I suspect 4 is pretty strong. I can’t distinguish 1 and 2, but 3 doesn’t seem right. People disagree all the time with little regard to whom they’re disagreeing with.
In 1, new LW readers start at the base rate for one-boxing, but some two-boxers switch after reading good arguments in favor of one-boxing, which other folks have not read. In 2, new LW readers start at the base rate for one-boxing, but two-boxers are less likely to stick around.
4 seems to explain Asimov’s two-boxing; his view seems to be an attempt to counterfactually stick up for free will.
6 seems like 3; it’s just attributing the “conversion” to the community’s influence at large, rather than to Eliezer’s specifically. (Neither 6 nor 3 assumes the arguments here are good ones, which 1 does.)
I suspect 4 is pretty strong. I can’t distinguish 1 and 2, but 3 doesn’t seem right. People disagree all the time with little regard to whom they’re disagreeing with.
In 1, new LW readers start at the base rate for one-boxing, but some two-boxers switch after reading good arguments in favor of one-boxing, which other folks have not read. In 2, new LW readers start at the base rate for one-boxing, but two-boxers are less likely to stick around.
4 seems to explain Asimov’s two-boxing; his view seems to be an attempt to counterfactually stick up for free will.
6 seems like 3; it’s just attributing the “conversion” to the community’s influence at large, rather than to Eliezer’s specifically. (Neither 6 nor 3 assumes the arguments here are good ones, which 1 does.)