Related: The question “Where is a comprehensive, well-argued explanation of Eliezer’s arguments for AI risk, explaining all lingo, spelling out each step, referencing each claim, and open to open peer review” apparently has no answer?
There is no such logically consistent argument, even scattered across dozens of hyperlinks. At least none I’ve seen.
Let’s not bury this comment. Here is someone we have failed: there are comprehensive, well-argued explanations for all of this, and this person couldn’t find them. Even the responses to the parent comment don’t conclusively answer this—let’s make sure that everyone can find excellent arguments with little effort.
I think he was referring to the enormous corpus of writing of Eliezer and others on LessWrong, which together do, as far as I can tell, fulfill all of your requirements, though there is a lot of sifting to do. My guess is you don’t think this applies, but laserfiche thought the problem was likely one of ignorance about the existing writing, not your confident belief in its absence.
Why would a user who’s only made 8 comments assume my ignorance about the most read LW writer, when I clearly have engaged with several hundred posts, that anyone can see within 10 seconds of clicking my profile?
If they’re genuinely confused it’s bizarre that they didn’t bother checking, so much so that I didn’t even consider it a possibility.
There is no such logically consistent argument, even scattered across dozens of hyperlinks. At least none I’ve seen.
Let’s not bury this comment. Here is someone we have failed: there are comprehensive, well-argued explanations for all of this, and this person couldn’t find them. Even the responses to the parent comment don’t conclusively answer this—let’s make sure that everyone can find excellent arguments with little effort.
Is this written for a different comment and accidentally posted here?
I think he was referring to the enormous corpus of writing of Eliezer and others on LessWrong, which together do, as far as I can tell, fulfill all of your requirements, though there is a lot of sifting to do. My guess is you don’t think this applies, but laserfiche thought the problem was likely one of ignorance about the existing writing, not your confident belief in its absence.
Why would a user who’s only made 8 comments assume my ignorance about the most read LW writer, when I clearly have engaged with several hundred posts, that anyone can see within 10 seconds of clicking my profile?
If they’re genuinely confused it’s bizarre that they didn’t bother checking, so much so that I didn’t even consider it a possibility.
I’m curious if there are specific parts to the usual arguments that you find logically inconsistent.