but a consequence or a re-framing of another idea. "How is this new?" is a typical question in any referee report. In some cases this concern is correct. In others, it is conceptual rounding of a new result.

This intellectual attitude dismisses useful new instantiations of general ideas. In many cases, the particular application could be more impac... (read more)

I am a long-time lurker; I started following EY in Overcoming Bias and then here, where I visit on and off. I have been a business school professor for about 15 years. I use a pseudonym to keep my online professional profile distinct from my non-professional online activity. 

I notice that  business topics are not often discussed in LW, or at least not in the same detail and precision as other topics. It is certainly not a focal theme of the blog, but I was wondering if there would be interest to discuss business topics without the "fluff" that on... (read more)

6lsusr
There's definitely an interest. Like many subjects, the limiting factor is people who are good writers, good at business (or at least knowledgeable about it) and have the slack to post. Pseudonyms are fine.

So this is a long ad for bioshelters? /s

joshcΩ71612

No

I agree with the frustration. Wolfram was being deliberately obtuse. Eliezer summarised it well toward the end, something like "I am telling you that the forest is on fire and you are telling me that we first need to define what do we mean by fire". I understand that we need definitions for things like "agency" or technology "wanting" something and even why do we mean by a "human" in the year 2070. But Wolfram went a bit too far. A naive genius that did not want to play along in the conversation. Smart teenagers talk like that.

Another issue with this conve... (read more)

2Juneaux Maeder
Yeah Eliezer really isn't the most efficient communicator, at least in discussions. Being able to predict how someone will interpret your words and adjusting them to illicit the correct interpretation is an impossible skill to perfect, but it's nearly as difficult to master. Unfortunately, it's the singular skill utterly completely critical for one party to posses for a conversation to go anywhere, and in this case neither party did a good job of efficiently contradicting incorrect interpretations. Eliezer did a better job though, for what it's worth.

Not a deep insight, Just to add an example to the curb-cut effect I experienced that went from mild reluctance to enthusiastic acceptance. 

Background: My son is hard of hearing (almost deaf). The health insurance paid for a system of microphones that connect to his hearing aid /CI and also to very high quality speakers in the back. The whole thing cost several thousands euros. The school also has really good acoustic panels in the ceiling (this schools admits one or two hard-of-hearing kids a year, out of about 120).

First reactions. Some teachers look... (read more)

1Michael Cohn
That's an amazing story, thanks for sharing! I would not have expected that outcome, and I hope the folks in charge take other lessons / hypotheses from it too.