If you post an argument online, and the only opposition you get is braindead arguments and insults, does it confirm you were right? Or is it just self-selection of those who argue online?
-
-
I'll check it out.
-
Read it; there is unfortunately no argument going on, and he seems to have misread my post. Too bad.
-
This is a pattern I see a lot: people getting worked up about a specific headline or a specific sentence, and locking on that instead of trying to consider the underlying reasoning or the more general point
-
It helps if you spell out the underlying reasoning and the more general point explicitly? I don't see anything that survives the simple reply "The real universe is low-entropy in a highly structured way and No-Free-Lunch is about a structureless max-entropy distribution."
-
I mean, that's what Aaronson thought on reading your essay, and that's what
@geoffreyirving thought, and I expect it's what @chatherineols's coworkers thought. It doesn't feel to us like quibbling, it feels like a central point. If we're misunderstanding, spell it out? -
Including me in this conversion isn't much good, since Francois blocked me months ago. :)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Mr. Chollet, please take your own advice to heart. It would help us all advance the important conversations in a humble, intellectual manner :) Cock-fighting (standing one’s ground to win an argument) does not get us anywhere. Im sure you agree.https://twitter.com/fchollet/status/937482365827297280 …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
One of the consequences of blocking people who point out flaws in arguments.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.