It’s not just the material there, but the references to material elsewhere that pay dividends.
I came here out of interest towards references to Jaynes and Korzybski. People who take those guys seriously are ahead of the curve, IMO. So they also take Cialdini and Kahneman seriously. And Hugh Everett. And some of them, Mencius Moldbug.
All guys with valuable insights.
I don’t share the fascination over Newcomb problems either. So I don’t read them. End of problem. Seems like the OP is busy looking for what he doesn’t value, instead of what he does. That’s too bad for him. This place is a nexus of a lot of good ideas.
It’s not just the material there, but the references to material elsewhere that pay dividends.
I came here out of interest towards references to Jaynes and Korzybski. People who take those guys seriously are ahead of the curve, IMO. So they also take Cialdini and Kahneman seriously. And Hugh Everett. And some of them, Mencius Moldbug.
All guys with valuable insights.
I don’t share the fascination over Newcomb problems either. So I don’t read them. End of problem. Seems like the OP is busy looking for what he doesn’t value, instead of what he does. That’s too bad for him. This place is a nexus of a lot of good ideas.