Agreed, why pay the time cost on posts rated on popularity on a site dedicated to rationality. They can only reinforce an established point of view.
If you would care about saying things that are truthful and look at what got upvoted you find from the last week the post UFO Betting: Put Up or Shut Up. The poster dissent in that they believe that UFOs are more likely than most people on LessWrong. They dissent to the point that they choose a username to highlight how they are dissenting.
Voting in LessWrong is often not about whether or not someone agrees with the position that a post takes but about the quality of the post.
You were not downvoted for dissent. You were downvoted for bad reasoning. “AI was going to prove that humanity and science were incompatible by ending us” is a statement that’s too vague to be wrong.
If you would care about saying things that are truthful and look at what got upvoted you find from the last week the post UFO Betting: Put Up or Shut Up. The poster dissent in that they believe that UFOs are more likely than most people on LessWrong. They dissent to the point that they choose a username to highlight how they are dissenting.
Voting in LessWrong is often not about whether or not someone agrees with the position that a post takes but about the quality of the post.
You were not downvoted for dissent. You were downvoted for bad reasoning. “AI was going to prove that humanity and science were incompatible by ending us” is a statement that’s too vague to be wrong.
ChristianKI, I apologize for disturbing the peace of your mind.