Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Radio Controlled]

Did somebody say eating babies?

Short story: the baby-eating aliens.

[Sergarr]

Ahhh, Less Wrong, aka More Crazy. People there once said that torturing a single person for 50 years can be acceptable if it means that a sufficiently high number of people won't get a single dust speck in their eyes.

[Akura]

Sometimes I try to put my skirt over top of my sweatpants without realizing it. Fashion statement, or fashioner statement?

I'm trying to imagine someone dressed like that and it's fantastic.

Considering dorky girls are my thing, I agree without a hint of irony

I don't see what's wrong with this. Something like extra-thick stockings or something.

[penguinofhonor]

.

[Radio Controlled]

Ahhh, Less Wrong, aka More Crazy. People there once said that torturing a single person for 50 years can be acceptable if it means that a sufficiently high number of people won't get a single dust speck in their eyes.

Even though their utilitarianism can get a bit... Extreme at times, it still a good site with a lot of very interesting articles. Even if you don't agree with all of it, it makes you think and reconsider, which is good!

[Sergarr]

Ahhh, Less Wrong, aka More Crazy. People there once said that torturing a single person for 50 years can be acceptable if it means that a sufficiently high number of people won't get a single dust speck in their eyes.

Even though their utilitarianism can get a bit... Extreme at times, it still a good site with a lot of very interesting articles. Even if you don't agree with all of it, it makes you think and reconsider, which is good!

Their articles are written in a style that's designed to make them incomprehensible due to the excessive amount of words and specific terminology that only they use. There are sites that can explain same things, but much, much better.

[Radio Controlled]

Ahhh, Less Wrong, aka More Crazy. People there once said that torturing a single person for 50 years can be acceptable if it means that a sufficiently high number of people won't get a single dust speck in their eyes.

Even though their utilitarianism can get a bit... Extreme at times, it still a good site with a lot of very interesting articles. Even if you don't agree with all of it, it makes you think and reconsider, which is good!

Their articles are written in a style that's designed to make them incomprehensible due to the excessive amount of words and specific terminology that only they use. There are sites that can explain same things, but much, much better.

In that case, care to show them to me?

[Sergarr]

Ahhh, Less Wrong, aka More Crazy. People there once said that torturing a single person for 50 years can be acceptable if it means that a sufficiently high number of people won't get a single dust speck in their eyes.

Even though their utilitarianism can get a bit... Extreme at times, it still a good site with a lot of very interesting articles. Even if you don't agree with all of it, it makes you think and reconsider, which is good!

Their articles are written in a style that's designed to make them incomprehensible due to the excessive amount of words and specific terminology that only they use. There are sites that can explain same things, but much, much better.

In that case, care to show them to me?

http://rationalwiki.org/

Bonus points: Yudkowsky (the guy behind the LessWrong) hates this site, for some inane reason.

[Radio Controlled]

Ahhh, Less Wrong, aka More Crazy. People there once said that torturing a single person for 50 years can be acceptable if it means that a sufficiently high number of people won't get a single dust speck in their eyes.

Even though their utilitarianism can get a bit... Extreme at times, it still a good site with a lot of very interesting articles. Even if you don't agree with all of it, it makes you think and reconsider, which is good!

Their articles are written in a style that's designed to make them incomprehensible due to the excessive amount of words and specific terminology that only they use. There are sites that can explain same things, but much, much better.

In that case, care to show them to me?

http://rationalwiki.org/

Bonus points: Yudkowsky (the guy behind the LessWrong) hates this site, for some inane reason.

Oh, I know that site as well, it's also interesting! But there's stuff on less wrong that's not really covered there (far as I know), so I'd say it's a good idea to use them side by side. They have a different style, for sure, but I wouldn't put one as strictly superior over the other.

[scrdest]

Ahhh, Less Wrong, aka More Crazy. People there once said that torturing a single person for 50 years can be acceptable if it means that a sufficiently high number of people won't get a single dust speck in their eyes.

Even though their utilitarianism can get a bit... Extreme at times, it still a good site with a lot of very interesting articles. Even if you don't agree with all of it, it makes you think and reconsider, which is good!

Their articles are written in a style that's designed to make them incomprehensible due to the excessive amount of words and specific terminology that only they use. There are sites that can explain same things, but much, much better.

In that case, care to show them to me?

http://rationalwiki.org/

Bonus points: Yudkowsky (the guy behind the LessWrong) hates this site, for some inane reason.

Seriously? Of all the sites, rationalwiki? These guys are for the most part the opposite but equal of conservapedia, almost by design. And in some cases, painfully, painfully euphoric.

[Sergarr]

Hey, I wasn't saying that they're good, just that they were better than Less Wrong at explaining things. Which isn't saying much, I know.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

RationalWiki is hard tack on both transhumanism and the singularity (it calls the latter a religion and the former like a religion, as I recall), as well as being critical of the credentials of many big name futurists.

I don't care much for the singularity or Yudkowsky, but I am most certainly a transhumanist, and RationalWiki has been getting steadily more SJW as time has passed.

[Loud Whispers]

Seriously? Of all the sites, rationalwiki? These guys are for the most part the opposite but equal of conservapedia, almost by design. And in some cases, painfully, painfully euphoric.

In this moment
4u

[Radio Controlled]

Ahhh, Less Wrong, aka More Crazy. People there once said that torturing a single person for 50 years can be acceptable if it means that a sufficiently high number of people won't get a single dust speck in their eyes.

Even though their utilitarianism can get a bit... Extreme at times, it still a good site with a lot of very interesting articles. Even if you don't agree with all of it, it makes you think and reconsider, which is good!

Their articles are written in a style that's designed to make them incomprehensible due to the excessive amount of words and specific terminology that only they use. There are sites that can explain same things, but much, much better.

In that case, care to show them to me?

http://rationalwiki.org/

Bonus points: Yudkowsky (the guy behind the LessWrong) hates this site, for some inane reason.

Seriously? Of all the sites, rationalwiki? These guys are for the most part the opposite but equal of conservapedia, almost by design. And in some cases, painfully, painfully euphoric.

You can usually spot the more... Radical articles quickly though, and just ignore those.

[MagmaMcFry]

Ahhh, Less Wrong, aka More Crazy. People there once said that torturing a single person for 50 years can be acceptable if it means that a sufficiently high number of people won't get a single dust speck in their eyes.

Even though their utilitarianism can get a bit... Extreme at times, it still a good site with a lot of very interesting articles. Even if you don't agree with all of it, it makes you think and reconsider, which is good!

Their articles are written in a style that's designed to make them incomprehensible due to the excessive amount of words and specific terminology that only they use. There are sites that can explain same things, but much, much better.

In that case, care to show them to me?

http://rationalwiki.org/

Bonus points: Yudkowsky (the guy behind the LessWrong) hates this site, for some inane reason.

Knowing both of these sites, RationalWiki can't shake a fraction of a line at Less Wrong. RW is maintained by amateur intellectuals who still think that trawling the internet for stupid people and debunking them one by one is a good way to spend their time. Because that's about all they're doing, really.

Less Wrong, on the other hand, is a site actually dedicated to helping people use their brains to maximum capacity, by pointing out all the parts where your brain is doing something it could be doing better. The site literally makes you more intelligent.

Comparing these, I totally understand and agree with Yudkowsky's opinion of RationalWiki. And if you don't understand all the terms in the Less Wrong articles, there is a suggested reading order which you could be using.