1. Do you see no discernable or meaningful distinction between the operating philosophy of these pairs: Audrey Tang v. Eliezer Yudokowsky
Let’s take Audrey Tang, Eliezer Yudokowsky, Glen Weyl and Jaron Lanier.
Audrey and Eliezer both created open spaces for web discussion where people can vote (Eliezer did two of those projects) while Glen Weyl decided against doing so when it comes to the Radical Market community and Jaron Lanier is against online communities to the point of speaking against Wikipedia and the Open source movement.
You can make an argument that cybernetic systems and web discussions where people vote being cybernetic in nature.
The thing that distinguises Eliezer the most from the others is that Eliezer is a successful fiction author while the others aren’t. You can discuss the merits of writing fiction to influence people but it seems to me to qualify as chosing humanistic ways of achieving goals.
In terms of augmenting human intellect, the entirety of the rationalist community represents an attempt at augmenting human intellect, even if the “bicycles” it creates are more along the lines of concepts, habits, principles, methods, etc.
That sounds to me like a strawman. We are having this discussion on LessWrong which a bicycle in the Engelbartian sense. We aren’t having this discussion on facebook or on Reddit but on software that’s designed by the rationalist community to facilitate debate.
The rationalist community is not about limiting itself to the lines of concepts, habits, principles, methods. I would expect that’s much more likely true of Weyl’s RadicalXChange.
Jaron Lanier is against online communities to the point of speaking against Wikipedia and the Open source movement.
Should have mentioned the first time — Jaron is critical of, but not against, Wikipedia or open source.
I’ve been a Wikipedia editor since 2007, and admit that most of his criticisms are valid. Anyone that has, say, over 1000 edits on Wikipedia either knows that it sucks to be a Wikipedia editor or hides how much it sucks because they’re hoping to be an admin at some point and don’t complain about it outside their own heads… in which case they don’t really add new content to articles, they argue about content in articles and modify what other people have already contributed.
He points on open source don’t seem to be any different than what people said in Revolution OS In like 2001–open source and proprietary software can co-exist. e.g. Bruce Perens said his only difference with Richard Stallman was the thought “that free software and non-free software should coexist.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vW62KqKJ5A#t=49m39s
That sounds to me like a strawman. We are having this discussion on LessWrong which a bicycle in the Engelbartian sense. We aren’t having this discussion on facebook or on Reddit but on software that’s designed by the rationalist community to facilitate debate.
That’s a fair point, I should have included the software that’s been written as part of the rationalist movement.
Let’s take Audrey Tang, Eliezer Yudokowsky, Glen Weyl and Jaron Lanier.
Audrey and Eliezer both created open spaces for web discussion where people can vote (Eliezer did two of those projects) while Glen Weyl decided against doing so when it comes to the Radical Market community and Jaron Lanier is against online communities to the point of speaking against Wikipedia and the Open source movement.
You can make an argument that cybernetic systems and web discussions where people vote being cybernetic in nature.
The thing that distinguises Eliezer the most from the others is that Eliezer is a successful fiction author while the others aren’t. You can discuss the merits of writing fiction to influence people but it seems to me to qualify as chosing humanistic ways of achieving goals.
That sounds to me like a strawman. We are having this discussion on LessWrong which a bicycle in the Engelbartian sense. We aren’t having this discussion on facebook or on Reddit but on software that’s designed by the rationalist community to facilitate debate.
The rationalist community is not about limiting itself to the lines of concepts, habits, principles, methods. I would expect that’s much more likely true of Weyl’s RadicalXChange.
Should have mentioned the first time — Jaron is critical of, but not against, Wikipedia or open source.
I’ve been a Wikipedia editor since 2007, and admit that most of his criticisms are valid. Anyone that has, say, over 1000 edits on Wikipedia either knows that it sucks to be a Wikipedia editor or hides how much it sucks because they’re hoping to be an admin at some point and don’t complain about it outside their own heads… in which case they don’t really add new content to articles, they argue about content in articles and modify what other people have already contributed.
He points on open source don’t seem to be any different than what people said in Revolution OS In like 2001–open source and proprietary software can co-exist. e.g. Bruce Perens said his only difference with Richard Stallman was the thought “that free software and non-free software should coexist.” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vW62KqKJ5A#t=49m39s
That’s a fair point, I should have included the software that’s been written as part of the rationalist movement.