That paragraph matches my overall impression of your post, even if the rest of the post is not as blatant.
It’s appropriate to affirm sensationalist things because you happen to believe them, when you do (which Yudkowsky in this case does), not because they are sensationalist. It’s appropriate to support causes/policies because you prefer outcomes of their influence, not because you agree with all the claims that float around them in the world. Sensationalism is a trait of causes/ideologies that sometimes promotes their fitness, a multiplier on promotional/endorsement effort, which makes sensationalist causes with good externalities unusually effective to endorse when neglected.
The title makes it less convenient to endorse the book without simultaneously affirming its claim, it makes it necessary to choose between caveating and connotationally compromising on epistemics. Hence I endorse IABI rather than IABIED as the canonical abbreviation.
That paragraph matches my overall impression of your post, even if the rest of the post is not as blatant.
It’s appropriate to affirm sensationalist things because you happen to believe them, when you do (which Yudkowsky in this case does), not because they are sensationalist. It’s appropriate to support causes/policies because you prefer outcomes of their influence, not because you agree with all the claims that float around them in the world. Sensationalism is a trait of causes/ideologies that sometimes promotes their fitness, a multiplier on promotional/endorsement effort, which makes sensationalist causes with good externalities unusually effective to endorse when neglected.
The title makes it less convenient to endorse the book without simultaneously affirming its claim, it makes it necessary to choose between caveating and connotationally compromising on epistemics. Hence I endorse IABI rather than IABIED as the canonical abbreviation.