anon_standards
anon_standards has not written any posts yet.

anon_standards has not written any posts yet.

FWIW, I do not think you over-reacted, nor do I think I agree with any of the criticisms of the comment above.
To me, and I expect to a group of other readers as well given upvotes to my comments and those of @subconvergence, this is a direction we really think LessWrong should not go in.
I think Raemon is able to see some appeals of this post that are something like:
I think there are some significant problems with this, however:
I appreciate your response, and my apologies that for time-efficiency reasons I'm only going to respond briefly and to some parts of it.
I don't think it's fair to say my dismissal of concerns is "cursory" if you include my comments under the post. Maybe the article itself didn't go deep enough, partly I wanted it to scan well, partly I wanted to see good criticism so I could update/come up with good responses, because it's not easy to preempt every criticism.
I'm somewhat sympathetic to this. I do feel as though given large claims e.g. "revolutionary" and the definite rather than the hedge in the title, it was worth doing more than the... (read 468 more words →)
This is an interesting response; mine is of the opposite valence. To me, this doesn't feel too dissimilar from something my cousin-who-is-into-pyramid-schemes would send me. I believe that this post has:
Claims that set off alarm bells to me in this post include:
... (read 1118 more words →)
- Your Dog is Even Smarter Than You Think
- Epistemic status: highly suggestive.
- There's a revolution going on and you're sleeping on it.
- her dog started to display capabilities for rudimentary syntax
- Once your dog gets the hang of it, you’re able to add more buttons faster, but it’s never quick. Dogs take a while to come up