Double's Shortform
post by Double · 2024-03-11T05:57:35.781Z · LW · GW · 4 comments4 comments
Comments sorted by top scores.
comment by Double · 2024-03-11T05:57:35.888Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
It is worrying that the Wikidata page for e/acc is better than the page for EA and the page for Less Wrong. I just added EA's previously absent "main subject"s to the EA page.
Looks like a Symbolic AI person has gone e/acc. That's unfortunate, but rationalists have long known that the world would end in SPARQL.
Replies from: Viliam↑ comment by Viliam · 2024-03-12T13:01:16.200Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
I like how EA is a "controversial philosophical and social movement that...", but e/acc is merely a "philosophical and social movement advocating for...".
I guess, for some editor, EA is an outgroup, while e/acc is a fargroup.
Replies from: Double, thomas-kwa↑ comment by Double · 2024-03-12T17:08:19.392Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
Plenty of pages get the bare minimum. The level of detail in the e/acc page (eg including the emoji associated with the movement) makes me think that it was edited by an e/acc. The EA page must have been edited by the e/acc since it includes “opposition to e/acc”, but other than that it seems like it was written by someone unaffiliated with either (modulo my changes). We could probably check out the history of the pages to resolve our speculation.
↑ comment by Thomas Kwa (thomas-kwa) · 2024-03-12T23:27:42.270Z · LW(p) · GW(p)
EA definitely has more controversies. Doesn't mean it's worse for the world.