Vafin
28
2
4
Vafin has not written any posts yet.
What do you think about this (short) critic of Paul Ingraham ?
https://www.painscience.com/blog/that-pain-reprocessing-therapy-study-is-way-too-good-to-be-true.html
Hi, sorry I'm sick I won't be able to hold the meeting
This year's Fall ACX Meetup everywhere in Genoble.
Location: We'll be in the Jardin de Ville, on the lawn near the cable car, with a small ACX Meetup sign. – https://plus.codes/8FQ75PVG+3H
Please RSVP on LessWrong so I know how many we are. We can go to a bar or somewhere else afterwards.
Contact: fantin.seguin@live.fr
This year's Spring ACX Meetup everywhere in Grenoble.
Location: We'll be in the Jardin de Ville, on the lawn near the cable car, with a small ACX Meetup sign – https://plus.codes/8FQ75PVG+3H
I gave this meeting place but we can go to a bar or somewhere else afterwards
Contact: fantin.seguin@live.fr
Are you familiar with the work of Paul Ingraham on https://www.painscience.com/ ?
I've been interested in these topics for several years, as I have chronic pain since a longtime, and he's still the person I trust the most on these subjects.
(He wrote a critic of John Sarno here : https://www.painscience.com/articles/sarno-review.php )
Is there no way to put more emphasis on quality rather than quantity of writing?
I feel like this community doesn’t lack prolific writers, if anything there’s too much to read. I probably only manage to read about 15% of my Substack subscriptions, and I use AI to summarize another 15%.
Wouldn’t it be interesting to experiment with something like one post every five days with a length limit, and at the end of each cycle a jury evaluates the posts? Then, for example, the six lowest-rated writers leave. I haven’t thought this through deeply, it’s just an idea for a more quality-centered structure.