So, Zack, I agree with most of your takes on the object level issues here. At the same time, the amount of motivated reasoning and dishonesty you attribute to this community and Yudkowsky in particular as a result of these passing comments seems comically exaggerated. Personally, I cannot recall any discussion of gender or transgenderism on LessWrong, or from major LessWrong contributors outside of LessWrong, except for yours. A few tweets from Eliezer asking to address trans people as they wish does not substantiate to me this sky-is-falling level of panic about community epistemics you seem to have.
Whether the sky is falling depends on how high the sky was in the past, and whether that’s worth panicking over depends on your utility function over sky height? (That’s the short version. The long version is another 70,000 words over four posts.)
I do not think this is a matter of merely having held Eliezer in less esteem. There is something to be said about how LessWrong developed a cult of personality around Eliezer, but rather than an objection to the cult of personality per se, what your posts are is a criticism of Eliezer for not living up to the standards of his personality cult, with small notes in passing about how unhealthy your reverence to him was.
The long version is another 70,000 words over four posts.
Criticisms of particular people or groups that long tend to be nebulous and pathological rather than based in some reasonable concern. I hope you will understand if I am too skeptical to read the whole thing, if it cannot be summarized into something concrete.
Thanks. It sounds like you should regard my sky-is-falling level of panic as unsubstantiated until I come back to you with a summary at the end, at which time you can reëvaluate the question of whether I was correct to panic.
So, Zack, I agree with most of your takes on the object level issues here. At the same time, the amount of motivated reasoning and dishonesty you attribute to this community and Yudkowsky in particular as a result of these passing comments seems comically exaggerated. Personally, I cannot recall any discussion of gender or transgenderism on LessWrong, or from major LessWrong contributors outside of LessWrong, except for yours. A few tweets from Eliezer asking to address trans people as they wish does not substantiate to me this sky-is-falling level of panic about community epistemics you seem to have.
Whether the sky is falling depends on how high the sky was in the past, and whether that’s worth panicking over depends on your utility function over sky height? (That’s the short version. The long version is another 70,000 words over four posts.)
I do not think this is a matter of merely having held Eliezer in less esteem. There is something to be said about how LessWrong developed a cult of personality around Eliezer, but rather than an objection to the cult of personality per se, what your posts are is a criticism of Eliezer for not living up to the standards of his personality cult, with small notes in passing about how unhealthy your reverence to him was.
Criticisms of particular people or groups that long tend to be nebulous and pathological rather than based in some reasonable concern. I hope you will understand if I am too skeptical to read the whole thing, if it cannot be summarized into something concrete.
Thanks. It sounds like you should regard my sky-is-falling level of panic as unsubstantiated until I come back to you with a summary at the end, at which time you can reëvaluate the question of whether I was correct to panic.