p(Draft Board is even AWARE of p4wnc6 really being John Smith)
TIMES
p(Draft Board even bothering with Google)
TIMES
p(LessWrong is a top result)
TIMES
p(An old thread is high on Google) AND/OR p(They spend time going through all their old threads)
So, um… seriously? You consider that compound possibility MORE LIKELY than LessWrong producing useful draft-dodging advice? I can’t help but think that would be strong evidence that LessWrong is bloody useless at problem solving, if it were true.
I allude to this point and get −3 votes. I appreciate this point. There are many good criticisms of what I’ve written. But this idea that I should be worried about an “internet trail” about it is not one of them.
p(Draft Board is even AWARE of p4wnc6 really being John Smith) TIMES p(Draft Board even bothering with Google) TIMES p(LessWrong is a top result) TIMES p(An old thread is high on Google) AND/OR p(They spend time going through all their old threads)
So, um… seriously? You consider that compound possibility MORE LIKELY than LessWrong producing useful draft-dodging advice? I can’t help but think that would be strong evidence that LessWrong is bloody useless at problem solving, if it were true.
I allude to this point and get −3 votes. I appreciate this point. There are many good criticisms of what I’ve written. But this idea that I should be worried about an “internet trail” about it is not one of them.