If you could limit your search results to sites with a higher level of epistemics, would that be more compelling?
Can you give an example of a case where I would want to do this? I have trouble thinking of one.
Some related but different cases that are already handled by normal search engines are:
Finding an article on LessWrong—search for “something about the article lesswrong”. A rationalist-specific search engine is overkill for this. Note that this actually works decently well to find articles that aren’t on LessWrong, like how https://www.google.com/search?q=the+toxoplasma+of+rage+lesswrong returns a Slate Star Codex article as the first result
Finding a relatively unbiased article about a recent political case—search for “the political event” then scan the first page for sites I think are relatively unbiased. Politics generally doesn’t get as much coverage in Rationalist spaces so I would expect a Rationalist-only search engine to fail to find anything at all most of the time (and personally I don’t think Rationalist sites are systematically better at political coverage than the decent mainstream outlets even when it does exist).
I don’t mean to be overly negative though, and it’s possible there is a use-case / audience for this. Just giving honest feedback on why I wouldn’t find this compelling since that seems to be what you were wanting.
Use cases: superconductor, Ukraine war, LLM development, diet or exercise, dealing with anxiety, etc. But you would only get results from a curated list of sites with higher epistemic standards.
I should have been more explicit in my initial post. I was relying on the word “rationalist” to do too much.
No worries about negativity. It is exactly what I want, so thank you.
Can you give an example of a case where I would want to do this? I have trouble thinking of one.
Some related but different cases that are already handled by normal search engines are:
Finding an article on LessWrong—search for “something about the article lesswrong”. A rationalist-specific search engine is overkill for this. Note that this actually works decently well to find articles that aren’t on LessWrong, like how https://www.google.com/search?q=the+toxoplasma+of+rage+lesswrong returns a Slate Star Codex article as the first result
Finding a relatively unbiased article about a recent political case—search for “the political event” then scan the first page for sites I think are relatively unbiased. Politics generally doesn’t get as much coverage in Rationalist spaces so I would expect a Rationalist-only search engine to fail to find anything at all most of the time (and personally I don’t think Rationalist sites are systematically better at political coverage than the decent mainstream outlets even when it does exist).
I don’t mean to be overly negative though, and it’s possible there is a use-case / audience for this. Just giving honest feedback on why I wouldn’t find this compelling since that seems to be what you were wanting.
Use cases: superconductor, Ukraine war, LLM development, diet or exercise, dealing with anxiety, etc. But you would only get results from a curated list of sites with higher epistemic standards.
I should have been more explicit in my initial post. I was relying on the word “rationalist” to do too much.
No worries about negativity. It is exactly what I want, so thank you.