Thank you also to the people who’ve contributed answers!
To respond to the quasi-questions about the post:
In particular, there was no discussion about which concerns were or would have been historically important.
Yeah, that’d be very interesting! I don’t know if I’ll find someone with the right expertise who I can get interested in researching this. Many of them are broadly applicable to the whole LW and rationality project, so I bet there are people with the right expertise and interests somewhere out there, though.
It is also unclear whether any practical actions will be taken as a result of the post, or whether it will be built upon.
My motivation for asking about it was that software I’m developing. I’ve started a write-up of my approach and reasoning behind it. Roughly, I categorize the risks by how urgent it is for us to address them and by how plausible it is that we can react to them rather than having to prevent them. I’ll probably continue that write-up once I’ve moved to my new place and worked on the software some more.
Yeah, that’d be very interesting! I don’t know if I’ll find someone with the right expertise who I can get interested in researching this.
This was also a point we discussed. Having something which builds upon someone else’s work, or having something which will be built upon in the future generally makes a project more valuable. And in practice, I get the impression that it’s mostly authors themselves which build upon their own work.
Another way we could have phrased things would have been, ”This post was useful in ways X,Y, and Z. If it would have done things A,B, and C it would be been even more useful.”
It’s always possible to have done more. Some of the entries were very extensive. My guess is that you did a pretty good job per unit of time in particular. I’d think of the comments as things to think about for future work.
Thank you! I’m honored to have won a prize! (For “How might better collective decision-making backfire?”) :-D
Thank you also to the people who’ve contributed answers!
To respond to the quasi-questions about the post:
Yeah, that’d be very interesting! I don’t know if I’ll find someone with the right expertise who I can get interested in researching this. Many of them are broadly applicable to the whole LW and rationality project, so I bet there are people with the right expertise and interests somewhere out there, though.
My motivation for asking about it was that software I’m developing. I’ve started a write-up of my approach and reasoning behind it. Roughly, I categorize the risks by how urgent it is for us to address them and by how plausible it is that we can react to them rather than having to prevent them. I’ll probably continue that write-up once I’ve moved to my new place and worked on the software some more.
Congratulations also to all the other winners!
This was also a point we discussed. Having something which builds upon someone else’s work, or having something which will be built upon in the future generally makes a project more valuable. And in practice, I get the impression that it’s mostly authors themselves which build upon their own work.
Good to hear, and thanks for the thoughts!
Another way we could have phrased things would have been,
”This post was useful in ways X,Y, and Z. If it would have done things A,B, and C it would be been even more useful.”
It’s always possible to have done more. Some of the entries were very extensive. My guess is that you did a pretty good job per unit of time in particular. I’d think of the comments as things to think about for future work.
And again, nice work, and congratulations!
Thank you! I read it like that, and I’m happy about the feedback too!
And I agree with it. It’s not like you can peek into my Google Drive.
^.^