I wish this post was never written at all, because as it is, I find it far too unnuanced, and your reasoning for not reading it over fully isn’t all that great, as it’s I think only 3000 words in the document.
In general, I think this is one of those cases where you need to slow down, and actually read over the document you plan to criticize, and this would be a better post if it did that.
It sounds like you wish this wasn’t written at all because you’d prefer a more detailed post? But that’s not always a realistic option. There’s a lot to attend to.
If you’re saying the that posting a “I ignored this but here’s some guesses I took about it that lead me to ignore it”, isn’t helpful, that’s more reasonable.
I find it helpful because Nate’s worldview is an important one, and he’s at least bothered to tell us something about why he’s not engaging more deeply.
If you’re saying the that posting a “I ignored this but here’s some guesses I took about it that lead me to ignore it”, isn’t helpful, that’s more reasonable.
This is what I was talking about, combined with “I expected better of Nate than to throw out an unnuanced take in response to something complicated.”
I wish this post was never written at all, because as it is, I find it far too unnuanced, and your reasoning for not reading it over fully isn’t all that great, as it’s I think only 3000 words in the document.
In general, I think this is one of those cases where you need to slow down, and actually read over the document you plan to criticize, and this would be a better post if it did that.
It sounds like you wish this wasn’t written at all because you’d prefer a more detailed post? But that’s not always a realistic option. There’s a lot to attend to.
If you’re saying the that posting a “I ignored this but here’s some guesses I took about it that lead me to ignore it”, isn’t helpful, that’s more reasonable.
I find it helpful because Nate’s worldview is an important one, and he’s at least bothered to tell us something about why he’s not engaging more deeply.
Fortunately, that more detailed analysis has been done by Steve Byrnes: Thoughts on “AI is easy to control” by Pope & Belrose
This is what I was talking about, combined with “I expected better of Nate than to throw out an unnuanced take in response to something complicated.”