Ok but jtbc that characterization of “affronted” is not the hypothesis I was offering (I don’t want to say it wasn’t a part of the downvoting, but I’d guess a minority).
I would personally kind of like it if people actively explored angles on things more. But man, there are so many things to read on AI these days that I do kind of understand when people haven’t spent time considering things I regard as critical path (maybe I should complain more!), and I honestly find it’s hard to too much fault people for using “did it seem wrong near the start in a way that makes it harder to think” as a heuristic for how deeply to engage with material.
Ok but jtbc that characterization of “affronted” is not the hypothesis I was offering (I don’t want to say it wasn’t a part of the downvoting, but I’d guess a minority).
I would personally kind of like it if people actively explored angles on things more. But man, there are so many things to read on AI these days that I do kind of understand when people haven’t spent time considering things I regard as critical path (maybe I should complain more!), and I honestly find it’s hard to too much fault people for using “did it seem wrong near the start in a way that makes it harder to think” as a heuristic for how deeply to engage with material.