apoligize, etc. You know, "Sorry, man. 140 characters didn't convey what I really meant."
-
-
Replying to @CShentrup @tqbf
you have, at least my, apology for tarring with a broad brush. The underlying problem is real though :(
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Okay, I'd love to see a post about the "underlying problem" that's a little more..thoughtful and descriptive.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CShentrup @tqbf
are you saying you've never encountered entire problem spaces shut down with simplistic reasoning about technical solns?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Not really. Much more often, I've seen technologists go into insane detail about the complexities of things.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @CShentrup @wycats
This is the problem I was originally commenting on; also, by implication: nerd attempts to “save the world”.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @tqbf
this is a good deep dive into the "save the world, simplistically" phenomenon http://www.vox.com/2015/8/10/9124145/effective-altruism-global-ai?0p19G=c …
4 replies 4 retweets 10 likes -
for completeness here's a response to the main concern of that vox article (AI risk) http://effective-altruism.com/ea/m4/a_response_to_matthews_on_ai_risk/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I can’t tell if that author does/doesn’t believe AI risk more important than poverty.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
the key point of the vox article was Pascal's Mugging (see https://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Pascal's_mugging …).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
the numbers give smart people the false impression they've learned something profound but there's lots of bugs
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.