and then, having stolen credit for Scott Sumner’s ideas as I have stolen credit for so many others, I will be recognized enough to talk openly about BDSM.
I don’t think that was a pun. Literally just that, on dath ilan, he’d need serious credibility before anyone listened to him saying “you know, sometimes sadism is ok!”
There a theme in BDSM paragraph about people on dath ilan not talking about certain matters.
The theme comes back later when it comes to serious people and the shadarak being the ones who don’t talk about X-risk.
The macroeconomics paragraph is in some sense about people coordinating (talking too much).
I will introduce the idea that serious people don’t need to coordinate to avoid crashes
It ends with speaking about talking openly.
The paragraphs have the quality that it rings bells of: Here’s someone making an argument that I’m not fully follow on my first reading.” Noticing confusion.
Could someone who knows a bit more about macroeconomics explain the full BSDM—macroeconomics pun?
To me it seems like there something in there for which I lack background economics knowledge.
I’m not sure what you mean. This part?
I don’t think that was a pun. Literally just that, on dath ilan, he’d need serious credibility before anyone listened to him saying “you know, sometimes sadism is ok!”
Why did the people on dath ilan get macroeconomics wrong in the first place?
It’s not so much that people on dath ilan got this wrong, as that these are areas where Eliezer thinks Earth has gotten things mostly right.
There a theme in BDSM paragraph about people on dath ilan not talking about certain matters.
The theme comes back later when it comes to serious people and the shadarak being the ones who don’t talk about X-risk.
The macroeconomics paragraph is in some sense about people coordinating (talking too much).
It ends with speaking about talking openly.
The paragraphs have the quality that it rings bells of: Here’s someone making an argument that I’m not fully follow on my first reading.” Noticing confusion.