I wonder what the collaborative process was like, who wrote what. Eliezer’s typical writing is...let’s go with “abrasive.” He thinks he’s smarter than you, he has the chutzpah to be right about that far more often than not, and he’s unrepentant of same, in a manner that outrages a large fraction of primates. That tone is entirely absent from IABIED. I wonder if a non-trivial part of Nate’s contribution was “edit out all the bits of Eliezer’s persona that alienate neurotypicals,” or if some other editor took care of that. I’m pretty sure someone filtered him; when, say, the Example ASI Scenario contains things like (paraphrased) “here’s six ways it could achieve X; for purposes of this example at least one of them works, it doesn’t matter which one” I can practically hear Eliezer thinking “...because if we picked one, then idiots would object that “method Y of achieving X wouldn’t work, therefore X is unachievable, therefore there is no danger.” And then I imagine Nate (or whoever) whapping Eliezer’s key-fingers or something.
In the interview sessions for people who pre-ordered the book, Nate said the writing processes involved multiple rounds of Eliezer writings waaaay too much stuff followed by Nate cutting it down by 3x. Some of the left-overs were re-used in the online supplements.
EDIT: Thank you for writing this review. It is basically what I would’ve said if I had to write a review.
In the interview sessions for people who pre-ordered the book, Nate said the writing processes involved multiple rounds of Eliezer writings waaaay too much stuff followed by Nate cutting it down by 3x. Some of the left-overs were re-used in the online supplements.
EDIT: Thank you for writing this review. It is basically what I would’ve said if I had to write a review.