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?
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @fchollet
It sounds like the reactions among the well-informed just aren't being routed to you. E.g. https://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=3553 .
3 replies 0 retweets 17 likes -
-
Replying to @fchollet @ESYudkowsky
Read it; there is unfortunately no argument going on, and he seems to have misread my post. Too bad.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @fchollet @ESYudkowsky
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
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @fchollet
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."
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes
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?
-
-
Replying to @ESYudkowsky @fchollet
Including me in this conversion isn't much good, since Francois blocked me months ago. :)
0 replies 0 retweets 5 likesThanks. 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.