It also sends an unintended signal: “This community is more interested in putting up with core-demographic provincialism for the sake of avoiding flamewars between the majority; folks on the periphery are better off not even trying to point it out, analyze it, or correct it.” I think this is bad for LW in the long run; while it’s definitely beginning to change, the user base is still very homogenous, with some fairly big gaps in knowledge and skills.
I think this is bad for LW in the long run; while it’s definitely beginning to change, the user base is still very homogenous, with some fairly big gaps in knowledge and skills.
Pretty much anything relating to biology from anything other than a careful reading of pop-sci evolutionary theory, for a start (and even that is often misleading when you try to extrapolate from it to real biological systems, let alone complex things like ecosystems). Given the unabashedly transhumanist and pro-cryonics position of SIAI’s main figures present here, that’s kind of glaring—it comes off as a bit overconfident and a bit naive.
A lot of things that amount to context and particulars of the world we live in. It’s my perception that LWers in general know very little about stuff like ecology, infrastructure, history, culture, and downrate their importance when trying to understand how the world works, how a given pattern has developed, ways in which it might change in the future, or to what degree and how one might seek to deliberately change some facet of that.
At the very best of times it seems like, to the extent this gap is recognized at all, it’s considered a problem for FAI to solve. We don’t need to know any of this stuff or why it’s relevant to stuff like “raising the sanity waterline”, “mitigating global existential risk” or “extrapolating human value”; if it has any relevance at all, our future genie will surely determine that and implement it tidily.
A lot of things that amount to context and particulars of the world we live in. It’s my perception that LWers in general know very little about stuff like ecology, infrastructure, history, culture, and downrate their importance when trying to understand how the world works, how a given pattern has developed, ways in which it might change in the future, or to what degree and how one might seek to deliberately change some facet of that.
If anything user Konkvistador seems remarkably interested and knowledgeable about history, culture and politics.
I also seems to recall several academically trained biologists, doctors and even ecologists being prominent members of the community. Are you really bothered by a lack of knowledge or skill, or are you bothered by how they are applied?
I would argue that you are actually bothered by LW not paying attention to them and discussing them as you think appropriate. At least that is what I get out of the quote here:
At the very best of times it seems like, to the extent this gap is recognized at all, it’s considered a problem for FAI to solve. We don’t need to know any of this stuff or why it’s relevant to stuff like “raising the sanity waterline”, “mitigating global existential risk” or “extrapolating human value”; if it has any relevance at all, our future genie will surely determine that and implement it tidily.
But again Konkvistador dosen’t exactly shy away from the topics I mentioned. He has 6000+ karma, so he’s not exactly a pariah. He often discusses them at length. I even recall a debate about ecology now that I think about it. Do we need a smaller share of people like him?
Okay, but that’s not the demographic/experience gap implied by political matters like that which spurred the thread. Everyone would like more and different scientists here. But come on, that’s not what you mean. When you say the user base is homogeneous in the context of Estoke’s comment you’re not talking about how there are too many computer programmers and not enough ecologists.
It also sends an unintended signal: “This community is more interested in putting up with core-demographic provincialism for the sake of avoiding flamewars between the majority; folks on the periphery are better off not even trying to point it out, analyze it, or correct it.”
I’m not completely sure what you mean by “putting up with core-demographic provincialism”—I assume it’s the “Yay hard sciences boo humanities!” subtext, no?
And I have no idea of what you mean by “flamewars between the majority”—flamewars dividing the majority? Flamewars between LessWrong and the rest of the world?
(For context, I’m French, so I may not have a clear idea of what kind of things signal what in an American context)
I’m not completely sure what you mean by “putting up with core-demographic provincialism”—I assume it’s the “Yay hard sciences boo humanities!” subtext, no?
I believe the subtext is more about LW’s racial and gender makeup than our favorite parts of academia.
Edit: Though I suppose part of it would be a typical anti-humanities reaction to, say, departments of gender studies, African-American Studies, Queer-studies etc. and their manifestation in, e.g. English departments.
It also sends an unintended signal: “This community is more interested in putting up with core-demographic provincialism for the sake of avoiding flamewars between the majority; folks on the periphery are better off not even trying to point it out, analyze it, or correct it.” I think this is bad for LW in the long run; while it’s definitely beginning to change, the user base is still very homogenous, with some fairly big gaps in knowledge and skills.
Which knowledge? Which skills? Be explicit.
Pretty much anything relating to biology from anything other than a careful reading of pop-sci evolutionary theory, for a start (and even that is often misleading when you try to extrapolate from it to real biological systems, let alone complex things like ecosystems). Given the unabashedly transhumanist and pro-cryonics position of SIAI’s main figures present here, that’s kind of glaring—it comes off as a bit overconfident and a bit naive.
A lot of things that amount to context and particulars of the world we live in. It’s my perception that LWers in general know very little about stuff like ecology, infrastructure, history, culture, and downrate their importance when trying to understand how the world works, how a given pattern has developed, ways in which it might change in the future, or to what degree and how one might seek to deliberately change some facet of that.
At the very best of times it seems like, to the extent this gap is recognized at all, it’s considered a problem for FAI to solve. We don’t need to know any of this stuff or why it’s relevant to stuff like “raising the sanity waterline”, “mitigating global existential risk” or “extrapolating human value”; if it has any relevance at all, our future genie will surely determine that and implement it tidily.
If anything user Konkvistador seems remarkably interested and knowledgeable about history, culture and politics.
I also seems to recall several academically trained biologists, doctors and even ecologists being prominent members of the community. Are you really bothered by a lack of knowledge or skill, or are you bothered by how they are applied?
I would argue that you are actually bothered by LW not paying attention to them and discussing them as you think appropriate. At least that is what I get out of the quote here:
But again Konkvistador dosen’t exactly shy away from the topics I mentioned. He has 6000+ karma, so he’s not exactly a pariah. He often discusses them at length. I even recall a debate about ecology now that I think about it. Do we need a smaller share of people like him?
Okay, but that’s not the demographic/experience gap implied by political matters like that which spurred the thread. Everyone would like more and different scientists here. But come on, that’s not what you mean. When you say the user base is homogeneous in the context of Estoke’s comment you’re not talking about how there are too many computer programmers and not enough ecologists.
I’m not completely sure what you mean by “putting up with core-demographic provincialism”—I assume it’s the “Yay hard sciences boo humanities!” subtext, no?
And I have no idea of what you mean by “flamewars between the majority”—flamewars dividing the majority? Flamewars between LessWrong and the rest of the world?
(For context, I’m French, so I may not have a clear idea of what kind of things signal what in an American context)
I believe the subtext is more about LW’s racial and gender makeup than our favorite parts of academia.
Edit: Though I suppose part of it would be a typical anti-humanities reaction to, say, departments of gender studies, African-American Studies, Queer-studies etc. and their manifestation in, e.g. English departments.