Yeah, I think I should probably stay out of this kind of interaction if I’m going to feel compelled to respond like this. Not that maximizing respect is the only goal, but I don’t think I’m accomplishing much else.
I’m also going to edit the the phrases “shouldn’t talk quite as much shit” and “full of himself,” I just shouldn’t have expressed that idea in that way. (Sorry Eliezer.)
(I think “role of a religious leader” is an apt description of what’s going on sociologically, even if no supernatural claims are being made; that’s why the “rightful caliph” language sticks.)
I used to find the hyper-arrogant act charming and harmless back in 2008, because, back in 2008, he actually was right about almost everything I could check myself. (The Sequences were very good.)
For reasons that are beyond the scope of this comment, I no longer think the hyper-arrogant act is harmless; it intimidates many of his faithful students (who genuinely learned a lot from him) into deferring to their tribal leader even when he’s obviously full of shit.
If he can’t actually live up to his marketing bluster, it’s important for our collective sanity that people with reputation and standing call bullshit on the act, so that citizens of the Caliphate remember that they have the right and the responsibility to think things through for themselves. I think that’s a more dignified way to confront the hazards that face us in the future—and I suspect that’s what the Yudkowsky of 2008 would want us to do. (He wrote then of being “not sure that human beings realistically can trust and think at the same time.”) If present-day Yudkowsky (who complains that “too many people think it’s unvirtuous to shut up and listen to [him]”) disagrees, all the more reason not to trust him anymore.
Yeah, I think I should probably stay out of this kind of interaction if I’m going to feel compelled to respond like this. Not that maximizing respect is the only goal, but I don’t think I’m accomplishing much else.
I’m also going to edit the the phrases “shouldn’t talk quite as much shit” and “full of himself,” I just shouldn’t have expressed that idea in that way. (Sorry Eliezer.)
I think the YouTube drama is serving an important function. Yudkowsky routinely positions himself in the role of a religious leader who is (in his own words) “always right”.
(I think “role of a religious leader” is an apt description of what’s going on sociologically, even if no supernatural claims are being made; that’s why the “rightful caliph” language sticks.)
I used to find the hyper-arrogant act charming and harmless back in 2008, because, back in 2008, he actually was right about almost everything I could check myself. (The Sequences were very good.)
For reasons that are beyond the scope of this comment, I no longer think the hyper-arrogant act is harmless; it intimidates many of his faithful students (who genuinely learned a lot from him) into deferring to their tribal leader even when he’s obviously full of shit.
If he can’t actually live up to his marketing bluster, it’s important for our collective sanity that people with reputation and standing call bullshit on the act, so that citizens of the Caliphate remember that they have the right and the responsibility to think things through for themselves. I think that’s a more dignified way to confront the hazards that face us in the future—and I suspect that’s what the Yudkowsky of 2008 would want us to do. (He wrote then of being “not sure that human beings realistically can trust and think at the same time.”) If present-day Yudkowsky (who complains that “too many people think it’s unvirtuous to shut up and listen to [him]”) disagrees, all the more reason not to trust him anymore.
This is correct.