What would make you personally use the new LessWrong?
Quality content. Quality content. And quality content.
Is there any specific feature that would make you want to use it?
The features which I would most like to see:
Wiki containing all or at least most of the jargon.
Rationality quotations all in one file alphabetically ordered by author of the quote.
Book reviews and topical reading lists.
Pie in the sky: the Yudkowsky sequences edited, condensed, and put into an Aristotelian/Thomsian/Scholastic order. (Not that Aristotle or Thomas Aquinas ever did this but the tradition of the scholastics was always to get this pie in the sky.) It might be interesting to see what an experienced book editor would advise doing with this material.
Everything I would want to not see has been covered by yourself or others in this thread.
Pie in the sky: the Yudkowsky sequences edited, condensed, and put into an Aristotelian/Thomsian/Scholastic order. (Not that Aristotle or Thomas Aquinas ever did this but the tradition of the scholastics was always to get this pie in the sky.) It might be interesting to see what an experienced book editor would advise doing with this material.
Rat:A-Z is like...a slight improvement over EY’s first draft of the sequences. I think when Craig says condensed he has much more substantial editing in mind.
I don’t know for sure, my guess is 80⁄20. Rob wrote some great introductions that give more context, but mostly the remaining posts are written the same (I think).
Quality content. Quality content. And quality content.
The features which I would most like to see:
Wiki containing all or at least most of the jargon.
Rationality quotations all in one file alphabetically ordered by author of the quote.
Book reviews and topical reading lists.
Pie in the sky: the Yudkowsky sequences edited, condensed, and put into an Aristotelian/Thomsian/Scholastic order. (Not that Aristotle or Thomas Aquinas ever did this but the tradition of the scholastics was always to get this pie in the sky.) It might be interesting to see what an experienced book editor would advise doing with this material.
Everything I would want to not see has been covered by yourself or others in this thread.
Doesn’t Rationality: From AI to Zombies achieve this already?
Rat:A-Z is like...a slight improvement over EY’s first draft of the sequences. I think when Craig says condensed he has much more substantial editing in mind.
FYI R:AZ is shorter than The Sequences by a factor of 2, which I think is a substantial improvement. Not that it couldn’t be shorter still ;-)
How much of that is selection (omitting whole articles) and how much is condensation (making individual articles shorter)?
I don’t know for sure, my guess is 80⁄20. Rob wrote some great introductions that give more context, but mostly the remaining posts are written the same (I think).
Oh huh, TIL. Thanks!