I assume that the claim deluks917 had in mind is that heavier usage, eg. more than what a normal person would use in everyday life, is basically security theater, but below that threshold it’s fine.
I think they can be used that way sometimes. And when they do, it is harmful. I recall hearing someone on LessWrong comment recently about how rationalists often don’t say things “loudly” enough.
But I also think that there are a lot of times where they are used appropriately. At least here on LessWrong and in other groups of respectable people. So saying that they’re basically epistemic security theater seems like a big stretch to me.
I think they are basically epistemic security theater.
Then why did you begin your comment with “I think”?
I assume that the claim deluks917 had in mind is that heavier usage, eg. more than what a normal person would use in everyday life, is basically security theater, but below that threshold it’s fine.
Me too. I just saw the opportunity for a bit of hopefully-amusing snarkiness :-).
I think the “I think” could perhaps be considered (basically) part of a joke, from a certain point of view.
Oh, that’s possible. deluks917, my apologies if I missed your joke and then tried to make the same one more clumsily.
I think they can be used that way sometimes. And when they do, it is harmful. I recall hearing someone on LessWrong comment recently about how rationalists often don’t say things “loudly” enough.
But I also think that there are a lot of times where they are used appropriately. At least here on LessWrong and in other groups of respectable people. So saying that they’re basically epistemic security theater seems like a big stretch to me.