FWIW, I have had the same experience of reading a post or comment by Alephwyr and bouncing off parts of it, unsure what he was saying. So I then tried giving it to Claude, who generally seemed to understand it, explained it to me, and when I then reread it, Claude’s explanation then fit, and when I then conversed with Alephwyr on that basis, it appeared that Claude’s interpretation had in fact been correct. So I think he’s not actually anything like as unclear as he, admittedly, sometimes seems on first reading by people very used to the discussion here on LessWrong. Which fits with how he’s describing his communication style below — I think he’s just not using all our terminology and making all the same sets of assumptions. Which, frankly, makes him a particularly valuable participant in the conversation — questioning previously unquestioned assumptions is worth doing periodically, and new ideas are often helpful.
FWIW, I have had the same experience of reading a post or comment by Alephwyr and bouncing off parts of it, unsure what he was saying. So I then tried giving it to Claude, who generally seemed to understand it, explained it to me, and when I then reread it, Claude’s explanation then fit, and when I then conversed with Alephwyr on that basis, it appeared that Claude’s interpretation had in fact been correct. So I think he’s not actually anything like as unclear as he, admittedly, sometimes seems on first reading by people very used to the discussion here on LessWrong. Which fits with how he’s describing his communication style below — I think he’s just not using all our terminology and making all the same sets of assumptions. Which, frankly, makes him a particularly valuable participant in the conversation — questioning previously unquestioned assumptions is worth doing periodically, and new ideas are often helpful.
So, if in doubt, ask Claude, as often helps.