Does it really? Do I have to repeat myself more? Is it against some unwritten rule to mention Bell curve prior which I have had from the start?
What is your purpose?
What do you think? Feedback. I do actually think he’s nuts, you know? I also think he’s terribly miscalibrated , which is probably the cause of the overconfidence in his foom belief (and it is ultimately the overconfidence that is nutty, same beliefs with appropriate confidence would be just mildly weird in a good way). It is also probably the case that politeness results in biased feedback.
Well, there’s also the matter of why I’d think he’s nuts when facing “either he’s a supergenius or he’s nuts” dilemma created by overly high confidence expressed in overly speculative arguments. But yea I’m not sure it’s getting anywhere, the target audience is just EY himself, and I do expect he’d read this at least out of curiosity to see how he’s being defended, but with low confidence so I’m done.
Does it really? Do I have to repeat myself more? Is it against some unwritten rule to mention Bell curve prior which I have had from the start?
What do you think? Feedback. I do actually think he’s nuts, you know? I also think he’s terribly miscalibrated , which is probably the cause of the overconfidence in his foom belief (and it is ultimately the overconfidence that is nutty, same beliefs with appropriate confidence would be just mildly weird in a good way). It is also probably the case that politeness results in biased feedback.
If your purpose is “let everyone know I think Eliezer is nuts”, then you have succeeded, and may cease posting.
Well, there’s also the matter of why I’d think he’s nuts when facing “either he’s a supergenius or he’s nuts” dilemma created by overly high confidence expressed in overly speculative arguments. But yea I’m not sure it’s getting anywhere, the target audience is just EY himself, and I do expect he’d read this at least out of curiosity to see how he’s being defended, but with low confidence so I’m done.