Yeah, I was hoping specifically for Raemon’s model. Are we interested in stories that only a very successful person can tell (i.e. Paul Graham on being a venture capitalist)? Or are we interested in rationality posts that anyone could write in theory, but that gain their aura of credibility due to the success of the person posting it? If the former, a CV wouldn’t be that useful, except as it came across in the storytelling. If the latter, it seems like you would want the person’s track record of accomplishment in some form, perhaps as part of the “epistemic status” disclaimer.
I meant the former – someone who’s actually accomplished something is more likely to have rationality lessons that are actually useful. But I don’t think people should have an attititude of deferral – I just didn’t want to try to solve the current overbalance of AI by having a bunch of college students write up some untested armchair rationality.
I don’t know that I’d put the bar at “Paul Graham” – if you’ve done any kind of reasonably hard project and learned something along the way I think that’s good to share. I also don’t want to discourage anyone inexperienced who is naturally drawn to write up their rationality thoughts – I just didn’t want to go out of my way to especially encourage it.
Does that mean you’d find it useful if people posted their CV or a list of their accomplishments with their LessWrong posts?
I am having a hard time knowing what it means when someone disagrees with my question. It’s not meant rhetorically.
Without being the person who voted, I would expect that it means: “No, it’s not useful”.
Yeah, I was hoping specifically for Raemon’s model. Are we interested in stories that only a very successful person can tell (i.e. Paul Graham on being a venture capitalist)? Or are we interested in rationality posts that anyone could write in theory, but that gain their aura of credibility due to the success of the person posting it? If the former, a CV wouldn’t be that useful, except as it came across in the storytelling. If the latter, it seems like you would want the person’s track record of accomplishment in some form, perhaps as part of the “epistemic status” disclaimer.
I meant the former – someone who’s actually accomplished something is more likely to have rationality lessons that are actually useful. But I don’t think people should have an attititude of deferral – I just didn’t want to try to solve the current overbalance of AI by having a bunch of college students write up some untested armchair rationality.
I don’t know that I’d put the bar at “Paul Graham” – if you’ve done any kind of reasonably hard project and learned something along the way I think that’s good to share. I also don’t want to discourage anyone inexperienced who is naturally drawn to write up their rationality thoughts – I just didn’t want to go out of my way to especially encourage it.
I endorse this.