I didn’t move significantly towards either party but it seemed like Eliezer was avoiding bets, and generally, in my humble opinion, making his theory unfalsifiable rather than showing what its true weakpoints are. That doesn’t seem like what a confidently correct person would do (but it was already mostly what I expected, so I didn’t update by much on his theory’s truth value).
ETA: After re-reading my comment, I feel I may have come off too strong. I’ll completely unendorse my language and comment if people think this sort of thing is not conducive to productive discourse. Also, I greatly appreciate both parties for doing this.
I find it valuable to know what impressions other people had themselves; it only becomes tone-policing when you worry loudly about what impressions other people ‘might’ have. (If one is worried about how it looks to say so publicly, one could always just DM me (though I might not respond).)
I didn’t move significantly towards either party but it seemed like Eliezer was avoiding bets, and generally, in my humble opinion, making his theory unfalsifiable rather than showing what its true weakpoints are. That doesn’t seem like what a confidently correct person would do (but it was already mostly what I expected, so I didn’t update by much on his theory’s truth value).
ETA: After re-reading my comment, I feel I may have come off too strong. I’ll completely unendorse my language and comment if people think this sort of thing is not conducive to productive discourse. Also, I greatly appreciate both parties for doing this.
I find it valuable to know what impressions other people had themselves; it only becomes tone-policing when you worry loudly about what impressions other people ‘might’ have. (If one is worried about how it looks to say so publicly, one could always just DM me (though I might not respond).)
FWIW I also don’t like the phrasing of my comment very much either. I came back thinking to remove it but saw you’d already replied :P