I’m in the Twitter thread with Steve. I’ll just note that I don’t think it’s realistic to expect the world’s reaction to be more passionate and supportive than the LW community’s signaled reaction.
Are most of the persnickety internal-disagreers actually signalling that they intend to promote the book, or at least not downplay its thesis? I don’t think rationalists at large have a great track record of engaging the outside world on a unified front, or in leaving nuance aside when the nuance would stand in the way of the important parts of the communication. In other words, I don’t think the two types of content are on different platforms. I think it’s usually the same content on both.
In general, I’ve noticed that a lot of people think “scout mindset” means never having to pick up a (metaphorical) rifle. That’s a good way to have a precise model of how you’re going to die, without having any hand in preventing it. The most useful people in the world right now are scouts who are willing to act like soldiers from time to time.
Are most of the persnickety internal-disagreers actually signalling that they intend to promote the book, or at least not downplay its thesis?
One of the persnickety internal disagreers here. I have recommended IABIED to those of my acquaintances who I expect may read it. I don’t really have any other platform to shout about it from, but if I did, I would’ve certainly used it to promote the book, leaving all nitpicking out of it.
I, at least, do explicitly make a distinction between “a place for persnickety internal discussion” and “the public-facing platform”, and would behave differently between the two.
In principle it makes sense. But in reality right now, the only place where there’s a sizable MIRI-aligned community, is the community that’s entirely going the persnickety route. I’m open to different counterfactual comparisons, I’m just noting that compared to the world where there’s a sizable MIRI-aligned community that shows support for MIRI, this world is disappointing.
LessWrong is not an activist community, and should not become one. I think there are some promising arguments for trying to create activist spaces and communities (as well as some substantially valid warnings). I am currently kind of confused about how good it would be to create more of those spaces, but I think if it’s a good idea, people should not attempt to try to make LessWrong into one.
I don’t see “how you express yourself on a highly argumentative web forum” as limiting “how you express yourself at a launch party” or “how you express yourself on a popular podcast” other places.
I’m in the Twitter thread with Steve. I’ll just note that I don’t think it’s realistic to expect the world’s reaction to be more passionate and supportive than the LW community’s signaled reaction.
Why not? It seems extremely reasonable to have a place for persnickety internal-ish discussion, and other content somewhere else?
Are most of the persnickety internal-disagreers actually signalling that they intend to promote the book, or at least not downplay its thesis? I don’t think rationalists at large have a great track record of engaging the outside world on a unified front, or in leaving nuance aside when the nuance would stand in the way of the important parts of the communication. In other words, I don’t think the two types of content are on different platforms. I think it’s usually the same content on both.
In general, I’ve noticed that a lot of people think “scout mindset” means never having to pick up a (metaphorical) rifle. That’s a good way to have a precise model of how you’re going to die, without having any hand in preventing it. The most useful people in the world right now are scouts who are willing to act like soldiers from time to time.
One of the persnickety internal disagreers here. I have recommended IABIED to those of my acquaintances who I expect may read it. I don’t really have any other platform to shout about it from, but if I did, I would’ve certainly used it to promote the book, leaving all nitpicking out of it.
I, at least, do explicitly make a distinction between “a place for persnickety internal discussion” and “the public-facing platform”, and would behave differently between the two.
In principle it makes sense. But in reality right now, the only place where there’s a sizable MIRI-aligned community, is the community that’s entirely going the persnickety route. I’m open to different counterfactual comparisons, I’m just noting that compared to the world where there’s a sizable MIRI-aligned community that shows support for MIRI, this world is disappointing.
LessWrong is not an activist community, and should not become one. I think there are some promising arguments for trying to create activist spaces and communities (as well as some substantially valid warnings). I am currently kind of confused about how good it would be to create more of those spaces, but I think if it’s a good idea, people should not attempt to try to make LessWrong into one.
I don’t see “how you express yourself on a highly argumentative web forum” as limiting “how you express yourself at a launch party” or “how you express yourself on a popular podcast” other places.