We only have people who cry wolf all the time. I love that for them, and thank them for their service, which is very helpful. Someone needs to be in that role, if no one is going to be the calibrated version. Much better than nothing. Often their critiques point to very real issues, as people are indeed constantly proposing terrible laws.
The lack of something better calibrated is still super frustrating.
This mental (or emotional) move here, where you manage to be grateful for people doing a highly imperfect job while also being super frustrated that no one is doing a genuinely good job: how are you doing that?
I see this often in rationalist spaces, and I’m confused about how people learn to do this. I would probably end up complaining about the failings of the best (highly inadequate) strategies we’ve got without the additional perspective of “how would things be if we didn’t even have this?”
For people who remember learning how to do this, how did you practice?
I don’t have any substantive comments, but I do want to express a great deal of joy about this approach.
I am really happy to see people choosing to engage with the policy, communications, and technical governance space with this attitude.