Curated! I don’t feel fully competent to evaluate this post, but gain confidence in its curation-worthiness from Habryka having endorsed it. Yet, I’ll describe the various many things I like about it, in no strong order. It is earnestly scholarship, engaging both on an interesting and important topic, and situating its reasoning amongst the work of others. Ihor didn’t just read a little or muse on the topic, but has studied the field. The topic is fundamental, and it’s challenging the fundamentals. I value the boldness of that. Most posts that are making intellectual contributions are pushing at the edges, the frontiers, and it’s cool (assuming quality is high, and I think that’s clearly the case here even if it would turn out to be wrong) to have challenges made at core doctrine – especially as the case does feel compelling here. The writing was pleasant to read notwithstanding a non-zero LLM score (we’re wrestling with LLM-assisted writing on LW, but felt quite good to read). The post doesn’t fully explain all it concepts for an unfamiliar audience, but does do some of this pedagogy in a nice way, e.g. explaining the different types of utility in a technical sense. I model that if we had more discourse of this kind, back and forth, we’d make some pretty neat intellectual progress. I could imagine someone coming along and making some really strong counters, but I’d just love to see that back and forth. I wasn’t familiar with Ihor before, but I hope he keeps writing. Kudos.
Curated! I don’t feel fully competent to evaluate this post, but gain confidence in its curation-worthiness from Habryka having endorsed it. Yet, I’ll describe the various many things I like about it, in no strong order. It is earnestly scholarship, engaging both on an interesting and important topic, and situating its reasoning amongst the work of others. Ihor didn’t just read a little or muse on the topic, but has studied the field. The topic is fundamental, and it’s challenging the fundamentals. I value the boldness of that. Most posts that are making intellectual contributions are pushing at the edges, the frontiers, and it’s cool (assuming quality is high, and I think that’s clearly the case here even if it would turn out to be wrong) to have challenges made at core doctrine – especially as the case does feel compelling here. The writing was pleasant to read notwithstanding a non-zero LLM score (we’re wrestling with LLM-assisted writing on LW, but felt quite good to read). The post doesn’t fully explain all it concepts for an unfamiliar audience, but does do some of this pedagogy in a nice way, e.g. explaining the different types of utility in a technical sense. I model that if we had more discourse of this kind, back and forth, we’d make some pretty neat intellectual progress. I could imagine someone coming along and making some really strong counters, but I’d just love to see that back and forth. I wasn’t familiar with Ihor before, but I hope he keeps writing. Kudos.