Its interesting that LW was being cited as a valid authority to make deeper points like “probability is in the mind, not reality”. I’ve never seen that tendency anywhere but here.
Anyone want to give odds on whether/when content from LW will start showing up as more authoritative than wikipedia when searching for standard terms like “cognitive bias”?
Or maybe a deeper question to motivate content generation and organization on our own part: what terms should eventually link to LW content? Any general terms like “Bayesian” or “Map vs Territory” or “Singularity”?
Type in “politics is the” and google suggests the following completions:
″...art of art the possible”
″...art of compromise”
″...art of art of looking for trouble”
Add an M with “politics is the m” and google changes to:
Anyone want to give odds on whether/when content from LW will start showing up as more authoritative than wikipedia when searching for standard terms like “cognitive bias”?
How does one site show up as more authoritative than another? Isn’t it simply a matter of how much trust the broader community puts into the source?
I did discover recently, to some amusement, that Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality is the second top result for a google search on “rationality,” and Eliezer’s own site is the eighth.
Its interesting that LW was being cited as a valid authority to make deeper points like “probability is in the mind, not reality”. I’ve never seen that tendency anywhere but here.
Anyone want to give odds on whether/when content from LW will start showing up as more authoritative than wikipedia when searching for standard terms like “cognitive bias”?
Or maybe a deeper question to motivate content generation and organization on our own part: what terms should eventually link to LW content? Any general terms like “Bayesian” or “Map vs Territory” or “Singularity”?
Type in “politics is the” and google suggests the following completions:
″...art of art the possible”
″...art of compromise”
″...art of art of looking for trouble”
Add an M with “politics is the m” and google changes to:
″...master science”
″...mind-killer”
″...master science aristotle”
″...management”
Just to clarify...
I didn’t intend to link to LW as an authority on certain topics, but merely as a storehouse of well-written explanations for those topics.
How does one site show up as more authoritative than another? Isn’t it simply a matter of how much trust the broader community puts into the source?
I did discover recently, to some amusement, that Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality is the second top result for a google search on “rationality,” and Eliezer’s own site is the eighth.